Often when it comes to building or operating a rail system the topic of what form of funding or ownership gets brought up. I used to be an absolutist about trains being run by private companies and then I realized it doesn't matter. There are examples world wide of successful state owned rail systems and private ones with everything in between. Each model has its advantages and disadvantages. Often a train is a train no matter who runs it. A private system might focus on efficiency where as a public owned system might offer service where it is not profitable to do so. A public system might be more publicly accountable but might also be turned into a political football (see Amtrak). A private system avoids tax dollars but has costs like interest and shareholders. To me both publicly owned and privately owned rail systems have a role to play and it isn't one or the the other. On the one hand I am ok with public funding for rail and operational subsidies where necessary but I also don't accept the notion that rail is inherently unprofitable and can only be done by government.
Railroad to Freedom
Methinks the problem on the private side these days is if something looks lucrative, someone will want to come in and milk it dry. This as opposed to the time when investors looked for a reasonable return on their investment and had the patience to wait for it to happen.
A public "authority" is usually at least a little autonomous, and is still free of such profit taking. That doesn't isolate it from the financial health of its parent municipality, however, so if there are to be cuts in the city budget, the transportation authority will likely suffer as well.
I liken the "milk it dry" phenomenon to TV 40 years ago (and more). Back then the networks might let a marginally rated show continue through the season - which oftimes meant that the shows would develop a following and possibly go on to several seasons of success.
Today, if a show doesn't do as well as hoped in the first few weeks, it's toast.
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...
Equality of results takes away incentive to achieve, so there are fewer results produced. Equality of opportunity is fairer. Equality of results requires a big layer of government to redistribute results from those who have many results to those who have less. That management itself also eats up a lot of the results.
ontheBNSF . To me both publicly owned and privately owned rail systems have a role to play and it isn't one or the the other. On the one hand I am ok with public funding for rail and operational subsidies where necessary but I also don't accept the notion that rail is inherently unprofitable and can only be done by government.
. To me both publicly owned and privately owned rail systems have a role to play and it isn't one or the the other. On the one hand I am ok with public funding for rail and operational subsidies where necessary but I also don't accept the notion that rail is inherently unprofitable and can only be done by government.
edblysardI see no reason why Mr. Buffett and Mr. Gates and the other mega wealthy are not fully entitled to keep all the money they made, after all, they made or earned it, created and guided companies, and along the way, they made me a nice little nest egg too.
Ha ha ha, not even Warren Buffet believes that. I can't believe you haven't seen Warren Buffet on Captal Hill talking about how his taxes are lower than his secretary's and that is unfair. He is the most outspoken person arguing that his and other rich people's taxes are too low. And Bill Gates is the second-most.
Idiot
This thread is awesome.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
That's music? Well at least it was not Mrs Miller.
The 1% feature the other 99% as what should be their unpaid servents.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Folks keep the thread on topic.
I posted this on another forum, and I will post it here: It is possible to disagree without being discourteous. It is discourteous for a person who disagrees with someone else to call the one with whom he disagrees a demeaning name. In the short time (about seven years) that I have been enjoying participation in the forums I have appreciated the courtesy that is generally shown to other participators. May practice continue
Johnny
p. s. sorry this named at or should I say aimed at ed?
I'm thinking maybe instead of locking this thread, it should be moved to Zardoz's humor thread.
By the way, does anybody remember what the original post was about? It wasn't about redistribution of wealth.
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
edblysard Yes, I was using myself as an example, but the question contained there is still valid…what exactly entitles anyone of us to someone else’s wealth?
Yes, I was using myself as an example, but the question contained there is still valid…what exactly entitles anyone of us to someone else’s wealth?
I still strongly agree with Ed's position.
In the interest of fairness, let us address Ed's question so that we can return to a sane discussion.
Sound good to all?
schlimm I thought this forum was supposed to be about railroading not the grammar police? This has really become petty and boring.
I thought this forum was supposed to be about railroading not the grammar police? This has really become petty and boring.
That is a petty and boring post.
zugmann schlimm I thought this forum was supposed to be about railroading not the grammar police? This has really become petty and boring. That is a petty and boring post.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Murphy Siding Oh yeah? Well I think that his post was important and exciting! Therefore, that gives me the right to call you a big maroon for disagreeing with me.
Oh yeah? Well I think that his post was important and exciting! Therefore, that gives me the right to call you a big maroon for disagreeing with me.
I'd be hurt if you didn't.
zugmann Murphy Siding Oh yeah? Well I think that his post was important and exciting! Therefore, that gives me the right to call you a big maroon for disagreeing with me. I'd be hurt if you didn't.
Murphy SidingWell....I wasn't going to respond to this becasue I thought I had expended my supply of mirth and goldth and frankensenth already...
This has my vote for one of the Posts of the Year.
Johnny: If one version of the expression is "Just between us..." (which I think it is) all we need to do is remember our subject and object pronouns for the other circumstance. His construction would leave him saying 'let's just keep this a matter between we.' (Which might not bother him, but would sure bother me...)
Perhaps we should get together off-list and chip in to get him a copy of Fowler for his very own.
When my geology professor friend joined an aviation forum I participate in she quickly became known as "Dr. Spell-chick". She's since given up on correcting people.
Norm
Norm48327 ... She's since given up on correcting people
As a self-professed comma cop, I learned most of this lesson a while back.
But this current grammar excursion isn't about 'correcting' people, it's about people who make fun of other people's grammar (and don't miss the opportunity to belittle them in the process) while even in the very act making egregious boners of their own.
Not as if this were an actual railroad-related topic to begin with...
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.