oltmannd Really? Consensus? I hope you don't mean the occasional opinion polls that ask roughly: "Do you think we should have more and/or better train service?
Really? Consensus? I hope you don't mean the occasional opinion polls that ask roughly: "Do you think we should have more and/or better train service?
No, Don. That is not what I mean. What I mean is that it is well known that Amtrak gets annual subsidies. And while Amtrak has its critics including strong critics they have never been able to stop Amtrak from continuing on in the way that you so strongly disagree with.
John
John WR Well, Lion, I'm glad that someone is getting some benefit from I-99. It just is not at all clear to me that this is an appropriate use of Federal funds. If you live along the route I hope your drinking water has not become like battery acid. John
Well, Lion, I'm glad that someone is getting some benefit from I-99. It just is not at all clear to me that this is an appropriate use of Federal funds. If you live along the route I hope your drinking water has not become like battery acid.
Bud Shuster knew how to bring home the bacon! As bad as I-99 was, redoing US22 over the mountain from Duncansville west to Cresson cost a pretty penny, too.....
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
John WRBut with all due respect up to now there has been a national consensus in support of the way Amtrak handles itself.
Really? Consensus? I hope you don't mean the occasional opinion polls that ask roughly: "Do you think we should have more and/or better train service?"
I would answer "YES!" to that. I fact, that's what I'm advocating!
NittanyLion And it was a fairly small area (and hilariously visible too) that had the pyrite issue. To be frank, it was preposterous that one of the largest universities in the nation could only be accessed by two lane roads and that there was no north-south interstate in the west-central part of the state.
And it was a fairly small area (and hilariously visible too) that had the pyrite issue.
To be frank, it was preposterous that one of the largest universities in the nation could only be accessed by two lane roads and that there was no north-south interstate in the west-central part of the state.
Well, I am glad that you live out of that small pyrite area. Unfortunately, there are people who do live there who are left with the problems and risks.
Should the Federal Government build interstate highways up to every state university in the country as it has in Pennsylvania? I understand that in Virginia there is so little money to repair I-95 that the Governor wants to put a toll on it.
I live in Virginia now.
oltmanndWhy are you trying to justify Amtrak's wastefulness?
As I have said before, Don, I don't believe Amtrak's attempts to balance priorities, to respond to diverse needs, is a mistake. In fact I believe it is essential that Amtrak do this if it is to maintain sufficient support in the country to continue.
I appreciate the fact that you have a different perspective and that you provide an insightful and well informed analysis of what you believe Amtrak should be doing. But with all due respect up to now there has been a national consensus in support of the way Amtrak handles itself. It is not clear that such a consensus exists for your proposals.
The whole of transportation in the US: air, water, road, and rail; freight and passenger; private and government owned and/or operated all have to come to the table of planning, financial, and other minds and a plan made. We have come almost 250 years of social and private enterprises working together and against each other leaving us with a hodge podge of services and organizations. Any argument about subsidies is mute simply because we are so knee deep in two and a half centuries of them that there is no sense arguing: they are there, some are hidden, but they exist and have brought us to where we are. We can argue all we want...but there has to be a will and a way at the top to change or ratify or justify or eliminate them. The US economy has always been a consortium and partnership of private enterprise and various government levels and railroads are just a small part...
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
oltmannd John WRDo we even know how much I-99, a road that is not needed, has cost us? Why are you trying to justify Amtrak's wastefulness? It's exactly that wastefulness that has prevented virtually any progress outside the NEC and is responsible for the NEC being in disrepair. It keeps the debate in the gov't pinned down on "airfare is cheaper than the Sunset" and "$15 hamburgers". The first step in fixing a problem is admitting you have one.
John WRDo we even know how much I-99, a road that is not needed, has cost us?
Why are you trying to justify Amtrak's wastefulness? It's exactly that wastefulness that has prevented virtually any progress outside the NEC and is responsible for the NEC being in disrepair. It keeps the debate in the gov't pinned down on "airfare is cheaper than the Sunset" and "$15 hamburgers".
The first step in fixing a problem is admitting you have one.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
NittanyLion John WR Do we even know how much I-99, a road that is not needed, has cost us? I thought it was pretty needed, given that I was a frequent user of it.
John WR Do we even know how much I-99, a road that is not needed, has cost us?
Do we even know how much I-99, a road that is not needed, has cost us?
I thought it was pretty needed, given that I was a frequent user of it.
Do you remember the big "Thanks, Bud!" billboard on the curve near Duncansville?
oltmannd If I throw a $5 out the window, that's not as bad as throwing a $10 out the window, so throwing the $5 out is a good thing to do?
Do we even know how much I-99, a road that is not needed, has cost us? And we are still left with pollution from the equivalent of battery acid. And a substantial part of that pollution has been covered up but not mitigated.
Don,
Thank you for Amtrak Profitability: An Analysis of Congressional Expectations at Amtrak’s Creation. Randall Peterman defines three groups: Those who believed the discouragement hypothesis that the railroads were trying to drive away passengers to focus on the more profitable freight traffic, those who believed the economic efficiency hypothesis that passenger railroads were an obsolete technology that had been eclipsed by automobiles and airplanes and a subgroup of the economic efficiency people who believed that by making policies supporting automobiles and airplanes the government itself was undermining passenger railroads and if the Federal Government would only treat them the same way it treated other forms of passenger transportation they would flourish. Peterman doesn't mention John Volpe or anyone else by name. Taking the title at face value he is focused only on Members of Congress and the positions they took.
My impression is that the issues Peterman describes are still with us today both in the Congress and among those citizens who are concerned about the future of rail passenger service.
There is an issue that jumps out at me but that the article does not consider. When Amtrak was created did anyone in the Congress or anywhere else consider what might happen if, after creating Amtrak, Congress did continue to fund it sufficiently to keep it operating but not sufficiently to accomplish the upgrades needed to operate profitably. It seems to me that was the most likely outcome of the legislation and it is what has happened.
oltmanndHe underestimated the porcinity of the LD train network....
No, you mean the suilladolianicity of the LD train network.
Or ...
It's not the pork that matters, it's whose barrel is, or whose constituents are, being rolled...
and/or the porcine tendencies its advocates.
schlimm "The Amtrak Improvement Act of 1978 (P.L. 95-421); the Conference report noted that the bill removed Amtrak's for-profit status but required that the corporation be "operated and managed as" a for-profit corporation (H.C.R. 95-1478)." Volpe had it right in the beginning, but 40 years later we've made little headway in achieving his vision.
"The Amtrak Improvement Act of 1978 (P.L. 95-421); the Conference report noted that the bill removed Amtrak's for-profit status but required that the corporation be "operated and managed as" a for-profit corporation (H.C.R. 95-1478)."
Volpe had it right in the beginning, but 40 years later we've made little headway in achieving his vision.
He underestimated the porcinity of the LD train network....
John WR PNWRMNMThe "for profit" designation for ATK was and is a fig leaf. Only the ignorant ever believed that story. Mac, Perhaps the "for profit" designation was there so people who did not vote against Railpax could later feign ignorance. In the Congress it is not totally unknown for individual members to claim strong positions for the folks back home but find a way out of those positions when it comes time for a vote. John
PNWRMNMThe "for profit" designation for ATK was and is a fig leaf. Only the ignorant ever believed that story.
Mac,
Perhaps the "for profit" designation was there so people who did not vote against Railpax could later feign ignorance. In the Congress it is not totally unknown for individual members to claim strong positions for the folks back home but find a way out of those positions when it comes time for a vote.
Volpe was the father of Amtrak. He helped write and sell the legislation on the Hill and snuck it by Nixon's closest henchmen who were against it (Haldemann and Mitchell, predominantly) . Here's what he thought: http://www.policyarchive.org/handle/10207/1446
Basically, he thought Amtrak could eventually cover operating costs if there was significant investment in corridors and the LD routes were further trimmed. Neither happened.
(Whole paper here: http://d1lj51l9p3qzy9.cloudfront.net/handle/10207/bitstreams/1446.pdf)
John WRThe best that can be said is that the return is less negative than it might be. But we also have to ask what do we compare the lack of a positive return to. If we compare it to the S&P 500 the losses look pretty horrible. But if we compare it to blasting away the side of a cliff for an unneeded road and suddenly finding we have the equivalent of battery acid coming out of the rock, well then Amtrack doesn't look so bad.
If I throw a $5 out the window, that's not as bad as throwing a $10 out the window, so throwing the $5 out is a good thing to do?
No doubt, there are parts of Amtrak where, if you sum the direct and indirect benefits, they exceed the costs. No doubt, there are investments in passenger rail that score better than the alternatives, but being better than a "bad thing" is unsound reasoning.
oltmannd Key work in the definition: "return" That means the benefits outweigh the cost. Does Amtrak have a positive return? In all places and services? Just some? Are some better than others? Is money being wisely allocated and wisely spent?
Key work in the definition: "return"
That means the benefits outweigh the cost.
Does Amtrak have a positive return? In all places and services? Just some? Are some better than others? Is money being wisely allocated and wisely spent?
I would say providing service to large amounts of people provides a return.
Railroad to Freedom
oltmanndDoes Amtrak have a positive return? In all places and services? Just some? Are some better than others? Is money being wisely allocated and wisely spent?
Well Don, I think you and I and the rest of us know that Amtrak does not have a positive return. The best that can be said is that the return is less negative than it might be. But we also have to ask what do we compare the lack of a positive return to. If we compare it to the S&P 500 the losses look pretty horrible. But if we compare it to blasting away the side of a cliff for an unneeded road and suddenly finding we have the equivalent of battery acid coming out of the rock, well then Amtrack doesn't look so bad.
The "for profit" designation for ATK was and is a fig leaf. Only the ignorant ever believed that story.
Mac
ontheBNSFPeople try to claim that because Amtrak was chartered as a for profit corporation that it is illegally loosing money.
It is easy for a lot of people to toss out words. But no one in government seriously believes Amtrak is illegal.
Forget the dictionary here, you are dealing with politics....everything in politics is what the politicians want to make it...
People try to claim that because Amtrak was chartered as a for profit corporation that it is illegally loosing money. Nothing in its charter say that it has to exceed capital costs. Profit can simply be someone's benefit.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/profit
A dictionary definition
1. An advantageous gain or return; benefit.
If Amtrak is providing some sort of gain or benefit then it is satisfying its requirement to be a for profit corporation. Semantics yes but no less true. Amtrak perfectly satisfying the needs of its charter.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.