UlrichActually not a bad idea. Government and business can co exist.
In the end it would probably depend on whether the government-run railroad became a political football (see: Amtrak) or not. If allowed to operate relatively free of government interference (including no government appointees), we'd probably never notice the difference.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
In many privatizations of state railways in Europe and elsewhere, the operations are privatized but the right-of-way continues to be owned by a government entity which is responsible for its maintenance and upkeep.
Another arrangerment is the granting of concessions by the government to private firms for a specific length of time with the concession holder responsible for operations and maintenance of the right of way. This has been the method used in Mexico, Brazil and other countries.
Actually not a bad idea. Government and business can co exist. There are currently several government owned railroads in the US, Vermont Railway would be a good example. I wouldn't assume its a money loser just because it is owned by the government. More likely than not it is quietly making money for the state and for the people of Vermont.
People assume that a government owned railway is necessarily less efficient than one owned in the private sector. But why so? I and ten million others currently own CSX.. i.e. we are the shareholders of CSX. Would CSX suddenly become less efficient if we shareholders were replaced by the American people through government ownership? Probably not.
I would opine that the current state of railroading in the US reflects the result of a more or less logical progression - mergers have been a part of the RR scene almost since day one. The New York Central was assembled from a number of shorter/smaller railroads.
Perhaps in hindsight some of the mergers over the years didn't result in what would have been desirable, but hindsight is almost always 20-20.
The eastern portion of the US especially was filled with shorter railroads that may have been Class 1's in their time, but which would qualify only as regionals, or even shortlines today.
As has been suggested, the best place for the railroads to be is in "private" hands, not as a government agency. That way, they are looking out for themselves, with their own money (borrowing notwithstanding), and will generally spend the money in ways that will best enhance their bottom line.
A government owned entity would be constantly competing with other government agencies for their piece of the pie, and could well end up on the short end of the stick. Look at Amtrak.
Regaarding freight railroading, I think the present "Big Six" (or 6-1/2) configuration of N. A. ralroads supplemented by regionals aand short lines makes a great deal of sense for present NA economics and pollitics. I think the status quo will be around for a long time, given stable economic and ppolitical conditions. Regarding passenger railroading, particularly long distance, privatization can come by the following: Look at the overall Amtrak subsidy, capitol costs as well as operating subsidy, then use it to base a formula related to passengers miles and no of passenger journeys to subsidze freight railroads for providing the service through tax breaks. This would especiallly apply to long distance services.
ontheBNSF There are advantages to such a set up it is easier to provide government subsidies for improvements than it would be for a private company.
There are advantages to such a set up it is easier to provide government subsidies for improvements than it would be for a private company.
It's not a subsidy if its the government spending money on itself.
If you can't wrap your head around concepts like that, you probably shouldn't try such lofty, pie in the sky musings.
Having the backbone of the economy dependent on a CR every year or so is probably the most laughably bad idea I've ever heard.
The reality is that a majority of those in our government, especially in Congress, don't want to go into any business, especially railroading. The prevailing philosophy is that we are a Capitalist, free private enterprise society and that the government should regulate, license, charter, subsidize but not own and operate for profit businesses. They got handed CR but got rid of it cleanly and quickly. Amtrak, they got handed but because the Class Ones don't want to be saddled with passenger services, cannot get rid of it. If Amtrak were to be privatized, private railroads would not have a reason or incentive to support or work with it...and no Congressman wants to tell his constituents he gave away and caused the demise of their passenger train. Plus, private rail likes and wants the government to keep Amtrak so they don't have to deal with it and the public themselves. It a "...if you do, ...if you don't" situation that works for government and industry in the status quo.
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.
Another thing the USRA got right was the standardized design of several locomotives, i.e. Pacifics, Mikados, and switchers. Not bad at all, even if a lot of 'roads wanted nothing to do with them.
Keep in mind what brought the USRA into being was the chaos and confusion brought about by the shipping failures and congestion that happened when the country entered the First World War. Some of it was the railroad's fault, but the fact of the matter was the country was caught flat-footed by Wilson's request of a declaration of war in April of 1917. No-one was ready, not the railroads, US industry, or even the Army. The Navy was the closest to being ready due to fleet modernization programs going back to Teddy Roosevelts administration.
The situation was so bad that US troops fighting in Europe had to do so with foreign equipment, mostly French, aside from small arms like the '03 Springfield and Model 1917 rifles. Superb weapons like the Browning machine gun and automatic rifle didn't show up in quantity until the last weeks of the war. Everything else that was used like tanks, aircraft, and artillery was all foreign made. All good stuff, by the way, but not a good way to do things.
I also think nationalization would be a bad idea. if anything, formerly nationalized railroads in Europe are more and more becoming privatized. Same in Japan.
As to the much maligned USRA, it certainly had its share of problems. However, the reason it came into being was not some socialist plot. Rather, the private lines were unable to handle the increased WWI cargo flow to the Atlantic ports (insufficient capacity and equipment) and traffic congestion ports brought movement to a near standstill.. USRA engine designs were pretty decent, too.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Political trolling bait!
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
True, the USRA wasn't ALL bad. Few things in life are. They came up with some excellent locomotive designs; but it's also true that they really messed up in general.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day (but only briefly).
I know of one good thing the USRA did: it began operating westbound trains between two points in Nevada on the Southern Pacific, and operating the eastbound trains between the two points on the Western Pacific; this operation continued as the railroads again controlled their operation.
However, the stupidity which brought about the demise of the Colorado Midland is almost beyond belief.
Johnny
ontheBNSFIf the Class 1 railroads were to become larger than they are now where is only one railroad per region then in my view it would be best to nationalize them.
Somehow I just don't see the government allowing this. And a government railroad would be more prone to be forced to run trains at certain times of day only, not ship dangerous goods through city centers etc, if the public wants it. And so service would likely suffer.
In the WW1 the program failed due to the temporary nature of it despite this the program did improve some of the railroads with more standardization. Also consider back then railroads were smaller and decentralized while today there are fewer of them. Also I don't advocate the current government nor the current financial situation these two factors prevent it from being done at this time. Also a government owned railroad should operate independently and be required to make money and you avoid subsidizing operations also make it illegal for railroads profits to be used outside of the railroad. Also consider that both Russia and China have nationalized railroads and they offer excellent service. Also consider that China and Russia have to a large extent more economic freedom than we do and still manage to have government owned railways.
Railroad to Freedom
Are you seriously expecting THIS congress to authorize spending on anything that would be good for the country in the long run? Have you looked at a highway bridge lately? Maybe it would be better for railroaders to run the railroads, without any "help" from the politicians.
And in the end we have to deal with MORE government that does whatever it feels like doing to us citizens.
Modeling the "Fargo Area Rapid Transit" in O scale 3 rail.
ontheBNSF More profits could invested in the capital improvements of the railroads themselves due to less of it being consumed by interest, stock options, dividends etc and for this reason the service could be provided at lower cost.
More profits could invested in the capital improvements of the railroads themselves due to less of it being consumed by interest, stock options, dividends etc and for this reason the service could be provided at lower cost.
This may not be a good analogy but i will use it anyway. Michigan has the 3rd highest gas taxes in the country, but some of the worst roads. Rather than reinvesting those gas taxes in roads the Michigan legislature spends those funds elsewhere. Anyone thinking the US congress will reinvest RR profits in the railroads and not spend it on projects elsewhere in being naive.
Nope. Been there, done that, and too early in history to get the T-shirt.
Government is not good a making money, only good at spending it. If our roads are any indication the railroads would go to pot in ten years or so,
Norm
Oh, this has been talked about, discussed, proposed, and debunked in this country. First, we are a free enterprise, capitalist society; nothing but private for profit businesses are the ideal. Second, look how the USRA fouled up the system during WWI; why would anyone want to go back to that. Third, it might work in more socialist style political states but has had a hard time in many, too. Look at England, it has been private ownership and operations, totally Nationalized, and returned to private owners except in some sections. And, here in the US, we kinda did that with Conrail but sold it off to the public sector. And we do have a lot of short lines which are actually owned by government entities with private investment and operating companies contracted to run the line.
The biggest fear of nationalizing class ones in this country for many, including me, lies in Congress being too political, too micromanaging, too inconsistent to get it right. And yes, we point to WWI and McAdoo as an example of how bad things can get.
If the Class 1 railroads were to become larger than they are now where is only one railroad per region then in my view it would be best to nationalize them. I would only support such measures under such conditions. Also a government take over should be non coercive and not done through a hostile take over. There are advantages to such a set up it is easier to provide government subsidies for improvements than it would be for a private company. Such a government railroad could be tax exempt as it would be pointless to tax one self. More profits could invested in the capital improvements of the railroads themselves due to less of it being consumed by interest, stock options, dividends etc and for this reason the service could be provided at lower cost. By having the government own the railroads it would the incentive to promote them in countries with government owned oil companies the government promotes them in various ways, Amtrak's quasi-private nature is one of the reasons why the federal government doesn't care much about it. A TVA model might be the way to go.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.