Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
John: Tom C? Webcams? I must've missed something... care to fill me in? On your other comment, yes. It makes no sense to offer an OPERATIONALLY (not capitally-) subsidize mode of ANY transport, just because "one (Congress) can". NEC is a prime example. It can be, and in many places IS profitable or at least break even on OPERATIONS. This is all I ask. The infrastructure is another matter. If the truth is that an air ticket would cost $4000 if it had to cover operational expenses.... then it should cost $4000! Why creat an artificial market? So we can subsidize my trip to Disneyland? Reality is, someone, (namely Southwest,) would figure a way to scare up a profitable and cheap airline and prove everyone wrong. Where is the SW for rail? As long as Amtrak is around playing boogey-man and holding onto it's monopoly, there will be none. I am as certain that passenger rail can be OPERATIONALLY profitable as I am that any other business can. Or maybe I should put it this way: In this country, of all countries, with our ingenuity, wouldn't it be strange if we could NOT make a profit running a few lousy trains? Or at the very least, not hemoraging to death doing so?
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