"Rail doesn't pay its fare share"

[jeaton]

Amtrak reports that the shortage of sleepers has hurt that revenue for this year. Sleeper business is described as "sold out". On the other hand, I doubt that Amtrak is any where near that situation with coach capacity.

As with everything else in Amtrak's budget, advertising dollars are tight. I think that there also a very concerted effort made to avoid advertising something that can't be provided with any decent degree of reliability. Amtrak has been showing a reasonable rate growth in the last few years. The issue that is addressed by Amtrak management is what mix of expenditures on advertising and fleet repair provides the greater return.

I, for one, would not suggest a change unless it was my job and I had all the studies and facts necessary to make that suggestion.

Jay

[Anonymous]

If the reason that Amtrak does not advertise much is because they are full tells us something. Perhaps it is time to add more cars to the train set or add an additional train. Our policy with Trinity Railway Express was to add an additional car when capacity reached 80%. Of course for Amtrak to add additional cars they must have them in their WORKING inventory.

[oltmannd]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Overmod

There are assuredly a large number of cars capable of going fast on the NEC... the MHC stock, for example, which to my knowledge will fit nicely anywhere Amtrak goes...

I personally would like to see whether Triple Crown via the tunnels could evolve a meaningful lane service over NEC in the Northeast. I know the lane traffic hasn't evolved yet, but I can think of a few traffic sources at each end that might allow a reasonable balance of both car loadings and frequency (in a deregulated fee environment, of course). The RoadRailers ought to offer the necessary combination of low tare weight, low clearance height, insulatable roof, good tracking, and off-ROW "switchability" to make operations to, say, Sunnyside or interchange with the NY&A practical. There might also be some possibilities with interchange via Croxton to other lanes for non-electrified trains, although I think that 'pilot' operation of RoadRailer trains (with engines shut down) ought to be possible with little more than an 'out-and-back' move of one of the locomotives at Sunnyside...

I agree that Intermodal service to LI is great idea and Roadrailers a good fit for the service. You could even use "all purpose" well cars, like NS did on their NEC experiment last fall. I suspect the problem is the money doesn't smell green enough to the Amtrak and the commuter agencies.

Up until Gunn, Amtrak did all they could to drive frt business from the NEC - the cost per car mile was absurd. Also, part of the reason Conrail quit using electrics on the NEC was the refusal of Amtrak to come to a resonable agreement on payment for "juice" - watthour meter data not withstanding.

I think the commuter agencies have the same point of view. There appears to be little incentive for them to earn revenue in this manner. It won't happen unless the guy at the top has the vision and pushes for it. Too bad.

[Overmod]

There are assuredly a large number of cars capable of going fast on the NEC... the MHC stock, for example, which to my knowledge will fit nicely anywhere Amtrak goes...

I personally would like to see whether Triple Crown via the tunnels could evolve a meaningful lane service over NEC in the Northeast. I know the lane traffic hasn't evolved yet, but I can think of a few traffic sources at each end that might allow a reasonable balance of both car loadings and frequency (in a deregulated fee environment, of course). The RoadRailers ought to offer the necessary combination of low tare weight, low clearance height, insulatable roof, good tracking, and off-ROW "switchability" to make operations to, say, Sunnyside or interchange with the NY&A practical. There might also be some possibilities with interchange via Croxton to other lanes for non-electrified trains, although I think that 'pilot' operation of RoadRailer trains (with engines shut down) ought to be possible with little more than an 'out-and-back' move of one of the locomotives at Sunnyside...

[kevarc]

"There was some serious thought to making the experimental service permanent, perhaps leasing some Genesis units (to allow 60 mph on the NEC versus the 50 allowed by the LSL on the GP40-2s) "

While the engines may want to go fast, the rolling stock will hold it back.

[DSchmitt]

Federal Highway funding FY 2000

Total Highway funding: 128.5 billion
Funding sources
Bond process: $11.2 billion, Investment income $7.5 billion, Other Highway user taxes $11.8 billion, General Funds, $17.1 billion, Tolls $5.4 billion , Other Highway user fees 75.5 billion

[oltmannd]

Here's opinion poll results on public support for Amtrak:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/vault/stories/data080502.htm

[rrnut282]

Shouldn't it be obvious by now that no form of transportation involving machinery can pay it's full capital and infrastructure costs? To reach the critical mass necessary to be self-sustaining has required government intervention (subsidies) to fund infrastructure almost without exception. The status quo will not change without a massive paradigm shift in how transportation is viewed (from an "entitlement that is granted by varoious mechanisms by government" to one of "if you want it, you pay for it, and make it work")
Then, and only then, serious reform could (not definitely) take place.

[oltmannd]

QUOTE: Originally posted by ohlemeier

QUOTE: Originally posted by slotracer

Speaking of flaws, "A Major portion of americans want Amtrak to exist"....if this was so, many mor people would be voting with their dollars and riding it, and it would not require massive subsidies to buy down the cost of operating the system o that ticketrs can be sold at anywhere near market value....to the minute percentage of the population that will ride it. I don't mean to sound insulting, just getting to the fact that times have moved on, people have moved on, for right or wrong, yet we continue to fund something that the population, and times have mostly rejected.

If I had my way, TV's would be abolished in facor of old radios with great shows to listen to, apple pies would be scratch made and cool in open windows and Auto teechnology would go back a number of decades, people would live at a slower pace and not need to get everywhere by air so fast, neighbors would know each other and a sense of community would return (Yes unbelievably I am a republican) but I realize these great things are unfortunately past, and I/We cannot make them return on a mass scale. I can scratch make a pie and get involved in my community, but I cannot make the passenger train vibrant and popular again......I reaize those things I can help change and those things beyond my control is all.......

This is like living in the past. Just because you THINK things are old=fashioned doesn't mean it's so.

Rail is on a renaissance. Light rail, commuter rail, long-distance rail.
Commuter rail ridership is increasing. AMTRAK HAS ITS MOST RIDERS EVER!

Speaking of radio, an overwhelming majority of the public - 3/4 - has rejected AM radio. Yet it still exists and has an audience. So.... we shouldn't have talk radio or sports radio? The market is still there.

A good number of Americans ride trains. Those numbers would increase if more resources and routes were provided.

Yet, some "railfans" want to ignore this fact and want to rage against Amtrak like it's the biggest evil in the world.

I think if you check it out you'll find Amtrak is just about at an all time low for overall market share, so saying ridership is at an all time high is a bit misleading. Now, it's not Amtrak's fault - there's been little investment, so growth hasn't been possible.

[oltmannd]

QUOTE: Originally posted by slotracer

Speaking of flaws, "A Major portion of americans want Amtrak to exist"....if this was so, many mor people would be voting with their dollars and riding it, and it would not require massive subsidies to buy down the cost of operating the system o that ticketrs can be sold at anywhere near market value....to the minute percentage of the population that will ride it. I don't mean to sound insulting, just getting to the fact that times have moved on, people have moved on, for right or wrong, yet we continue to fund something that the population, and times have mostly rejected.

If I had my way, TV's would be abolished in facor of old radios with great shows to listen to, apple pies would be scratch made and cool in open windows and Auto teechnology would go back a number of decades, people would live at a slower pace and not need to get everywhere by air so fast, neighbors would know each other and a sense of community would return (Yes unbelievably I am a republican) but I realize these great things are unfortunately past, and I/We cannot make them return on a mass scale. I can scratch make a pie and get involved in my community, but I cannot make the passenger train vibrant and popular again......I reaize those things I can help change and those things beyond my control is all.......

Slot-

You're still missing the point. It doesn't matter if anyone ever rides a single Amtrak train today, tomorrow or ever. If the will of the people is for Amtrak trains to operate - then they will!

I think, if you do some seaching, you will find that every time asked, a majority of Americans want more train service whether they themselves would use it or not.

[oltmannd]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Overmod

Mark -- what's the current story behind NS "experimental" train 25A? That's freight in the NEC (I've seen pictures of GP-40-2s and Genesis engines as power, with the Genesis perhaps being more for train-control 'protection' than actual motive power) and I presume it runs faster than 30mph.

It's not running right now. There was some serious thought to making the experimental service permanent, perhaps leasing some Genesis units (to allow 60 mph on the NEC versus the 50 allowed by the LSL on the GP40-2s) . What stopped it was the huge increase in business levels this year. It's been a struggle to keep the existing network of trains in locomotives and crews without putting on more service. I suspect that the issue will resurface at the next business downturn or when resources catch up with traffic levels.

For me, seeing 4 shiny GP40-2s doing what they were built to do 25 years ago was a magic moment for me. Almost like gettting my wish in the "time machine" thread.

[DSchmitt]

If you don't include capital expenses you are comparing apples and oranges.
You can't drive unless you have the auto and in most cases a road.
You can't ride the train unless you have the rail vehicle and track and right of way

In round numbers for all rail

Capital costs $8.7 billion
Operating costs $8.0 billion
Fares $4.2 billion
Subsidy $12.5 billion

Heavy Rail
Capitol $4.6 billion
Operating $4.3 billion
Fare $2.5 billion
Subsidy $ 6.4 billion If Capitol were not counted the subsidy would still be $1.8 billion

[Anonymous]

Amtrak doesn't need to advertise much, as their trains are running full..... maybe that's why they don't advertise much....

Of course, if the needed capital was expended to expand Amtrak's capacity, and modernize Amtrak with high speed rail.....Amtrak might have a larger ridership share.....

Also, Amtrak doesn't have the same funding mechanisms as private business..... Amtrak doesn't have the capacity to sell $100 billion in bonds to build a sufficient high speed rail system.....its dependent upon the government to provide its needed capital funding..... or even $1 billion......

SO STOP COMPARING A FEDERAL SERVICE WITH A PRIVATE BUSINESS!

This is as comparing apples to oranges as anything else mentioned above.....

All forms of transportation is subsidized, Amtrak actually gets the small straw every year.... If you are really interested in cutting spending, cut something which gets a larger share of the federal transportation pie....like highways and airports.....

The real truth of the matter is that most Amtrak trains are running a profit operationally..... it's the capital expenses that bring Amtrak into the red.....

You say let Amtrak increase its prices to bring its capital expenses into the black.... I say okay as long as we also let the airlines and bus companies pay all of its capital infrastructure expenses too.... WE ALL KNOW AMTRAK IS AND WILL BE MUCH MORE AFFORDABLE THAN TRAVELING BY EITHER AUTOMOBILE OR AIRLINER!

Amtrak is so underfunded capital wise that it leases just about everything..... I wonder how many airliners or truck/bus companies do the same..... Greyhound, the only national bus company which provides a scheduled service has been in bankrupcty court for years...... similar to many of the large full service airlines......
The only airlines turning a profit are the ones that have cherry picked routes which don't serve San Angelo or Abilene Texas....

As for the cruise lines, they are subsidized to by the feds, who built the ports, dredge the harbors, and man customs.....

[Overmod]

What's the current story behind NS "experimental" train 25A? That's freight in the NEC (I've seen pictures of GP-40-2s and Genesis engines as power, with the Genesis perhaps being more for train-control 'protection' than actual motive power) and I presume it runs faster than 30mph.

[DSchmitt]

QUOTE: Originally posted by DSchmitt

In $ per passenger-mile what is the subsidy for:

Amtrack? All passenger rail? Highway?

I found the following information at Victoria Transportation Policy Institute
http://www.vtpi.org/

From: TDM Encyvlopedia -Transportation Costs $ Benefit , Table 15
Cost per vehicle mile for motor vehicles (2000 US dollars) is $1.20
costs incliude: travel time, veh ownership, crash damage, non residential off-street parking, vehicle operation, roadway costs, traffic congestion, environmental costs, roadway land value, residential parking, fuel externalities, traffic impacts.

Assuming 1.4 passenger per vehicle cost per passenger mile (capital + operating) = 86 cents

From a report titled: Comprehensive Benefits of Rail transit Benefits
dated 12-May 2004
Table 6 US Transit Expenses and Revenues By Mode (APTA 2002)
note auto is not included in this Table
Total rail: Total exp/passenger mile 1.55 Fares paid $0.22 Subsidy $1.33
Percent subsidy 79%
All bus Total exp/passenger mile $1.86 Fare $0.26 Subsidy $1.59
Percent subsidy 83%
Costs include: Capital expences and operating expences

The Subsidy for Heavy Rail is 72% Commuter Rail 73% and Light Rail 91%
The Sibsidy for Bus 76% Trolley Bus 84% Demand Responce 90%

[Junctionfan]

QUOTE: Originally posted by M.W. Hemphill

Andrew, in order:

1. Of course! But where will it get the money to buy them? Amtrak would love to have more of its own lines like the MC and the NEC, but it will need to get the capital from the taxpayer, first.
2. Yes, if freight was forbidden to use the lines. It would be just like a light-rail or subway system, conceptually.
3. The freight railroads were averse to an illegal taking of private property without due compensation -- a basic constitutional right in every Western country. The "competition" would sit on top of a theft. For example, despite the fact that I don't know squat about the retail grocery business, I bet I can make a lot of money selling groceries anyway, if I can take over 10% of the space in the local supermarket to stock my inventory and not have to pay a fair-market rent on the space. Of course, I'll need my own police force to make my appropriation of that space possible.
4. Sure. You'd probably have to amend the U.S. Constitution to make it stick. A majority of the public would have to be in favor of it, first. Not very likely at present, because it would open the door to government seizure of many types of private property. If, in the future, the U.S. becomes a country where most of the wealth is owned by a minority of the people, then the majority might change its mind and change the laws to redistribute the wealth. That is EXACTLY the issue every time every tax law is changed, along with a lot of other law in the U.S., including land-use law, labor law, you name.
5. If Amtrak owned its own lines, and got into the freight business, it would then be a freight railroad and subject to STB regulation and have to prove public convenience and neccessity. It would then be subject to legal challenge because it would be sitting on top of a massive public subsidy to do that. It would be illegal, to put it mildly.

The laws can always be changed. They often are. The public gets to do that every time it votes, either directly through referendum or indirectly by choosing representatives of its collective will. Be careful of what you wish for.

Thankyou for your response.

I agree that it would very expensive but it depends on how bad the public wants it (of course) People will pay just about anything if they want it bad enough (that's why the black market is so successful unfortunately); legally speaking the government can take whatever financial or law changing steps necessary if the majority of the people will back them up. I believe that the people may decide at some point in the future to do this (near future or far future; time will tell).

Now if Amtrak owned their own lines, in theory the railroads wouldn't be entitled for compensation if Amtrak is no longer running on their line right? The only time that would change is if to get to a station using ROW than I think the railroads would have to be compensated for that.

If they ran specialized intermodal like solid Amtrak roadrailer trains, is Amtrak still subjected to STB regulation and thus would also require constitutional and non-constitutional law changes?

[TH&B]

Answer to Oltmannd,
Yes to all Q's ! Free market should prevail I think... in principal anyways. In reality I may think twice about it in case it would affect me personaly adversly. But in principal I do agree, and if our wish do drive on freeways realy is so strong the free market would eventualy become cost effective without being on 'life support''. Our government and coorporate life support system is putting the long term economy in jeoperdy. On the long run it would become cheaper then it is now, all provided that it realy is what people want and that they vote with their wallets. But on the short run it would get more expensive wich I don't want to live through even though I still might have to.

On the other hand I also agree with Slotracer in that the older qualities and values of life and technoligy is what I'd realy want too, but even if times have changed and we may not be able to return to those times it is still worth fighting to the death to try ! I don't have to join the ratrace you know.

I still don't realy see why Amtrak still can't run hi-speed freight trains on the NEC ?
Politics aside physicaly the NEC railroad should be quite capable of it.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by slotracer

Speaking of flaws, "A Major portion of americans want Amtrak to exist"....if this was so, many mor people would be voting with their dollars and riding it, and it would not require massive subsidies to buy down the cost of operating the system o that ticketrs can be sold at anywhere near market value....to the minute percentage of the population that will ride it. I don't mean to sound insulting, just getting to the fact that times have moved on, people have moved on, for right or wrong, yet we continue to fund something that the population, and times have mostly rejected.

If I had my way, TV's would be abolished in facor of old radios with great shows to listen to, apple pies would be scratch made and cool in open windows and Auto teechnology would go back a number of decades, people would live at a slower pace and not need to get everywhere by air so fast, neighbors would know each other and a sense of community would return (Yes unbelievably I am a republican) but I realize these great things are unfortunately past, and I/We cannot make them return on a mass scale. I can scratch make a pie and get involved in my community, but I cannot make the passenger train vibrant and popular again......I reaize those things I can help change and those things beyond my control is all.......

This is like living in the past. Just because you THINK things are old=fashioned doesn't mean it's so.

Rail is on a renaissance. Light rail, commuter rail, long-distance rail.
Commuter rail ridership is increasing. AMTRAK HAS ITS MOST RIDERS EVER!

Speaking of radio, an overwhelming majority of the public - 3/4 - has rejected AM radio. Yet it still exists and has an audience. So.... we shouldn't have talk radio or sports radio? The market is still there.

A good number of Americans ride trains. Those numbers would increase if more resources and routes were provided.

Yet, some "railfans" want to ignore this fact and want to rage against Amtrak like it's the biggest evil in the world.

[Junctionfan]

Here is are some hypothetical questions that might be able to be answered.

Would Amtrak be better off owning their own lines instead of running on the railroad's lines?

If Amtrak owns its own lines, any money spent on Amtrak will be for Amtrak and not the class 1s right?

Now I was criticised for suggesting that Amtrak can not run freight (intermodal) because they are not allowed to; is that because the class 1s wouldn't allow the competition?

I know that the laws say Amtrak has to be passenger only but could the laws change?

If Amtrak owns their own lines and the laws were changed, why wouldn't Amtrak be able to run intermodal traffic on their own lines-if the laws are changed, what right does the class 1s have in dictating what Amtrak can do on their own property?

This is very contraversial indeed and before anybody responds about the law, remember I said "if the laws are changed". This is not open access. Amtrak actually becomes more of a railroad (owning more lines other than the NEC) and runs their own stuff. This would help pay for the upkeeps as passenger doesn't necessarily have to be the only method in paying for the upkeep, wouldn't it?

[Anonymous]

I seem to remember that when those planes were down on the ground, the only thing running was Amtrak. Do you really want to go to a place where we have another attack, no Amtrak. We would be stuck. Also, there are a lot of people who do not like to fly who take Amtrak. I don't think that it would be fair to take that source away from them. I normally am a conservative, but on transportation, I think that we should have Amtrak, I would give them double the funding they have right now. Maybe add a 1/2 cent gas tax, that would give Amtrak and Commuter rail plenty of money.
Brad

[oltmannd]

Slotracer-

More to the point of this thread and some of your points - I think all modes are on life-support, they just fill different market niches. None are a panacea. You seem to really like "free market" solutions, but we are, and have been so far away from a free market in passenger travel in the country , since the dawn of time, that going directly to complete free market solutions would displace and upset so many lives its laughable.

Here's a few questions for you.

Do you think interstate highways should be privatized?

Do you think interstate highways should pay local property tax?

Do you think the total cost of the air traffic control system should come from commercial airline tickets? (with military paying incrementally for regular use instead of vise-versa)

Do you think user fees for highways (i.e. gasoline/fuel tax or tolls) should be cover all highway construction, maint. and operating costs, including police and fire, and be directly proportional to costs incurred?

Do you think air quality has any place in the transportation policy?

How about highway congestion?

Have you ever driven I-95 between Wash DC and NY on a Friday evening or Sunday afternoon?

[slotracer]

Speaking of flaws, "A Major portion of americans want Amtrak to exist"....if this was so, many mor people would be voting with their dollars and riding it, and it would not require massive subsidies to buy down the cost of operating the system o that ticketrs can be sold at anywhere near market value....to the minute percentage of the population that will ride it. I don't mean to sound insulting, just getting to the fact that times have moved on, people have moved on, for right or wrong, yet we continue to fund something that the population, and times have mostly rejected.

If I had my way, TV's would be abolished in facor of old radios with great shows to listen to, apple pies would be scratch made and cool in open windows and Auto teechnology would go back a number of decades, people would live at a slower pace and not need to get everywhere by air so fast, neighbors would know each other and a sense of community would return (Yes unbelievably I am a republican) but I realize these great things are unfortunately past, and I/We cannot make them return on a mass scale. I can scratch make a pie and get involved in my community, but I cannot make the passenger train vibrant and popular again......I reaize those things I can help change and those things beyond my control is all.......

[oltmannd]

Slotracer-

What you say has some truth to it. The passenger train of 1925 is no longer relevant in today's America. Our society has rearranged itself around highways and suburban living. But your main point is completely irrelevant.

The bottom line is Amtrak has a sizable constituency and that contituency votes and is vocal. A majority of Americans want Amtrak to exist. Therefore, Amtrak will continue on, roughly as it has for the past 33 years, flawed or not. That is a fact you don't seem to grasp.

The only real question is, given that Amtrak exists, how should it be configured and operated.

[slotracer]

Amtrak is a relic from past times and lifestyles that would/should have died a natural death about 40 or 50 years ago. If it was not for it's place in political posturing and special interest groups like train buffs that can't get out of the past it would have died. It is obelete due to the speed and flexibility issues already outlined. A tiny faction (Mostly train buffs) can't seem to deal with the fact that nearly all of the rest of the US population has moved on to other modes (Vehicle and airline) and that times have changed, the world has changed, out economy and logistics have changed and non of the arguements of the pro amtrack crowd is going to change the reality we live in today. It was wonderful and quaint the way travel was when the times had rail as the primary mode and it thrived, but new technology came, the masses went with it and the landscape changed....it ain't commin back in all likelyhood. I don't care how much you subsidize amtrack to the point their fares are a bargain, and how much you pour into expanding their network so it is convenient to ride trains again, people are getting into their cars or airplanes as that is the most effective means of travel they have chosen. Despite all of the arguements of comparing costs and subsidies and apples to oranges comparrison, the plain and simple fact is that the mass number of traveling public has left rail transportation as something better in their minds has come along, and no amount of wishing, hoping or finger waving will change that. The era of the passenger train ended about a half century ago when will some people accept this fact and get on with life ?

Amtrak is a vacant shell of what passenger trains once meant anyway, why any buffs have any interest in it escapes me, if you love trains, ride an excursion or luxury train and acept that Amtrak is dead and only on life support.

Railroads had planty of public subsidy in the 19th century to get tehm going, they were private companies who made a profit from operating them and returned much in the way of taxes, much like the canals that the railroads replaced. Highways are public systems open to individuals as well as truck companies, we pay for them through fuel taxes, fees and a number of other taxes and bonds, the government recoups it's investment and more over time and a public system is developed and maintained, same goes for airports. Just because you put your truck trailer on a rail carrier does not make it public, you pay that individual company a fee to move that trailer, it covers their cost on all of their property and labor that they own and pay taxes on, plus a profit (Dirty word in the mind of lefties) it is NOT the same.

Please face it...the world moved on...about 5 decades ago, sad that it is, that is reality.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

This is what the pro-Amtrak crowd can't seem to get into their thick skulls.

THE PRICE OF TICKETS TO RIDE AMTRAK DOES NOT COVER A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF
IT'S COSTS, OTHERWISE THEY WOULDN'T KEEP BEGGING FOR MORE AND MORE SUBSIDIES. IF AMTRAK CHARGED A TICKET PRICE THAT COVERED IT'S OPERATING COSTS, I GUESS NO ONE COULD AFFORD TO RIDE IT. THAT SHOULD TELL YOU SOMETHING!

Frankly, what this tells me is how much some have bought the highway crowd's BS hook, line and sinker.

Amtrak covers 60-80% of its farebox costs. That's hardly insignificant compared to highways not even half, if you count ALL the subsidies - the hidden ones as well.

Thick skulls? One could use the same "logic" against the highway and airline crowd that's always picking on tiny Amtrak.

If Amtrak were done away with, there would be so much federal $$ we could pour into the highway system.

Right. Like the $30 billion invested in Amtrak over the past 3 decades that Amtrak's "thick-skulled" critics keep hammering upon would only pay for the Big Dig in Boston. Not much else in terms of highway construction, which, by the way, individual motorists pay precious little in direct taxes for.

Subsidies comparisons ARE important since it shows the ONE-SIDEDNESS of the "thick-skulled" Amtrak enemies that are "always begging" for less money for Amtrak.

[jockellis]

The year 1946. Wasn't that the year that the government's discount for "giving" the cross country railroads all that land finally ended? Seems like I read that the government gave away some $250 million in funds and land to get the railroad across the country, but realized a $billion in transportation savings. So it really didn't give the railroads anything, only advanced the funds then got back three times that amount. State and local governments learned in the ninteenth century to use the railroads as personal piggybanks through taxation. That never changed.
Jock Ellis

[bobwilcox]

What is so hot about being a bus line or airline? They are lined up at the front door to the bankruptcy court. The financials for large TL motor carries are not much better.

[jeffhergert]

IMHO, if the playing field were truly level, and every mode of transportation paid 100% of it's costs, rail transportation (freight and passenger) would thrive.

[DSchmitt]

In $ per passenger-mile what is the subsidy for:

Amtrack? All passenger rail? Highway?