DwightBranch schlimm My reference was obviously for primarily within-state services. You should realize those services are limited to within states or going on to adjoining states. from Amtrak: "In FY 2011, 20 of the 27 state-supported corridor services set annual ridership records." Fifteen states provide some level of operating support for 21 different routes, with payments totaling over $191 million in FY 2011. Many states (including California, Illinois, Oregon, New York, Pennsylvania and Washington) recognize the benefits of investing in corridor development and have spent substantial state funds to improve services with positive ridership results. Amtrak currently operates 21 state-supported routes in 15 states across the country. The states that contract with Amtrak are California, Illinois, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Oklahoma, Oregon, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin. Section 209 of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA) required Amtrak to work with its state partners to establish a consistent cost-sharing methodology across all corridor routes of less than 750 miles, in order to ensure fair and equitable treatment of all states. " That Illinois resident, whether a citizen or not, can easily take a flight from many regional airports in the state besides St. Louis or Chicago (Champaign, Bloomington, Springfield). Long distance trains make little sense as practical transportation. And for whatever reason, you continue to display your total lack of civility. I have said all I intend to say to you , except that I still think you and the other shills should hang out on busride.com and stay off the long distance passenger train board.
schlimm My reference was obviously for primarily within-state services. You should realize those services are limited to within states or going on to adjoining states. from Amtrak: "In FY 2011, 20 of the 27 state-supported corridor services set annual ridership records." Fifteen states provide some level of operating support for 21 different routes, with payments totaling over $191 million in FY 2011. Many states (including California, Illinois, Oregon, New York, Pennsylvania and Washington) recognize the benefits of investing in corridor development and have spent substantial state funds to improve services with positive ridership results. Amtrak currently operates 21 state-supported routes in 15 states across the country. The states that contract with Amtrak are California, Illinois, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Oklahoma, Oregon, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin. Section 209 of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA) required Amtrak to work with its state partners to establish a consistent cost-sharing methodology across all corridor routes of less than 750 miles, in order to ensure fair and equitable treatment of all states. " That Illinois resident, whether a citizen or not, can easily take a flight from many regional airports in the state besides St. Louis or Chicago (Champaign, Bloomington, Springfield). Long distance trains make little sense as practical transportation. And for whatever reason, you continue to display your total lack of civility.
My reference was obviously for primarily within-state services. You should realize those services are limited to within states or going on to adjoining states.
from Amtrak: "In FY 2011, 20 of the 27 state-supported corridor services set annual ridership records."
Fifteen states provide some level of operating support for 21 different routes, with payments totaling over $191 million in FY 2011. Many states (including California, Illinois, Oregon, New York, Pennsylvania and Washington) recognize the benefits of investing in corridor development and have spent substantial state funds to improve services with positive ridership results.
Amtrak currently operates 21 state-supported routes in 15 states across the country. The states that contract with Amtrak are California, Illinois, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Oklahoma, Oregon, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin. Section 209 of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA) required Amtrak to work with its state partners to establish a consistent cost-sharing methodology across all corridor routes of less than 750 miles, in order to ensure fair and equitable treatment of all states. "
That Illinois resident, whether a citizen or not, can easily take a flight from many regional airports in the state besides St. Louis or Chicago (Champaign, Bloomington, Springfield). Long distance trains make little sense as practical transportation. And for whatever reason, you continue to display your total lack of civility.
I have said all I intend to say to you , except that I still think you and the other shills should hang out on busride.com and stay off the long distance passenger train board.
First, this is not the "long distance" passenger train board. It is just plain "passenger".
Second, argue the topic, not the motive. I believe you are guilty of "if the argument doesn't fit my conclusion, then there must be something wrong with it or the person presenting it." e.i. Some of us are "evil bus people" (we are not!)
Third, what about Amtrak Thruway buses?? Good or evil?
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
All I can say is I, like Don and Phoebe and Paul M. and henry6 and sam1 and blue streak and others have been pushing for a real and better passenger rail service in the US for much longer than Branch or John. I don't agree with all of them, but I truly believe we all want to see an improved service and are not "shills" trying to sabotage passenger rail in the US.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
schlimm All I can say is I, like Don and Phoebe and Paul M. and henry6 and sam1 and blue streak and others have been pushing for a real and better passenger rail service in the US for much longer than Branch or John. I don't agree with all of them, but I truly believe we all want to see an improved service and are not "shills" trying to sabotage passenger rail in the US.
I'll second that! We all have our "druthers" but we generally seem to be rowing in the same direction.
Does the "US highway network" serve rural areas better than Amtrak? I suspect most rural areas are served by state and country roads rather than US highways.
Was there a goal when Amtrak was created? I am skeptical that 535 people (the number of Senators and Representatives in the Congress) could create anything with a goal.
I don't know where your figures on the per cent of intercity traffic carried carried by automobiles comes from. I do know that in many places people are forced to drive whether they want to or not because there is no public transit, neither trains nor buses. But I do agree that here in the US we have pursued a policy of widely disbursed suburbs that relies on private automobiles and makes public transit difficult or impossible. Certainly, automobiles are a big part of our transportation system but slowly we are coming to realize their limitations and that we need other transportation alternatives.
If there is any "1950 business model" in our society it is the way the construction industry builds our sprawling suburbs. The model is rooted in the philosophy of Robert Moses whose influence has resulted in the destruction of large parts of our cities and their replacement with bigger and bigger houses and highways. I mean do you really think a 5 acre lot and a 4 lane road with so much traffic that children cannot play with their friends across the street and they need to ride a bus 8 blocks to school because the traffic is so dangerous? But that is what we do.
When I speak about subsidy to roads I do not mean the excise taxes on motor fuels. Actually there are so many subsidized road expenses I don't know how to figure them out. To begin, local and country roads are paid for with property tax but property tax is not related to road usage. And things like street lamps, police protection including pensions and medical benefits and local court systems are not counted in road subsidy but most of their costs exist because of our roads. In my state, New Jersey, we also have a state excise tax on motor fuels but all of the money collected goes to pay interest on bonds so state highway repairs and the costs of a state police force come out of sales taxes which again are unrelated to roads. Interstate highway direct costs are paid with Federal motor fuel excise tax but the cost of policing also comes from state sales taxes. State taxes even pay for snow removal on interstate highways. Then there the the environmental costs from adding the hard surfaces which adds to the problem of rivers flooding and the costs of pollution. I could go on.
My real point here is that all transportation that moves people and much of the transportation that moves freight is subsidized. None of the subsidized are based on a business model.
Not to get on my high horse or even my high level coach seat, Schlimm, but I have been pushing for better train service since the late 1950's. However, I have only come to Trains recently.
Again, very well said John WR, highways are NOT paid for on a user-fee arrangement as the libertarians here would have you believe.
How these improvements are paid for is not my concern. I know it will require a commitment of major federal financing for the infrastructure. My point is that the improvements in rail travel have nothing to do with roads and the airways. Rather it is what kind of a future one envisions for passenger rail service: one with a fast, frequent, state-of-the-art modern service that is rational within the context of intermodal transportation or some nostalgia trip back 50 years- wait, more like 100 years with every little town having its depot). Ignorantly labeling people ("shills" "libertarians") because you are incapable of making a cogent argument is pretty lame.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.