blue streak 1 But Philly those persons in the western states have to pay taxes for your waterways that they cannot use unless they go to those locations.
A key point is the importance of what people in one part of the country are being asked to support in another part of the country that is not likely to benefit them directly.
I am happy to have my federal tax dollars go to support the NEC, as well as several other high density corridors, because they are important or maybe even critical alternatives for mobility in those corridors.
Likewise, I would support using some of my state tax dollars to support better passenger rail service along the I-35 corridor between DFW and San Antonio, even though I would not be able to use it that much.
But I don't want my tax dollars going to support once a day, often late running long distance trains, that could go away tomorrow and very few people would miss them. They are not critical transport for but a tiny fraction of the nation's population.
It is a matter of priorities.
Rio Grande Valley, CFI,CFII
NKP guy Neither are ......or the TVA,
The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) is a corporate agency of the United States. Unlike Amtrak, it does not have any shares outstanding.
Philly Amtrak Fan I don't necessarily think Amtrak should be profitable or break even but one statistic Amtrak frequently talks about financially is they cover, as of 2017, "94.7 percent of its operating costs with ticket sales and other revenues". The trend is that number has gone up every year and IMO that number should be 100%. You can say Amtrak is a public service. The problem is this service isn't available to everyone. A lot of the country doesn't have access to Amtrak (within say 100 mile radius). Is it fair for someone living in Columbus, OH to pay tax money for Amtrak when they can't use it? Also, others have better service and more trains than others and it isn't always population based (Texas, Florida, and Ohio have relatively poor rail service).
I don't necessarily think Amtrak should be profitable or break even but one statistic Amtrak frequently talks about financially is they cover, as of 2017, "94.7 percent of its operating costs with ticket sales and other revenues". The trend is that number has gone up every year and IMO that number should be 100%.
You can say Amtrak is a public service. The problem is this service isn't available to everyone. A lot of the country doesn't have access to Amtrak (within say 100 mile radius). Is it fair for someone living in Columbus, OH to pay tax money for Amtrak when they can't use it? Also, others have better service and more trains than others and it isn't always population based (Texas, Florida, and Ohio have relatively poor rail service).
But Philly those persons in the western states have to pay taxes for your waterways that they cannot use unless they go to those locations.
Philly Amtrak Fan I don't necessarily think Amtrak should be profitable or break even but one statistic Amtrak frequently talks about financially is they cover, as of 2017, "94.7 percent of its operating costs with ticket sales and other revenues".
NKP guy Americans have consistently shown for almost a half-century that they want nationwide passenger train service and are willing to subsidize it.
What Americans have shown with their pocketbooks for almost half-a-century is a preference for personal vehicles for short to intermediate trips and airplanes for long distance trips.
Less than one percent of intercity travelers go by train. A higher percentage of travelers along the NEC or one of the two or three other relatively high-density corridors use the train, but they are greatly outnumbered by motorists.
Abilene, Amarillo, Brownsville, Corpus Christi, Harlingen, Lubbock, McAllen, Midland, Odessa, and San Angelo, all cities in Texas with populations of more than 100,000, don’t have any passenger train service. There is no real market demand for it. When these cities get passenger train service, along with every other city in the United States of equal size, I will buy the argument that Amtrak is a national system.
Passenger trains make sense in relatively short, high density corridors. The long-distance trains don’t make any sense. To throw one more dollar at them, irrespective of what the federal and state governments do with the taxpayer’s other dollars, is poor financial management.
NKP guy Amtrak is a public service run by a quasi-governmental body; it is not a business.
GrampI love trains, but I'm not in favor of spending good money after bad money.
So is the unneeded $1.5 trillion tax cut is OK with you? Amtrak's puny subsidy is a waste of money and must be sacrified on the Altar of Sound Financial Principles, but the tax cut is OK?
My guess (from the quotations you cited) is that you supported the tax cut and the political party that wrote it.
The great fiscal guru Dick Cheny said that Ronald Reagan proved that in politics, "Deficits don't matter."
So why does the Amtrak subsidy matter so much that it must be ended along with the service to the American public which it provides?
I don't know about you, but I received very little recently in the way of tax relief, while the 1% got nearly all of it. But I do like, need, and use Amtrak, and you would take that away from your countrymen because it would increase the federal deficit?
What percent of the deficit, let alone the national debt, is Amtrak responsible for? I simply can't understand people who go along withe the tax cut and then cry poor mouth about Amtrak.
If Amtrak has to die for the sake of some Principle, then I want to see huge cuts in Social Security, Medicare & Medicaid, Veterans Hospitals, etc., because the same Principle is involved.
Let's start by closing all the lighthouses. If people and businesses want them, let them pay for them, right?
The propane was used to power the air conditioners. As far as I remember, only two roads, Southern and Snta Fe, used steam-powered air conditioners. I believe most roads used electrically-powered air conditioning--and if the batteries were not kept up, there was little cooling, as on the SAL combines that ran between Wildwood and St. Pertersburg (the run was not long enough to fully charge the batteries and keep the cars cool)..
Johnny
NKP guy PJS1 If Amtrak’s executives were allowed to manage Amtrak like the business it is supposed to be, it would cut the long-distance trains in a heartbeat. Amtrak is a public service run by a quasi-governmental body; it is not a business. It is not expected to make a profit. Americans have consistently shown for almost a half-century that they want nationwide passenger train service and are willing to subsidize it. To further CMStPnP's point, try imagining the effect on public opinion when they learn about the hundreds of millions of dollars of train equipment that would suddenly become redundant. The brand-new and expensive dining cars that even now are not being used for the purposes for which they were designed. This enormous fifty-year public financial investment would be just junked. How many years would it take to amortize the costs of the labor, equipment, and goodness knows what else? Would even fifty years do it? Out of this upheaval and huge waste the public gets less than nothing, but the principle of operating a business as it ought to be is upheld! All this destruction of the public good was justified after all! Except no one asked the public, let alone made a convincing case of it. This government just gave away 1.5 trillion dollars in tax cuts to people who were already millionaires and billionaires. How many years of Amtrak subsidies would that have covered? Where were the much-vaunted principles of business when businessmen rammed that tax bill through a compliant Congress and then down our collective throat? Any concern for who pays for that?
PJS1 If Amtrak’s executives were allowed to manage Amtrak like the business it is supposed to be, it would cut the long-distance trains in a heartbeat.
Amtrak is a public service run by a quasi-governmental body; it is not a business. It is not expected to make a profit.
Americans have consistently shown for almost a half-century that they want nationwide passenger train service and are willing to subsidize it.
To further CMStPnP's point, try imagining the effect on public opinion when they learn about the hundreds of millions of dollars of train equipment that would suddenly become redundant. The brand-new and expensive dining cars that even now are not being used for the purposes for which they were designed. This enormous fifty-year public financial investment would be just junked.
How many years would it take to amortize the costs of the labor, equipment, and goodness knows what else? Would even fifty years do it?
Out of this upheaval and huge waste the public gets less than nothing, but the principle of operating a business as it ought to be is upheld! All this destruction of the public good was justified after all!
Except no one asked the public, let alone made a convincing case of it.
This government just gave away 1.5 trillion dollars in tax cuts to people who were already millionaires and billionaires. How many years of Amtrak subsidies would that have covered? Where were the much-vaunted principles of business when businessmen rammed that tax bill through a compliant Congress and then down our collective throat?
Any concern for who pays for that?
Thoughts...
'And did we tell you the name of the game, boy? We call it "Riding The Gravy Train".' Pink Floyd
"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." Ronald Reagan
"Simple fairness dictates that government must not raise taxes on families struggling to pay their bills." Ronald Reagan
"You can't be for big government, big taxes, and big bureaucracy, and still be for the little guy." Ronald Reagan
"Whenever we lower the tax rates, our entire nation is better off." Ronald Reagan
"Today the Federal Debt is about $21,733,425,227,728.46
The amount is the gross outstanding debt issued by the US Dept. of the Treasury since 1790.
It doesn't include state and local debt.
And, it doesn't include so-called "agency debt".
And, it doesn't include so-called unfunded liabilities of entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare.
Federal Debt per person is about $66,606." usgovernmentdebt.us
I love trains, but I'm not in favor of spending good money after bad money.
If/when Texas Central becomes a reality (with its Japanese and Renfe partners among others), maybe the Amtrak football will be seen in a different light.
I am concerned about our country should the day of reckoning come.
NKP guyTo further CMStPnP's point, try imagining the effect on public opinion when they learn about the hundreds of millions of dollars of train equipment that would suddenly become redundant.
So this reminded me of a long ago issue at Amtrak's formation that still has me a little confused....
Maybe some of the old railroaders on this website would remember. There were some new safety rules that made Milwaukee Road Passenger equipment not acceptable without upgrades. It was primarily that reason vs. Amtrak standardizing on Budd (which it didn't, BTW, Amtrak selected passenger cars from other manufacturers and for a year or two accepted the Milwaukee equipment).
There was something in regards to safety that DQ'd most of the Milwaukee Road equipment in which Amtrak returned it back to the Milwaukee Road. It was U.S. Safety rules only because they were able to move some of the Milwaukee Road equipment to tourist lines in the United States as well as to Canada's CN ( from what I remember CN just took the Pullman built skytops, Pullman built Sleepers). Maybe it was just the Milwaukee Shops built passenger cars that were the issue? I don't know.
Now I remember the Cannonball derailment in Brookfield, WI in 1972 the Fire Department complained specifically of two items in the derailed Milwaukee Road cars. Use of regular glass instead of plastic (it shattered into shards). Also remember the FD complaining about propane tanks underneath the coach equipment. No idea what the Milwaukee Road used Propane for but the cars on that train were only Coaches they were not Snack or Cafe cars. Was propane used for the Air Conditioning units? I thought they were steam powered as well. Could they have possibly used propane to prevent the steam lines from freezing or when the cars were disconnected from the locomotives?
So I only remember those two safety concerns from that one derailment. Oh and the glass was used on interior windows and partitions it was not exterior window glass the FD was complaining about. Last time I brought this up someone got confused.
NKP guy No company cuts its way to profitability.
No company cuts its way to profitability.
You might want to study the history of Conrail before making that statement. Or US Steel. Or GM in the last 10 years. Or, well there are a whole lot of examples of companies that have done just that.
An "expensive model collector"
NKP guy Any concern for who pays for that?
You know who is going to pay - and who isn't.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
PJS1If Amtrak’s executives were allowed to manage Amtrak like the business it is supposed to be, it would cut the long-distance trains in a heartbeat.
Amtrak is a public service run by a quasi-governmental body; it is not a business. It is not expected to make a profit. Neither are school systems, Churches or the TVA, for example, although they use many business practices and principles.
Just because of the labor provisions. I suspect any decision to abandon the LD trains would need to be approved by Congress and a supplimental appropriation granted to cover the labor provisions as well as shutdown costs. Pretty sure it would be in the Billions of Dollars and it's far beyond anything Amtrak management could do on it's own. Amtrak Managements hands are tied. They have to keep the LD trains running unless they get an agreement with special appropriation from Congress to cover the Labor Seperation Costs.
You'll note they will never terminate the Food Service or Commissary employees they will get them to quit via offering them another job they cannot possibly accept. Far cheaper that way and keeps Congress out of it. They cannot however do that to the LD network wholesale as Amtrak does not have anywhere near the budgeted or reserve funds to pay for all the related labor seperation payments and likewise they could not offer those same LD employees into new positions again because lack of funds.
So I don't see termination of LD trains ever happening. Current and past CEO's of Amtrak do not have the gumption to approach Congress with such a proposal and if they did one could see their hat being handed to them shortly thereafter.
Even the implied termination of the Southwest Chief would surplus too many Amtrak employees and they could not be absorbed back into the rest of Amtrak and that would trigger ginormous Labor Seperation Payments Amtrak would be hard pressed to meet financially.
Forget what Labor and Amtrak agreed to but I think they have to pay each employee seperated due to a train discontinuance several years pay and benefits according to the contract that was agreed to at Amtraks establishment. Someone could probably look up what the labor protection agreements are. With Congress as oversight.....you trigger one of those puppy's with a LD train discontinued and you will get Congress' unwanted attention fast just due to the money that would be burned through.
NKP guy What Congressperson from outside the NEC could possibly support ending service to his or her state? And why? Amtrak was meant to be a national asset, not one that offers only Boston to Richmond day trains.
Amtrak was meant to be a national asset, not one that offers only Boston to Richmond day trains.
blue streak 1 We are not accountants but how in the world will the overhead now allocated to LD trains be eliminated ? It is more likely that unless congress did not reduce its appropriations that Amtrak would loose money on what remaining operations it maintained ? Congress maintain the same subsidy ? Fat chance.
The biggest discontinuance challenge would be the severance provisions for the long-distance operating employees. Their salaries, wages, and benefits account for approximately 65 percent of the long-distance train operating expenses. So, for the first year or two after discontinuance, the severance payments could cause Amtrak's expenses to increase significantly, but in time these too would be eliminated.
No one knows what would happen to the subsidies if the long-distance trains were dropped. The argument that Congressional support for what remained would dry up is untested.
BaltACD It would become a Real Estate company. Sell everything owned, declare the profit and go out of business.
It would become a Real Estate company. Sell everything owned, declare the profit and go out of business.
PJS1If Amtrak’s executives were allowed to manage Amtrak like the business it is supposed to be, it would cut the long-distance trains in a heartbeat. If it were not hobbled by the long-distance train operating losses, it would have had an operating profit of $374 million in 2017. That is cutting its way to profitability, at least from an operating perspective.
PJS1 No company cuts its way to profitability. If Amtrak’s executives were allowed to manage Amtrak like the business it is supposed to be, it would cut the long-distance trains in a heartbeat. If it were not hobbled by the long-distance train operating losses, it would have had an operating profit of $374 million in 2017. That is cutting its way to profitability, at least from an operating perspective.
No company cuts its way to profitability. If Amtrak’s executives were allowed to manage Amtrak like the business it is supposed to be, it would cut the long-distance trains in a heartbeat. If it were not hobbled by the long-distance train operating losses, it would have had an operating profit of $374 million in 2017. That is cutting its way to profitability, at least from an operating perspective.
If Amtrak’s executives were allowed to manage Amtrak like the business it is supposed to be, it would cut the long-distance trains in a heartbeat. If it were not hobbled by the long-distance train operating losses, it would have had an operating profit of $374 million in 2017. That is cutting its way to profitability, at least from an operating perspective.
If I may repeat myself (and others here): No LD trains = No Amtrak.
What Congressperson from outside the NEC could possibly support ending service to his or her state? And why?
BaltACD NKP guy No company cuts its way to profitability. They do in the minds of Wall Street, Legislators and idiots.
They do in the minds of Wall Street, Legislators and idiots.
Most successful companies shed business lines, products, services, etc. that are not profitable. Or scale them back. In some cases they may be profitable, but not as profitable as alternative investments, e.g. sell a profitable business unit for a more profitable business.
Many years ago, I was shocked to learn that PepsiCo had sold Wilson Sporting Goods. Why I asked? Wilson was profitable. It generated a reasonable return for PepsiCo. But PepsiCo had a better alternative for its resources, and it was repositioning them. GE is doing the same thing. Hundreds of companies do it every year.
Deggesty How does Amtrak segregate families with children. Actually, the Family Bedroom is not fully segregated from the rooms of other passengers. It is at one end of the lower level, beyond the four roomettes that are down there. The shower and three restrooms are at the other end, and the accessible room is beyond the restrooms.
The situation you describe could be alleviated in any future sleeper designs by the simple expedient of having each room in the car equipped with a toilet, as was the norm until the misguided Superliners came into use.
A private toilet is a civilized thing for those who choose to pay very expensive fares in order to ride a passenger train that is doubtlessly late and certainly without a dining car, as the term is traditionally understood. Such customers don't relish the idea of using increasingly-messy (or filthy) public toilets "downstairs" or at the end of the car, as the new Viewliners threaten to be .
Gentlemen, have you ever asked your own wives or daughters if they'd prefer a toilet available to a carload of passengers, or one in their own room? Have you? I have and I know the answer; so do you.
When I researched why new Viewliners will not have toilets in the roomettes, the answer seemed to be: because it's cheaper. No other reason. After all, it's not like this hasn't been done before.
So here is where we are in late 2018 as far as Amtrak LD travel: No dining car. No in-room toilets for First Class customers in roomettes. No consideration whatsoever about the needs or desires of female passengers. No on-time performance of any LD train that's worth believing in. No amenities. Simply put: More and more...no nothin'.
CMStPnP I have noticed a decline in maintenence on the sleepers but it predates Mr. Andersons arrival. The Septic Smell is caused because they are not emptying the retention tanks, I ran into that on the Texas Eagle once and asked the crew and I was told the train skipped the servicing for the latrines in San Antonio to make up time because it was late. It stunk horribly all the way to St. Louis luckily my compartment was at the end of the car and I only faintly smelled it but those across from that restroom.........horrible. No secret that Amtrak operational management is fairly stupid as a general rule with a few exceptions here and there.
The Septic Smell is caused because they are not emptying the retention tanks, I ran into that on the Texas Eagle once and asked the crew and I was told the train skipped the servicing for the latrines in San Antonio to make up time because it was late. It stunk horribly all the way to St. Louis luckily my compartment was at the end of the car and I only faintly smelled it but those across from that restroom.........horrible. No secret that Amtrak operational management is fairly stupid as a general rule with a few exceptions here and there.
CMStPnP alpinemike yuk any health and safety issues? Typically they do a fairly good job of keeping the restrooms clean, sometimes not so much but there are enough restrooms on a sleeper that you can always find one that is clean. The upper level single restroom sometimes gets nasty fast if there are kids on the second level. However, I have noticed one item Amtrak reservations does smart is isolate the kids / families in one section of the sleeping car.......not sure how they do that but never have I been next to a comparment of kids nor a family of kids. Could be price that is the limiting factor. Meals are generally OK though I would never give Amtrak food more than three stars. Diner trains and the Rocky Mountaineer in Canada both much better with food and food presentation for that matter. Amtrak food presentation is similar to a chow hall in the Army. Rocky Mountaineer you'll get caviar. Amtrak your very lucky to see something that should be common like whipped creme. Service on the dining car is usually horrible and watching them serve meals is like a bad laurel and hardy skit. Sometimes only on plate to a table at a time. Never do they tray the plates like a restaurant. If your in Sleeper and you order anything like wine or beer that you have to pay for. Your going to be one of the last to leave the dining car seating time. They handle safety pretty well.
alpinemike yuk any health and safety issues?
Typically they do a fairly good job of keeping the restrooms clean, sometimes not so much but there are enough restrooms on a sleeper that you can always find one that is clean. The upper level single restroom sometimes gets nasty fast if there are kids on the second level. However, I have noticed one item Amtrak reservations does smart is isolate the kids / families in one section of the sleeping car.......not sure how they do that but never have I been next to a comparment of kids nor a family of kids. Could be price that is the limiting factor.
Meals are generally OK though I would never give Amtrak food more than three stars. Diner trains and the Rocky Mountaineer in Canada both much better with food and food presentation for that matter. Amtrak food presentation is similar to a chow hall in the Army. Rocky Mountaineer you'll get caviar. Amtrak your very lucky to see something that should be common like whipped creme.
Service on the dining car is usually horrible and watching them serve meals is like a bad laurel and hardy skit. Sometimes only on plate to a table at a time. Never do they tray the plates like a restaurant. If your in Sleeper and you order anything like wine or beer that you have to pay for. Your going to be one of the last to leave the dining car seating time.
They handle safety pretty well.
alpinemikeyuk any health and safety issues?
yuk any health and safety issues?
[quote user="runnerdude48"]I think the lyric goes "Who could ask for anything more?"
Of course, you're right about the original lyric. I was being too clever by half, as the Brits would say, trying to make my point.
I should have added that the unsatisfactory (to me) menus are, so far, only on the Capitol Limited and Lakeshore Limited. The Silver Star does not have a real menu, only a list of what could possibly be called "snacks."
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.