Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
MichaelSol The point about the highway trust fund 'policy' is that it's not based on priorities or need, rather politics, therefore it's loaded with pork barrel projects. Homeland Security funding works the same way, not to mention Amtrak so there's no reason to believe any type of OA rail fund administered from Washington would be any different. IMHO the problem IS Washington where the regulators and policies swing from one extreme to the other with the political tides.Captive shipping rates wouldn't be an issue if the STB was doing it's job. FM The 'new' company would be the one that owns and maintains the infratructure. In addition to that expense, you've proposed runninng shorter trains faster and more frequently, meaning more maintainence, fuel, and labor costs. You've also said companies would be allowed a decent ROI, which the Class I's are just starting to see now. Mergers are done to reduce duplicate expenses and overhead, this would be in effect a reverse merger and I don't see where a reduction in overall real costs is coming from. If costs go up and everyone gets a decent ROI, then rates need to increase to produce more income.
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