Christie did the right thing on the Tunnel to Macy's Basement

With the news that the still incomplete World Trade Center cost overruns are pushing 40% of the projected cost so far Gov Christie's decision to pull the plug on the tunnel (which NJ would've been solely responsible for the overage) seems like a prudent move for NJ taxpayers.
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/02/port_authority_audit_reveals_n.html

Yes, clearly the fact that the Port Authority was managing a hot potato poorly means that NJ Transit would have done equally as poorly in building the tunnel. Maybe nothing should ever be built again - by anybody - because of what this audit reveals.

Christie is fat.

ktc said:

Christie is fat.

Yup. As are a lot of his fellow New Jerseyans. That's right, his-he's the Governor, thank God! Can you imagine if we'd voted in Corzine for a second term-just look what he did to MF Global!

Steve-are you really serious? Ever hear of the big dig in Boston?

The salient point is that the way it was structured, NJ alone-not NY, not the Feds-were to carry any overruns on our back. He did the prudent thing and flushed it down the toilet. Go Gov!

Steve, NJ Transit would not be the one building the tunnel. 3 guesses as to who it would be.

And any way you slice it, lame comment ktc.

Leaving aside the relative merits of each decision, it's pretty clear that the WTC overruns are for specific reasons unrelated to the ARC.

But on a generic, simplistic basis, I suppose some folks would think you made a point.

Billions and billions of dollars of overruns that would have cost NJ taxpayers is hardly generic or simplistic.

When has any large scale construction project in NJ come in on budget? I can't think of any. Anyone thinking that NJT would do any better than the PA has been hitting the crack pipe.

Christie's decision might have made sense had he put in place an alternative plan rather then just give lip service to extending the subway from NYC to NJ. Another tunnel is needed and what he should have done was tried to work out a solution with NJ Transit, NY, and the Feds.
As it stands now the big loser is NJ.

grilled_weber said:

Christie's decision might have made sense had he put in place an alternative plan rather then just give lip service to extending the subway from NYC to NJ. Another tunnel is needed and what he should have done was tried to work out a solution with NJ Transit, NY, and the Feds.
As it stands now the big loser is NJ.

Extending the 7 line to Secaucus is the answer now.

Having NJ shoulder the overrun cost when both the Feds and NY would be major beneficiaries would have been insane. Which is what the Feds and NY were hoping for.

We would have been major chumps had this gone through-the fact that NY and the Feds haven't come up with their own plan/solution shows they were trying to play us.

If this is so vital to the nation, where is the money?

John Locke's opinions always revolve around hypothetical situations. He's the master at knocking down strawmen!

And Christie is really fat.

Extending the 7 isn't going to happen.

The Gateway Tunnel is most likely - but still along the lines of 50/50.

nohero said:

Leaving aside the relative merits of each decision, it's pretty clear that the WTC overruns are for specific reasons unrelated to the ARC.

But on a generic, simplistic basis, I suppose some folks would think you made a point.

johnlockedema said:

Billions and billions of dollars of overruns that would have cost NJ taxpayers is hardly generic or simplistic.

And since your quoted comment has nothing to do with my comment, quoted above, this comparison quote is my only response to your distortion.

Seriously, instead of distorting what others post, or injecting other issues into a discussion as a distraction, would it be so hard for you to just respond to what was posted?

On second thought ...

-- I think the 7 line extension is a great idea

-- Christie is really fat but he's honest about it. I liked that he supported M. Obama re: her childhood obesity project.
Other than that I'm not a big fan.

-- They actually had a brand of ice cream in New England called "Big Dig Ice Cream" I saw it in Providence, RI.
When my friend Ellen mentioned it to me I thought she said, "look Big D**k Ice Cream" and I did a spit take.

BabFab said:

-- They actually had a brand of ice cream in New England called "Big Dig Ice Cream" I saw it in Providence, RI.

It was a flavor, the brand was Brigham's - did they have Brigham's down here?

I agree with OP.
I don't know anyone who lives in NJ who wants to commute to NYC but does not do so due to a lack of available mass transportation.
The biggest cheerleaders of this tunnel project were the unions, who obviously were licking their chops at the billions of taxpayer dollars that would have been sloshing around. Sorry guys.
I'm all for necessary public infrastructure projects but to me this tunnel was unnecessary, so I credit christie for nixing where Corzine would have rubber-stamped.

grilled_weber said:

Christie's decision might have made sense had he put in place an alternative plan rather then just give lip service to extending the subway from NYC to NJ. Another tunnel is needed and what he should have done was tried to work out a solution with NJ Transit, NY, and the Feds.
As it stands now the big loser is NJ.

+1.

I guess Christie doesn't ride the NJT. I was stuck on the train this morning due to a train disabled in the tunnel. Unfortunately, that one train delayed many others behind it; Penn Station was full with folks waiting on their train when I got off due to the delay. If we had another tunnel, it would alleviate the congestion and problems such as the one I experienced this morning.

We need a second tunnel under the Hudson River. PERIOD

ktc said:

Christie is fat.

no he's not.


he's morbidly obese.

phenixrising said:

We need a second tunnel under the Hudson River. PERIOD

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2011/11/engineering_work_to_begin_on_g.html

nohero said:

nohero said:

Leaving aside the relative merits of each decision, it's pretty clear that the WTC overruns are for specific reasons unrelated to the ARC.

But on a generic, simplistic basis, I suppose some folks would think you made a point.

johnlockedema said:

Billions and billions of dollars of overruns that would have cost NJ taxpayers is hardly generic or simplistic.

And since your quoted comment has nothing to do with my comment, quoted above, this comparison quote is my only response to your distortion.

Seriously, instead of distorting what others post, or injecting other issues into a discussion as a distraction, would it be so hard for you to just respond to what was posted?

On second thought ...

Did I link the WTC overruns to a overrun on a project not started? No. I just wanted to show that huge overruns are common in large scale construction projects, and that our history in NJ is not one of cost containment. That's neither generic or simplistic, it's factual. Carry on.

johnlockedema said:

nohero said:

nohero said:

Leaving aside the relative merits of each decision, it's pretty clear that the WTC overruns are for specific reasons unrelated to the ARC.

But on a generic, simplistic basis, I suppose some folks would think you made a point.

johnlockedema said:

Billions and billions of dollars of overruns that would have cost NJ taxpayers is hardly generic or simplistic.

And since your quoted comment has nothing to do with my comment, quoted above, this comparison quote is my only response to your distortion.

Seriously, instead of distorting what others post, or injecting other issues into a discussion as a distraction, would it be so hard for you to just respond to what was posted?

On second thought ...

Did I link the WTC overruns to a overrun on a project not started? No. I just wanted to show that huge overruns are common in large scale construction projects, and that our history in NJ is not one of cost containment. That's neither generic or simplistic, it's factual. Carry on.

Watch out Strawmen, John Locke's "logic" is in town!

phenixrising said:

grilled_weber said:

Christie's decision might have made sense had he put in place an alternative plan rather then just give lip service to extending the subway from NYC to NJ. Another tunnel is needed and what he should have done was tried to work out a solution with NJ Transit, NY, and the Feds.
As it stands now the big loser is NJ.

+1.

I guess Christie doesn't ride the NJT. I was stuck on the train this morning due to a train disabled in the tunnel. Unfortunately, that one train delayed many others behind it; Penn Station was full with folks waiting on their train when I got off due to the delay. If we had another tunnel, it would alleviate the congestion and problems such as the one I experienced this morning.

We need a second tunnel under the Hudson River. PERIOD

Lincoln + Holland = 2.

The first moving truck is unloading furniture....I think he should raise taxes to get NJ out of dept.
Insert Joni Mitchell California about now

Probably true, but I do believe that PA is currently loaded up with CC patronage appointments, so he's not off the hook. In any case, they certainly are a mess.

phenixrising said:

grilled_weber said:

Christie's decision might have made sense had he put in place an alternative plan rather then just give lip service to extending the subway from NYC to NJ. Another tunnel is needed and what he should have done was tried to work out a solution with NJ Transit, NY, and the Feds.
As it stands now the big loser is NJ.

+1.

I guess Christie doesn't ride the NJT. I was stuck on the train this morning due to a train disabled in the tunnel. Unfortunately, that one train delayed many others behind it; Penn Station was full with folks waiting on their train when I got off due to the delay. If we had another tunnel, it would alleviate the congestion and problems such as the one I experienced this morning.

We need a second tunnel under the Hudson River. PERIOD

Just how many billions of dollars should we allocate for your commute? It might be cheaper to pay for limos for the locals to car pool into NYC.

ktc said:

johnlockedema said:

nohero said:

nohero said:

Leaving aside the relative merits of each decision, it's pretty clear that the WTC overruns are for specific reasons unrelated to the ARC.

But on a generic, simplistic basis, I suppose some folks would think you made a point.

johnlockedema said:

Billions and billions of dollars of overruns that would have cost NJ taxpayers is hardly generic or simplistic.

And since your quoted comment has nothing to do with my comment, quoted above, this comparison quote is my only response to your distortion.

Seriously, instead of distorting what others post, or injecting other issues into a discussion as a distraction, would it be so hard for you to just respond to what was posted?

On second thought ...

Did I link the WTC overruns to a overrun on a project not started? No. I just wanted to show that huge overruns are common in large scale construction projects, and that our history in NJ is not one of cost containment. That's neither generic or simplistic, it's factual. Carry on.

Watch out Strawmen, John Locke's "logic" is in town!

We voted Christie in, sorry, you have to deal with it! He'll get a lot more done before his second term is up.

johnlockedema said:

Did I link the WTC overruns to a overrun on a project not started? No.

Yes, you did link it.

johnlockedema said:

With the news that the still incomplete World Trade Center cost overruns are pushing 40% of the projected cost so far Gov Christie's decision to pull the plug on the tunnel (which NJ would've been solely responsible for the overage) seems like a prudent move for NJ taxpayers.

johnlockedema said:

Just how many billions of dollars should we allocate for your commute? It might be cheaper to pay for limos for the locals to car pool into NYC.

Great idea. We'd just need to spend billions more on car tunnels and highways.

nohero said:

johnlockedema said:

Did I link the WTC overruns to a overrun on a project not started? No.

Yes, you did link it.

johnlockedema said:

With the news that the still incomplete World Trade Center cost overruns are pushing 40% of the projected cost so far Gov Christie's decision to pull the plug on the tunnel (which NJ would've been solely responsible for the overage) seems like a prudent move for NJ taxpayers.

In the manner that large scale construction of all types do run over. I didn't link the reason for the overruns as being similar. Carry on.

johnlockedema said:

Steve-are you really serious? Ever hear of the big dig in Boston?

So, based upon the Big Dig in Boston and the rebuilding of the WTC, we should not build anything else - ever. I get it.

by the way - how much of the WTC cost overruns are due to Pataki's idiocy with the whole design competition and redesigning to meet actual security concerns? Pataki wanted a monument to himself.

Steve said:

johnlockedema said:

Steve-are you really serious? Ever hear of the big dig in Boston?

So, based upon the Big Dig in Boston and the rebuilding of the WTC, we should not build anything else - ever. I get it.

by the way - how much of the WTC cost overruns are due to Pataki's idiocy with the whole design competition and redesigning to meet actual security concerns? Pataki wanted a monument to himself.

My objection has been that the cost overruns were solely on NJ taxpayers. Make it shared, with the majority of money coming from the Feds (from whom we receive the, what, first or second lowest return on taxes sent to DC?) then I'd be onboard. How that?