What does Bush and parts of the US not understand about Amtrak and the national passenger rail?

[kevarc]

Singular point of view? Maybe. I looked at using Amtrak to visit my parents. I live on the Sunset Route and they live in Pittsburgh. After finding out the cost for my wife, son, and me, it was crazy. For what it would cost, I could have flown and still had a hunk of money left over. Then we get to the time - I could drive it faster, stay in a nice hotel and still have money left over. Kinda of a no brainer. The time was longer, and that is on the premise that Amtrak is on time. Fat chance on that. Then the layovers - New Orleans and then I had my choice of Washington or Chicago. None of them are what I would consider a garden spot to wait for 6 hours. Bah, I don't mind driving that much, even with the cost of gas.

I just don't see where Amtrak is worth the effort for most of the country. In certain corridor, yes, but let the states help pick up the cost like they do in California. If they want it that bad, let them pay for it.

Common good? For who? Those that live near a line? What about the rest of the country? Are we going to jam it down the RR's throat? Another bad idea. The government could always appropriate the tracks, right? But then who is going to compensate those that have an interest in the RR's, the stockholders and bond holders? I own RR stock, maybe not much, but enough that I would definatley be interested in filing a breach of fiduciary duty lawsuit on any of the management and board that would agree to a deal with the government. Never forget how well the government did in WW1 and 2 in dealing with the RR's. Do you really want a repeat of that? They got lucky in Conrail that they had people who knew what they were doing.

[edblysard]

First, I agree, Amtrak in its current form sucks...I rode it the year it was created, and swore I would never set foot on it again.
Santa Fe spoiled me!
But then, I rode it in the middle 90s, and was surprised at how much better it had become, and disappointed at how badly the freight railroads screwed it over.

Re-read my original idea...let the feds run it at a loss if needs be...but price it so the average Joe can afford it.

As for those who don’t live near a rail line..so.

How many don’t live near an airport?

My sister lives in Bandera, way out in the Texas hill country, at least 50 miles from SA, for her to fly anywhere outside of the south west takes a days worth of airport hopping just to make the connections.

Face it, no matter what form of national transportation system you design, you can’t please everyone all the time.

I am not saying take any funding away from the other types of transportation.

What I am says is let quit worrying if they make money, because none of them do.

Not in real, concrete measurable terms.

But they do allow us, the taxpayer, to use them to make us, private concerns, money.

The Mississippi flood control, the intercostal water way, the airports and the interstate don’t pay for themselves in cash back...but they do allow us to make enough in corporate profits to pay the taxes to keep them working.

Which is exactally what we expect from our federal goverment.

Apply the same concept to a passenger train.

Who cares if it makes money, as long as it moves a sufficient number of people from point A to point B, at a price they are willing to pay, then it works just as well as any airport, city bus line, or light rail.

Ed

[dharmon]

Fund it...make it good, reliable, seperated from freight traffic as much as possible, equipped with modern equipment and ideas...doesn't have to be run for profit, but stop running it like a coma patient on life support...

...or kill it and let the states pick up regional traffic in the corridors that make sense.

...and if they do kill it, I've got a study of fermented grain beverage induced flatulance that I think would make a good long term government funding project. <burp>

[edblysard]

So, Dan,
You saying beer isnt just a breakfast food anymore?

Ed

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dharmon

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by paugust

Yawn, just another NeoCon obsessed with Clinton. _!_

So, on the one hand I have paugust calling me a NeoCon, and on the other I have Larry Kaufman calling me a communist. I guess that puts me smack dab in the middle of the ole' Bell Curve.

Just remember, when Clinton lied, thousands of Serbs died. BTW, have we rebuilt the Serbian rail network yet? After all, first bombed, first served.

Well would you please make up your mind then.....Which is it? Are you a Neo-Con or a Clintonista???[;)]

I'm just an average joe who's proud to be an American.

[dharmon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by dharmon

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by paugust

Yawn, just another NeoCon obsessed with Clinton. _!_

So, on the one hand I have paugust calling me a NeoCon, and on the other I have Larry Kaufman calling me a communist. I guess that puts me smack dab in the middle of the ole' Bell Curve.

Just remember, when Clinton lied, thousands of Serbs died. BTW, have we rebuilt the Serbian rail network yet? After all, first bombed, first served.

Well would you please make up your mind then.....Which is it? Are you a Neo-Con or a Clintonista???[;)]

I'm just an average joe who's proud to be an American.

Okay ..good enough for me.

[daveklepper]

Kevin: I think the elderly and handicapped have a right to travel because when they were working they paid the taxes so you can drive your car and fly. Again, a think two billion dollars a year to insure that most elderly and handicapped have access to most of the country is worth it. To continue to releave highway congestion in corridors is worth it. To provide backup in most places in various time of emergency is worth it. To give people choices instead of locking them to auto transportation and nothing else in particular communities is worth it. To eventually provide money for capacity expansion at rail choke points to benefit both passsenger and freight is worth it. To provide a tourist amenity that foreign visitors expect in any civilized country is worth it.

You may not agree and you have a right to your opinion, but considering the hundreds of billions (total) spent each year on highways and airports, I think two billion a year for Amtrak is worth it.

Of course then there are the billions that have been spent on fuel-cell-Hydrogen research . Which will not buy the people a single thing regarding transportation. One big scam by the hihgway-auto-petroleum people so they can keep oil profits high while doing nothing practical about USA energy independence.

[Anonymous]

OK. United may shut down account of a work stoppage generated by the pension fund problem. All the airlines are booked. Where are the people gonna go?

By the way, and I may not understand this correctly, but it looks like the government is going to have to fund the United pension program at a reduced payout to employees.

When it comes to airlines there seems to be no end to the funds available to a "private concern."

Mitch

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

Actually, UAL is just the latest firm to fob off its pension plans on Uncle Sam by way of Chapter 11. The precedent was set by Bethlehem Steel and other steel firms in the late 1980's and early 1990's. From here, it looks like United is headed for a Chapter 7 liquidation so the PBGC will get stuck with the pension plans in any case.

[edblysard]

The pension guarantee fund was set up as a tool of last resort...to be used only after a business was completely closed, as a buffer for the former employees.

It does not guarantee 100% payment on the pension; a lot depends on the contributions of the employer.

If, and that’s a suspicious if, the feds let United dump their pension, the problem will be that all major corporations in financial trouble will line up at the door to dump theirs.

Imagine you, the tax payer, having already "paid" for GMs pension fund as part of the purchase price of your new GM vehicle, now having to pay for the fund outright.

Pissed off yet?

Well, say your a United employee, worked there 25, 30 years, and are a month from retirement.

You put in your time, worked your fanny off, and surprise, when you retire, not only is there a very real chance your wont get a dime of your pension, if you do get anything, it might be as low as 50 cents on the dollar.

If that happened to you, I would bet that, instead of worrying what the impact on the rest of the industry would be, you would be screaming for the feds to bail out the fund...after all, you are now looking at not only losing almost 50 to 75% of your retirement funds, but are facing the certainty of having to remain full time employed the remainder of your life, just to keep even with your survival needs, and any chance of enjoying the fruits of your years of hard work are gone...

I think you are looking at the beginning of the end in the way major US companies conduct business.

I mean, look at this.

GM stock is reduced to junk status, not because they make a bad car, but because their managed to miss-manage their businesses.

They sell EMD in an attempt to hold off debt, and it still doesn’t work.

Over 1/2 of every dollar they make in profit has to go to the pension fund.

For every person on the GM pension fund, GM has to employee two full time workers on the current payroll just to pay the bills of day to day operations.

One of those employees are doing nothing more that earning the company enough (in productivity) to pay the pension fund debt.

A bare bones ratio would be one employee being productive enough to not only pay for his or her own pension, and keep the company solvent, but to also to retire the pension debt on at least one employee already retired.

That’s a very, very dangerous ratio.
Workable, but dangerous.

GM is way past that, United is also.

Many other airlines are either in the same condition, or so close as to not matter much.

Ought to scare the crap out you....

Ed

[Anonymous]

Ed-

From this mornings AP Wire.

LC

"United Can Dump Four Pension Plan

(AP) United's unions reserve the right to strike if contracts change.
The shift to a federal benefits plan inflames the unions and prompts some in Congress to warn that the Fed's pension agency may need a bailout."\

[passengerfan]

Is California the only state that realizes the importance of rail travel, don't the others get the message. Oh well California always leads the nation, the others eventually wake up and follow suit.

[kevarc]

Yes, but look at the population density for the routes in California as compared to just about anywhere else. The NEC is the only other place where the density compares.

[edblysard]

If I remember correctly, last night on ABC evening news, the feds said the pension fund guarantee was 23 million in the red already... yet a few years ago; it was 10 million in the black.

QUOTE: Originally posted by Limitedclear

Ed-

From this mornings AP Wire.

LC

"United Can Dump Four Pension Plan

(AP) United's unions reserve the right to strike if contracts change.
The shift to a federal benefits plan inflames the unions and prompts some in Congress to warn that the Fed's pension agency may need a bailout."

[Anonymous]

Oh, unfunded liabilities. Do you think enough US citizens will figure out that eventually there's a reckoning when you borrow, borrow, borrow for your wants, wants, wants, and think somebody else is really paying the bill? Hark, do I hear "monetize the debt"?

[Hugh Jampton]

QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard

If I remember correctly, last night on ABC evening news, the feds said the pension fund guarantee was 23 million in the red already... yet a few years ago; it was 10 million in the black.

I saw a retransmission of that and it was Billions they were talking about

[edblysard]

Thanks, Hugh,
I couldnt remember if it was millions or billions...all those zeros get me confused!
Either way, it still ought to scare everyone!

Ed

[Paul Milenkovic]

QUOTE:
Just remember, when Clinton lied, thousands of Serbs died. BTW, have we rebuilt the Serbian rail network yet? After all, first bombed, first served.

Yeah? Tell me all about Serbs. That Blagojevich fellow is completely out of control. First off, I wanted to return to my homeland, but when I crossed the border I got hit up for a dollar at each toll station instead of 40 cents. And then he wants to back out of paying his share of the Hiawatha train.

[Modelcar]

....Not only the high cost of pension fund staring GM in the face but among others is the higher than normal cost of building their vehicles per vehicle....AND then we still have the enormous cost of HEALTH CARE.....It is a shame....GM is really up against reality like they haven't been for who knows when...Sad. They gave away too much in contracts agreements and now it's catching up with them. Somehow....Can't imagine how.....But somehow they will have to lower costs or we may see something we would have never guessed could happen....We loose GM as we know it.....!
GM is not the only one in such a serious situation but we have another....FORD. and it all goes on......On top of that is both those Co's. are loosing market share to the Japaneese Co's....And that continues to happen without a way of stopping it in sight...!
Chrysler Corp. has been purchased by the Germans....Can't remember when our own auto Co's have been in such state of affairs....Again, Sad.....

[Anonymous]

Kerkorian recently took a 4% ownership of GM. Has offered to buy to 9%. Split off GMAC from GM manufacturing plus pension plus healthcare liabilities. Kind of reminds you of the "railroads" that became "industries" during the 60's.

[Anonymous]

what is the key to all that? Union jobs... At my work, I have a 401K, and since it is in my name, I can take it with me if I go to another place. If the company I work for goes under, Yes I will lose part of the money they put in, (since it is in company stock), but the rest will ber there. Because of the unions, United, Ford, GM, are all barely making it. There is a reason that all those jobs that were in Michigan have gone to Mexico. So you have a choice to give up part of your retirement, or have no job. Plus you get the job of giving up a bunch of your salary in union dues. If you are a republican, you are doubly spat on as they will be campaigning against everything that you believe in as well with your money.
Brad

[daveklepper]

Do you suppose that GM might be more profitable today if they had run with the fuel conservation issue after 11.09.01 and borrowed some Electro-Motive Division technology for their cars and come up with Hybrids that would have been even more effiicient than the first Japanese Hybrids? I happen to think that would have guaranteed their success. And I think they had the ability to do so and consciously avoided doing so. It is not that they are out just to maximize oil profits, but rather it is taxes on petroleum that pay for highway expansion which is what GM spends money for politically by contributing to the pressure groups and think tanks that promote highway expansion. This repeats the history of their reaction to the first "compact revolution" when they first lost market share to VW and Toyotta (and MG).

[edblysard]

Brad,
It easy to point the finger at the UAW, or unions in general, and say that’s where the blame lies...
They make an easy villain, and on the surface, it looks like they are greedy...
But trust me; a retired UAW member makes no more in retirement benefits than just about any other person retired from a company with a pension plan.

Take the railroad and the retirement board, which we, the employees, fund.

If I manage to live long enough to retire, and I want my full payment, I have to work, full time, until I am 68.
Because my wife works, and by then will be drawing her measly $726.00 a month SS payment, I get less than if she had stayed at home, and never worked.

Where you should place blame is squarely on the shoulders of the people who deserve it, the financial management and risk cost management.
You cant tell me the financial managers and the top executives at these companies cant do the simple math needed to figure out that, on any given date in the future, X number of employees are going to be retiring, X number of employees will already be retired, and they will need X number of current employees, being productive at a given rate, to cover the cost of the retired workers and earn the company money.

Insurance companies do this every single day!
Actuary tables are not that hard to grasp!

With today’s current computer technology, and almost instant world wide communication, the ability to figure this stuff is simple.

The big problem for GM, United, and companies like that is they gambled, and lost.
I can tell you straight up that at the last contract negations, the UAW didn’t ask for anything new, or any more perks or money.
In fact, all they were hoping for was to maintain the status quo...no changes.

Which is pretty much what the BLE and UTU are hoping for this time around with the railroads, but it looks like we will lose at least one more crew member this time.
So crew consist will change, even though, in the 1985 contract, the carriers, as part of a legal binding contract, agreed to never attempt to change crew consist, as long as any pre 1985 man was employed, in exchange for the then current and very deep cuts in employee benefits.
Those cuts include, but are not limited to, increased employee payment towards health insurance, lower COLAs, smaller percent in the staggered raises....thanks to the "greed" of the UTU, I now earn, because of my last "raise" enough to buy a large cup of Star Bucks coffee, every other day.
Of course, I pay more towards my health insurance now too, so in reality, my last raise cost me, about one hundred bucks a month.
To bring it into perspective for you, my UPS driver earns more take home pay on a daily basis than I do.

You want to blame someone for GMs problem; blame GM, same as United.
Management at both companies do have a crystal ball of sorts, they can project how many people will use or buy their products in the near future.

Could anyone project, the 9/11 disaster?

No, but you want to know something?

The insurance companies figured that a given number of people will be flying in airplanes today; May 12th, 2005...they figured this number out in 2000.
In fact, they have the projected numbers for every single day, based on data updated daily, on any date you choose.

And surprise...no one quit flying.

That’s right, the projected number, figured out in 2000, for today’s number of airline passengers, is accurate, to within 1%.

Guess what?

GM knows how many pick ups it will sell next year, and the year after, barring any disaster.

They have the knowledge to project that, and they still did nothing but continue business as usual.

I would hold the 1980s Chrysler corp. up as a good example of how to survive...
Before you scream the government bailed them out, (it did and didn’t) understand this...what Chrysler asked for, in simple terms, was for the government to issue them guaranteed loans, at fixed interest rates.
They then did something GM, and Untied, failed to do.

They changed the way they did business, and the product they sold.

Chrysler dumped the old school concept of the American automobile.
The went front wheel drive with a vengeance, because their competitors were destroying the American market with low cost, well built front wheel drive cars, that looked good and sold great.

GM and Ford didn’t, until well into the 1980s, and by then Chrysler had paid back the government loans, on time, with interest, and had managed to change the way they build cars enough to capture enough of the market to survive, and survive well today.

They also did something you don’t see to often.
They went to the UAW, and the other unions they have to deal with, and honestly stated the facts.
To survive, this is the bottom line on what we can pay perks and all.
If you want the jobs, great, we want the skilled workers.
If you don’t want the jobs at this rate, we will close the plant and move it, or close the company.
The unions are not as dumb and greedy as you might think, and they did the smart thing.

Never doubt for an instant that United didn’t know this point was going to be reached, and when it would happen.
They stated so in all the news reports that they had been looking for some resolution for years...
What they will not tell you is they manipulated their numbers to look a lot better than they were, (GM does that too) hoping the government would somehow fix the industry, which the government is still trying to do.
Remember when everyone was proclaiming that the airline industry was dead due to 9/11...no one would ever get on a plane again..
Didn’t happen.

Tell you what, if United goes belly up, I will feel sorry for the employees, but not for the industry.

Here’s why.

They refuse to change, to adapt to the current market requirements.
People who fly for business will still fly...they will pile into an old Ford Tri-motor if that’s all there is.
Tourist will fly the cheap seats.
The "executives" and what is termed first class passengers will find some way to travel, first class has never paid for itself (sound familiar).
So, if they refuse to become lean and mean, they go out of business.
And you know what?
Someone like Southwest will step in, offer a basic service, and fill in the gap.
That’s how business works, adapt or fail.

United (and GM) have failed to adapt.
They had all the info needed to see this coming.
They refused to change they way they did business.

Paying your CEO a 4.5 million pension for 2 years of service, while defaulting on the pensions of all your workers who put 20 plus years into you business is not a good way to stay in business, nor does it point to a enlightened management.

Ed

[passengerfan]

Just finished reading an article that said GM builds six of ten cars just to meet the employee retirement and benefit packages. And people wonder why the cost of automobiles are what homes sold for in some parts of thr country during the 1960's.
And if United goes under inspite of there dumping the retirement on the government that could very easily be like a falling stack of blocks. How solvent is AMR parent of American, Delta, Northwest, and US Air. Probably the survivors will be the discoiunt airlines such as Southwest.

[Anonymous]

Also, remember that the airline industry was heavily regulated, and then deregulated just as the railroads were. High cost structure. Flying used to be expensive - many people couldn't afford to fly. Being new, Southwest and others have been able to pick and choose without the burden of the heavy past.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by passengerfan

Just finished reading an article that said GM builds six of ten cars just to meet the employee retirement and benefit packages. And people wonder why the cost of automobiles are what homes sold for in some parts of thr country during the 1960's.
And if United goes under inspite of there dumping the retirement on the government that could very easily be like a falling stack of blocks. How solvent is AMR parent of American, Delta, Northwest, and US Air. Probably the survivors will be the discoiunt airlines such as Southwest.

Employees' retirement and benifit packages. Does that include those of the CEO, COO, CFO, and The VP in Charge of Looking Out the Window? If it does, that's where a huge chunk o' dough is draining.

Mitch

[passengerfan]

But Southwest Airline's is smart enough to own only one type of aircraft the Boeing 737 and they do not have galleys. They only have to maintain a parts inventory for that one type of aircraft. United on the other hand has at least eight different typoes of Aircraft and must maintain parts inventory for all. Personally I have never seen happier airline employees than those that work for Southwest.
Just because the guy flew a 747 for twenty years did that make him worth the $300, 000 he was receiving in pay and benefits. The plane only transports 350 passengers in most versions. No Amtrak engineer makes anywhere near that amount of money for carrying the same passenger load and is just as responsible for the safety of the passengers as the airline captain is. What's wrong with this passenger.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by passengerfan

But Southwest Airline's is smart enough to own only one type of aircraft the Boeing 737 and they do not have galleys. They only have to maintain a parts inventory for that one type of aircraft. United on the other hand has at least eight different typoes of Aircraft and must maintain parts inventory for all. Personally I have never seen happier airline employees than those that work for Southwest.
Just because the guy flew a 747 for twenty years did that make him worth the $300, 000 he was receiving in pay and benefits. The plane only transports 350 passengers in most versions. No Amtrak engineer makes anywhere near that amount of money for carrying the same passenger load and is just as responsible for the safety of the passengers as the airline captain is. What's wrong with this passenger.

Not to mention suburban train engineers that work 6 days a week and can carry upwards of 1400 souls on one trip. If he works 4 trains a day, and makes $200 for that, in essance when he arives at the depot with his first train carrying all those folks, safely and on-time, he's handed a crisp $50 bill for his efforts.

Mitch

[Paul Milenkovic]

Slightly off topic.

To say that GM builds 10 cars and needs to sell 6 of them to pay their pension costs might be a tad misleading. That kinda suggests that 60 percent of the cost of a car goes to pensions, and I find that hard to believe. I think what it means that if GM builds 10 cars, the profits on 6 of them go into the pension fund and the profits on the remaining 4 go to the shareholders. Pensions may be large compared to profits, but I think a lot of other costs are large compared to profits -- profits are typically a thin margin after all expenses are paid in a mature, competitive industry. That said, pensions are still a concern because the car company has to pay out at least some profits unless we decide to subsidise car making (you know, airplane makers get subsidies in the form of defense contracts, and a person has gotta have a car, and a lot of jobs are at stake to make cares in the U.S. -- at some point the government may have to take over auto manufacturing from the Big 3 and institute the National Automobile Manufacturing Corporation and be prepared to subsidise it).

Another issue is the effect of the oil/gas squeeze on auto profits. What I don't understand is the Ford World magazine comes in the mail, and the headline was "SUV and truck sales down -- we think it has to do with high gas prices." It is largely believed that one of the choke points on gas prices is refinery capacity because no one wants a refinery in their back yard (think northern Indiana or much of New Jersey). Doesn't someone at GM and at Ford do the math -- gee, there is so much gasoline refining capacity, and SUVs use so much gas, and we won't be able to sell more SUVs then there are refineries to keep their tanks full? Is anyone minding the store over there or do they just make cars and trucks and hope for the best?

[Anonymous]

Ed, thanks for the reply, I agree that the problems are the companies own making. But now there is the problem, so what do we do about it? Thanks again for the reply,
Brad