Bush to seek Amtrak subsidy cuts

[Spiffor]

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.

[Dinner]

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.

[Dinner]

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.

[Boris Godunov]

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.

Bull****. 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.

[Dinner]

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.

[alva]

Originally posted by Spiffor

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.

[Kidlicious]

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.

[mrmitchell]

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.

[Dinner]

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

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Oerdin

I think he means the rail lines.

[chequita guevara]

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.

[DanS]

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.

[chequita guevara]

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.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


I think he means the rail lines.

You ruined his good laugh, you meany.

[DanS]

Bull****. 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.