HOW CAN THE GOVERNMENT DO THIS TO AMTRAK EMPLOYEES

[jeaton]

Jock

I get that wide screen deal every so often, a pain.

Interesting thing. If you look at constant (uninflated) prices on gasoline from the '70s, I think we are still paying less for gas now. Funny thing about monetary inflation, most people don't make a connection between wages/income and prices. In 1959, my first summer job out of high schooled paid me $1.05 an hour, and I think gas was around 25 cents a gallon. In 1989, I had a salary that came to about $25.00 per hour and was paying something like a buck a gallon for gas. I think it was a pretty good deal.

The short term response to a big jump in gas prices, such as we had in 2004, seems to be a reduction in consumption. I am sure that drops in employment or shifts in employment come into play, there is probably some shift to public transit and most likely reduction in discressionary travel.

Given the conventional mindset of the public it is unlikly that there will be real support for massive improvements in public transit until there are real shortages of gasoline. Proponents of tax reductions are fond of saying that it isn't the government's money, it is the taxpayers money and taxpayers know better than the government on how to spend the money. And so we spend money on a form of transportation that demonstrably the least efficient method of getting from one point to another i.e., our good old gas guzzling automobile.

Our society doesn't respond well to wakeup calls. We seem to need to be thrown to the floor and doused with a bucket of icewater before we even start to wake up.

Jay

[MP57313]

QUOTE: Originally posted by greyhounds
even the Army saw its Comanche helicopter program <snip> chopped off.
<snip>
Bush won't confiscate people's income to build destroyers just for the sake of building destroyers, nor will he confiscate their income to run trains just for the sake of running trains.

The Comanche was terminated after 21 years because it had never reached production due to ever-changing design/requirements (Army kept changing its mind on what it wanted). Some small portions of the program continue.

Bush won't confiscate {harsh word!} people's tax moneys but has no qualms about borrowing money instead. I suppose that's prefereable to taxation IF the people you borrow from continue to support you (China, Japan, South Korea, mutual funds, state retirement fund managers, etc.). I'm no fan of higher taxes but I am very leery of the huge debt the country has run up, for both domestic concerns and the war on terror/Iraq.

I support Amtrak and other non-private auto transit modes...and a strong national defense. I am somewhat amused that Bush's most ardent supporters are also most adept at minimizing their tax payments. Go after the bad guys and bomb them? Heck yes!!! Pay for the bombs and troops with tax money? No way!! Get the money somewhere else!!

Looking through old magazines from the WW II era one sees ads for "War Bonds" and other ways that citizens could help the war effort. Do you see that today? No! Conservation is viewed suspiciously (admittedly some of conservation's strongest supporters are 'way to the left'). I suppose one could write a check to the 'Bureau of Public Debt' (and get a tax deduction for it!) but I don't think many people take that seriously.

Anyway...I believe Amtrak should be as apolitical as possible...though I realize that's kinda tough when it relies on annual appropriations to keep going.

For you anti-Amtrak folks...I'll continue to buy business class tickets now and then but not consume all the freebies. That way the extra $10 or so for each ride will go straight to Amtrak's cashbox and "cover" your involuntary Amtrak contributions.

Happy New Year!!

MP

[andrewjonathon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by conrailman

To: Futuremodal
The Airplane people get 7 to 10 Billion every year from congress. They got over 300 billion over 30 years and Highways gets 35 Billion a year from Congress to Amtrak 37 Billion over 30 Years. So Futuremodal what do you say about that the airlines and highways get alot more money than Amtrak?[?]

If my calculations are correct and if Amtrak carries 25 million people during the next year then a government subsidy of $1.2 billion means then each passenger will receive a subsidy of about $48/person. I understand that 650 million people fly on planes in the US each year so the subsidy of $35 billion comes to about $53/person. On a per person basis it seems relatively similiar. Of course if you extend the analysis to miles travelled per person, I imagine the airline subsidy would shrink considerably in comparison to the passenger trainsubidy since most train passengers will not go more than a few hundred miles on a train while airline passengers will often go thousands. If $48/passenger is not sufficient how much is necessary to run a decent passenger rail service? I have travelled across the US a number of times on Amtrak. And I enjoyed each time however, based on my experience I would have a hard time arguing that the long distance passenger train is an essential service. Services that are truly essential such as the Northeast Corridor and California will be around for a long time because there is a real need for them. However, I think the money spent to continue to support services such as the Southwest Chief, Empire Builder, Sunset Limited takes away from the passenger train lobbies ability to put forth a legitimate argument for additional spending on passenger rail and it is hard to argue that the subsidies are well spent. As much as I enjoy travelling by train, if the long distance services disappeared tomorrow I can't see that it would cause more than a blip in the ability of people to move around this country.

[conrailman]

They is a good story on Amtrak in Altamont Press.com in Todays News Section Jan 1, 2005. People should read that about Amtrak.[8D]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by johnsousa

FIRST OF ALL I WOULD LIKE TO SAY HAPPY HOLIDAYS ,
NOW I AM A NEW AMTRAK ( OBS ) EMPLOYEE, AND I JUST FOUND OUT THAT THE REPUBLICAN CONGRESS DID NOT GIVE US OUR ANNUAL
FUNDING, SO THAT MEANS THAT ALL AMTRAK EMPLOYEES (THE EMPLOYEES WITH LESS THAN 2 YEARS SENOIRITY) WILL BE SOON GETTING PINK SLIPS,
WELL THAT MAKES ME VERY UPSET THAT THIS IS GOING TO HAPPEN,
BUT THE REPUBLICAN IDIOTS WHO RIDE OUR TRAINS IN THE FIRST CLASS ACELA FOR FREE ON OUR TAXPAYERS DOLLARS WHICH WE KNOW WHO THEY ARE --MR SEN. TRENT LOTT OF MISSISSIPPI, WHO RECENTLY RODE ON MY TRAIN IN FIRST CLASS ACELA WITH HIS ( WIFE ? ) AND BODYGUARDS SAT AND ENJOYED EVERYTHING THAT WE HAD TO OFFER, THEN UPON EXITING THE TRAIN IN WASHINGTON D.C .
@UNION STATION I LOOKED HIM RIGHT IN THE EYE WITH A BIG AMTRAK SMILE AND SAID THANK YOU SENATOR HOPE YOU ENJOYED YOUR TRAIN RIDE AND HAVE A NICE DAY, WELL HE LOOKED AT ME WITH A SHREWD LOOK AND MUMBLED SOMETHING I COULD NOT HERE WHAT HE SAID BUT I'M SURE IT WAS NOT NICE,
IT JUST PROVES TO ME THAT THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED TO PRIVATIZE AMTRAK ARE THE PEOPLE ( REPUBLICAN IDIOTS IN CONGRESS ) WHO RIDE OUR TRAINS IN FIRST CLASS AND ARE ABUSING US IN THE PROCESS OF THE SLOW DEATH OF OUR JOBS WITH AMTRAK,

SO FOR ALL YOU BUSH SUPPORTERS GET READY TO GOING BACK TO LONG LINES AT THE GAS STATIONS , AND HIGHWAYS AND BYWAYS,
BECAUSE YOU JUST GOT FOOLED AND MADE YOUR PRESIDENT BUSH ALOT RICHER,

THEIR WILL BE AND END TO THIS SOMEDAY BUT WE WILL HAVE TO WAIT WHEN ----HILLARY CLINTON WILL BE ELECTED IN 4 YEARS SO FOR NOW -----------------------GOOD LUCK ALL


THANK YOU FOR LETTING EXPRESS MYSELF AND I HOPE WE ALL CAN PROVIDE FOR ALL OUR AMTRAK FAMILIES,

Welcome to railroading where you can be cut off for any reason or no reason or just plain fired. Crying won't help. Just make sure you have a backup plan.

Also, Sen. Lott has been a huge supporter of Amtrak. I'd make sure of your facts before spouting that garbage. He probably just thanked you.

LC

[motor]

QUOTE: Originally posted by conrailman

They is a good story on Amtrak in Altamont Press.com in Todays News Section Jan 1, 2005. People should read that about Amtrak.[8D]

I like it. I'll link it ...

http://railroadnews.net/news/1-1.html

motor

[greyhounds]

QUOTE:

For you anti-Amtrak folks...I'll continue to buy business class tickets now and then but not consume all the freebies. That way the extra $10 or so for each ride will go straight to Amtrak's cashbox and "cover" your involuntary Amtrak contributions.

Happy New Year!!

MP

Can't you just send me the ten bucks?

[joesap1]

Let me say from the outset that I sincerely love passenger trains the most of all. But the best way to help Amtrak is to cut ALL government funding. This would in the long run help all forms of public transportation. Sure, when the government funding is cut the railroad will fold, but if there is a true need for passenger service someone will take up the challenge and start anew. The result will be a railroad that turns a profit and stays in business.
I hate to say "cut the funding" but it has never worked or will never work to keep something on artificial support. The railroad must make money to stay in business and it must be run efficienctly to do this. Anything and everything the government does it screws up!!!!!!!!!!! Private enterprise is the only way. I know this means pains for us at times, but we will get over it.
Of course, will the government do the right thing and cut Amtrak free? Probably not, the government rarely does the right thing. It only perpetuates itself and never does the will of the majority. Sad, but true.
Finally, the original comment that H. Clinton will be the next president is probably true, but she won't get my vote.

[Junctionfan]

If it's any consolation to the Bush haters, next election, he can't run for president anymore. What is it 4 or 5 more years?

[Modelcar]

...Not all the government does is worthless....How about the US mail delivery...also include Social Security....There are other functions but no need to get into all of that on here...One thing for sure, you are correct...Amtrak will fail without funding from an outside source. And another fact is clear...No one is going to run passenger rail in any wide spread area and make a profit...so forget that part of it. It will be dead. Period..!

[Anonymous]

How many billions and counting to the AIRLINES? Until we decide what we want for transportation in this country we will hear the sme old same old.

[Anonymous]

I have a lot of friends that don't want to fly anymore. Some of them can't because of cabin pressure. Some can't drive their cars. So if they want to go from Chicago to California, and someone says that long distance rail service is not needed, we're screwed. Of course we can treat ourselves to a nice Greyhound bus ride for 4 days sitting next to a garlic-eater.
If we cut Amtrak free from subsidies, let's cut the airlines free as well. And all the interstates can become toll roads at $14 a toll, every 10 miles.
Is Chicago to New York long distance, or an exacerbation of medium distance? Is 16 hours ovrnight too much to expect? Is frequency of trains like prunes? Is 2 enough, are 3 too many?
This discussion will go on longer than depot diner and coffee shop.

Mitch

[dharmon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by joesap1

Anything and everything the government does it screws up!!!!!!!!!!! Private enterprise is the only way. I know this means pains for us at times, but we will get over it.
Of course, will the government do the right thing and cut Amtrak free? Probably not, the government rarely does the right thing. It only perpetuates itself and never does the will of the majority. Sad, but true.

Yeah okay......everything the US Goverment does.....you get mail I presume, and it costs a heck of a lot less to mail something in the US than other places, and there's a pretty good chance it's going to make it where's it going, and I imagine you've used interstates and host of other services the government has screwed up. It's always easy to blame the government...the big bad bureacracy. Well.....hello.....It's your government and you helped make it. Why is it that it takes so long for the government to act??? Becasue it spends alot of time bowing to the whims of the tyranny of the masses, who want everything for nothing and they want it yesterday. Open bidding for x number of days, can't have a contractor that has less than x number of women, minority or handicapped employees. The public that has allowed special interests to make rules and done nothing is to blame.....the government does not collectively wake up one morning and say ..hmmmm today I am going to arbitrarily cut Amtrak funding..........

......So on one hand, the right thing to do is fund Amtrak fully ...and appease one set of special interests and the other right thing is to cut funding and let it go....so which is it??? What is the right thing...I'm sure your government wants to know..In the mean time nobody seems to get what they want and the compromise, the ultimate result of partisan politics, is not apparently doing either.

[MP57313]

QUOTE: Originally posted by greyhounds

Can't you just send me the ten bucks?

[andrewjonathon]

In almost everything in life you never get everything you ask for. I assume that Gunn knew he would not get everything and therefore asked for more than he really needed. Therefore the missing $600 million may be not be as bad as it sounds. I agree that in general where possible the subsidies to all forms of transport should be cut. There are some subsidies that are necessary to maintain because it is in the interest of the nation to have modern, efficient transportation system. However, airline passengers could bear a lot more of the costs of flying. For example, a fee such as $10 from each airport should be added the cost of each ticket to recover operating costs. I doubt that such a fee would reduce the number of airline passengers much but would significantly reduce the need to subsidize the airline system. Similiaryly, I have no problem with the concept that the US Interstate system should be charging tolls so that the user pays the bulk of the cost to operate it. Many countries in Europe use a "user pay" system on the freeways and they are supposedly less market oriented than the US. The city of London even charges car ~$10 (5 pounds) to enter the city center. The rationale is that individual drivers should pay for the cost of traffic jams and the pollution they cause.

[andrewjonathon]

Mark, I am willing to re-think my comment about budgets. It just seems that I have run across a number of annecdotal examples of government departments trying to spend money remaining in their previous year's budget (sometimes on questionable projects) in order to justify getting the same allocation in the next year. And wasn't one of the criticisms Congress had of Amtrak before Gunn arrived that they never felt confident that Amtrak was being honest in its budget estimates?

I do agree that tolls of any sort can be a poitical mine field for politicians to negotiate. There probably aren't too many who would be willing to take on such as task. I find that once imposed though people tend to grudgingly accept them as a fact of life as in the case of London. The Vancouver, BC airport imposed an "Airport Improvement Fee" of $10 - $20 for years after building a new terminal. It was recently removed although I believe that may be because the airport came to an agreement with the airlines to include it in the ticket price. Anyway, I think it would be feasible if someone had the guts to take it one.

[arbfbe]

I made a trip to California a couple of years ago and for entertainment opted for a charter bus to Ensenada. Sort of a chance to see the country beyond the border. The road south of TJ was pretty modern but we stopped frequently to pay a toll for the next segment of the road. I asked the driver, of Mexican descent but a US citizen, why there were tolls and why they were so closely spaced. He said it was so the user paid for the roads and those who did not own cars did not have to pay taxes to support the roads. So I said that was a good idea but the application was extremely ineffecient compared to the US system. I noted Mexico could accompoli***he same thing for a lot less expense if they just financed highway construction via a fuel tax like in effect in the US. Same directed $$ collection with fewer collectors involved.

So maybe the US needs to expand the highway user tax on fuel purchases to all modes of transportation. Bring AMTK up to the level it should be and then figure out the operational and capital budget necessary for a successful operation. Divide that by the number of gallons of fuel to be used and add that amount as a tax on the fuel. If the ticket prices cannot afford the increase then AMTK will fold. If it survives then then can increase the tax or reduce it as needed in the future. Do the same with barge lines, trucks and the airlines, add up all the public costs for air traffic control, the FAA all the local airports and increase the fuel tax to cover these costs. Those that use will pay or find an alternative and those that do not will not have to pay for the convenience of others.

Alan

[joesap1]

Okay I am willing to concede that we have a good U.S. mail system. Though a guy sent me a package from back east last October and I never did receive it. He probably should have insured it.
Anyway, I vote in every election, including small time school board elections, and I write my representatives all the time telling them what I believe they should do.
As I said from the beginning, I love passenger trains the most. But the government has been keeping Amtrak alive since it's inception. The best way to provide passenger service is to cut the funding and we would see many small railroads spring up providing regional passenger service. Eventually, they would interconnect. The final result would be a system of profit making passenger service railroads. It can be done and without government support.
The government has grown into an unwieldly monster were 3 out of 4 work in some sort of government related job. Who pays their wages and benefits? We all do! This must stop or we will destroy what is left of freedoms we so boastfully brag about.

[joesap1]

Dear Mr. Hemphill, whom I deeply respect, you have forgotten more about the railroad than I will ever know.
So I will concede that private passenger service will not happen, but what was that attack on private contractors? Who cares if they are corrupt as long as they are not using government money. Our government and the general public as a whole are corrupt. It is the nature of mankind to be corrupt. It is what the Bible calls sin.
Since we(I put myself at the head of the list) are rotten to the core are only true hope is to put ourselves into the mercies of God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
Now that the issue of corruption has been pinpointed and put to rest-we are all guilty. Let's try to stop the growth of the insatiable monster that is our government, and push for eliminating spending on all programs across the board. Let's, as has been mentioned, cut off the airlines.
Wouldn't be great to see the government actually decrease instead of the growing like the "blob?" I guess not. Most people have some section of the government that they work for(remember that 3 out 4) and therefore, want to make sure no one cuts their budget.
Oh, go ahead and continue to support Amtrak, but don't cry that it is not enough. No amount of money is never enough. It is not the amount that is really important as to how they spend it.
Out here in California we have more than enough money spent on education. Yet our schools stink. Our state superintendent of Education has a salary higher than the President of the United States. It is not the amount of money appropriated, it is how it is spent. The government money is not free, it comes from you and me. So let's make sure what ever little they get they use it wisely.

[daveklepper]

The solution for Amtrak is:

Bush will defeat himself in Iraq because of his extremely bad and misconceived energy and transportation policies in the USA itself which are equivalent to continuing to sell scrap iron to Japan AFTER Pearl Harbor and not just before. Terrorists exist at all because of oil money and only oil money supports them. The USA needs a well funded complete nationwide PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM that can allow the economy to still fundtion if A-card rationing had to be imposed. Then and only then Bush will have the streingth to order the Saudis to return Islam to the classical Islam of the Koran (which by the way would condemn Jews if we DON'T all move to the Holy Land!) which allowed churches and synagogues to coexist with mosques. You cannot order another country to change its philosophy or theology? We did that precisely with Nazi Germany and Hirohito';s Japan through winning a war, and did it to Soviet Communism by Regonomics and Regan's tough foreign policy. To defeat Global Terrorism, the USA has to stop being run by car-lovers and the oil companies and the highway - auto lobby. Then full funding of Amtrak is possible as part of a National Public Transit Network. I voted for Bush because I think basically he is honest enough to realize his mistake when the proper people give him the necessary data. Yes the Public Transit Network must be subsidized as part of National Defense. I am sure the WWII Shipyard Railway with its rehabbed NYC 2nd Avenue El cars running moslty on city street trolley tracks did not make money for the Key System and was subsidized by the Shipyard or directly by the Government. Global terrorism is major problem and good public transportation is a very necessary part of the solution. The money will save lives of US and British soldiers in Iraq.

[Anonymous]

Wow. [:0]

To the originator of this thread: I doubt you'll ever read this, because your post looks like the rant of a 15 yr old. It's never polite to type in all caps like that, it's considered shouting. Everyone has a bad day at work, but we don't all run around screaming about it.

I'm not even going to touch the political aspects of this thread. I will say that Hillary Clinton will never be President. I would like some of that model glue you guys are sniffing though. [:)]

As for my thoughts on Amtrak...I don't really have much to say. I've never used it, and I doubt I ever will. Those who support it are likely to be the ones who want national healthcare and even more government programs. There few countries whose governments are bigger than ours now. If it gets any bigger, there's a word for that too...communism.

Free enterprise is the backbone of this country. The freedom to pull your own weight, live the American Dream and make it big. Or you can be a failure and live off welfare for the rest of your life. Fake a disability and you get double. I put my socks on one at a time and pay my taxes. Why should I have to pay for something I don't use? I'm a proud member of Generation X . I've worked since I was 14 years old, but do you think I'll ever see a dime of that social security money? Pass the model glue again please.

Let the ticket buyers of Amtrak pay for it and stop the government funding. I don't drink, so I don't pay the liquor tax, and I sure don't want to pay for Amtrak.

[cspmo]

QUOTE: Free enterprise is the backbone of this country. The freedom to pull your own weight,

Why do the Taxpayers have to pay for building, maintaining airports? shouldn't the people use them pay for it?

[oltmannd]

I don't think that Congress wants Amtrak to fail. That's why they give them "status quo" money each year. $1.2B is just enough to see them thru exactly as-is until next year. The $1.8B Amtrak asked for included a lot of capital repairs and improvements.

It appears to me that the politicaly reality is that as long as Amtrak remains fundamentally structured as it is today, they will get "status quo" money each year. However, if their is some change that is perceived as an "improvement" either structurally or financially, then Amtrak may get "growth" money.

It may mean having to give up some stuff now to get more later - a strategy that Amtrak supporters have not been willing to embrace as yet.

[jabrown1971]

I support Amtrak, but not government healthcare.....that doesn't mean that healtcare doesn't need reformed...it does. And so does Amtrak.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by cspmo
Why do the Taxpayers have to pay for building, maintaining airports? shouldn't the people use them pay for it?

Airports are different. It's more ecomonical to fly than it is to travel by train. I'm all for my tax dollars going for the greater good of this country. In terms of travel infrastructure: highways, roads, rail, air, etc. I'm not saying that all roads should be toll based and only those using facilities or services should be the ones paying for them.

My point is, the government needs to trim the fat. Amtrak is crying because they didn't get a small fraction of the money they wanted. There are numerous programs like this that need to be given a pat on the behind and sent on their way. Amtrak just isn't a viable form of transportation, and it will never make money. Someone earlier in this thread posted that if gasoline costs increased to $4-$5 per gallon then things might be different, and I agree. I hate to see anyone lose their job due to downsizing, as I've been there before myself. But in my mind, Amtrak is a waste of government spending, aka tax dollars, aka my money.

[arbfbe]

Cyb0rg,

Why do I have to pay county, state and federal taxes to support the county airport nearby that I have not used for over 10 years? I have used AMTK more recently than that. The only way you can say air travel is cheaper than rail travel is if you put a monetary value on the time it takes to make the journey. In an increasing number of markets rail travel is quicker than air travel if you factor in the time it takes to get to and from the airport and the delays there.

The small amount of money, as you put it, that AMTK did not get, $1.2B vs $1.6B is about 25%, not an insignificant amount in anyone's budget.

Also, big government does not equate communism. Look it up in the dictionary sometime before you bandy it about. "From each according to his abilities and to each according to his needs", does not at any point mention big government.

[conrailman]

U.S. should stop the Giving aid to these other country like Russia and War 200+ billion Dollars. WE give 100 billion in aid to these other country every Year. So that Waste of Government spending every single every. The U.S. should take care of us not these other country in aid every year.

[daveklepper]

I gather from the response to my contribution that most Americans are willing to live with the security arrangements needed to coexist with Islamic global terror and the Saudi theology behind it rather than get really serious about energy independence, which would mandate a much improved Amtrak. Pardon me, I should have written lack of response.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by arbfbe
Also, big government does not equate communism. Look it up in the dictionary sometime before you bandy it about. "From each according to his abilities and to each according to his needs", does not at any point mention big government.

Interesting. Perhaps it is you who should look it up.

com·mu·nism n.
1. A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.
2. A system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power, claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people.

That pretty much says it all. A simplified version is that the large government entity takes the country's assets as a whole, and divides them up among the people. A trivial example would be if I made $200/week and you made $100/week, we would each receive $150/week under this type of system. It "levels the playing field" so to speak, which in my mind, is what a lot of social programs seek to do. We do not need the government to tell us how to live or spend our paychecks for us, that's not what it was built for.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, and I to mine on a great many things, including the funding...or lack therof...for Amtrak. However, in the future, refrain from advising me to look something up in the dictionary sometime before I banty about it. Much less when it's you who needed to look it up.

[Modelcar]

....And I shall say no one on here can say whether Hillary will or will not be President of our country in the furture. We're not Prophets.