PHILADELPHIA | Schuylkill Yards Future Phases | 1,095 - 375 FT | 70 - 28 FLOORS

[Busy Bee]

Originally Posted by City Wide

^^^^^as soon as the gov't privatizes much of the military, where the big bucks are...

I can't tell if you're kidding, but I'm having a hard time thinking of anything more firghtening and innapropriate than a privatized national military. Shudder to think. Here's some food for thought: When you privatize prisons and create a profit motive model, you de-incintivize the reduction of crime. When you privatize military and security forces, you de-incintivize the avoidance of conflict.

[mousquet]

Um, I would warmly second the busy bee there.

Do you guys want Colombian-like paramilitary cartels? That's what private military is.
They are motherfucking terrorists out of control, practicing terrorism to intimidate the population enslaved to their rule.

Sometimes principles of capitalism happen to seriously suck, so officials of the public, democratically elected authorities are a much better option in such cases.

Don't let yourselves go stupidly brainwashed and watch the world, it's full of useful lessons.
Just saying.

[mcgrath618]

I think that this is the most off topic I have ever seen a thread become. Can we please get back to discussing Schuylkill Yards? I posted a picture on the last page of what appear to be holes for the screen to be implanted on the facade of the Bulletin Building.

[phishtown]

Originally Posted by mcgrath618

I think that this is the most off topic I have ever seen a thread become. Can we please get back to discussing Schuylkill Yards? I posted a picture on the last page of what appear to be holes for the screen to be implanted on the facade of the Bulletin Building.

It's somewhat impressive (although annoying) how off topic this forum can get.

As for the screen, I wonder what else they're doing in the initial renovations? I noticed they have a big green roof deck in the renders but it seems like a long shot.

[The Best Forumer]

Originally Posted by mousquet

Um, I would warmly second the busy bee there.

Do you guys want Colombian-like paramilitary cartels? That's what private military is.
They are motherfucking terrorists out of control, practicing terrorism to intimidate the population enslaved to their rule.

Sometimes principles of capitalism happen to seriously suck, so officials of the public, democratically elected authorities are a much better option in such cases.

Don't let yourselves go stupidly brainwashed and watch the world, it's full of useful lessons.
Just saying.

i sorta agree with some of this.

[City Wide]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

I can't tell if you're kidding, but I'm having a hard time thinking of anything more firghtening and innapropriate than a privatized national military. Shudder to think. Here's some food for thought: When you privatize prisons and create a profit motive model, you de-incintivize the reduction of crime. When you privatize military and security forces, you de-incintivize the avoidance of conflict.

I'm DEFINITELY not serious about privatizing the troops. I just get pissed at all the 'free market' advocates who use the low hanging fruit as examples of how private industry can save us. I say let them figure out how to better do our free market health system, the most expensive on the globe.
Now, for me, back to the regularly scheduled programing-----
Question, what needs to happen to get the first new construction started? Does someone need to sign up for a couple 100K sq.ft. of space? Is Drexel taking any space this far off the heart of their campus?

[Daario]

Originally Posted by skyscraper

in its current form, yes. kill it, and burn it. then from its ashes could arise a more efficient and well run system that serves essential routes, and prunes routes that are not as essential - as dictated by the ridership market. it would be run for profit, like any other service, which would force it to streamline.

I see your point, but isn't the entire reason Amtrak exists is because previously private passenger rail companies were collapsing and going bankrupt, so the government grabbed them and consolidated them into what we now know as Amtrak? I'm sure I'm missing out on a few things but I believe that's the jist of it. What makes you so sure that the same thing won't happen again if Amtrak is privatized?

[mcgrath618]

Originally Posted by Daario

I see your point, but isn't the entire reason Amtrak exists is because previously private passenger rail companies were collapsing and going bankrupt, so the government grabbed them and consolidated them into what we now know as Amtrak? I'm sure I'm missing out on a few things but I believe that's the jist of it. What makes you so sure that the same thing won't happen again if Amtrak is privatized?

While I don't think that Amtrak should be privatized (quite the opposite actually), you could make the argument that it worked for Conrail.

Perhaps this discussion should be carried over to the Transportation Subforum.

[wanderer34]

Originally Posted by mcgrath618

While I don't think that Amtrak should be privatized (quite the opposite actually), you could make the argument that it worked for Conrail.

Perhaps this discussion should be carried over to the Transportation Subforum.

Conrail is a shell of it's former self. Plus why privatize Amtrak when it's major purpose was to replace the struggling railroads during the 60s and 70s (PRR, Reading, NY Central, B&O, IC, etc.). Like I said, Amtrak needs to be restructures, giving the most used lines more funding and reducing service on the least used lines.

And back to Schuylkill Yards, I hope the Transit Terminal Tower can be built within this next decade. It's too damn long for such a proposal to be built in the 2030s. I'll be an old, old man by that time and plus, we're not sure what type of economy Philly is going to have in the near future, so I'm not holding my breath for that supertall.

It was a bummer that the American Commerce Center was killed off and I was hoping the Transit Terminal Tower would rejuvenate some enthusiasm that the ACC once had, but like the great ACC proposal, I have my doubts if the Transit Terminal Tower starts getting built in the 2030s.

[skyscraper]

Originally Posted by mcgrath618

While I don't think that Amtrak should be privatized (quite the opposite actually)

it's already the opposite of privatized, it's owned and run by the federal government. what more would you do to it?

[allovertown]

Originally Posted by skyscraper

it's already the opposite of privatized, it's owned and run by the federal government. what more would you do to it?

You're literally the only person in this forum who has spoken up so far that thinks the answer to what ails Amtrak is to to privitize it.

First off it would never happen because history has shown it to be a bad investment. Even if it did, why you think it would be good for Amtrak to drastically reduce service on underperforming lines and jack up the prices on heavily used lines in the name of profits is beyond me.

A debate on a forum where one person instigates it and then continues that debate despite UNIVERSAL disagreement, is generally considered trolling. I don't think that is what you're trying to do, but the end result is the same.

If you really want to continue this debate I'm sure you can find numerous forums on the internet where people would welcome your belief that the free market would solve any problem regardless of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Either way, this debate doesn't belong here and you're not changing anyone's mind, so just let it go.

[Boku]

Are there any mods around to shut this discussion down?

[skyscraper]

Originally Posted by allovertown

You're literally the only person in this forum who has spoken up so far that thinks the answer to what ails Amtrak is to to privitize it.

Doesn't mean I'm wrong. See my quote below: All great truths begin as blasphemies.

Originally Posted by allovertown

why you think it would be good for Amtrak to drastically reduce service on underperforming lines and jack up the prices on heavily used lines in the name of profits is beyond me.

Supply and demand.

Originally Posted by allovertown

A debate on a forum where one person instigates it and then continues that debate despite UNIVERSAL disagreement, is generally considered trolling. I don't think that is what you're trying to do, but the end result is the same.

A debate where there is no dissenting opinion is not a debate, it is an echo chamber.
And no, I'm not trying to troll, I truly believe this. When in doubt, privatize.

Originally Posted by allovertown

If you really want to continue this debate I'm sure you can find numerous forums on the internet where people would welcome your belief that the free market would solve any problem regardless of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Either way, this debate doesn't belong here and you're not changing anyone's mind, so just let it go.

right, silence the dissenter. way to be open to other ideas. not exactly the hallmark of someone who has confidence in his / her point of view, when they refuse to be challenged on them.

[nimshady]

So ummm, Schuylkill Yards...

[Busy Bee]

Amtrak was created because the legacy roads (many of which donn't exist anymore) wanted out of their gov mandated obligation to provide pssenger services. The market on many routes decreased to pitiful levels, but many where also seeing healthy ridership, but the rail roads did not see the vast majority of their passenger services as having a bright future. But governments across the nation acknowledged they didn't want to see paasenger services dissappear, and paired with the notion that a country should maintain at least a bare bones passenger rail network, Congress created the NPRC. That's the back-of-the-napkin history. Now, if BNSF or UP came to Congress and said let us operate the trans-West long distance trains, I think it should be considered, but its a nonsense hypothetical becuase they DO NOT want anything to do with running passenger trains. They are multi-billion dollar cargo haulers and that's where the money is. For this reason, moving people around by train should not first and foremost be about the pursuit of profit. It is a neccessary service in the interest of society that should not be expected to rake in huge returns for shareholders. The economic benefits come from facilitating the mobility of people for the purposes that are required by those people (tourism, business, recreation, family, etc.), not the actual physical transport of people.

[Redddog]

So those Redwoods....

Those are gonna be cool.

[City Wide]

Originally Posted by wanderer34

And back to Schuylkill Yards, I hope the Transit Terminal Tower can be built within this next decade. It's too damn long for such a proposal to be built in the 2030s. I'll be an old, old man by that time and plus, we're not sure what type of economy Philly is going to have in the near future, so I'm not holding my breath for that supertall.

It was a bummer that the American Commerce Center was killed off and I was hoping the Transit Terminal Tower would rejuvenate some enthusiasm that the ACC once had, but like the great ACC proposal, I have my doubts if the Transit Terminal Tower starts getting built in the 2030s.

I think what is being called the Transit Terminal Tower is part of the long term (as in dream on!) plans for the 30th St. Station District, not Schuylkill Yards. If you think SY's is slow in coming, you'll going to love the time line for the Station District, as in unfortunately not anywhere in the foreseeable future.
What's with the ACC love? Did you ever think that was going to happen?

[mcgrath618]

Aaaaaaaand as soon as we get back on topic, we get back to the ACC.

When do the redwoods come in? Their planting area was being prepped yesterday.

[Philly Fan]

Originally Posted by mcgrath618

Aaaaaaaand as soon as we get back on topic, we get back to the ACC.

When do the redwoods come in? Their planting area was being prepped yesterday.

Can you just imagine what might have been if Amtrak had laid REDWOOD tracks all the way up to the ACC?

Ahhhhhh, the glory of it all . . . . .

[Mr Saturn64]

Originally Posted by City Wide

What's with the ACC love? Did you ever think that was going to happen?

The appeal of the ACC and the reason it's still on our minds to this day is no doubt the height. 1,510 feet, would be the second-tallest building in the country. Not even Chicago would have a taller building than us. That would've been awesome. Better yet, if it had been built on schedule, it would've gotten there before 1WTC and would've been the tallest for a year. There's no denying that it would be awesome to have those claims. Also, I think the ACC would've been a great tourist attraction. It's a few blocks from City Hall and the Parkway. Put an observation deck up there and you're covered.

Now, I don't know what the age range of forumers is here, but I was a kid when the ACC was proposed. I had no idea the economy was going down the drain because little kids don't notice that stuff. For me, I thought we were getting one of the tallest buildings in the world. it was a great thought for little me.