“The cost-effectiveness of upgrading rail crossings tends to be fairly low,” said Christopher Pflaum, president of Overland Park, Kansas-based research firm Spectrum Economics Inc., who has studied the cost of safety at train intersections. “From an economic perspective, getting away from all the emotion involved when trains hit vehicles, just pure dollars and cents and lives saved, spending more money on rail crossings is not a good way to save lives.”
The Ford/Pinto exploding gas tank defense resurrected i.e. it’s cheaper to pay the death claims than fix the car. Tell that to a jury that won’t be “getting away” emotional issues.
And then today I heard a story of somebody taking a selfie on a train track and being killed by a commuter train. As my buddy likes to say, “You can’t fix stupid.”
What ever happened to cow catchers on the front of trains? If a vehicle is struck by a train it would be flipped out of the way. The outcome for the driver of the vehicle will still not be good, however it might save a lot of passengers.
The simple solution is not to try to beat a train or stop on the tracks, but in America the concept of personal responsibility has been taken away by the trial lawyers.
“The bullet train that will whisk passengers between San Francisco and Los Angeles at 200 miles per hour won’t pass through the kinds of intersections that have led to two major commuter-rail accidents this month.”
Another pork barrel project that the country and the citizens of California cannot afford, but will happen anyway.
Dave, building a high speed rail on top of the San Andreas fault is not a common sense idea, but it fits with California and the Federal Government. I am sure Obama thinks it is a good idea. They can whisk all those undocumented illegals up to the crop region to work until it derails when the next earthquake hits. Hollywood can then make a movie about it. They haven’t had a good disaster movie in a while.
Is this website for insurance people? Since when will we accept that the cost to save many, many lives now and in the future is too expensive? You mean to tell me that there are no quans out there that can figure out a practicable way to figure this out? I would suggest that the cost does not have to only include the municipality, but also the Federal Government, all the railroads as well as the passengers. Overpass or underpass roads through railroad intersection should be mandatory in areas of dense population. How dense is subject to negotiation. Anyway, such an undertaking could give this country a good shot in the arm economically and the benefits just may save your life and those of your family and friends.
Hey rocket, do you remember our President passing the Stimulus that ended up not being a Stimulus where he famously said that a good portion would be dedicated to infrastructure repairs? I assume railroad crossings would be included with roads and bridges. Where did that nearly trillion dollars go? Why is he now proposing an additional $300 billion for infrastructure repairs? Where are our tax dollars going? Inquiring minds want to know.
“The cost-effectiveness of upgrading rail crossings tends to be fairly low,” said Christopher Pflaum, president of Overland Park, Kansas-based research firm Spectrum Economics Inc., who has studied the cost of safety at train intersections. “From an economic perspective, getting away from all the emotion involved when trains hit vehicles, just pure dollars and cents and lives saved, spending more money on rail crossings is not a good way to save lives.”
The Ford/Pinto exploding gas tank defense resurrected i.e. it’s cheaper to pay the death claims than fix the car. Tell that to a jury that won’t be “getting away” emotional issues.
And then today I heard a story of somebody taking a selfie on a train track and being killed by a commuter train. As my buddy likes to say, “You can’t fix stupid.”
Dave, the same crowd that thinks it is ok to text and drive. They have no clue what is going on around them.
What ever happened to cow catchers on the front of trains? If a vehicle is struck by a train it would be flipped out of the way. The outcome for the driver of the vehicle will still not be good, however it might save a lot of passengers.
The simple solution is not to try to beat a train or stop on the tracks, but in America the concept of personal responsibility has been taken away by the trial lawyers.
“The bullet train that will whisk passengers between San Francisco and Los Angeles at 200 miles per hour won’t pass through the kinds of intersections that have led to two major commuter-rail accidents this month.”
Another pork barrel project that the country and the citizens of California cannot afford, but will happen anyway.
Dave, building a high speed rail on top of the San Andreas fault is not a common sense idea, but it fits with California and the Federal Government. I am sure Obama thinks it is a good idea. They can whisk all those undocumented illegals up to the crop region to work until it derails when the next earthquake hits. Hollywood can then make a movie about it. They haven’t had a good disaster movie in a while.
Is this website for insurance people? Since when will we accept that the cost to save many, many lives now and in the future is too expensive? You mean to tell me that there are no quans out there that can figure out a practicable way to figure this out? I would suggest that the cost does not have to only include the municipality, but also the Federal Government, all the railroads as well as the passengers. Overpass or underpass roads through railroad intersection should be mandatory in areas of dense population. How dense is subject to negotiation. Anyway, such an undertaking could give this country a good shot in the arm economically and the benefits just may save your life and those of your family and friends.
Hey rocket, do you remember our President passing the Stimulus that ended up not being a Stimulus where he famously said that a good portion would be dedicated to infrastructure repairs? I assume railroad crossings would be included with roads and bridges. Where did that nearly trillion dollars go? Why is he now proposing an additional $300 billion for infrastructure repairs? Where are our tax dollars going? Inquiring minds want to know.