John WR Bucyrus, Did you hear Al Franken's speech? It was really eloquent. "You shall not crucify mankind on a cross of gold." John
Bucyrus,
Did you hear Al Franken's speech? It was really eloquent. "You shall not crucify mankind on a cross of gold."
John
No, I have not heard any Franken speeches lately. What speech are you talking about?
The famous "Cross of Gold" speech. In my mind's eay I can see Al on Saturday Night Live. "You shall not crucify mankind on a cross of gold."
Franken on SNL was one thing. Franken now is something else.
The only thing I have heard about Franken lately is his attempt to sidestep blame for the medical device tax that he championed as a means to pay for the Affordable Care Act.
http://www.startribune.com/business/182883681.html?refer=y
Apparently the medical device industry in Minnesota is not convinced that the AFA is going to be the golden goose for the medical device industry that Franken had promised before anybody knew what was in the bill.
John WR The famous "Cross of Gold" speech. In my mind's eay I can see Al on Saturday Night Live. "You shall not crucify mankind on a cross of gold."
The famous "Cross of Gold" speech was actually delivered by William Jennings Bryant, aka "The Great Commoner" and "Boy Orator of the Platte" and three-time failed candidate for President. The speech was delivered at the 1896 democratic convention in Chicago.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Mr. Bryan was appointed Secretary of State by Woodrow Wilson, but that was the highest postion he ever held.
He heard the voice of the grangers (farmers) complaining about railroad freight rates, and pitched his campaigns towards them; he also pitched his campaigns towards the people who felt that bankers were mulcting them (hence his "Cross of Gold" speech, which called for $16.00 in silver coin for every $1.00 in gold coin.)
Mr. Franken seems to be trying the same, though he has not yet (so far as I know) said anything about the money situation.
Johnny
schlimmThe famous "Cross of Gold" speech was actually delivered by William Jennings Bryant
I know you're always accurate Schlimm, but are you sure the Cross of Gold speech wasn't delivered by Al Franken?
When I hear about ending the freight rail monopoly, I wonder how that could be done in practical terms. I picture Al Franken setting the fair price of affordable transportation. It would permit the railroads to make a reasonable profit without gouging the shippers. But then Franken would have to be paid for his role, and we would all have to pay for that just like we pay for the monopoly.
The more direct approach would be to introduce more competition by open access, but that just seems unfathomably complex. In the end, it might add more cost than the monopoly did.
Here is a link to a piece that explains how the freight rail monopoly could be eliminated. As you can see, it is much more nebulous than what would first come to mind as a practical way to end the monopoly. And again, I wonder if complying with all the new regulation would add more cost than it removes by ending the monopoly:
http://www.nreca.coop/press/fastfacts/Documents/FastFactsRailCompetition.pdf
In the good old days, if you didn't like the product or the price, you went out and found or created an alternative. Today, you cry to the government. Hopefully Congress realizes that they are getting the best rail transportation system in the world at no cost to them.
In the good old days the farmers complained about railroad rates for moving grain so formed the Grange which led to the Interstate Commerce Commission being formed. Discontents in public and business sectors have always gone to the government for help. How many laws and procedures do we have today which are the result of law suits and legislation? All created and pursued by individuals and businesses and their self created and self serving organizations. Not new at all. Business loves a monopoly while telling us how great the American system of competition is so good when in reality each wants to be the last dog standing with you on the chained end of the leash.
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.
John WR I know you're always accurate Schlimm, but are you sure the Cross of Gold speech wasn't delivered by Al Franken? John
No, not always accurate. No one is. And not sure if you are being facetious, but yes, it was by Bryant.
Link to a recording he made in 1921:
http://www.historicalvoices.org/earliest_voices/bryan.html
jeffhergert Most stations, and the customers located at those stations, have always only had single line service.
Most stations, and the customers located at those stations, have always only had single line service.
On a related note closer to Franken's employment history, how many people have more than one cable TV provider?
In metro areas there are often choices of cable providers + the two satellite providers. So there is competition.
Perhaps fewer choices in smaller towns?
schlimm In metro areas there are often choices of cable providers + the two satellite providers. So there is competition. Perhaps fewer choices in smaller towns?
And farmers can use railways, trucks, horse-drawn carriages, cargo helicopter, and probably a blimp company or two.
It's not like they have to use railways.
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
Railroad share of traffic and profits have gone down hand in hand with mergers and removal of competition; thusly followed by service level. Other industries which have merged their way to smaller business activity and smaller revenue and profits when in monopolistic and semi monopolistic situations include banks, broadcasters, newspapers, manufacturers of various products, insurance companies, telephone communications, and a few others.
There are many supporters of capitalism who think the free market means free to collude, price-fix and form monopolies, all of which are inefficient, as henry6 points out, regardless of the economic sector. The whole advantage of the free market is that competition leads to correct prices and wages. Take away that efficiency and you might as well have the inefficiencies and distortions of centrally-planned economies.
Dear Sen Franken,
I would like some more information before I consider your request for action.
1. A station is any named point along a rail line for the purpose of identifying a location. It does not necessarily correspond to a location with economic activity. So, of course, there will be a majority of locations on a single line because the railroad created the "station" in the first place. Who did the "analysis" an 8th grader?
2. What farmer MUST use rail? Is there a gun to their head? Is it legislated? Oh, that's right, it's cheaper than trucks. Why aren't the evil trucking cartels being targeted for forcing those poor farmers into the arms of the railroads?
3. Shipping grain by barge is cheaper than via rail. Why aren't you demanding the barges serve these remote locations where there is only a rail monopoly? They benefit from government maintenence of waterways, so isn't not about time they give back? Just because there isn't a river there is no excuse.
3. Would the farmers even be there if it weren't for the railroad in the first place? Without a way to get his product to market, he would be at a competetive disadvantage and suffer even greater economic harm. They would have located elsewhere.
4. How many farmers deal directly with the railroads? I don't know of many. Most sell their grain to a consolodater/marketer who then may or may not make use of rail transport. Why does this middleman get a free pass from you Mr Franken? Maybe because they wrote the letter for you to sign?
5. How is a railroad is a monopoly? Please clarify.
Signed,
A concerned taxpayer
p.s. This tripe is way funnier than anything from your previous career.
schlimm John WR I know you're always accurate Schlimm, but are you sure the Cross of Gold speech wasn't delivered by Al Franken? John No, not always accurate. No one is. And not sure if you are being facetious, but yes, it was by Bryant. Link to a recording he made in 1921: http://www.historicalvoices.org/earliest_voices/bryan.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/9904979/Italy-paralysed-as-Grillo-plots-exit-route-from-euro.html
Hopefully, comedian Al Franken does not hold enough power to do as he wishes.
(Sorry, machine sent from will not link.)
Franken’s words are the inane prattle of a very ignorant man.
“Recent analysis indicates that 78% of the 28,000 “stations” in the continental United States where a major freight railroad picks up or delivers freight are served by a single railroad. Of the remaining 22% of rail stations that are nominally served by a second railroad, a significant number are served by a short line or regional rail carrier that is dominated by the major railroad serving the location. This lack of competition in our national freight rail transportation system and the resulting railroad monopoly power over a significant portion of annual railroad freight movement create significant problems for our state and national economies. “
So?
By the senator’s (Lord please help us.) “Reasoning”, the BNSF intermodal facility (station?) at Willow Springs, IL constitutes a “monopoly” because only the BNSF can receive or deliver freight at that particular facility. No, it doesn’t. The UP is just a few miles up I-294. But that apparently is well beyond his understanding.
It’s the same with farmers’ grain. Nothing ties a farmer to a particular loading point. The farmer will seek the best financial outcome with the sale of his/her crops. Midwest farmers have many outlets for their crops. These crops may be shipped by truck from the fields to grain processing facilities. Or they may be trucked to a river terminal for barge movement. Or they may be trucked to a Great Lakes port. Or they may be trucked to a rail loading terminal on one of the several competing railroads serving the Midwest. (Franken’s Minnesota has four class 1 railroads, plus short lines/regionals, plus the Mississippi River, plus the Port of Duluth.)
In any event, the grain can come out of the field in a tractor-trailer and that gives it some range. The farmer is not “monopolized” by a loading facility served by only one railroad, as the ignorant senator falsely charges. (It also can come out of the field in a farm wagon pulled by a farm tractor if that’s the choice of the farmer.)
The US has the best rail freight system in the world and this ignorant man with power wants to mess with it. He has no knowledge or background in the subject. But that never stopped a *** fool politician such as Franken.
Deggesty Mentioning accuracy, I had never heard of William Jennings Bryant until you named him. I did know about William Jennings Bryan, though.
Mentioning accuracy, I had never heard of William Jennings Bryant until you named him. I did know about William Jennings Bryan, though.
petitnjHopefully Congress realizes that they are getting the best rail transportation system in the world at no cost to them.
I think that Congress does realize that, but it might work against the freight railroads rather than for them. I think part of Congress perceives the prosperity of freight railroads opportunistically as being somewhat of a golden goose. Regulation is not just a matter adjusting the price between railroad and farmer. It is also the government actually taking a piece of the action for their own interest in growth.
The regulations impose cost, and some of that cost pays for the governmental regulatory apparatus. So, it is not just farmers who are motivated to regulate. The cost of regulation will also pay for new government employees, their careers, and their retirement. To Congress, expanding regulation is like growing a business. So they are part of the motivation to regulate, and not just a neutral arbiter. Indeed, Franken, Congress, and the Administration may very well be a larger part of the motivation for re-regulating the railroads than the farmers are.
Farmers can demand regulation on a continuous basis, but the likelihood of their success depends on the mood of Congress from moment to moment. At this particular moment, I believe that the mood of government is to favor higher taxes and regulation much more so than it has been for a long time. So, I could see the regulation pendulum swinging the other way, undoing the rail industry gains of the last thirty years. I would not underestimate Franken’s ability to get action on this.
Let's not give Franken's words any more credit than they deserve. This isn't "The Farmers" seeking/demanding rail economic regulation. Farmers are a diverse lot. While it's undoubtedbly true that there are some farmers who would support Franken, I can't find railroad regulation on a list of legislative issues for any state farm bureau. It's questionable as to how many farmers want more government involvement in their business.
What I do find on an Internet search is farmers' concern for non railroad related government regulations that adversely impact them.
Having said that, it is important to not ignore people such as Franken. As Bucyrus wrote, there are people in the government who see this as an opportunity to advance their own power and economic well being. They join with others who just cannot imagine anything working well unless it is thoroughly guided by a Federal bureaucrat. But they have no real skin in the game.
When they make bad decisions (and they will make bad decisions) the government types won't be the ones that suffer. The railroads and the farmers will pay the cost. I may be optimistic, but I'm confident that the majority farmers realize that. But we all know the government does strange things. So I'm optimistic but also concerned.
schlimm And not sure if you are being facetious
You are right, Schlimm. I was speaking tongue in cheek. It seems to me Senator Franken's remarks are very much in the spirit of the old Granger vs. Railroad debates. More deja vu all over again.
If rates are too high due to lack of competition then build another railroad or spur line to a competitor line. This is what happened here in Guelph. Initially the Grand Trunk was the only game in town. Local merchants and manufacturers felt they were being gouged and decided to join forces to build another line from Guelph to connect with the CP at Guelph Junction. End of problem. Today shippers who feel they aren't getting a fair shake can do the same, they can look at alternative modes, or in some cases they can relocate to a more favorable competitive climate.
Perhaps the concern is with grain shipped from west coast ports.
I know what the concept of monopoly is but I have no idea what terms define a monopoly in a legal sense. The freight rail monopoly activists call this present condition a monopoly, but is it really?
My reading of this suggests to me that it would be profoundly complex to prove that today’s railroads actually are a monopoly. I am not sure experts would agree, or that a conclusion could even be reached.
Here is something else to consider: Is it possible to have a monopoly without any unfair or abusive pricing that a monopoly will enable? In the recent example of a little town with only one store, and no other stores nearby, you only have one store to choose from. Does that mean that it is a monopoly?
Anyone is free to build a second store in town. If the one store charges prices that people think are unfair, anyone is free to build a second store to compete with the first one.
So even with just one store, the owner must compete with the threat of someone adding a second store. And even if that does not happen, the owner of the one store must keep his prices low enough to prevent people from moving out of town. So there is that competition even without a second store.
In the calls for ending the so called freight rail monopoly, I don’t hear any mention of specific price gouging. And without such unfair pricing, is the so called monopoly causing damage? The anti-rail activists say it is. They say that excessive rail pricing is hurting our economy. Yet they say nothing about how much it is hurting the economy, or what the rail transportation price should be.
A monopoly how? Bucyrus is right. A rail monopoly: the only railroad in town but there maybe highways and water ways and airway. A land monopoly: no air way. A total monopoly: no other form of transportation available but the one dubbed a monopoly. Well, we didn't use the two or three (and maybe overbuilt) railroads we did have, so one went broke and folded its tent and disappeared; the other two merged leaving only one. Whose fault is that? The market place? Investors? Business models? What would Franken want done? Build a new railroad? undo the merger? rebuld the road ripped up? enlarge the highway (or build a brand new one)? Did a waterway? Quite a conundrum we've weaved in this country of government commissions, rate making agencies, free enterprise, government subsidies, stockholder-investor companies, the concept that big is beautiful and efficient, and so on. Is there really an answer?
henry6 Is there really an answer?
There are many answers. Which means there is no answer.
But I predict we ill not build a canal from the Great Lakes to the west coast.
Don't forget that McDonalds has a monopoly of Big Mac sales!
How about open access at those "stations"?
I suspect Senator Franken has been hearing from his constituents about railroad monopolies. What I wonder about is how far he is willing to go with this issue.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.