Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
DM&E Financing revisited.
Edit post
Edit your reply below.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="TheAntiGates"][quote user="futuremodal"] <P><BR></P> <P>Yet you display no similar hostility to the fact that both BNSF and UP received federal assistance for their PRB projects. Indeed, there is nary a peep out of you concerning NS's grant from the taxpayers for their doublestack project.</P> <P>At least you're consistent in your inconsistency.</P> <P>[/quote]<BR><BR>Believe me when I tell you, you have yet to see me "hostile" towards anyone.<BR><BR>I think that the word you meant to use was opposition.<BR><BR>And in that vein it's for good reason. For one, federal loans to UP and BNSF are not on the table here, we are talking about a loan to DM&E, an entirely seperate entity. what's done is done, we can't change that.<BR><BR>Where you seem to be trying to argue that since BNSF/UP received such loans, that the gov't somehow "owes" similar treatment to DM&E, you (thankfully) seem to be in the minority in that regard.<BR><BR>The "everybody else is doing it" mentality is not what I consider to be a persuasive argument, never has been, never will.<BR><BR>The BNSF/UP loans were ENTIRELY seperate, with a loan recipient that was far less leveraged, had far more collateral, with a FAR longer track record (no pun) as a long term operator than this DM&E bunch.<BR><BR>The two can not and should not be considered in the same spirit, since they come from entirely seperate universes.<BR><BR>The "inconsistency" you see is actually in your delusion pretending BNSF/UP and DM&E are "peers" worthy of the same consideration.<BR><BR><BR>Matt Rose and Dick Davidson just don't strike me as a risk that would borrow 10 times what they are worth, using the proceeds to bankroll an operation where they can draw handsome salaries for six years, then as payments start falling due, say "whoops, it didn't work", and hand the bag back to the american taxpayer.<BR><BR>Draw whatever inferences you find convenient there. <BR>[/quote]</P> <P>Sorry, I didn't realize you had so many multiple personalities as to represent a *majority* on this issue!</P> <P>Dude - it's just YOU that hates DM&E, at least on this forum (thankfully). You are the sole minority. You are alone on an island of your own making. YOU ARE IN A SEPARATE UNIVERSE!</P> <P>Oh, Murphy kicks in from time to time on the anti-DM&E side of things, but that's just because Kevin Scheiffer won't wave back to him from his ivory tower.[|(]</P> <P>FYI - DM&E will be reclassified as a Class I railroad when this is all said and done. That'll make DM&E a peer of all the other Class I's by any definition, whether you agree or not. They'll also be peers in that they ALL received (and will continue to receive) federal aid.</P> <P>It's just how things are done in this country regarding railroad construction.</P>
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
Update Reply
Join our Community!
Our community is
FREE
to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Login »
Register »
Search the Community
Newsletter Sign-Up
By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our
privacy policy
More great sites from Kalmbach Media
Terms Of Use
|
Privacy Policy
|
Copyright Policy