Game changer, or bluster in an election year?

The real point of high speed rail: MP claims a $200,000 house could be worth $600,000 under Turnbull plan

 

Who's going to pay the $100 each way for your daily commute to Sydney?

Are there properties in Goulburn for $200k?

 

It is similar too Sydney getting it's second airport.......don't hold your breath if you buy in Goulburn now waiting for the train to bring CG........

 

I'd prefer they don't build it at this stage. Knowing Australia in the current environment, they will probably design it for 200-250km/h and think it's really fast.

Then again not really a fan of Badgery's Creek either, the cost for duplicating everything when you still have capacity at Sydney Airport is crazy

 

I'd vote for something that'd take my 200k properties to 600k

I dont think it's worthwhile though at current technology levels. If its only an hour or 2 to fly between cities now, a train won't be that much better given you'll still have to get to the station, (probably) go through a security gate, (probably) check in, etc.

Perth is the main exception i guess. If there was something that could take you from Perth to Melbourne in an hour via Adelaide that'd be a game changer.

 

Every cost/benefit breakdown I've seen for high speed rail in Australia has shown it to be a massive waste requiring significant subsidy from government. Just populist nonsense brought up as election cycles begin to simmer.

 

It's not gonna happen. And if they do manage to push it through, it won't be profitable.
There were companies spending big money on feasibility years ago, the government kept dicking them around. I don't think any private company will be too keen to spend any money without a guarantee.

 

This is coming. First at Flinders University then the wider Australia. Pretty broad time lines though, this has been an idea with the founder since the 1980's I believe.

Sky rail proposed for Flinders University by ex-transport head Rod Hook

 

Hyperloop

Hyperloop release date news and rumors | TechRadar

 

Brought to you by the guy who hasn't made a profit with his businesses and relies on governments giving him billions upon billions in subsidies and 'grants' whilst running decade long losses.

 

Do you mean the guy who is pushing a climate change agenda while selling electric cars?

That guy. I do think hyperloop has legs though. The product seems to be performing well in testing.

 

I think high speed rail of this speed (250kmph+) going all the way interstate, is a massive expense for NSW yo bare for questionable benefit. I think it smarter to do what VIC has already done and build semi-high speed (I believe VLINE trains top speeds are 110/120 thereabouts?) to nearby satellite cities.

In VIC's example thesre are: Geelong 50 minutes, Ballarat 64 minutes, Bendigo 85 minutes. In NSW delivering 110kmph+ trains to Newcastle (probably about 90 minutes), Wollongong (probably sub-45 mins) and maybe even Canberra (sub 2hours) is the smarter idea. This helps thin a crowded sydney population to other already-developed cities that each offer further space for expansion and already-good lifestyle/liveability).

QLD could do the same aith rapid transit just to GC, SC, and Toowoomba.

 

We're struggling to get A train that works.

 

try LEGO® City Train Products and Sets - LEGO® City Products and Sets - LEGO.com US - City LEGO.com

 

Isn't that negative gearing?

 

And he plans to fund it...how?

He did such a terrific job with the NBN....he should never be allowed near as purse.

 

I've always thought he was more of a man bag type of guy personally.

 

He did a terrific job funding the NBN or delivering it? Two different things...lets not get our arguments muddled .

To answer your question... he can issue long term AUD bonds and raise debt at or around the rate of inflation - ie pretty well free of charge, effectively. Then he can sell land along the corridor to developers using a value capture model.

Or shall we do what we always do with infrastructure in the modern era in Australia? Wait until we are bursting at the seams in 30 years and spend 10 times as much trying to play catch up...?

Its perfectly fine if you dont like the idea... but this "all Govt debt is bad" mentality which permeates Australia today strikes me as the mother of all hypocrisy - even moreso given the investment ( debt based) focus of this forum. At an individual level, Australia's happily gobble up as much debt as possible, often spending it on depreciating assets such as cars, electronics etc, or on non income producing assets , or on loss making assets.... yet we crucify an idea where a Govt uses debt to build genuinely game changing infrastructure?

For me its very simple... I think its a perfectly sound idea to borrow to build game changing infrastructure.... but Im the kinda guy who would have voted yes for a multi lane ( plus train) Sydney Harbour Bridge, anticipating future demand... sounds like others may have been the kind to vote for 1 lane each way. Hows that working out for the modern versions of infrastructure? Like the 2 lane motorways which are gridlocked and redundant before they even open. Or the proposed Sydney Airport minus rail....

Please....

 

Neither...that was my (sarcastic) point....the guy is a Political failure....and I am a Liberal (not am; now was; actually).