>> It is the Valley/SJ connection that most helps people seeking low cost housing and non car commuting options to Bay Area jobs.

+1

Talk to any working class family - they will all tell you about a friend or family member who can't afford to live here, and instead commute from ridiculous distances. Nurses, bartenders, service jobs - I've heard stories from everyone within that social-economic rung of the ladder (*not* hyperbole.)

Terrible, unsustainable quality of life. Terrible for our businesses and economy, as well. Terrible for our society - it has trickle effects for all levels of our society.

>> It is the Valley/SJ connection that most helps people seeking low cost housing and non car commuting options to Bay Area jobs.

Except that HSR ticket prices might be out of reach of most of these folks for daily use.
Except that there is no identified operator yet.
Except that there no identified funds to build anything beyond Merced <--> Bakerfield and even it's a stretch.

What has not yet been discussed openly by the governor or rail authorities is the emerging likelihood that the new rail line (not necessarily high speed) in the CV is now planned to extend to Merced rather than Madera. This should enable connection to the already funded, modernized ACE corridor service over Altamont and through the Tri-valley area. That's the route that has the highest ridership demand for CV commuters and where many of us advocated HSR should have gone.

I think Pat's idea is interesting.
I know that San Jose downtown is looking at 200,000-3000,000 added jobs in the next 15 years.

My main argument is that a Valley/Bay Area connection is a good idea for both regions.

I think detailed and peer reviewed ridership and financing plans are needed before going forward.

I disagree with the Governor's apparent decision to remove the two-region connection from consideration now.

Ticket prices may be an issue for some riders (most of whom are not poor) but that calls for companies being wiling to help defray costs as many do now.

If the Valley/Bay Area connection is a good idea as believe, other details will have be worked out.

So, basically you want to spend a hundred billion dollars so that a few hundred people can commute to SJ for good paying jobs and afford a single family house in the central valley. Please, please learn some economics before proposing to spend other people's money. Please think just a little bit deeper into effects of your proposals. The HSR ticket price lie was sold when funding for the project was first approved tickets were projected to be closer to the $50 range. So call it $100 round trip and extend the lie. You really think people will spend $500 a week to commute to a service job in SJ? $25,000 a year just for that portion of their commute (this a $12.50/hr just for the rail commute). The reality is that ticket prices will be much higher. The only real winners are the current owners of the land the new single family homes will be built on as their land value to increase.

@ new guy

Let's clean up some of your math.

The total system cost is now estimated at $77 billion so a line from Madera to San Jose can hardly cost $Billions.

I think a ridership study is needed but my guess in many tens of thousands daily riders to the hundreds of thousands of jobs in downtown San Jose by 2030 or so.

And, yes, I do want to help people find cheaper housing outside the region if that is their prefeence and then help them access jobs here car free. It seems like a win win for them and our local economy.

The ticket prices you quoted were for the full North-Soth toute not a small route from Madera to San Jose.

But I do agree that ticket prices could be a problem and hope that comapnies can help defray costs as they do now for many workers.

We need massive amounts of transportation infrastructure. Our businesses and economy depend on it to remain competitive.

Our businesses also need more affordable housing, to keep ample amounts of reasonable labor available.

Build the damn trains.

The Valley/SJ connection does not need to be HSR. An RSR with frequent trains could carry the same or greater passenger load and be running much sooner than an HSR, if people would ditch their HSR fantasies and work to create the RSR system that is eminently feasible right now.

The first step is easy: Repeal the nineteenth century robber baron legislation forbidding eminent domaining of railroad ROWs.

Buy the ROWs.

Give passenger service priority over freight on the newly public trackage. That enables the vital reliable scheduling now sorely lacking on UP/BNSF rails (e.g., ACE).

Buy locomotives and rolling stock and you're running a railroad.

Why do these discussions always leave out this piece: relocating JOBS?

I get that many people will still need to commute here and goodness knows this area wants that to work lest we find ourselves with an even more serious under-employment situation for community-serving employees, but the demand on housing and transportation and other pieces of Silicon Valley infrastructure would be lessened if jobs-generating companies would spread the wealth to areas that want and can support the growth.

What is the supportable argument against doing that?

> ...spread the wealth to areas that want and can support the growth.
> What is the supportable argument against doing that?

If "supporting the growth" means qualified labor pool, then you might have issues with companies relocating to Manteca.