Trains.com

Debate

663 views
8 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    June 2003
  • 1,009 posts
Debate
Posted by GDRMCo on Friday, November 12, 2004 3:28 AM
I think we should have a debate against each other like teams. We could pick our teams and decide on a topic to debate for and against. I'll start off by chosing who I want on my team, only 3 to a team. I chose M636C and Junctionfan.

ML

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • 4,612 posts
Posted by M636C on Friday, November 12, 2004 3:32 AM
Are two Australians allowed on the same team?

Is there a subject yet?

Peter
  • Member since
    June 2003
  • 1,009 posts
Posted by GDRMCo on Friday, November 12, 2004 3:43 AM
Yes two aussies are allowed on the same team. The topic is wether or not we should bring back the name trains of the 50s and 60s and they should be operated by the railroads (or mergered roads) that operated them. I'm for.

ML

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Midwest
  • 718 posts
Posted by railman on Friday, November 12, 2004 4:42 AM
Sounds like a pretty one-sided debate...not many folks would argue devil's advocate against the "good old days."
  • Member since
    February 2004
  • From: St.Catharines, Ontario
  • 3,770 posts
Posted by Junctionfan on Friday, November 12, 2004 6:27 AM
Sounds like something we could win easily. Not really a challenge to our team.
Andrew
  • Member since
    June 2003
  • 1,009 posts
Posted by GDRMCo on Friday, November 12, 2004 6:34 AM
What about wether or not high speed rail would be profitable. I'm for.

ML

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, November 12, 2004 3:56 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by GDRMCo

Yes two aussies are allowed on the same team. The topic is wether or not we should bring back the name trains of the 50s and 60s and they should be operated by the railroads (or mergered roads) that operated them. I'm for.


Good topic. Regarding the Amtrak situation, we had this debate a while back. My position was that it would have been better (e.g. less expensive for the taxpayers) if instead of Congress creating Amtrak back in 1970, they should have instead provided tax incentives to the Class I's to keep operating their name trains. Thus, the competitive rivalries would have continued, and rail passengers would have recieved better service. Not to mention the diversity of train paint schemes!
  • Member since
    January 2002
  • 4,612 posts
Posted by M636C on Friday, November 12, 2004 6:30 PM
Well, BNSF have enough existing colour schemes to cover a number of the merged railroads. For the old Santa Fe lines, we could use Red and Silver units fully lettered BNSF. On the Great Northern, for the "Empire Builder" we could have units in "Heritage I", and on the Northern Pacific, the "Executive" green and cream would be a reasonable substitute. I'm not sure what we can do for the Burlington. On UP, since their trains were yellow and grey, even on SP and C&NW, no change, except it would be nice to get Red and Orange back on the Coast line!

Peter
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, November 12, 2004 6:37 PM
I'll pass

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

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