Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="BaltACD"] [quote user="Sam1"] There is no economic justification for the taxpayers to support another money losing train. And given the numbers, it is unlikely that an investor owned operator would take it on.[/quote] Operation of Auto Train eliminates at least 2 medically caused auto accidents on I-95 per week.  You would be amazed at the number of times Auto-Train has to be met by local EMT's.  If those people were driving?????? [/quote] I would like to see the verifiable data for this claim.  Where can I find the records regarding the number of times the Auto-Train has been met by local EMT's, the nature of the impairments, and the outcomes.  Also, it would be important to know whether the passenger was traveling alone, thereby implying that he or she might be driving alone, or was he or she traveling with a companion that might have been driving. A statistical correlation is not a cause and effect explanation.  This is one of the cleverest justifications for a train that loses more than $30 million per year.  It is akin to the argument that crops up periodically that we need the long distance trains for people who are too impaired to drive, fly, or take a bus.  If this argument is valid, then shouldn't the government provide long distance train service to every community in the country that is larger than say 25,000?  Why would Brownsville, TX, for example, not have train service?
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