Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="greyhounds"] If you want a very nice, educational, totally enjoyable experience, drive down alongside the Mississippi from St. Paul to Dubuque.  You'll see some of the best scenic views in the Midwest,  you'll see lots of trains, and you'll see that there is absolutely nothing "natural" about commercial navigation on the upper Mississippi.  It's amazing how often they've had to dam the river to permit barge transportation on that segment.  There are 25 "Lock and Dam" facilities between St. Paul and St. Louis.I don't know the river miles between those cities - but from an old Official Guide I make the BNSF route, which pretty much runs along the river, at 624 miles.  So there's basically a lock and dam every 25 miles.  A 15 barge tow will, every 25 miles, have to stop, take itself apart, send eight barges through the lock, then seven more will go through with the towboat, then put itself back together.  All only to do it all again around 25 miles latter.The only reason this inefficient river transportation system exists at all is that we get dinged for it on our income tax.  Despite our involuntary subsidization of railroad competition, the BNSF can take freight off the river.  Iron ore trains run along that riverbank hauling ore from Minnesota to steel mills near St. Louis and Birmingham.  In the past, under regulation, the government would have prevented the railroad from competing with the barges.  Now the trainloads of ore roll.I disagree with Jay that it's OK for the Federal Government to spend our tax dollars in this manner.  He says it produces benifits so it's OK for the governement to spend money in this way.  And I'll agree that there are benifits from having the Mississippi open to commercial navigation above St. Louis.  Where I disagree is that the costs of these benifits are more than the actual benifits.  It ain't worth it.  Although some certain individuals and corporations may benifit from the navigation, overall and in general we're all a little bit poorer because of the lock and dam system on the upper Mississippi.I'm confident that the costs of keeping the Mississippi open for commercial navigation above St. Louis are greater than the benifits of keeping the Mississippi open for commercial navigation above St. Louis.  (and as for the Missouri River above St. Louis, 4getaboutit)How do I know the costs outweigh the benifits.  It's simple.  If the benifits outweighed the costs the tows could be charged the full costs of maintianing the river for commercial navigation.  That ain't happening.  If it did, BNSF would start double tracking between Savanna and St. Louis.Below St. Louis, it's a different river.  It might require some minor touch ups by the Army COE, but it's a wonderful avenue of commerce that requires no lock and dam system.[/quote]Aahhh, Ken.  I was wondering when you'd show up.  Glad to see your participation!Question:  Do you really want to compare maintenance requirements of a heavy duty rail line with that of the Upper Mississippi?
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