NITL's suggestions to STB for rail policy oversight

[jeaton]

q1. No but the effect is trivial.
q2. If you are speaking of US shippers only the answer, by definition, is yes. If you are speaking of world wide shippers the answer is no, unless China has opted for open access.

By the way, I and at least 80% of US taxpayers know source of money for government assistance.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jeaton

futurmodal

I have yet to hear anyone beside you argue that monopoly rail rates are the cause of the exodus of manufacturing from the United States.

Would you go so far as to suggest that captive rail rates have no effect on relative trade imbalance? Or will you admit that most captive rail shippers are indeed domestic producers?

Whether such results in an exodus of manufacturing, or if it simply results in a greater share of domestic production needing some form of government assistance (e.g. we the taxpayers) to stay afloat, the effect is reasonably inductive.

[jeaton]

futurmodal

I have yet to hear anyone beside you argue that monopoly rail rates are the cause of the exodus of manufacturing from the United States.

What manufacturing that remains here is either fairly well positioned for rail carload service or has TOFC/COFC service and motor carrier service to meet transportation needs. Given that the businesses that provide rail intermodal and direct truck services are in rather vigorous competition, I find it highly unlikely that the rates for this service provide anything close to excessive margins.

Low wage rates, which in this county would not pay for food, no health care costs, no worker safety provisions and no requirements limiting the discharge of anything that causes environmental degradation makes it the cheap place to manufacture goods. In fact, even Mexico is losing business to China.

[BaltACD]

NITL wants their cake and wants to eat it and the carriers share also.

[Anonymous]

There is a slight difference here between "going back" to rate regulation pre-Staggers and re-regulating under the auspices of Staggers. What the NITL is saying is that there are competition caveats pertaining to Staggers that simply have not been enforced, so why not start to enforce them, especially now that the idea of overcapacity is a thing of the past?

It goes to the heart of the fight for survival our brick and mortar industries face under the threat of global competition. Here we are with a trade deficit, farmers struggling, the steel industry still struggling, the U.S. aluminum industry close to extinction, U.S. car manufacturers facing the possibility of bankruptcy, etc, ect, ect, and what do our U.S. railroads do?!? They charge captive shipper rates to our domestic producers while charging overseas importers cut throat rates, practically subsidizing the importation of Chinese goods on the backs of our domestic goods. Shouldn't it be the other way around, if indeed U.S. railroads are American owned?

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

The "captive shipper" issue seems to be a smokescreen for reverting to the bad old days of rate regulation, despite what the NITL says upfront. All modes practice differential pricing to some extent, so full re-regulation of rates over ALL modes would be the only answer to that issue.
The NITL is trying to get cheap rates for its members no matter what they call it.

[jeaton]

QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd

What the NITL says is not necessarily what the STB does, is it?

The US Congress my not fall in line either.

[oltmannd]

What the NITL says is not necessarily what the STB does, is it?

[PNWRMNM]

If NITL is really concerned about service and expanding rail capacity, which they should be, they can not argue for lower rates at the same time. The industry is not yet revenue adequate. Only NS was last year and that is the first year in the past several for them.

Mac

[kenneo]

Dave

A real irony here. Had not the railroads sent 90% of its clerical forces and all but 2 crew memeber on trains, think how much higher the transportation bill would really be.

But $$ is only part of the equation. Another major piece is service --- RELIABLE service. This is, of course, a function of attitude. Since what is percieved is 90% of reality, well.

[Anonymous]

http://www.logisticstoday.com/displayStory.asp?nID=7515

Seems the National Industrial Transportation League's solution to the captive shipper/differential pricing problem is to revert to a form of rate regulation via certain caveats in the Stagger's Act. I told you this would happen, abuses by the Class I's (percieved or otherwise) will always lead to retroactive actions.