----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.P.’s absolute “theorem” from early, early childhood that he has seen over and over and over again: Those that CAUSE a problem in the first place will act the most violently if questioned or exposed.
QUOTE: Originally posted by daveklepper Based on the Mineta-Bush Philosophy, shouldn't free parking anywhere be illegal? I walk to my neighborhood supermarket and buy things. The supermarket owns and pays taxes on a huge parking lot occupied by most customers, and the taxes and upkeep of the parking lot are paid by the supermarket and reflected in the prices of what I buy. Is this fair for me? I don't use the parking lot! I live on a quiet residential street. Most houses have garages but some hold only one car. There are some families with two or three cars. There are always cars parked on the street. The street has four lanes but effectively only two are used because of the parked cars. I walk, bike, and use public transit. Why should my taxes pay for the upkeep of other people's paarking places ANd be reflective of the additional land off the tax roles? I'l bet a real evaluation would say that free parking is worth far more than two billiion a year that is direct subsidy to car drivers.
Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
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...
QUOTE: Originally posted by daveklepper You are being unfair. Generally the elderly and infirm who cannot fly or drive cannot walk or bike across country. Your clipper ship analogy is false, more like running steam trains on dieselized railroads, and there the analogy is a good one, because there are sailboats, including races, that do recreate the past. And like steam trains, they are there for those that can afford them. I think a better analogy is the sound systems and the ramps for the hard of hearing and the handicapped in auditoriums and theatres and sports stadiums, a definite subsidy by the audiences with normal hearing and streingth. Also, despite the fact that they slow down traffic and provide some annoyance to some impatiant dirvers, you can rent a horse and buggy to tour Manhattan if you want, also in Salt Lake City, and I have done so for elderly relatives in both place. Perhaps this is true in other places as well.
QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe Dave, Bush's claim with Amtrak is that if people had to pay for it with local money—that they perceive as their own—instead of with federal money—which they perceive as belonging to someone else—no one would support it. Gabe
QUOTE: Originally posted by dharmon QUOTE: Originally posted by daveklepper You are being unfair. Generally the elderly and infirm who cannot fly or drive cannot walk or bike across country. Your clipper ship analogy is false, more like running steam trains on dieselized railroads, and there the analogy is a good one, because there are sailboats, including races, that do recreate the past. And like steam trains, they are there for those that can afford them. I think a better analogy is the sound systems and the ramps for the hard of hearing and the handicapped in auditoriums and theatres and sports stadiums, a definite subsidy by the audiences with normal hearing and streingth. Also, despite the fact that they slow down traffic and provide some annoyance to some impatiant dirvers, you can rent a horse and buggy to tour Manhattan if you want, also in Salt Lake City, and I have done so for elderly relatives in both place. Perhaps this is true in other places as well. Yes, I probably am, but then again life isn't fair. My tax dollars already go to to local transport for elderly on special buses. They go to make sure that persons with diabilities have access to public transportation and facilities. The go to make sure I have road to drive on and a place to park my cars. They go to paying for food stamps and a host of other programs which I do not use becasue I have worked hard to provide for my family and future, and to providing grants and foriegn aid to countries I will probably never visit. If there is ever a system of long distance high speed rail that would be great. But to support continued half way funding of Amtrak..life support....to ensure that a few people have an opportunity to take vacations......because these elderly passengers are not travelling by Amtrak cross country on business.... is not what I consider to be a priority. If a no kidding efficient, modern passenger rail system that was funded and then capable of being either self sufficient or recognized as a utility..I'd be all for it. But continuing to support Amtrak in it's current state....as a transportation system..not a luxury..is like saying we need to keep the USS Constitution in a battle worthy condition ...just in case we are attacked by a British Man o' War.
QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe .... Bush's claim with Amtrak is that if people had to pay for it with local money—that they perceive as their own—instead of with federal money—which they perceive as belonging to someone else—no one would support it. .... Gabe
QUOTE: Originally posted by dharmon QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe Dave, Bush's claim with Amtrak is that if people had to pay for it with local money—that they perceive as their own—instead of with federal money—which they perceive as belonging to someone else—no one would support it. Gabe Excellent point Gabe!
QUOTE: Originally posted by IRONROOSTER QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe .... Bush's claim with Amtrak is that if people had to pay for it with local money—that they perceive as their own—instead of with federal money—which they perceive as belonging to someone else—no one would support it. .... Gabe Wonder how much Air Traffic Control the locals would buy. Enjoy Paul
QUOTE: Originally posted by daveklepper Fine. All that is good. But a Democratic Society takes care of minorities too. And the car-free non-flyer American Citizen deserves access to the entire country. That has been my point on the Amtrak Funding basis. Regardless of the figures put forth by Mineta. Long distance auto travel is also subsidized and so should Amtrak
QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe You just pointed out a glaring deficiency in our national defense. The USS Constitution as a mere frigate will be seriously outgunned by a British Man o' War. If the Limies come after us we will be defenseless. Our national past time will be changed from baseball to curling. You laugh? The Brits have a three decker ship of the line that has been mysteriously kept in tip-top condition. Why else would they spend the money to keep that around? We need a ship of the line to properly protect ourselves. Gabe (Hawkins)
QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe Thank you. I must admit, though I have felt that way long before ever logging on to this forum, I probably stole the gist of the wording from you from one of your posts about four months ago. Gabe
QUOTE: Originally posted by GabeYou just pointed out a glaring deficiency in our national defense. The USS Constitution as a mere frigate will be seriously outgunned by a British Man o' War. If the Limies come after us we will be defenseless. Our national past time will be changed from baseball to curling.
QUOTE: Originally posted by daveklepper Gabe, I respect your criticism. I guest the best way to tackle the Bush Mineta line is to point out that their view of who and how many and why the riders of long distance trains isn't accurate. Mineta himself has not ridden a train like the Empire Builder or the CZ or the SW Chief or Sunset and spoken with the passengers. If Amtrak shuts down and thus long distance passenger service shuts down, there are going to be many people whose lives will be affected downward, some drastically. Yes Amtrak does serve the entire country, if not directly then via connectin buses. Mineta and Bush attack Amtrak because it is heavily subsidized. Others as well as I have shown there are lots of subsidies. The points I've made are that possibly Amtrak is a lot more important than Bush or Mineta or some readers think. that if it goes down a future more ideal system will be lots more expensive, and that there are parallels in other areas for this type of subsidization.
QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe QUOTE: Originally posted by daveklepper Gabe, I respect your criticism. I guest the best way to tackle the Bush Mineta line is to point out that their view of who and how many and why the riders of long distance trains isn't accurate. Mineta himself has not ridden a train like the Empire Builder or the CZ or the SW Chief or Sunset and spoken with the passengers. If Amtrak shuts down and thus long distance passenger service shuts down, there are going to be many people whose lives will be affected downward, some drastically. Yes Amtrak does serve the entire country, if not directly then via connectin buses. Mineta and Bush attack Amtrak because it is heavily subsidized. Others as well as I have shown there are lots of subsidies. The points I've made are that possibly Amtrak is a lot more important than Bush or Mineta or some readers think. that if it goes down a future more ideal system will be lots more expensive, and that there are parallels in other areas for this type of subsidization. Dave, I think your points are fair. My opinion is, I don't mind my tax dollars going toward subsidies from which I will never see a direct or indirect benefit. It happens all of the time; I don’t expect my government to serve me and only me. I am sure I receive some benefits that others do not; so it is more than fair. What I do mind, is when my tax dollars are being spent and it doesn't appear that they are being maximized. The public perception of Amtrak—as well as my own—is that we are not getting a lot of bang for our buck. I wouldn't mind spending 3x the money on Amtrak if there would be a corresponding benefit. Amtrak—in my view—is a problem because no one is willing to suffer the political consequences to kill it or raise taxes to fix it. I think either raising taxes to fix Amtrak or killing Amtrak would be much better than what we have now. So, I kind of admire Bush’s plan. He is at least moving it in a direction and—unlike past Presidents—he is willing to suffer consequences of moving it in one direction or the other. Raising taxes and saving Amtrak might be a better direction Bush’s chosen resolution, but I think killing Amtrak is better than keeping it in its current state. Just my opinion; what do you think? Gabe
QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe QUOTE: Originally posted by IRONROOSTER QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe .... Bush's claim with Amtrak is that if people had to pay for it with local money—that they perceive as their own—instead of with federal money—which they perceive as belonging to someone else—no one would support it. .... Gabe Wonder how much Air Traffic Control the locals would buy. Enjoy Paul I suspect quite a bit. Most cities, which is about as small of a public voting entity that you can get, directly subsidize airports. Currently, Indianapolis is setting up an initiative to spend its own money to considerably expand its airport. Gabe
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.