On a recent vacation we drove from Salt Lake City UT to Reno NV sure didn't see much traffic. From Elko NV to Reno we were skunked couldn't believe it was the UP thought they would be running one right behind the other. It was mid-day so could have been caused by track blocks. On the return did see traffic East of Winnemucca NV. Which route does Amtrak take into Reno from Winnemucca?
Overall US rail traffic thriugh the first 24 weeks of 2016 is down 8% from 2015 levels.
http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/freight/class-i/grain-gain-helps-offset-coal-and-crude-crash.html?channel=50
But 2015 traffic is down from 2014. On UP, 7 day carloadings ran 188,000 weekly in 2014 and dropped to 177,000 in 2015. They are running at about 160,000 so far in 2016. See slide 3 of 9 in the attached UP presentation.
http://www.up.com/cs/groups/public/@uprr/@investor/documents/investordocuments/pdf_up_citi_slides.pdf
Major parts of the economy are in recession but it is not shown on Wall Street because artificially low interest rates are designed to both subsidize the large annual Federal deficit spending and drive investors to the stock market out of a desperate need to get a modest return, which buttresses the Dow Jones Industrial Average.
And the unemployment rate does not show it and keeps dropping because they stop counting discouraged workers who have needed a job but have given up to looking.
Labor force participation - the percent of working age able-bodied workers who should be working, is at historic lows again. At 62.6%, we are close to 2 out of 5 able-bodied workers not working.
Yes, GDP seems to be trending down. Manufacturing is very slow right now.
herdebu On a recent vacation we drove from Salt Lake City UT to Reno NV sure didn't see much traffic. From Elko NV to Reno we were skunked couldn't believe it was the UP thought they would be running one right behind the other. It was mid-day so could have been caused by track blocks. On the return did see traffic East of Winnemucca NV. Which route does Amtrak take into Reno from Winnemucca?
Johnny
kgbw49Labor force participation - the percent of working age able-bodied workers who should be working, is at historic lows again. At 62.6%, we are close to 2 out of 5 able-bodied workers not working.
Hardly and a very misleading number the rightist media loves to quote. According to the BLS, before Oct. 1977 is was lower, eg., in 1954, it was 58.1%. The peak was 1997-early 2001 (during the Clinton years) often above 67%, with an all-time high of 67% Jan. 2000. Much of the drop is the early retirement of baby-boomers and people returning to school for retraining. The CBO says that roughly half of the three-percentage-point decline in labor-force participation since the end of 2007 is due to the aging of the workforce. article
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
I have been volunteering as Treasurer and Board Member for one of the largest food shelves in the state I live in since 2008. Our usage has tripled and a lot of that increase has been those early retiree baby boomers - mainly white collar - getting laid off and not being able to find another job. They burn through their 99 weeks, then their 401k and then hace nowhere else to go. It is matter of perspective, and that is one story from the front lines. People are being left behind.
kgbw49 ... artificially low interest rates are designed to both subsidize the large annual Federal deficit spending ... Labor force participation - the percent of working age able-bodied workers who should be working, is at historic lows again...
... artificially low interest rates are designed to both subsidize the large annual Federal deficit spending ...
Labor force participation - the percent of working age able-bodied workers who should be working, is at historic lows again...
How does low interest rates subsidize the federal deficit? It makes T bills less attractive, and inflation would make it easier to pay off the debt with dollars that are not worth as much.
Part of the labor force shrinkage is due to the afordable care act, where couples who both worked to qualify for employee health insurance, are now free to leave one spouse at home to care for the family.
Through the end of week 24, 2016 vs. 2015, as per the Weekly Carloads and Intermodal Traffic Report, UP carloads declined 290,160, of which 205,504 or 70.8 per cent were due to a reduction in coal loadings.
The other large declines in car loadings - more than 10,000 cars - were crushed stone, gravel & sand, chemicals, and petroleum. Together they along with coal accounted for 96.5 per cent of the decline, some of which was offset by samall increases in a few categories, i.e. coke and non-metallic metals.
The biggest factor leading to the decline in coal shipments appears to be the switch by electric power generators from coal to natural gas, because of its price advantage, and renewables.
Rio Grande Valley, CFI,CFII
Low interest rates make it easier for the Federal Government to sell more debt - borrow more - because the payments are lower. On $20 trillion in outstanding Federal debt which is growing by $400-$500 billion annually, if the 10 year Treasury ever returns to historical levels of 5% or so, the annual Federal deficit will balloon by hundreds of billions of dollars more than than it currently is. That is because the new debt will come on at a higher interest rate plus any outstanding debt that is reaching maturity has to be rolled over at a higher rate.
That then will cause an even bigger annual Federal deficit requiring even more annual borrowing, and the downward spiral continues.
So low interest rates support more borrowing by the Federal government.
This is the last comment I will be making on this because I erred in talking about unemployed people with little money to spend being a factor in the tepid economy, which in turn is one reason for a roughly 16% drop in carloads over the last two years. I should have realized that it would quickly turn in to a political discourse, and on this forum I would rather spend my time discussing railroad topics than politics.
So as for this thread, I am out and others can take it where they wish to go.
kgbw49This is the last comment I will be making on this because I erred in talking about unemployed people with little money to spend being a factor in the tepid economy, which in turn is one reason for a roughly 16% drop in carloads over the last two years. I should have realized that it would quickly turn in to a political discourse, and on this forum I would rather spend my time discussing railroad topics than politics.
JBS1 and myself pointed out with actual facts the reasons for both a drop in carloadings and the decline in participation in the labor force. That was not political. You simply waltzed in repeating a false talk radio meme.
The Brexit thing possibly could damage our economy, too.
http://www.nytimes.com/images/2016/06/25/nytfrontpage/scan.pdf
kgbw49 Low interest rates make it easier for the Federal Government to sell more debt - borrow more - because the payments are lower. On $20 trillion in outstanding Federal debt which is growing by $400-$500 billion annually, if the 10 year Treasury ever returns to historical levels of 5% or so, the annual Federal deficit will balloon by hundreds of billions of dollars more than than it currently is. That is because the new debt will come on at a higher interest rate plus any outstanding debt that is reaching maturity has to be rolled over at a higher rate. That then will cause an even bigger annual Federal deficit requiring even more annual borrowing, and the downward spiral continues. So low interest rates support more borrowing by the Federal government. This is the last comment I will be making on this because I erred in talking about unemployed people with little money to spend being a factor in the tepid economy, which in turn is one reason for a roughly 16% drop in carloads over the last two years. I should have realized that it would quickly turn in to a political discourse, and on this forum I would rather spend my time discussing railroad topics than politics. So as for this thread, I am out and others can take it where they wish to go.
While the Feds set some interest rates, their T bills/bonds are set by market rates, so I can't see how your arguement applies. Nevertheless, since you don't wish to comment any more, I also don't wish to belabor the point any further. I would also rather spend my time on railfan stuff.
How far from the toilet is the line in this urination contest?
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
MidlandMike kgbw49 Low interest rates make it easier for the Federal Government to sell more debt - borrow more - because the payments are lower. On $20 trillion in outstanding Federal debt which is growing by $400-$500 billion annually, if the 10 year Treasury ever returns to historical levels of 5% or so, the annual Federal deficit will balloon by hundreds of billions of dollars more than than it currently is. That is because the new debt will come on at a higher interest rate plus any outstanding debt that is reaching maturity has to be rolled over at a higher rate. That then will cause an even bigger annual Federal deficit requiring even more annual borrowing, and the downward spiral continues. So low interest rates support more borrowing by the Federal government. This is the last comment I will be making on this because I erred in talking about unemployed people with little money to spend being a factor in the tepid economy, which in turn is one reason for a roughly 16% drop in carloads over the last two years. I should have realized that it would quickly turn in to a political discourse, and on this forum I would rather spend my time discussing railroad topics than politics. So as for this thread, I am out and others can take it where they wish to go. While the Feds set some interest rates, their T bills/bonds are set by market rates, so I can't see how your arguement applies. Nevertheless, since you don't wish to comment any more, I also don't wish to belabor the point any further. I would also rather spend my time on railfan stuff.
"How far from the toilet is the line in this urination contest?"
I am not trying to be a " Hall Monitor" BUT, This might be a good time for everyone on this Thread to take a deep breath.....
samfp1943YIKES!
schlimm samfp1943 YIKES!
samfp1943 YIKES!
To illustrate the effect of the labor force participation rate versus the unemployment rate, consider this. If everybody quit their job today and decided to never work again, would that result in a good economy or a bad economy? The unemployment rate would be zero.
See the comment about workforce participation above. In 1954, there were a lot fewer women in the workforce. There were some places that wouldn't employ married women, or would do so only reluctantly. That skewed the statistics downward.
samfp1943 schlimm samfp1943
schlimm samfp1943
samfp1943
Yes, if you have to have a Snafu in a Trains Forum thread, this is how to do it...
JPS1 The decline in UP’s car loadings is just part of the story. How nimble is the railroad in adjusting it operations to the decline? It appears the UP is more scalable than many imagine. First quarter 2016 operating revenues were down 13.9 per cent compared to the first quarter of 2015. A like kind quarterly comparison indicates that UP was able to reduce operating expenses by 13.6 per cent, thereby mitigating the decline in revenues associated with the fall-off in car loadings. Compensation and benefits were down 11.4 per cent, and fuel fell by 43.3 per cent. These are two of the railroad’s biggest operating expenses. Off-setting these declines was a 2.2 per cent increase in depreciation expense. Operating income was down 15.6 per cent and net income was down 15 per cent. More importantly, however, cash flows from operations during the first quarter 2016 vs. first quarter 2015 was up 5.28 per cent. These numbers suggest that UP management is scaling the railroad to deal with the decline in traffic. My guess is that it will continue to meet the future challenges, as it has done for many years, and will remain a viable investor owned railroad.
There's a big push on to get the operating ratio down to 55. They say it's not only about making cuts, but so far that's mostly what they've done.
They only have to last another 17 years.
Jeff
kgbw49 I have been volunteering as Treasurer and Board Member for one of the largest food shelves in the state I live in since 2008. Our usage has tripled and a lot of that increase has been those early retiree baby boomers - mainly white collar - getting laid off and not being able to find another job. They burn through their 99 weeks, then their 401k and then hace nowhere else to go. It is matter of perspective, and that is one story from the front lines. People are being left behind.
Lack of personal responsibility in my view on an individual to save or live within their means. Some people need to have this happen to them in order to learn, is also my view. We will become a stronger country and much better educated on saving for the future because of this (happened after the Great Depression). So as hard as it is to watch. Sometimes you just have to stand back and watch (and help out where you can without dragging yourself down with them). I always wonder how Parents raised their kids without teaching the concept of budgeting or saving.
Sorry, had to get my personal feelings in as well. I am all in financially with Union Pacific, more than $100,000 invested with them so far and I hope to grow that amount. They kick arse with the dividend payment and I feel yes they might be going through a slight rough patch now but they have both the innovation and the business marketing skill to bounce back and wow the industry again. Would definitely rate them higher than BNSF and think if Warren had a second chance would pick UP instead of BNSF.
jeffhergert There's a big push on to get the operating ratio down to 55. They say it's not only about making cuts, but so far that's mostly what they've done. They only have to last another 17 years.
What happens in 17 years? (Not the Rapture?)
CMStPnP Sorry, had to get my personal feelings in as well. I am all in financially with Union Pacific, more than $100,000 invested with them so far and I hope to grow that amount. They kick arse with the dividend payment and I feel yes they might be going through a slight rough patch now but they have both the innovation and the business marketing skill to bounce back and wow the industry again. Would definitely rate them higher than BNSF and think if Warren had a second chance would pick UP instead of BNSF.
CMStPnP I am all in financially with Union Pacific, more than $100,000 invested with them so far and I hope to grow that amount.
Putting all or even most of your eggs in one basket is a pretty risky strategy, even with a sound investment such as UP.
samfp1943 MidlandMike kgbw49 Low interest rates make it easier for the Federal Government to sell more debt - borrow more - because the payments are lower. On $20 trillion in outstanding Federal debt which is growing by $400-$500 billion annually, if the 10 year Treasury ever returns to historical levels of 5% or so, the annual Federal deficit will balloon by hundreds of billions of dollars more than than it currently is. That is because the new debt will come on at a higher interest rate plus any outstanding debt that is reaching maturity has to be rolled over at a higher rate. That then will cause an even bigger annual Federal deficit requiring even more annual borrowing, and the downward spiral continues. So low interest rates support more borrowing by the Federal government. This is the last comment I will be making on this because I erred in talking about unemployed people with little money to spend being a factor in the tepid economy, which in turn is one reason for a roughly 16% drop in carloads over the last two years. I should have realized that it would quickly turn in to a political discourse, and on this forum I would rather spend my time discussing railroad topics than politics. So as for this thread, I am out and others can take it where they wish to go. While the Feds set some interest rates, their T bills/bonds are set by market rates, so I can't see how your arguement applies. Nevertheless, since you don't wish to comment any more, I also don't wish to belabor the point any further. I would also rather spend my time on railfan stuff. YIKES! And this comment as well : Posted by BaltACD on Saturday, June 25, 2016 10:11 PM "How far from the toilet is the line in this urination contest?" I am not trying to be a " Hall Monitor" BUT, This might be a good time for everyone on this Thread to take a deep breath.....
YIKES! And this comment as well : Posted by BaltACD on Saturday, June 25, 2016 10:11 PM
I was trying to back away from a controversy, and agreed with Mr. kgbw49 that I also would rather talk about railroads than politics. Instead of being a "Hall Monitor" it seems you were just calling attention to a nif-naf that was fading away. Perhaps you could have taken a deep breath to see if the controversy re-ignited before fanning the embers.
schlimmPutting all or even most of your eggs in one basket is a pretty risky strategy, even with a sound investment such as UP.
UP is the lowest risk in the RR industry and is the only transport sector stock I own. Portfolio is well balanced.
dakotafred jeffhergert There's a big push on to get the operating ratio down to 55. They say it's not only about making cuts, but so far that's mostly what they've done. They only have to last another 17 years. What happens in 17 years? (Not the Rapture?)
I'll retire. If all goes well. That's a few years longer than I'd have to stay. Most can't wait to retire.
I doubt Warren Buffett wishes he had bought UP instead of BNSF. I've heard that one of the reasons he didn't go after UP was because he thought they were top-heavy in management. Supposedly, although I can't find the quote, he said UP was the biggest mismanaged gold mine in the world. That may have been a few CEOs ago, but I'm not sure much has really changed that would change his mind about buying BNSF.
jeffhergertI doubt Warren Buffett wishes he had bought UP instead of BNSF. I've heard that one of the reasons he didn't go after UP was because he thought they were top-heavy in management. Supposedly, although I can't find the quote, he said UP was the biggest mismanaged gold mine in the world. That may have been a few CEOs ago, but I'm not sure much has really changed that would change his mind about buying BNSF.
Railroads don't have a monopoly on that. Too many corporations are top heavy and mismanaged.
Norm
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.