Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote]QUOTE: Originally posted by ohlemeier [quote]QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Here are some "lies" regarding Amtrak's market share: http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-vranich062802.asp http://www.heritage.org/Research/Budget/WM118.cfm http://www.publicpurpose.com/hu-amtrk.htm 2. The definitive 1990 DOT study on Amtrak's true market share has it at 0.4% based on passenger trips and 0.6% based on passenger miles. Lies, lies, all lies, huh? I guess this is all part of a giant government coverup, right? I'm waiting on the edge of my seat for someone to present the opposition view with such references....... [/quote] You're going to be disappointed, then. Those sources are avowadly anti-Amtrak bigots. 1) "Public Purpose" - so called - is the brainchild of Wendall Cox, a noted ANTI-RAIL TRANSIT type. Any city anywhere that proposes adding light rail, he always shows up, writes op-ed pieces, etc., distroting the facts, claiming how "unsubsidized" cars are so much cheaper (yeah, right). He's a right-wing ideologue that likely gets his money from the petro industry. Few, except Sen. McCain and other Amtrak enemies, hold any respect for him. Interesting how his own town, Belleville, Ill., ignored his tripe and went on ahead and built a VERY SUCCESSFUL light rail system in the St. Louis area. Still, Cox will try to smear it and claim rail is all a big waste. 2) The Heritage Foundation? You've got to be kidding. Ron Utt, the flame thrower who lives and breathes anti-Amtrak, is another biased "source." All he talks about is how getting rid of Amtrak will help the world. Utt's also a name-caller. He called David Gunn, Amtrak's reform-minded CEO, "an SOB." Utt couldn't support his arguments with the facts so he hurls insults. I guess Utt doesn't want Amtrak to reform and improve its performance - just shut down, thank you. The NATIONAL REVIEW is another case. "cept that WILLIAM F. BUCKLEY - the godfather of conservatives- like Paul Weyrich - has come out of the conservative closet and endorsed passenger rail. He logically rejects the fallacious assertions by the so-called think tanks. Amtrak's MARKET SHARE in the NEC from DC to NYC is 50+%. The national market share of course is a lot smaller. U.S. airline travel share is 12% with automobiles hogging 85%. Bus and rail are aournd 2%. Most trips over 100 miles are personal and are by car. Should we then castigate the airlines because they have such a pathetic market share? Dittos for buses? And don't forget the cruise industry. Cruise ships only carry about 4 million people a year - a tiny market share compared to rail and bus. Yet the federal government builts and maintains ports and rivers. Why would you expect a gigantic market share from a rail system that's only been given crumbs for 30 years? Do you think Delta Airlines would have been as successful as it is if it were given only enough money to fly THREE TIMES A WEEK from very few cities? Sure, Amtrak should run more than 3 trains a week to Houston, and at better hours. But that's not Amtrak's fault. That's Congress,. which has failed to properly fund it. Instead of whining about how bad Amtrak is - and I do acknowlege its shortcomings - railfans should work to improve it. David Gunn IS reforming it. Just don't rely on the blind ideologues that only want to shut it down and use that money to build more roads and highways. [/quote] Ohlemeier, you have failed the test. I gave you references for my points of argument, you did not. Furthermore, even IF the groups and people who come out with these so-called anti-Amtrak talking points are biased against the current Amtrak structure, at least they themselves have referenced DOT studies to back up their arguments. For your information, I also went to NARP's website to find any contrary information regarding market share, and there is none. They just BS around the issue the way you do, telling us how Amtrak's market share has increased such and such percent, but not what the base number is. Who cares if Amtrak has increased market share 36%, when the base market share is 0.4%? A 36% increase of 0.4% comes to a whopping 0.5%, well within the range of variability i.e. statistically insignificant. Why are people like you so opposed to trying to improve the passenger rail situation in the U.S.? Even you admit the current Amtrak situation is not ideal, but you offer nothing other than increased subsidies as your solution. What Amtrak needs is not so much a complete makeover, but a complete destruction and rebirth with a different government oversight and a willingness to foster passenger rail operations in a private market spectrum. BTW, if you have any website links which reference a different analysis of Amtrak, I will gladly go to them to search for an opposing point of view that hopefully is backed up with facts, not feelgoodism.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag