Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
Passenger
»
Transportation Polls, Politics, Consumers, and Think-Tanks
Edit post
Edit your reply below.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
<p>[quote user="dakotafred"]</p> <p>[quote user="Sam1"]</p> <p>[quote user="dakotafred"]</p> <p>[quote user="Paul Milenkovic"]</p> <p>And Essential Air Service, which gets a lot of love around here, is a kind of Amtrak in the air.</p> <p>[/quote]</p> <p>This would be true if EAS boarded 31 million passengers a year, instead of the 959,867 it boarded in 2010 at a taxpayer cost for operations almost half of Amtrak's, or $235 million in FY 2013. (Sorry about the disagreeing years; best I could find.) </p> <p>In my state, North Dakota, this service subsidizes expense-account travelers in Devils Lake, Jamestown, Dickinson and Williston. Other travelers from those cities drive 100 miles, saving hundreds of dollars, to fly out of real airports in Bismarck, Minot, Fargo and Grand Forks.</p> <p>Alaska, the one state for which you could make a case for air service being "essential" for ordinary people, needed only $15 million for EAS in 2013. The Lower 48 required $220 million. [/quote]</p> <p>Using your numbers, the average subsidy would be $244.83 per passenger. However, your numbers are mixing apples and oranges. According to Wikipedia, the EAS spend in 2011, which is the closest that I could find to 2010, was $131.5 million, which would make the average EAS subsidy $137 per passenger, assuming that the FY10 spend was not more than the FY11 spend.</p> <p>Comparatively, the average loss for Amtrak's long distance train passengers in FY13 was $147.14 per passenger.</p> <p>Assuming that the EAS spend in FY13 was $235 million, which is close to what Wikipeda shows, the total loss for the EAS program was considerably less than the total loss for Amtrak's long distance trains.</p> <p>[/quote]</p> <p>No, "assuming that the EAS spend in FY13 was $235 million," the cost per passenger (if ridership was the same as in 2010) would be Sam's first figure of $245, not only considerably more than the $147 she finds for LD Amtrak passengers but FIFTEEN (15) TIMES the federal operating subsidy for all Amtrak riders (about $16, or $500 million divided by 31 million riders).[/quote]</p> <p>The average federal operating subsidy for Amtrak's passengers in FY13 was $13.78 for all three product lines, i.e. NEC, State Supported and Other Short Distance Trains, and long distance trains. But the subsidies go beyond those to cover operations. They also cover the capital charges. Thus, after accounting for the capital charges, the average total subsidy per passenger was $36.72 before inclusion of state capital payments, which apply only to the state supported trains. These payments lowered the total average subsidy to $34.30.</p> <p>The total average subsidies ranged from $11.66 for the state supported trains, $24.55 for the NEC, and $139.53 for long distance. These figures are based on an assumption that the NEC wears 90 per cent of Amtrak's depreciation and interest charges, which is just a guess. The $147 number for long distance was based on an assumption that the NEC wears 80 per cent of the capital charges and the other two product lines wear 10 per cent each. In fact, we don't know how Amtrak allocates depreciation and interest charges.</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