Psychot Euclid Lithonia Operator Euclid, I don't think companies should exist solely for the purpose of making money for the owners. I think companies have responsibilities to the people who work there, and to society in general. I think most big-company executives are grossly overpaid, and that laying off workers while CEOs are making ten of millions is just plain wrong. The people who work at companies get wages for their effort. Is that not fair enough? What other responsibilities to you think companies have toward their employees besides paying them to work? Don't companies get to decide how much to pay their executives? If laying off workers while paying large salaries to CEOs is wrong, what needs to be done about it? You make good points, but I would answer your questions with another question: what's going to happen when technology continues its inevitable march forward and the only employment available is a few well-remunerated jobs for the very best and brightest and those with connections, and relatively few low-wage service jobs for everyone else? The future of capitalism depends on the answer to that question, because if it's not addressed, that vast cohort of people who are left out of the economy completely will revolt at some point in the future and the end result will likely be some form of command economy. We're going to have to find a way to keep people gainfully employed and with a reason to get out of bed in the morning, rather than sacrificing everything at the altar of efficiency and profits. As I have said before, I could see paring train crews down from 5 to 2 people, but running 150+ car trains and gumming up the rail network to cut a few more people and some equipment out of the equation seems insane to me, and an example of the kind of corporate behavior that's going to undermine the entire capitalist system at some point.
Euclid Lithonia Operator Euclid, I don't think companies should exist solely for the purpose of making money for the owners. I think companies have responsibilities to the people who work there, and to society in general. I think most big-company executives are grossly overpaid, and that laying off workers while CEOs are making ten of millions is just plain wrong. The people who work at companies get wages for their effort. Is that not fair enough? What other responsibilities to you think companies have toward their employees besides paying them to work? Don't companies get to decide how much to pay their executives? If laying off workers while paying large salaries to CEOs is wrong, what needs to be done about it?
Lithonia Operator Euclid, I don't think companies should exist solely for the purpose of making money for the owners. I think companies have responsibilities to the people who work there, and to society in general. I think most big-company executives are grossly overpaid, and that laying off workers while CEOs are making ten of millions is just plain wrong.
Euclid,
I don't think companies should exist solely for the purpose of making money for the owners. I think companies have responsibilities to the people who work there, and to society in general.
I think most big-company executives are grossly overpaid, and that laying off workers while CEOs are making ten of millions is just plain wrong.
The people who work at companies get wages for their effort. Is that not fair enough? What other responsibilities to you think companies have toward their employees besides paying them to work?
Don't companies get to decide how much to pay their executives? If laying off workers while paying large salaries to CEOs is wrong, what needs to be done about it?
You make good points, but I would answer your questions with another question: what's going to happen when technology continues its inevitable march forward and the only employment available is a few well-remunerated jobs for the very best and brightest and those with connections, and relatively few low-wage service jobs for everyone else?
The future of capitalism depends on the answer to that question, because if it's not addressed, that vast cohort of people who are left out of the economy completely will revolt at some point in the future and the end result will likely be some form of command economy. We're going to have to find a way to keep people gainfully employed and with a reason to get out of bed in the morning, rather than sacrificing everything at the altar of efficiency and profits.
As I have said before, I could see paring train crews down from 5 to 2 people, but running 150+ car trains and gumming up the rail network to cut a few more people and some equipment out of the equation seems insane to me, and an example of the kind of corporate behavior that's going to undermine the entire capitalist system at some point.
Yes, the capitalist system is always in danger of being undermined, and I am not comfortable about losing our manufacturing base and seeing the quality disappear from all consumer products. Not all decisions made in the capitalist system are good, but what defines it is the freedom to make those decisisons.
One of those decisions is where to cut costs. Businesses don't exist to make employees comfortable and secure throughout their lives. They might offer some of that enticement, but they are not required to. Requiring it is not part of the capitalist system. It is part of another system.
From https://www.aar.org/news/rail-traffic-for-the-week-ending-october-19-2019/ :
For this week, total U.S. weekly rail traffic was 507,381 carloads and intermodal units, down 8.6 percent compared with the same week last year.
Total carloads for the week ending October 19 were 245,002 carloads, down 7.8 percent compared with the same week in 2018, while U.S. weekly intermodal volume was 262,379 containers and trailers, down 9.3 percent compared to 2018.
Lithonia Operator Euclid Lithonia Operator So let's just stick to trains. So why do you think rail carloadings are continuing to slump? I don't have any particlar insight into why this is. Mostly this is above my pay grade. But from what I read here and elsewhere, "Precision Scheduled Railroading" (I put this in quotes because it is so hypey/silly) seems mainly to be a way to squeeze short-term gains from the railroads primarily by laying off workers. Generalizing here, Class 1 roads seem to want only unit trains; grabbing boxcars off of sidings here and there is too labor-intensive. If you get out of the single-carload (or small cut) business, then you have less carloadings. So that's some of it. Also, it seems that the railroads are simply not tending their gardens. Service is not great. So people get a truck.
Euclid Lithonia Operator So let's just stick to trains. So why do you think rail carloadings are continuing to slump?
Lithonia Operator So let's just stick to trains.
So why do you think rail carloadings are continuing to slump?
I don't have any particlar insight into why this is. Mostly this is above my pay grade.
But from what I read here and elsewhere, "Precision Scheduled Railroading" (I put this in quotes because it is so hypey/silly) seems mainly to be a way to squeeze short-term gains from the railroads primarily by laying off workers. Generalizing here, Class 1 roads seem to want only unit trains; grabbing boxcars off of sidings here and there is too labor-intensive. If you get out of the single-carload (or small cut) business, then you have less carloadings. So that's some of it.
Also, it seems that the railroads are simply not tending their gardens. Service is not great. So people get a truck.
If that was the case, trucking would be doing great. It doesn't seem to be the case.
https://www.truckinginfo.com/336158/is-trucking-in-the-midst-of-a-freight-recession
"In ACT Research’s Freight Forecast for July, the firm affirmed its view that trucking is in the midst of a freight recession, forecasting that truckload and intermodal contract rates would fall this year due to overcapacity and weak freight demand. In turn, overcapacity is expected to give shippers the upper hand in rate negotiations."
An "expensive model collector"
Lithonia Operator Let me get this straight. If a thread contains discussion of antique aircraft the moderators swing into action. But if specifically-forbidden political content drones on for page after page, the moderators nap?
Let me get this straight. If a thread contains discussion of antique aircraft the moderators swing into action. But if specifically-forbidden political content drones on for page after page, the moderators nap?
As others have said, it's impossible to exclude politics completely from these discussions. What we can do is refrain from using inflammatory rhetoric. I was guilty of that myself, and I apologized for it.
Be it right or wrong or smart or not, I think the big companies are all about reducing head count. Smaller to medium sized companies are where employment growth lies.
At the same time, the nature of work is changing. Just as in past transcending shifts. Not much need for foragers and their skills when agriculture developed. Fewer farmers needed when mechanization came on the scene. Now it’s information/knowledge technology. Learning how to harness it.
zardoz Euclid Do you think it is possible that some of the layoffs are for long term gains for the good of the company and not just short term gains? You might be right; after all, who needs all them pesky employees; you know, those that do actual work? The tracks will fix themselves.The locomotives will never need service.Signals? Who needs 'em? Dispatchers? Nah. The drivers can just follow the crumbling rails.Conductors? Nope--no switches will need throwing.Engineers? Not with Trip Optimizer.Trainmasters/Travelling Engineers? Not them either--no one left to supervise.Clerks? The computer will do it all. Anyone left? No? There you go, Euclid: your perfect railroad. just like the toy train in your parents' basement.
Euclid Do you think it is possible that some of the layoffs are for long term gains for the good of the company and not just short term gains?
You might be right; after all, who needs all them pesky employees; you know, those that do actual work? The tracks will fix themselves.The locomotives will never need service.Signals? Who needs 'em? Dispatchers? Nah. The drivers can just follow the crumbling rails.Conductors? Nope--no switches will need throwing.Engineers? Not with Trip Optimizer.Trainmasters/Travelling Engineers? Not them either--no one left to supervise.Clerks? The computer will do it all.
Anyone left? No? There you go, Euclid: your perfect railroad. just like the toy train in your parents' basement.
Railroads have been laying off employees that were made unecessary due to technological advancements since the beginning. Were these layoffs not justified? I never claimed that all employees are unecessary. But there are always some that become unecessary as things move forward.
Euc's perfect railroad is actually an ATM - CEO comes in, goes to the excruciating physical labor of pushing a button and all the machine does electronically transfer funds to the company's account - until he exercises his second excruciating act of physical labor - pushing the button again and going home.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
charlie hebdo Does anyone seriously think the slowing economy isn't the primary factor in slumping carloadingd?
Does anyone seriously think the slowing economy isn't the primary factor in slumping carloadingd?
Yes, I do. The world wide economy seems to be slowing, not just ours.
I'm sure there are customers who are switching to trucks because the railroads (PSR or not) don't really want or care about their business. But the drop off is bigger than that. Besides, I think that while PSR might drive off some business, it's biggest hinderance is making it harder to justify adding new business. New business may bring in more money, but it might also raise the OR doing it. They don't want that.
One local bright spot. The last couple of days I've seen M-O-W replacing some ties on a spur track that hasn't been used by the ag industry next to it for quite a few years. The last use was bringing in ag chemicals in tank cars. It looks like that might start up again. When I first hired out, 21 years ago today, they still loaded grain in 25 car blocks. I don't expect that to happen. Both facilities are part of a large regional Co-Op that has larger grain loading facilities nearby.
Jeff
Lithonia Operator Euclid, I don't think companies should exist solely for the purpose of making money for the owners. I think companies have responsibilities to the people who work there, and to society in general. I have more respect for a guy that can bring a long train down a steep grade than I do for a guy who got a hot stock tip and had cash to gamble. I think most big-company executives are grossly overpaid, and that laying off workers while CEOs are making ten of millions is just plain wrong.
I have more respect for a guy that can bring a long train down a steep grade than I do for a guy who got a hot stock tip and had cash to gamble. I think most big-company executives are grossly overpaid, and that laying off workers while CEOs are making ten of millions is just plain wrong.
That's the stakeholder concept some propose to save the free market system. But it would require a major structural change that would encounter severe resistance.
EuclidDo you have an anger problem?
EuclidDo you think it is possible that some of the layoffs are for long term gains for the good of the company and not just short term gains?
Does anyone seriously think the slowing economy isn't the primary factor in slumping carloadings?
Lithonia OperatorSo let's just stick to trains.
Well I’m sure I’ll upset someone, but I for one enjoy the heck out of these types of discussions, regardless of tempers. Great points and perspectives from every angle. True or false? Great justifications for most of them. Just depends on perspective. And I really enjoy the comments from Shadow the Cats Owner simply because we have a trucking staffer who keeps providing great insights into what it looks like from another side of the table. Politics? So what, I think we’re all big boys and girls. Keep posting!
Discussions of what is and is not working in railroading, and freight transportation in general, and logistics/supply chains, however one wants to frame it, at some point become a political discussion. Railroading grew from a great idea into a powerful industry that helped turn the US into a world power partly because it was a great new technology, and IMHO to a larger extent due to corruption at all levels and swindling to an extraordinary degree. Land grants made something economically feasible and enticing and attractive to risk-takers. And the benefits were huge, again IMHO. However, that may not be the narrative that a Native American would support. It depends on perspective, to one degree or another.
The transportation advances that gave us paved roads and rubber tires were incredible. And yet the politics of it, how things are financed, how costs are hidden/buried/misallocated, have also had profound impacts. My perspective is that it has given us weakened railroads in an ongoing slide of market share for non-bulk traffic, created a management culture of being risk-averse and stymied creativity and innovation other than generally-proven technologies. I have my ideas – political – on what it takes to fix that. In fact, they are very political and highly charged and evoke all kinds of support and condemnation.
Yee-haw!
charlie hebdoYork: You consider my comment unfriendly? It's an opinion as to why rail carloadings are slumping. Sorry if it offends you.
Apology accepted.
York1 John
York1, I have to admit that you have a point there. I was only remembering the post that most stuck in my craw, not the ones that reinforce my own beliefs.
Which in some ways is an excellent illustration of the state of our divisions.
Can we all please just try to keep politics out of these threads. I quit doing Facebook 100% because there was so much politics, and I inevitably would get sucked in. My opinions on this stuff are very strong. And I know that others feel just as strongly the other way. Nobody is going to convert anyone, let's face it.
So let's just stick to trains.
(BTW, born in New Orleans, I'm a Saints fan too!)
York: You consider my comment unfriendly? It's an opinion as to why rail carloadings are slumping. Sorry if it offends you.
Lithonia OperatorThe cat owner's post was blatantly poltical. It was chock full of inaccurate negative stereotyping of liberals and their views. It was rah-rah Trump. And it turned the thread in a less friendly environment.
The thread was less friendly from almost the beginning. These were comments before Shadow the Cats owner posted any comment:
charlie hebdoJust like our chaotic foreign policy, it's a chaotic economic policy based on lunatic theories and tweets. And uncertainties are bad in both arenas.
PsychotI agree that the alternatives to Trump aren’t great, but at this point, I’ll take anyone who isn’t a narcissistic, thin-skinned igoramus who governs by Tweet.
WELL SAID.
The cat owner's post was blatantly poltical. It was chock full of inaccurate negative stereotyping of liberals and their views. It was rah-rah Trump.
And it turned the thread in a less friendly environment.
Trump is great at making himself and his cronies richer. Other than that, his only talent is making ill-informed people angry, while creating ugly division in this country.
See? The other side can do this too.
But is this where we want a thread about freight carloadings to go?
Politics and religion should be strictly avoided. Close to the line is roughly the same as over the line, as it stirs up the same discord.
I think most of us here just want to talk about railroads; and if we cannot police ourselves, then the moderators need to do their job.
EuclidI would say there is occasionally discussion that crosses the line of the rule on political discussion. But I do not know exactly where that line is drawn. How about the discussion about the amusement tax in Jim Thorpe? Is that political? How about land grants or locomotive color schemes? Political?
The line is drawn where the moderator du jour chooses to draw it; a bit like the adage about the 'golden rule'. If you need guidance above what has been provided in advisory posts from the moderation staff or in the revisions to the TOS, you will have to ask one or more of the moderators, either via PM or directly.
I understand the proscription on 'political arguments' to be about a continuation of either acrimonious or doctrinaire views that potentially cause discord rather than just disagreement of opinion. That they be 'railroad-related' is a different TOS condition (and things like the 'warbird' thread are, as noted, going to be flagged if even once 'complained about' whether or not well-patronized or tolerated by others in the subject community).
As we've noted a number of times, discussing Amtrak (or one of the regional commuter authorities) is implicitly political, because so much of the subjects are intimately involved with political issues or priorities or action. I would argue that this might involve strong opinion, or even ridiculously doctrinaire opinion, as long as it focuses on something with railroad applicability -- and does not disintegrate into purely doctrinaire arguments about political theory or ad hominem disparagement of someone simply because they hold or express an opinion. Facts should be addressed with facts, not handwaved with reference to ideology or whatever, and in any good argument they would be. (And that applies to public figures as well as other posters, even if the recent 'dimwit' discussion produced no PM "advice" from the moderators.)
Jim Thorpe is political because a political body is involved, acting for political reasons, and legitimately rail-related details are present. Where the problem begins to creep in is in, say, going beyond discussing the application of amusement tax to LG&N retroactively to question the parentage or intelligence of people on the forum who may disagree.
Land grants were a political issue, as were the subsequent efforts by the Government to get benefits from them, certainly including the rather clever attempt -- which I think was successful -- by the ODT to 'cobble up' a fake north-south 'common carrier route' including the maximum number of land-grant miles and then demand a pro-rata discount on freight sent by any alternate route serving the same destination pairs (this was described in the 'Frimbo' and Ball book on the great decade of the trains). I don't see any way this isn't going to remain controversial here, nor do I expect anyone to be particularly swayed by argument or discussion, but that in itself is no reason for a 'railroad-related' discussion to be moderated away. Except if it becomes the same sort of lightning rod that Mr. Schmidt has said posts about 'graffiti' and 'hoboes' are -- subjects that are no less 'railroad-related' than politics potentially affecting rail traffic or Amtrak amenity changes. I'm sure that if moderators disapprove of land-grant posts, they'll either send PMs or put warnings in threads appropriately ... or add particular timeless topics to that list of banned subjects in the revised TOS.
Discussion of the trade war as it influences, or might influence, rail traffic or other rail concerns would be appropriate -- and that includes the tolerance of other opinions and beliefs when fairly expressed. I don't think that involves either trolling or 'happily ganging up on a particular member', though, not that I claim to be innocent of some of that behavior in the past.
Locomotive color schemes become controversial, somewhat unexpectedly so, when needless political discussions either frowned upon by Kalmbach 'staff members' or brought to their attention through reader complaints are involved. As I was party to at least one of these, I will not further comment other than to add that it is wise to avoid purely political things and stick to historical or aesthetic concerns in those sorts of thread.
(I'm tempted to add that we need an 'official' moderation opinion on grammar threads (or grammatically-centered thread drifts) ... but that's not the same as explicitly political concerns.)
Apparently that is the case. Of course we know a certain member complained about the antique aircraft thread and that was why the moderator acted.
Euclid The discussion was established to talk about an economic downturn. Is that political? I believe one of the biggest factors related to the downturn is our trade war. Is discussion about trade wars political? Is discussion about the politicians in favor of Amtrak political? I would say there is occassionally discussion that crosses the line of the rule on political discussion. But I do not know exactly where that line is drawn. How about the discussion about the amusement tax in Jim Thorpe? Is that political? How about land grants or locomotive color schemes? Political?
I believe one of the biggest factors related to the downturn is our trade war. Is discussion about trade wars political? Is discussion about the politicians in favor of Amtrak political?
I would say there is occassionally discussion that crosses the line of the rule on political discussion. But I do not know exactly where that line is drawn. How about the discussion about the amusement tax in Jim Thorpe? Is that political? How about land grants or locomotive color schemes? Political?
CMStPnP SD70Dude So overall, Navarro's punishment of China may only make them stronger and make us weaker. Reads like they are getting stronger too.......NOT https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3018991/chinas-total-debt-rises-over-300-cent-gdp-beijing-loosens Kind of interesting a country growing at over 6% a year would need to borrow so much money. While the stats in the article might be inflated, Chinese debt is rapidly growing, you can Google and see there is no dispute with that. If you buy into their growth stats, there is the question of where all this borrowed money is being spent? Unless of course it is all smoke and mirrors. A lot of their infrastructure money is wasted on shabbily built projects that fall apart in a few years to a decade timeframe. Have you looked at any of the youtube videos from Americans and other ex-patriots living in China. Suggest you take a little time and do so. We are not talking just a few hundred million mispent we are at least talking tens of billions mispent with whole cities built new but completely vacant of people. High Speed Trains with little or no patronage, etc. No doubt China does not like this information to leak out and has it's share of cheer leaders in the Western Press. Go look at youtube from Americans that live there and see it first hand. The entire notion that Communists manage economies well and spend government monies well has never, and I mean never, been demonstrated on planet Earth. Except we are led to believe by our media that the Chinese Communist Party is different from all the rest. You can buy into that line if you want. I will listen to Americans that live in the country and report back on what they see. They won't be there much longer as Chairman Xi is booting out as much foriegners as he can. Moving to a wartime footing with increasing propaganda and shut out of the Western press.....harrassing ex-patriots that live there now to get them to leave.
SD70Dude So overall, Navarro's punishment of China may only make them stronger and make us weaker.
Reads like they are getting stronger too.......NOT
https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3018991/chinas-total-debt-rises-over-300-cent-gdp-beijing-loosens
Kind of interesting a country growing at over 6% a year would need to borrow so much money. While the stats in the article might be inflated, Chinese debt is rapidly growing, you can Google and see there is no dispute with that. If you buy into their growth stats, there is the question of where all this borrowed money is being spent? Unless of course it is all smoke and mirrors.
A lot of their infrastructure money is wasted on shabbily built projects that fall apart in a few years to a decade timeframe. Have you looked at any of the youtube videos from Americans and other ex-patriots living in China. Suggest you take a little time and do so. We are not talking just a few hundred million mispent we are at least talking tens of billions mispent with whole cities built new but completely vacant of people. High Speed Trains with little or no patronage, etc. No doubt China does not like this information to leak out and has it's share of cheer leaders in the Western Press. Go look at youtube from Americans that live there and see it first hand.
The entire notion that Communists manage economies well and spend government monies well has never, and I mean never, been demonstrated on planet Earth. Except we are led to believe by our media that the Chinese Communist Party is different from all the rest. You can buy into that line if you want. I will listen to Americans that live in the country and report back on what they see. They won't be there much longer as Chairman Xi is booting out as much foriegners as he can. Moving to a wartime footing with increasing propaganda and shut out of the Western press.....harrassing ex-patriots that live there now to get them to leave.
Most of your regurgitated remarks about China are about as accurate as your erroneous term 'ex-patriots' [former members of the NFL team? ]. The word is, of course, 'expatriates' as most folks other than you know quite well.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.