Quote:
Originally Posted by Will O' Wisp
While I can see your logic relating to cost of living, I think you fail to appreciate just how stupidly expensive the SF housing market is. My sister lives in downtown SF and pays $1900 a month to rent a room the size of a largeish closet in an apartment with 4 other gals. A good friend of mine spends $2400 a month to rent a studio in San Mateo and spends 30+ minutes commuting everyday to work. Both consider themselves to be getting a deal as well.
Each could easily move to Merced or Fresno, buy a $150K house, and spend $1000 a month for the HSR to their jobs in SF, and still come out financially ahead of their current situations. Especially my poor buddy in San Mateo, he could afford the mortgage payments on a $250K house in Merced ($1,182 a month @ 3.92%) plus the $1000 for the HSR and still be saving $200 a month. After the tunnel to the transbay finishes he'd even have a similar commute time to boot!
This is why no one is pushing harder for HSR than SF, they have the most to gain.
|
No one is going to be doing this. If it were feasible it would be happening somewhere on the planet with HSR, and it isn't.
This is intercity rail, not commuter rail. The scheduling and pricing (assuming this is completed) will be for intercity passengers, not some poor schlub wasting all his money and time ultracommuting. It also makes no sense because HSR trains are almost always at capacity, so why would commuters stuff into them at the tail end (also annoying the base ridership)?
Also, and no offense to Central Valley residents, but much of inland CA is not gonna be appealing to someone who would otherwise live in SF or Silicon Valley, even if you gave everyone a personal helicopter. You think if they built, say, maglev, to Scranton, PA, that NYC professionals would move there? These areas are cheap for a reason.