03-02-2005 03:09									#61
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by alva Is that all? 164 miles? Hmm, always thought it was more. As to the freeway part, it is mostly freeway ( if not all which I actually think it is ).

Well, Eurolines busses are pretty slow, I think. They're cheap though, so if you're on vacation and on a budget (or if you migrating from a poor country), their prices and their extensive network is attractive.

	03-02-2005 03:24									#62
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

There is a big problem with eliminating the subsidies to Amtrak. Congress mandates that Amtrak must serve all of the lower 48 states even if it is unprofitable to do so and Amtrak cannot close an unprofitable line unless Congress approves the measure. Congressmen normally won't vote to cut rail service in their states but they are willing to cut funding. That's why Amtrak is always out of money.

Competetion has been tried before and it was found companies couldn't make money in the passanger rail business. That's why Amtrak was formed in the 1970's by taking the assets of the bankrupt passenger rail line and making one national line. The problem is maintaince costs are to high on the tracks while the competetion is heavily subsidized by state money.

Roads, airports, canals, ship docks, and river passages are all built and/or maintained by the government yet conservatives want rail to be totally without government assistance. Rail can't compete against highly subsidized competetion unless it is also subsidized.

	03-02-2005 03:48									#63
	Tired of ads?

I love the idea of the state owning the tracks and private opporators using the track (for a fee) and I've written at least two threads in the past advicating that. However, that's not what Bush is calling for; instead he just wants to cut the subsidies but still legally require Amtrak to continue providing unprofitable lines.

That won't work and will result in bankruptcy.

	03-02-2005 03:54									#64
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by DanS Bus and rail take about 4 hours. Maybe a couple minutes longer for bus. Plane takes 1 hour + security checks + cab ride to and from downtown NYC or Washington.

Bullshit. It takes 5 hours by bus (a lot more if there are any stops, which there usually are). It takes 3.5 hours by train, and that's with stops. The train is also a lot more comfortable.

*********

If they're going to cut subsidies they should do it across the board. But by subsidizing the NE Corridor, they're just being biased in favor of big business, since that's the value of that line. Which sucks.

	03-02-2005 03:57									#65
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by DinoDoc Screw Amtrak. The fact a large number of their trains have virtually no riders should be a clue of how well they use the money.

I road on Amtrak three weeks ago between San Diego to LA and the train was so packed it was standing room only for part of the trip. These are the large double decker passenger cars Amtrak uses here in California not the dinky single decker ones they use in the rest of the country.

Along with the DC- NYC route the coastal California route are the two biggest profitable lines Amtrak owns. Or at least that's what the newspaper says when ever they run articls on the coaster.

	03-02-2005 04:12									#66
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Spiffor quote: alva: Is that all? 164 miles? Hmm, always thought it was more. As to the freeway part, it is mostly freeway ( if not all which I actually think it is ). Well, Eurolines busses are pretty slow, I think. They're cheap though, so if you're on vacation and on a budget (or if you migrating from a poor country), their prices and their extensive network is attractive.

Huh? Spiff, what exactly were you answering?
I was taking about distance, not speed.

	03-02-2005 04:36									#67
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

The thing is that Amtrak is privately owned. Whether or not they are run efficiently I don't think we can really know unless we worked there. I kind of think they might not do too badly if they operated in Europe where gas is more expensive and more people like to ride the train.

	03-02-2005 05:10									#68
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Amtrak shouldn't be looked at as a for-profit corporation. Maybe then it can get something done.

If they're going to cut subsidies what they ought to do is buy Amtrak a set of them super-fast trains and upgrade all the tracks. The ride will be quicker, the price will be lower, they'll cut the subsidy, everyone will be happy.

I mean, how short could those trains make a trip? Didn't DanS say DC-NYC was 225 miles? The Japanese bullet train goes 150 miles an hour. That's a 1 and a half hour trip, and a shorter trip means they can make more trips with more people on them, and cut the fare, which will let more people ride them, and so on.

And it's an important thing to do. If all those people on Amtrak just got dumped onto the highway system, it'd be hell. DC is already the worst city in the nation for highways, right? And there's so many cars in LA that the birds change colors and fall off the trees instead of the leaves. And both of them (I'd imagine) have Amtrak running through them, at least marginally making things better.

	03-02-2005 05:15									#69
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious The thing is that Amtrak is privately owned.

	03-02-2005 05:28									#70
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin

I think he means the rail lines.

	03-02-2005 05:35									#71
	Got spare money?

If they cut subsidies on rail, why not cut them on air and highways as well? We could stop spending $200,000,000,000 so that we could have cheap gasoline by killing Iraqis.

Funny thing is, I'll bet if Amtrak were privately owned, Republican congressman would be lining up to give it government money.

	03-02-2005 05:37									#72
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: I mean, how short could those trains make a trip? Didn't DanS say DC-NYC was 225 miles? The Japanese bullet train goes 150 miles an hour. That's a 1 and a half hour trip, and a shorter trip means they can make more trips with more people on them, and cut the fare, which will let more people ride them, and so on.

Our current right-of-ways aren't straight enough for the bullet trains. In order to create the straight tracks, you would have to buy out every homeowner between Washington and Boston and then the environmentalists would be suing the government at every turn because the train is disturbing this or that.

We're talking extreme amounts of money.

	03-02-2005 05:42									#73
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Nah, environmentalists love mass transit. Plus, you can build the tracks down the middle of the expressways, so you don't have to buy out all the property, though you'd have to do something in the cities.

	03-02-2005 05:42									#74
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara I think he means the rail lines.

You ruined his good laugh, you meany.

	03-02-2005 05:42									#75
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Bullshit. It takes 5 hours by bus (a lot more if there are any stops, which there usually are).

Who have you taken and when? I'm not talking Greyhound.

	03-02-2005 05:44									#76
	Tired of ads?

There's another bus line besides Greyhound?

	03-02-2005 05:46									#77
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Plus, you can build the tracks down the middle of the expressways

Unfortunately, you can do this only in select places, few of which are in the NE. Normal freeways are curved so that people don't fall asleep at the wheel.

quote: There's another bus line besides Greyhound?

Sure. There's a half dozen or so that ply the non-stop NYC <-> Washington route.

	03-02-2005 05:46									#78
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara I think he means the rail lines.

Amtrak owns most of its own rail lines though some of the tracks it uses are other belong to freigh companies. Amtrak itself is entirely a goernment owned entity just like the Post Office.

	03-02-2005 05:49									#79
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Amtrak only owns a small portion of the track that it uses. Mainly, it owns the NE corridor tracks.

	03-02-2005 05:56									#80
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: There is a big problem with eliminating the subsidies to Amtrak. Congress mandates that Amtrak must serve all of the lower 48 states even if it is unprofitable to do so and Amtrak cannot close an unprofitable line unless Congress approves the measure. Congressmen normally won't vote to cut rail service in their states but they are willing to cut funding. That's why Amtrak is always out of money.

Right, that's exactly why AMTRACK is losing money, they're required BY LAW to keep all the long-distance routes open in square-shaped states etc. that nobody uses. This is also why AMTRACK costs a lot in the Northeast, they've got to make up for losing ****-loads of money in the Mid-west by yanking up prices in the North East. If AMTRACK were privatized, they'd probably have to cut service to most of the country except the NE and maybe a little in the California to Las Vegas area.

And the talk in the article about trains not being special and not needing subsidies anymore than other means of transportation is a joke when you realize how much the government spends on highways...

Hmmmm, where's Adam Smith when you need him?

	03-02-2005 06:04									#81
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by DanS Amtrak only owns a small portion of the track that it uses. Mainly, it owns the NE corridor tracks.

I believe it owns the tracks in much of California. Do you have a map?

	03-02-2005 06:07									#82
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Boshko And the talk in the article about trains not being special and not needing subsidies anymore than other means of transportation is a joke when you realize how much the government spends on highways...

Yeah, the government spends hundreds of millions on highways and airports but doesn't want to spend money on railroads. We really should just nationalize all the tracks and have the government upkeep them like it does the roads while letting different companies opperate the routes.

	03-02-2005 06:10									#83
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: There is a big problem with eliminating the subsidies to Amtrak. Congress mandates that Amtrak must serve all of the lower 48 states even if it is unprofitable to do so and Amtrak cannot close an unprofitable line unless Congress approves the measure. Congressmen normally won't vote to cut rail service in their states but they are willing to cut funding. That's why Amtrak is always out of money.

I don't believe this is the case any longer, with the passage of the Amtrak Reform and Accountability Act in 1997. Amtrak can close any lines that don't make money. However, if Amtrak were to cut a line, then over time it would lose congressional support for its fat subsidies -- not a good move.

http://www.amtrakreformcouncil.gov/#background

	03-02-2005 06:19									#84
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: And the talk in the article about trains not being special and not needing subsidies anymore than other means of transportation is a joke when you realize how much the government spends on highways...

Airports and freeways are funded through user fees (i.e., taxes on those modes of transport). Rail doesn't have any similar user fees.

	03-02-2005 06:21									#85
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: I believe it owns the tracks in much of California. Do you have a map?

No, but consider the following...

quote: Amtrak owns 730 miles of track, mostly in the Northeast Corridor between Boston and Washington, plus in Michigan. It owns stations along the Northeast Corridor, plus Union Station in Chicago. The tracks and stations Amtrak owns represent just a tiny fraction its network. Amtrak serves 500 stations over 22,000 route miles. Most of the tracks are owned by freight railroads, which receive usage fees from Amtrak. Amtrak was not originally designed to own real estate. It took possession of the Northeast Corridor assets in 1976 from the estate of Penn Central Railroad, as part of the creation of Conrail.

http://www.railfan.net/lists/rshsde...1/msg00068.html

	03-02-2005 06:22									#86
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

That's a very interesting link. I hadn't realized the reforms were so extensive.

	03-02-2005 06:25									#87
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Are they extensive in comparison to what should have been done?

	03-02-2005 06:26									#88
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by DanS Airports and freeways are funded through user fees (i.e., taxes on those modes of transport). Rail doesn't have any similar user fees.

Dan, you and I both know that the amounts paid in user fees doesn't cover the whole cost of building and maintaining roads & airports. There are government subsidies.

	03-02-2005 06:31									#89
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

At a minimum, the user fees cover federal government involvement in these industries. Each state and local government does its own thing, of course.

I have no problem with state and local governments subsidizing rail, if they choose. In some instances, it may make sense. But subsidizing most routes that Amtrak runs is pure madness.

	03-02-2005 06:39									#90
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

It seems like the option the Republicans want (and two of the three Democrats on the council) is to break Amtrak up into pieces which won't solve anything. The best way is to nationalize all the tracks and then let companies compete to provide service.

That would level the playing field with buses, cars, and planes.