Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding Does that banjo play any other song? * futuremodal hates BNSF...do-da...*
23 17 46 11
"We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics
QUOTE: Originally posted by jeaton Hmmm, one would think that a company would use its monopoly profits to invest in projects that would produce more business that makes monopoly profits.
QUOTE: Originally posted by jeaton Lotus098 You really ought to stop putting on headphones and listening to tapes of Rush Limbaugh while you sleep. It will cause your brain to atrophy... from left to right.
Randy Vos
"Ever have one of those days where you couldn't hit the ground with your hat??" - Waylon Jennings
"May the Lord take a liking to you and blow you up, real good" - SCTV
QUOTE: Originally posted by rvos1979 Popcorn anyone?? Randy
QUOTE: Originally posted by ironken [br Should't you be chasing girls and wanting fast cars at your age?
QUOTE: Originally posted by CSSHEGEWISCH QUOTE: Originally posted by rvos1979 Popcorn anyone?? Randy Keep the popcorn coming, I've got some cold Guinness. This is becoming one of the more entertaining and less enlightening threads around.
Have fun with your trains
QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard By the way, James, You are aware that Wal-Mart, McDonalds, Burger King, KFC all have major stores in...China! In fact, Wal-Mart is planning to open two more next year, and Sears/Kmart are looking for property there...it’s a two way street. Granted, it is a little lopsided... But you claim to have knowledge of economics....so how do you expect any US company to ignore the buying power of several billion people who's national economy has grown over 100% in the last 5 years? Oh, just a side note...looked at your profile photo...one, you should never stand in the middle of the tracks, we call that the dead zone...and two; your cute "engineers" souvenir hat, and your classy shirt both have Made in China and Made in Mexico tags inside...you should practice what you preach and boycott non American goods...but that would mean you would have to give up your computer too, its full of parts made outside the US.... Ed
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Wow, did this thread ever get wild overnight?! As usual, most of you who defend BNSF's actions have missed the point. What BNSF is doing is taking money made from captive US shippers (where revenues can be as high as 200+% of variable costs), and using those monopoly profits to invest in the import intermodal business (where revenues are usually as low as 106% of variable costs). The STB defines revenue adaquacy as revenues that are 180% of variable costs. No, jeaton, BNSF is not reinvesting it's monopoly profits back into it's monopoly business sector. Normally, a business will reinvest profits into it's highest revenue income streams to further maximize the net income there. One has to wonder why BNSF is using it's profits from the high revenue business and throwing it away on the low revenue business. The railroads will never approach revenue adequacy in the import intermodal business, yet it seems all their capacity improvement projects are predicated on that very thing. Conversely, the railroad is doing nothing to increase capacity on the high revenue bulk export side of the business. It does not make business sense.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
QUOTE: Originally posted by Old Timer futuremodal - I don't know how to break this to you gently, my friend, but BNSF isn't in business to provide jobs for folks who don't care about anything but their take-home pay. If you want to know how come we don't export more to other countries, look at GM, for example. They pay more for health benefits to their union members and retirees than the gross national product of several third world countries. BNSF is in business to make money, which, if you haven't been paying attention, isn't all that easy to do for railroads, nowadays. Sounds like you'd rather be part of the problem than part of the solution. Good luck. Old Timer
QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith Your profile is very vague, I assume your in college?
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Latest BNSF *pr* report (from ProgressiveRailroading.com).... http://www.progressiverailroading.com/freightnews/article.asp?id=7867 Quote (?) from BNSF Group Vice President-Consumer Products Steve Branscum at a recent ocean shipping conference in Ningbo, China, "BNSF serves all major U.S. West and Gulf Coast ports, and is the country’s largest intermodal carrier — attributes that make the railroad an ideal transportation partner for Chinese and other Asian shippers." The article goes on to point out that BNSF is adding capacity and purchasing more double stack cars - which is another way of stating the obvious, namely BNSF uses it's profits from US captive shippers to make it that much more easier to bring in cheap Chinese imports. It should be noted the article makes no mention of BNSF making any investments into improving the export potential of US goods - 'cause they ain't! Anyone still want to argue that BNSF isn't predicated to aiding Chinese and other Asian manufacturers to the detriment of US manufacturers and our own hard working union members? Didn't think so.[^]
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Wow, did this thread ever get wild overnight?! As usual, most of you who defend BNSF's actions have missed the point. What BNSF is doing is taking money made from captive US shippers (where revenues can be as high as 200+% of variable costs), and using those monopoly profits to invest in the import intermodal business (where revenues are usually as low as 106% of variable costs). The STB defines revenue adaquacy as revenues that are 180% of variable costs. No, jeaton, BNSF is not reinvesting it's monopoly profits back into it's monopoly business sector. Normally, a business will reinvest profits into it's highest revenue income streams to further maximize the net income there. One has to wonder why BNSF is using it's profits from the high revenue business and throwing it away on the low revenue business. The railroads will never approach revenue adequacy in the import intermodal business, yet it seems all their capacity improvement projects are predicated on that very thing. Conversely, the railroad is doing nothing to increase capacity on the high revenue bulk export side of the business. It does not make business sense. BNSF is not investing in it's high revenue business, it is investing in it's low revenue business. And there is no chance import intermodal will ever be a high revenue business, because there is optimal competition availed at every import port, and as Gabe pointed out some time ago, competition is bad for railroads because they do not approach revenue adequacy when there is competition. So BNSF's investment will not benefit the stockholders, unless those stockholders are Asian manufacturers with other financial concerns beyond their BNSF dividend. Lotus, it should also be pointed out that although the average wage stateside is higher than that of the Asian countries, our labor productivity is the best in the world, so the high productivity justifies the higher relative wages. Unless you include those suicidal pension liabilities that will kill some US companies, labor costs are not the cause of overseas flight of US manufacturing. Rather, it is (in order of impact) high energy costs, high environmental compliance costs, and high domestic transportation costs due to rail captivity. As long as our minority party leaders threaten to filibuster every attempt to explore and drill OUR domestic sources of oil and natural gas, there's not much we can do about energy costs. As long as our minority party leaders threaten to filibuster every attempt to rationalize environmental laws, there's not much we can do about the high cost of environmental compliance. But one thing we can do is to get rid of the monopolistic practices of the Class I's, that is something that is doable from the political perspective.
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Anyone still want to argue that BNSF isn't predicated to aiding Chinese and other Asian manufacturers to the detriment of US manufacturers and our own hard working union members?
Originally posted by futuremodal [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Mookie Member sinceJune 2001 From: US 13,488 posts Posted by Mookie on Friday, November 18, 2005 12:46 PM I can kill a thread just by showing up on it. Pass the popcorn? Mookie She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw Reply edbenton Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: Back home on the Chi to KC racetrack 2,011 posts Posted by edbenton on Friday, November 18, 2005 12:57 PM We all better learn to speak chinease hear in a few years. As fast as W Bush doubled the national debt we are soon going to be owned by the Chinease. I for one will not eat with chopsticks. Always at war with those that think OTR trucking is EASY. Reply vsmith Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Smoggy L.A. 10,743 posts Posted by vsmith on Friday, November 18, 2005 1:28 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith Your profile is very vague, I assume your in college? To be honest with you-I think somewhere Lotus said he was 14. (That's not a slap. I have a 14 year old son. They're just wired differently than a 44 year old dad[;)]) 14??????? Holy Ceasar Salads!!! Can anyone confirm this before I comment further.... Would explain a hellova lot though.... Have fun with your trains Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, November 18, 2005 1:29 PM Here,here! brother benton Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, November 18, 2005 1:44 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by Old Timer futuremodal - I don't know how to break this to you gently, my friend, but BNSF isn't in business to provide jobs for folks who don't care about anything but their take-home pay. If you want to know how come we don't export more to other countries, look at GM, for example. They pay more for health benefits to their union members and retirees than the gross national product of several third world countries. BNSF is in business to make money, which, if you haven't been paying attention, isn't all that easy to do for railroads, nowadays. Sounds like you'd rather be part of the problem than part of the solution. Good luck. Old Timer Priceless! [:D] Reply Edit selector Member sinceFebruary 2005 From: Vancouver Island, BC 23,330 posts Posted by selector on Friday, November 18, 2005 1:54 PM Yes, Old timer, that was well said. But the world is filled with those who feel that anyone with more wealth owes them a living. The business magnates have a duty, spelled out in a manifesto, to hire employees and pay them wages that will eventually put the company out of business. Those employees all have a right to several large TV sets, new pickups every three years, yadda, yadda. Oh, and pensions, too. To see how far this has gone, in Canada, federal civil servants are allowed to take five (5!) consecutive sick days away from work...each month...without proof that they were sick. On top of five weeks of paid vacation, they can take another 60 days each year and not show up for work with impunity. Gotta hate those darned Chinese who will work for $1.00/hr and save for their old age out of that....with or without a single colour TV. Reply arbfbe Member sinceFebruary 2002 910 posts Posted by arbfbe on Friday, November 18, 2005 3:26 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by selector . Gotta hate those darned Chinese who will work for $1.00/hr and save for their old age out of that....with or without a single colour TV. Well, that and the fact that if they tried to organize, unionize and demand better from their bosses who just happen to be the Chi-Com (a term from the Korean war, not a limbah original, bty) government, they would be sent to labor camps where the pay is even worse, harrassed or perhaps even shot. The same thing happened to labor activists in the US a while ago. Ever hear of the Pullman strike? The coal mines in Colorado? Abductions and assinations of labor activists by goons from or hired by the companies they were striking? It is not a pretty picture. China is not a democratic country. The population and the workers do not have a say in the laws they work under. So much for Socialism, eh? Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, November 18, 2005 3:29 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by Mookie I can kill a thread just by showing up on it. Pass the popcorn? Mookie Sorry Mook, I wish it had worked, but I don't think so this time...lol... Oh, popcorn on its way... LC Reply Edit TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Friday, November 18, 2005 3:33 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by Junctionfan Well this is just a dandy thread.......... As far as the railroad BNSF goes, the problem lies with the governments. They are the ones allowing outsourcing-BNSF is just adapting by increasing its intermodal profits to make up for its loss in general merchandise profits in my opinion. Our government isn't just "allowing" outsourcing, they're leading the way. Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply PBenham Member sinceJuly 2005 From: In the New York Soviet Socialist Republic! 1,391 posts Posted by PBenham on Friday, November 18, 2005 3:48 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by jeaton Lotus098 You really ought to stop putting on headphones and listening to tapes of Rush Limbaugh while you sleep. It will cause your brain to atrophy... from left to right. Your brain, if you have one, will not atrophy after six weeks of prelimimary listening to the greatness for the full three hours daily. If anything you, will feel stronger, more intelligent, and confident in yourself and others who think like you will after the preliminary period. But it may be rough at first. The Lib Dogma is difficult to break away from, once you do my friend, you will have become a better person than you could have imagined you could be. The Chicoms are having problems now, since they can't keep the truth out like they used to. Eastern Europe and the asian parts of the old Soviet empire "fell" under the weight of the truth about communisim. So too will China. The people there are on the cusp of an awakening that will be very profound, indeed. Reply vsmith Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Smoggy L.A. 10,743 posts Posted by vsmith on Friday, November 18, 2005 3:48 PM I heard someone say something this morning, (Marketplace on NPR) and I think it should be repeated as best I can, the comment was that the Chinese today are about as Communists as Henry Ford was, they are Capitalist TO THE CORE, TO THE MARROW. Look at every business action they taken in the last 5 to 10 years is geared to money making or expanding marketshare. There is nothing left of the communist party but the old label of the party, the party insider connections and the old rigid authoritarian control system left. They are autocratic, authoritarian, and controlling but NOT Communist or even Socialist anymore, and have for the most part dropped all pretext of it for the last few years. There is an unbeleivable change in the way the country deals with the outside world compared to when even when the Tienniman Square massacre took place, in the long run, the students won, the old gaurd of Maoist's have all died or been swept out. Look at all the corporations, business, trade and money flowing INTO China, The sheer mass of construction in the major cities is staggering. If you visit Mao's grave and hear a whirling , thumping sound, its Mao, he's spinning in his grave. Someone joked that in his Mausoleum in Red Square, they had to glue Lenin down. FYI there is a very serious look now at removing Lenin's body and finally burying him. Bury Lenin, the saying if you bury Lenin, you've buried Communism for good. edit Let me add that to me its this rapid shift to Capitalism in 2 dedades, without the checks and balances developed in this country over the last 2 centuries, that should have companies thinking twice about their ru***o do business there (could get very very burned by their government, unless you like handing your proprietary technologies over to them) and our government very concerned over the long term stability of the region. Chinese food for thought. Have fun with your trains Reply jeaton Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: Rockton, IL 4,821 posts Posted by jeaton on Friday, November 18, 2005 5:16 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by PBenham QUOTE: Originally posted by jeaton Lotus098 You really ought to stop putting on headphones and listening to tapes of Rush Limbaugh while you sleep. It will cause your brain to atrophy... from left to right. Your brain, if you have one, will not atrophy after six weeks of prelimimary listening to the greatness for the full three hours daily. If anything you, will feel stronger, more intelligent, and confident in yourself and others who think like you will after the preliminary period. But it may be rough at first. The Lib Dogma is difficult to break away from, once you do my friend, you will have become a better person than you could have imagined you could be. The Chicoms are having problems now, since they can't keep the truth out like they used to. Eastern Europe and the asian parts of the old Soviet empire "fell" under the weight of the truth about communisim. So too will China. The people there are on the cusp of an awakening that will be very profound, indeed. I can tell you that my brain is quite fine and that I have read and listened to many fine, very intelligent conservatives from William S Buckley to Charles Krauthammer. Oh yes, the political left also has babbling spin doctors. I don't pay any attention to them either. My rule. If an idea or opinion is made that makes me feel good with out giving it a second thought, then I decide I better give it a second thought. "We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, November 18, 2005 5:25 PM Congratulations. You are in an elite 10% of the population.[:-^] As Thomas Edison, put it. "5% of the people think, 10% of the people think they think, and the other 85% of the people would rather die than think." James. A red necked, assault rifle owning, huntin', freedom fightin, Rush litening, Cowboy lovin', American. And proud of it. Reply Edit ndbprr Member sinceSeptember 2002 7,486 posts Posted by ndbprr on Friday, November 18, 2005 5:30 PM There are two ways to deal with anti American regimes. Force and a lot of our soldiers getting killed and trade. If you do some research instead of kneejerk reaction you will find that every time we have traded with a country and its people see what we can buy they overthrow their represive governments from within and that is worth the price economically. I also asume BNSF is buying all the goods in those containers and are the heavy. OR would you prefer them being shipped by truck and clogging all the western interstates? Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, November 18, 2005 5:46 PM Hey Benham, Rush is a lying moron. If you don't want shots to be taken at you, don't shoot at others ie Liberals. You may go back to your Conservative hole.....I'm done. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, November 18, 2005 5:55 PM I'll make this simple so that even the lefties can understand: Import intermodal < revenue adequacy captive domestic production > revenue adequacy Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, November 18, 2005 6:11 PM Lotus. Go to your room! You're grounded! No Train simulator, no coloring books, no assault rifles (yeah right). Don't come out until you can speak from experience. You say 85% of the pop doesn't think.....hell that's you. You only speak what you have been programmed. When you are off of restrictions you are ordered to chase girls and become a normal boy. You are dismissed. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, November 18, 2005 6:35 PM QUOTE: Rush is a lying moron. I know I am not supposed to talk back to me elders. But, have you ever listened to him? Until you do you have no experience as to what he says, listen to him for just a hour and tell me that again. Note I said listen to him, don’t listen to what democraps tell you about, or what you are sure he says. I only speak what I have been programmed, who may I ask is programming me into writing Train Trivia questions; Rush sure he talks about trains, not? James, right-wing radical, steak munchin, AR-15 shootin, St. Lois Hawken ownin, Constitution reading, Marine to be, American. And proud of it. Reply Edit Junctionfan Member sinceFebruary 2004 From: St.Catharines, Ontario 3,770 posts Posted by Junctionfan on Friday, November 18, 2005 6:44 PM Your attitude-you would have the U.S plunge into a major war with China. Is that really a good idea-use some intelligence based on research. The U.S as mighty as they are, can not without serious losses, engage in a conventional war with a mighty country like China. China isn't the middle east or some of the other countries; you fight with them, you are in a MAJOR fight. War is supposed to be avoided if possible-hence diplomacy. Try a more diplomatic approach Lotus; non-violent attacks can be more effective than violent ones in a lot of cases. Welcome to 21st century thinking. Andrew Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, November 18, 2005 6:51 PM I knew if we got Andrew and Lotus Blossom on the same thread we'd have fireworks...LOL... Pass the popcorn back here willya? LC Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, November 18, 2005 6:55 PM So, it's only conservatives who have an attitude problem, eh JF? The lefties *NEVER* exhibit a hostile attitude on these forums, do they. Back to the topic at hand: Juxtapose BNSF's capacity improvements for it's import intermodal corridor with CP's Mt. MacDonanld project last decade. The CP project was intended to improve the westward flow of export goods by rail, e.g. coal, grain, et al, and it has. It seems the Canadian railroad hierarchy has more of a clue than the US railroad hierarchy. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, November 18, 2005 6:55 PM I am not for fighting China, I just don't think we should be making them our allies. Why should we send our leaders over their like they are some great freind. Regan managed to deafeat the soviets without firing a shot, yes you are right. The Arnie joke was a joke, I don't want to see World War 4 any more than anybody else. Reply Edit espeefoamer Member sinceNovember 2003 From: West Coast 4,122 posts Posted by espeefoamer on Friday, November 18, 2005 7:00 PM I listen to Rush all the time. I think he is really cool.I agree with him most of the time. Remember: Under Communism,Man exploits man. Under Capitalism,it's the other way around.( Quote from an old copy of Mad Magazine). Ride Amtrak. Cats Rule, Dogs Drool. Reply TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Friday, November 18, 2005 7:02 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal I'll make this simple so that even the lefties can understand: Import intermodal < revenue adequacy captive domestic production > revenue adequacy I find it funny that a so called "conservative" doesn't understand the concept of a company making money, even after using the term "revenue" after the less than and more than signs. The key word is "Revenue" as in "the company making money" (wow, you'd almost think we had an economic system that encourages such a thing). Like it or not, the powers that be in DC have pushed us into the trade with China, and the freight will have to be moved (IIRC that's what the BNSF does). Do you honestly think that them turning down the business will suddenly make your world all rosy again? A small business reality: another transportation company will take the business of moving the freight. If the money is there to pay the transportation bill, it will be moved. BNSF sounds like they're going after the business first. Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, November 18, 2005 7:03 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by ironken Hey Benham, Rush is a lying moron. If you don't want shots to be taken at you, don't shoot at others ie Liberals. You may go back to your Conservative hole.....I'm done. You lefty types can't aim and can only shoot blanks, so there's no need to fear such potshots. BTW, when has Rush Limbaugh ever lied? You may not like his POV, and if you want to call him a moron that is your subjective opinion, but to call someone a liar you need objective proof, otherwise you turn out to be the moron. Reply Edit TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Friday, November 18, 2005 7:05 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by Limitedclear I knew if we got Andrew and Lotus Blossom on the same thread we'd have fireworks...LOL... Pass the popcorn back here willya? LC Sorry guys, just had to throw another log on the fire. We ARE popping the corn over an open fire, right? Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, November 18, 2005 7:20 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal I'll make this simple so that even the lefties can understand: Import intermodal < revenue adequacy captive domestic production > revenue adequacy I find it funny that a so called "conservative" doesn't understand the concept of a company making money, even after using the term "revenue" after the less than and more than signs. The key word is "Revenue" as in "the company making money" (wow, you'd almost think we had an economic system that encourages such a thing). Like it or not, the powers that be in DC have pushed us into the trade with China, and the freight will have to be moved (IIRC that's what the BNSF does). Do you honestly think that them turning down the business will suddenly make your world all rosy again? A small business reality: another transportation company will take the business of moving the freight. If the money is there to pay the transportation bill, it will be moved. BNSF sounds like they're going after the business first. Tom, Do you even have a clue as to the reference to "revenue adequacy"? And who said anything about BNSF turning down business? Certainly in past threads I have provided evidence of such. No, what we're talking about here is the fact that the lowest ratios of revenues to variable costs occur in the import intermodal business. They are barely covering their variable costs with this import "business", which means under STB definitions import intermodal actually loses money for the railroads. That's probably why they have to use revenues from captive grain and coal shippers to further expand this money losing import intermodal business. We all know that they could never use the *revenues* from import intermodal to pay for the capacity expansions of these corridors. Also, it might shock you to learn that we are not engaged in "trade" with China, so much as we are engaged in a permanent act of trade deficit expansion with China. That doesn't mean China wouldn't gladly accept our grain exports if it was the most price competitive, but because of US rail captivity the price of US grain overseas is higher than the prices of Canadian and Australian wheat. Canada addresses rail captivity by subsidizing grain exports, Australia has an open access rail system so grain exports get a competitive rail rate to port, while we in the US get the shaft from the STB with their steadfast refusal to implement the vague dust-covered competition caveats of the Staggers Act. I don't mind Chinese imports being gifted by competitive rail rates, as long as our domestic producers get the same gift. If the railroads are going to give it away, they should give it away to their fellow Americans, not a neo-communist regime. Reply Edit jeaton Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: Rockton, IL 4,821 posts Posted by jeaton on Friday, November 18, 2005 7:22 PM Well... certainly half the truth is better than none. "We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics Reply Junctionfan Member sinceFebruary 2004 From: St.Catharines, Ontario 3,770 posts Posted by Junctionfan on Friday, November 18, 2005 7:38 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal So, it's only conservatives who have an attitude problem, eh JF? The lefties *NEVER* exhibit a hostile attitude on these forums, do they. Back to the topic at hand: Juxtapose BNSF's capacity improvements for it's import intermodal corridor with CP's Mt. MacDonanld project last decade. The CP project was intended to improve the westward flow of export goods by rail, e.g. coal, grain, et al, and it has. It seems the Canadian railroad hierarchy has more of a clue than the US railroad hierarchy. Don't get me wrong. I am proud to be leftist socialist but my politics has no bearing on the U.S way of government and general political structure of today. The U.S is a rather capitalist society so you can't blame a railroad in the U.S for staying in the realm of allowed capitalist practices. Like I said, the blame is the government and the change needs to be with the government and the people who vote for those pinheads. As far as Canada goes. Our government is much more relaxed and we aren't as big on capitalism as you are. That is why the railroads are the way they are; because the society of Canada will not allow the railroads the same privalages as the U.S because we are Canada just like you won't be like Canada because you are the U.S. Andrew Reply TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Friday, November 18, 2005 7:44 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal I'll make this simple so that even the lefties can understand: Import intermodal < revenue adequacy captive domestic production > revenue adequacy I find it funny that a so called "conservative" doesn't understand the concept of a company making money, even after using the term "revenue" after the less than and more than signs. The key word is "Revenue" as in "the company making money" (wow, you'd almost think we had an economic system that encourages such a thing). Like it or not, the powers that be in DC have pushed us into the trade with China, and the freight will have to be moved (IIRC that's what the BNSF does). Do you honestly think that them turning down the business will suddenly make your world all rosy again? A small business reality: another transportation company will take the business of moving the freight. If the money is there to pay the transportation bill, it will be moved. BNSF sounds like they're going after the business first. Tom, Do you even have a clue as to the reference to "revenue adequacy"? And who said anything about BNSF turning down business? Certainly in past threads I have provided evidence of such. No, what we're talking about here is the fact that the lowest ratios of revenues to variable costs occur in the import intermodal business. They are barely covering their variable costs with this import "business", which means under STB definitions import intermodal actually loses money for the railroads. That's probably why they have to use revenues from captive grain and coal shippers to further expand this money losing import intermodal business. We all know that they could never use the *revenues* from import intermodal to pay for the capacity expansions of these corridors. Also, it might shock you to learn that we are not engaged in "trade" with China, so much as we are engaged in a permanent act of trade deficit expansion with China. That doesn't mean China wouldn't gladly accept our grain exports if it was the most price competitive, but because of US rail captivity the price of US grain overseas is higher than the prices of Canadian and Australian wheat. Canada addresses rail captivity by subsidizing grain exports, Australia has an open access rail system so grain exports get a competitive rail rate to port, while we in the US get the shaft from the STB with their steadfast refusal to implement the vague dust-covered competition caveats of the Staggers Act. I don't mind Chinese imports being gifted by competitive rail rates, as long as our domestic producers get the same gift. If the railroads are going to give it away, they should give it away to their fellow Americans, not a neo-communist regime. So you're trying to say the revenue isn't adequate for BNSF to provide this service? How is that different than saying they are losing money to provide this service? They won't stay in business long doing that. What exactly are they "giving away?" Current revenues and assets are always used to expand services, not just in railroading but in any business, regardless of whether you think the rates are fair to the shippers. So what exactly ARE you saying BNSF should do about this business, if not turn it down? Sit back and let a competitor take it? Bulk services, ie moving large quantites of freight from point A (the west coast docks in this case) to point B (intermodal transloading facilities) is the cheapest service they provide due to the minimal handling and yarding, and as such should demand the lowest price to provide the service. Add dock handling and loading, plus transfer facility unloading and trucking, you get the total price of the transporation service. If BNSF is contracting to provide the whole ship-to-loading-dock service, their bid will include these services. They didn't get as big and remain fluid and solvent (unlike another western railroad we all know and love) by providing transportation services at a loss. Again, this "engagement of trade" or "permanent act of trade deficit expansion" is not a policy that was set up by the BNSF or any other railroad in this country. It was set up by the weenies in DC, starting with Nixon and finalized by Dubya and his boys. For a company to make a profit off of what you seem to think is a bad government decision is the American way, just like the Halliburton Companies did. You think they ought to provide transportation services to "captive domestic shippers" at the same cut rates which you think would be equivlent to what they're charging to move the Chinese intermodal traffic? That has got to be the most Liberal thing I think I've EVER heard you say. Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, November 18, 2005 7:47 PM QUOTE: I am proud to be leftist socialist If only Tom and Jeaton, and vsmith would be so honest. James, 'tater munching, coke guzzlng, flag wavin, American. And proud of it. Reply Edit TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Friday, November 18, 2005 7:55 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 QUOTE: I am proud to be leftist socialist If only Tom and Jeaton, and vsmith would be so honest. James, 'tater munching, coke guzzlng, flag wavin, American. And proud of it. You haven't figured out that I'm a Liberal Conservative? Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, November 18, 2005 7:55 PM QUOTE: ...starting with Nixon and finalized by Dubya and his boys. Just what did they do? [?]Tom, what the hell is a Liberal Conservative?[?] Liberals are on one side conservatives are on the other. James, A Liberty lovin, SUV drivin, American. And proud of it. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, November 18, 2005 8:19 PM Lotus, yes I have listened to ex-druggie Rush. He is a ***! I am a "Democrat," you accidentally misspelled the word. About train trivia....you know squat about railroading. You are proficient at reading and regurgitating.....that's all. Now go back to your room before I spank your little butt and make you cry. Reply Edit selector Member sinceFebruary 2005 From: Vancouver Island, BC 23,330 posts Posted by selector on Friday, November 18, 2005 8:23 PM QUOTE: As far as Canada goes. Our government is much more relaxed and we aren't as big on capitalism as you are. That is why the railroads are the way they are; because the society of Canada will not allow the railroads the same privalages as the U.S because we are Canada just like you won't be like Canada because you are the U.S. Of course our government is relaxed. With one of the highest marginal income tax rates in the industrial world, and GST too boot, they can afford to lay back and spend, spend, spend...just like what we have recently been promised. And remember, not so long ago the government ran direct, subsidized competition against CPR and Canadian Airlines. It still does it with medicare and with the CBC..mothercorp. Reply TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Friday, November 18, 2005 8:24 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 QUOTE: ...starting with Nixon and finalized by Dubya and his boys. Just what did they do? [?]Tom, what the hell is a Liberal Conservative?[?] Liberals are on one side conservatives are on the other. James, A Liberty lovin, SUV drivin, American. And proud of it. Tricky Dicky was the first US President to visit Communist China, getting the "foot in the door" to open trade talks. The current high level of trade has come about in the last few years, as in the reign of Dubya. I was kind of hoping you'd see the irony in the contradiction of terms. I'm Liberal in some things and Conservative in others, meaning, I don't believe there is such a thing as a pure Conservative or a pure Liberal. Futuremodal ALMOST had me convinced I was wrong until his last post with that Liberal opinion. Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, November 18, 2005 8:28 PM Tom, So other than visit China we have "done" nothing. Maybe if we could get the governement out of the way and let the free market work things would work. Ah, so your one of those moderates, a middle of the roader. Well you know the old saying the only thing you find in the middle of the roads are white lines, and road kill. Reply Edit TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Friday, November 18, 2005 8:32 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by ironken Lotus, yes I have listened to ex-druggie Rush. He is a ***! I am a "Democrat," you accidentally misspelled the word. About train trivia....you know squat about railroading. You are proficient at reading and regurgitating.....that's all. Now go back to your room before I spank your little butt and make you cry. Now Ken, let's try to stay on subject. You're starting to take the fun out of this. Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Friday, November 18, 2005 8:36 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 Tom, So other than visit China we have "done" nothing. Maybe if we could get the governement out of the way and let the free market work things would work. Ah, so your one of those moderates, a middle of the roader. Well you know the old saying the only thing you find in the middle of the roads are white lines, and road kill. No, a Moderate never takes sides. I thought my last 100 or so comments would have proven that point. Of course there are times I enjoy playing "Devil's Advocate." When a head of state visits another country, it's not like you or me going on a sightseeing vacation. There is, at the very least, diplomatic reasons behind the visit. Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, November 18, 2005 8:40 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by ironken Lotus, yes I have listened to ex-druggie Rush. He is a ***! I am a "Democrat," you accidentally misspelled the word. About train trivia....you know squat about railroading. You are proficient at reading and regurgitating.....that's all. So, smarty, what did Rush say when you listened that was a lie? QUOTE: Now go back to your room before I spank your little butt and make you cry. Go ahead make my day! Well, do ya feel lucky? Well do ya, punk. James, a real American, and proud of it. Reply Edit TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Friday, November 18, 2005 8:49 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 QUOTE: Originally posted by ironken Lotus, yes I have listened to ex-druggie Rush. He is a ***! I am a "Democrat," you accidentally misspelled the word. About train trivia....you know squat about railroading. You are proficient at reading and regurgitating.....that's all. So, smarty, what did Rush say when you listened that was a lie? QUOTE: Now go back to your room before I spank your little butt and make you cry. Go ahead make my day! Well, do ya feel lucky? Well do ya, punk. James, a real American, and proud of it. Wrong picture James, but right actor. The quote is from "Dirty Harry" a more current LA Cop. Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, November 18, 2005 8:51 PM I know that, but that one is much more impressive, just look at those revolvers. Reply Edit photogeek88 Member sinceJanuary 2005 From: Dixon, IL 64 posts Posted by photogeek88 on Friday, November 18, 2005 8:52 PM I would think you would support the idea of helping employees here in AMERICA, Lotus098...seeing as you're all keen on patriotism. The last time I checked, the American Dream was not, "screw everyone else, as long as you're fine." I'm seventeen, and a Union member of Local 881 UFCW. It might not be a great idea for a part-time student only making $7.20, with $7 a week going to the union. But I know for certain that some seventeen year old making tennis shoes in China isn't going to be able to save enough money to go to a first rate university, like I am. Nor is he going to transfer to another branch of that factory in the town where his university is, be able to work part time while in school, and stay in the union to keep some basic health benefits while he tries to support himself away from his family. 'Oh, those commies in China will pay for his health benefits and education' I hear you thinking. Well, let me tell you, China is a pretty sore excuse for Communism. I know it might be a little off topic, but hopefully it will give you something to think about. If you don't like the government spending money, maybe you shouldn't support companies that drain our national treasury because they don't pay their employees enough to get off of food stamps. What happened to "help your fellow man?" Wesley Click Here To View My Pictures On railpictures.net! http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=9873 Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, November 18, 2005 8:59 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by photogeek88 I would think you would support the idea of helping employees here in AMERICA, Lotus098...seeing as you're all keen on patriotism. The last time I checked, the American Dream was not, "screw everyone else, as long as you're fine." I'm seventeen, and a Union member of Local 881 UFCW. It might not be a great idea for a part-time student only making $7.20, with $7 a week going to the union. But I know for certain that some seventeen year old making tennis shoes in China isn't going to be able to save enough money to go to a first rate university, like I am. Nor is he going to transfer to another branch of that factory in the town where his university is, be able to work part time while in school, and stay in the union to keep some basic health benefits while he tries to support himself away from his family. 'Oh, those commies in China will pay for his health benefits and education' I hear you thinking. Well, let me tell you, China is a pretty sore excuse for Communism. I know it might be a little off topic, but hopefully it will give you something to think about. If you don't like the government spending money, maybe you shouldn't support companies that drain our national treasury because they don't pay their employees enough to get off of food stamps. What happened to "help your fellow man?" Now I won't agrue about China, but what do you propose to do? Now exactly where do you get your idea "they don't pay their employees enough to get off of food stamps" who are we talking about? You know people can always quite thier jobs. James, following the American dream of freedom and indepence from governement. Reply Edit TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Friday, November 18, 2005 8:59 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 I know that, but that one is much more impressive, just look at those revolvers. But Dirty Harry's .44 Magnum was certainly impressive. Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply photogeek88 Member sinceJanuary 2005 From: Dixon, IL 64 posts Posted by photogeek88 on Friday, November 18, 2005 9:04 PM Keep jobs in America! The Chinese aren't going to get any stronger if we don't stop feeding the fire! Outlaw trade with China, and when they put up a fight, nuke 'em! That should be reasonable in your eyes. Wesley Click Here To View My Pictures On railpictures.net! http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=9873 Reply photogeek88 Member sinceJanuary 2005 From: Dixon, IL 64 posts Posted by photogeek88 on Friday, November 18, 2005 9:05 PM If you think I'm refering to Wal-Mart, you'd be 'quite' right. Wesley Click Here To View My Pictures On railpictures.net! http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=9873 Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, November 18, 2005 9:12 PM Mr. Geek. You go talking about the American dream, what about free trade? James, Looking up to real heroes. Reply Edit TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Friday, November 18, 2005 9:22 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by photogeek88 Keep jobs in America! The Chinese aren't going to get any stronger if we don't stop feeding the fire! Outlaw trade with China, and when they put up a fight, nuke 'em! That should be reasonable in your eyes. BIG flaw in that theory: China has lots of nukes, too, and I don't think they'd sit back and let us blast away without returning fire. Sounds like you need to move to the wilds of Idaho and live in a shotgun shack AWAY from the real world. Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Friday, November 18, 2005 9:24 PM Ooops, sorry James, I meant the wilds of Montana for Photogeek. Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, November 18, 2005 9:39 PM Mr. Geek, All this time I thought we had minimum wage so that companies were forced to pay enough to keep families off of food stamps. If Wal-Mart pay was so terrible you would see workers striking in droves, but you don't. Let us examine some simple facts. The majority of Wal-Mart’s hourly store associates in the United States work full-time. That is well above the 20 - 40 percent typically found in the retail industry. Their average hourly wage for regular full-time associates in the U.S. is $9.68 an hour, almost double the federal minimum wage. Wal-Mart’s average full-time wage in urban areas is slightly higher than the national average. For example: Chicago, $10.69; Austin, TX, $10.69; Washington D.C./Baltimore, $10.08; Atlanta, $10.80; and in Los Angeles, $9.99. Did you get all of that, good now lets look at some more facts, the average worker at Star Bucks a well known Liberal company only pays $7.00 an hour. So what proof do you have? Tom, right the air polution is bad enough down here. James, bringing facts to a gun fight, and buying ink by the barrel. Reply Edit edbenton Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: Back home on the Chi to KC racetrack 2,011 posts Posted by edbenton on Friday, November 18, 2005 9:48 PM Actually china has a grand total of 12 ICBM's and 16 SLBM the rest are cruise missles and gravity bombs. The Wia is the boomer and my friends in the navy say the shrimp cover their ears when it is out at sea. The ICBM's are titan 2 clones and have to be kept defueled all the time. A titan 2 can only be fueled for 2 days before it has to be serviced its fuels eat thru the tanks. As for Wal-mart paying good they are the ony company that has personal dedicated to helping you get on Medicaid. Always at war with those that think OTR trucking is EASY. Reply edblysard Member sinceMarch 2002 9,265 posts Posted by edblysard on Friday, November 18, 2005 10:13 PM James, Not an engineer alive would be caught dead wearing that dorky cap... You’re made in China Wal-Mart shirt doesn’t quite hide you’re baby fat... And you are standing in the middle of the tracks, with your back to a piece of live equipment, minus blue flag protection, looking like you have a corn cob or a potato in an uncomfortable and personal location. (Which puts lie to your middle of the road comment earlier, sometimes even wanna be men like you stand in the middle of the road with their thumb up their tailpipe). All of which means you’re too fooli***o get out of the way of something that is going to run over you, and too young to know to tuck in your shirt so it doesn’t get caught on something. If the best you can come up with is an AR15 and a pair of old Army ball and cap 36s, then I doubt today’s Marines have much use for you. Stay home picking taters and listening to Rush on your made in Taiwan headphones, watching old movies on cable TV, it’s safer that way. You have yet to introduce anything original here, other that spouting off second hand garbage you hear at the dinner table from your disgruntled parents/cousins and the ramblings of a radio host who’s only skill is to talk enough tra***o keep his advertisers happy; after all, their target audience is the lower half of the IQ and income charts... Ed 23 17 46 11 Reply jeaton Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: Rockton, IL 4,821 posts Posted by jeaton on Friday, November 18, 2005 10:20 PM edbenton I doubt that Lotus would know anything about Medicaid. Those folks out in Idaho do everything by themselves, and they are proud of it. Quite amazing when someone thinks $9.68 an hour is a good wage. Probably explains why they don't understand about the $7.00 an hour alleged as the average wage paid by Starbucks. Ever hear of tip income? "We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics Reply TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Friday, November 18, 2005 10:25 PM Is it just me or did we "lose" Futuremodal? Maybe he couldn't argue with my "liberal" comment. 3 for 3 Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply greyhounds Member sinceAugust 2003 From: Antioch, IL 4,371 posts Posted by greyhounds on Friday, November 18, 2005 10:50 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl Is it just me or did we "lose" Futuremodal? Maybe he couldn't argue with my "liberal" comment. 3 for 3 We just ain't that lucky. He got what he wanted, a good p-ss-n contest. "By many measures, the U.S. freight rail system is the safest, most efficient and cost effective in the world." - Federal Railroad Administration, October, 2009. I'm just your average, everyday, uncivilized howling "anti-government" critic of mass government expenditures for "High Speed Rail" in the US. And I'm gosh darn proud of that. Reply TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Friday, November 18, 2005 11:04 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by greyhounds QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl Is it just me or did we "lose" Futuremodal? Maybe he couldn't argue with my "liberal" comment. 3 for 3 We just ain't that lucky. He got what he wanted, a good p-ss-n contest. He makes up a few "facts" and "statistics" then you call him on it, he calls you an idiot and gives an answer that has nothing to do with the question. You call him on that and he runs and hides. Talk about him being full of BS Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, November 18, 2005 11:17 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard James, Not an engineer alive would be caught dead wearing that dorky cap... What about all those old photos from the steam days? QUOTE: You’re made in China Wal-Mart shirt doesn’t quite hide you’re baby fat... And you are standing in the middle of the tracks, with your back to a piece of live equipment, minus blue flag protection, looking like you have a corn cob or a potato in an uncomfortable and personal location. (Which puts lie to your middle of the road comment earlier, sometimes even wanna be men like you stand in the middle of the road with their thumb up their tailpipe). All of which means you’re too fooli***o get out of the way of something that is going to run over you, and too young to know to tuck in your shirt so it doesn’t get caught on something. [#offtopic][#offtopic][#offtopic][#dots] WHAT IS THIS A FASHION FORUM! I never really was a fan of that picture, camera adds 20 pounds; I only put it in my profile so people would believe I am who I say I am. However the Challenger had been parked their in Portland over a week with her fire down, 20 other people had been standing in front of it. Now I don't think I was in any danger.[;)] As for personal apperance, that doesn't affect my intellect in the least; would you care to use any facts. QUOTE: If the best you can come up with is an AR15 and a pair of old Army ball and cap 36s, then I doubt today’s Marines have much use for you. As must not know an AR-15 is the same thing as a M-16 used by the military. During the summer I take my AR (one of dad's three and go shooting monthly. This is a NRA match thing, firing plenty of amo at 200 300 and 600 yards. I have also been very proficient with an M-1 Carbine (World War II/Korea rifle). Not to toot my own horn, but I have built from a kit my own muzzleloader, a Saint Louis Hawken 50 cal. Rifle Here is me shooting it, I would usally shoot off-hand (standing), but this was to sight in. This is an AR-15 I shoot the standard military version, with peep sight, no scope, quite well. QUOTE: Stay home picking taters and listening to Rush on your made in Taiwan headphones, watching old movies on cable TV, it’s safer that way. Just what kind of country hick do you take me for anyways? Nampa is a very rapidly growing city, Boise is already bigger than Tacoma, and I don't even know any spud farmers. QUOTE: You have yet to introduce anything original here, other that spouting off second hand garbage you hear at the dinner table from your disgruntled parents/cousins and the ramblings of a radio host who’s only skill is to talk enough tra***o keep his advertisers happy; after all, their target audience is the lower half of the IQ and income charts... Ed Nice to know you have my house bugged. How about you get some facts, I have never seen you like this, and I have always thought you were very smart.[xx(][D)] In fact I am stunned by your insults here.[:O] Rember I am not the topic here, let's get back on track. Reply Edit Big_Boy_4005 Member sinceDecember 2003 From: St Paul, MN 6,218 posts Posted by Big_Boy_4005 on Saturday, November 19, 2005 1:23 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 QUOTE: Originally posted by jeaton Lotus098 You really ought to stop putting on headphones and listening to tapes of Rush Limbaugh while you sleep. It will cause your brain to atrophy... from left to right. So that's why it's called the fastest three hours in media. [:D][zzz] At least I hear both sides of the story.[;)] Yes James, but you only listen to one side. It's a condition called selective hearing. When you take your brain out of the wash, make sure you get the RIGHT one.[:0][banghead][;)] I'm back! Follow the progress: http://ogrforum.ogaugerr.com/displayForumTopic/content/12129987972340381/page/1 Reply dharmon Member sinceAugust 2003 From: Bottom Left Corner, USA 3,420 posts Posted by dharmon on Saturday, November 19, 2005 1:47 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by edbenton Actually china has a grand total of 12 ICBM's and 16 SLBM the rest are cruise missles and gravity bombs. The Wia is the boomer and my friends in the navy say the shrimp cover their ears when it is out at sea. The ICBM's are titan 2 clones and have to be kept defueled all the time. A titan 2 can only be fueled for 2 days before it has to be serviced its fuels eat thru the tanks. As for Wal-mart paying good they are the ony company that has personal dedicated to helping you get on Medicaid. Cool...my friends in the Navy would be interested to know that......Underestimating the capabilities of one's potential adversary based on heresay is most unwise.... 1 nuke, by the way, is too many. Reply dharmon Member sinceAugust 2003 From: Bottom Left Corner, USA 3,420 posts Posted by dharmon on Saturday, November 19, 2005 1:53 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 Tom, So other than visit China we have "done" nothing. Maybe if we could get the governement out of the way and let the free market work things would work. Ah, so your one of those moderates, a middle of the roader. Well you know the old saying the only thing you find in the middle of the roads are white lines, and road kill. No, a Moderate never takes sides. I thought my last 100 or so comments would have proven that point. Of course there are times I enjoy playing "Devil's Advocate." When a head of state visits another country, it's not like you or me going on a sightseeing vacation. There is, at the very least, diplomatic reasons behind the visit. A moderate can take sides, it's just that it seeks to be the side of reason. I am generally conservative, but moderately so...what they used to call a Dixiecrat, conservative democrats, which seem to have been turned into moderate Republicans over the past twenty years or so... ...the far right and far left seem to be getting closer together on the other side of the circle though..[:D] Dan Reply edblysard Member sinceMarch 2002 9,265 posts Posted by edblysard on Saturday, November 19, 2005 4:56 AM Actually James, The AR15 is not the same as a M16...I know, I own one of the original AR15s, with the stubby composite front stock, and one of the later ones with the full stock. Also have a M16, and 1861 Springfield 45.70 trapdoor Carbine, several Model 1911 Colt Commanders, and number of original black powder weapons...well, enough guns to fill two gun safes and a chest. But I did get want I needed from your response...so thank you for being so prompt. Ed 23 17 46 11 Reply Junctionfan Member sinceFebruary 2004 From: St.Catharines, Ontario 3,770 posts Posted by Junctionfan on Saturday, November 19, 2005 7:56 AM To Lotus: You have as much insight in the Global World as George W Bush and Julius Caesar combined. Your T.Roosevelt tactics worked in a time before nuclear weapons and just a big piece of artillary or an ironclad was the worst of the weapons. You are a threat to the safety of mankind if that is your honest to god opinion on things-I hope you are never in a position of power then. To edbenton: How do you know they just have that? Does the U.S make their exact ordinance known to the world? Andrew Reply TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Saturday, November 19, 2005 9:43 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by dharmon QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 Tom, So other than visit China we have "done" nothing. Maybe if we could get the governement out of the way and let the free market work things would work. Ah, so your one of those moderates, a middle of the roader. Well you know the old saying the only thing you find in the middle of the roads are white lines, and road kill. No, a Moderate never takes sides. I thought my last 100 or so comments would have proven that point. Of course there are times I enjoy playing "Devil's Advocate." When a head of state visits another country, it's not like you or me going on a sightseeing vacation. There is, at the very least, diplomatic reasons behind the visit. A moderate can take sides, it's just that it seeks to be the side of reason. I am generally conservative, but moderately so...what they used to call a Dixiecrat, conservative democrats, which seem to have been turned into moderate Republicans over the past twenty years or so... ...the far right and far left seem to be getting closer together on the other side of the circle though..[:D] Dan The point is, the labels seem to insinuate that there are absolutes in the labels. There aren't. Heck, even Futuremodal is making Liberal comments. Go figure. Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, November 19, 2005 9:49 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard Actually James, The AR15 is not the same as a M16...I know, I own one of the original AR15s, with the stubby composite front stock, and one of the later ones with the full stock. Also have a M16, and 1861 Springfield 45.70 trapdoor Carbine, several Model 1911 Colt Commanders, and number of original black powder weapons...well, enough guns to fill two gun safes and a chest. But I did get want I needed from your response...so thank you for being so prompt. Ed Man, I wish I had those. What's the difference between an AR, and an M-16, is it just that the M-16 can fire three rounds with one pull of the trigger? Just what did you want from my response? Reply Edit TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Saturday, November 19, 2005 9:58 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard Actually James, The AR15 is not the same as a M16...I know, I own one of the original AR15s, with the stubby composite front stock, and one of the later ones with the full stock. Also have a M16, and 1861 Springfield 45.70 trapdoor Carbine, several Model 1911 Colt Commanders, and number of original black powder weapons...well, enough guns to fill two gun safes and a chest. But I did get want I needed from your response...so thank you for being so prompt. Ed Man, I wish I had those. What's the difference between an AR, and an M-16, is it just that the M-16 can fire three rounds with one pull of the trigger? Just what did you want from my response? James, that's the M16A1 that shoots in 3 shot bursts, a modification from around the end of the Vietnam war. The Original M-16 would empty the clip in full automatic, which only took a few seconds. The problem is the rifle had a tendency to "climb" (barrel end would come up due to the kick of firing) and made it hard for the user to even "spray" an area. When being fired on, people have a tendency to "hit the dirt" so they go down and your bullets are going up. Very inefficient use of ammo. Personally, I think they should teach marksmanship more in the military to the regular grunts. Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply Junctionfan Member sinceFebruary 2004 From: St.Catharines, Ontario 3,770 posts Posted by Junctionfan on Saturday, November 19, 2005 10:03 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard Actually James, The AR15 is not the same as a M16...I know, I own one of the original AR15s, with the stubby composite front stock, and one of the later ones with the full stock. Also have a M16, and 1861 Springfield 45.70 trapdoor Carbine, several Model 1911 Colt Commanders, and number of original black powder weapons...well, enough guns to fill two gun safes and a chest. But I did get want I needed from your response...so thank you for being so prompt. Ed Man, I wish I had those. What's the difference between an AR, and an M-16, is it just that the M-16 can fire three rounds with one pull of the trigger? Just what did you want from my response? James, that's the M16A1 that shoots in 3 shot bursts, a modification from around the end of the Vietnam war. The Original M-16 would empty the clip in full automatic, which only took a few seconds. The problem is the rifle had a tendency to "climb" (barrel end would come up due to the kick of firing) and made it hard for the user to even "spray" an area. When being fired on, people have a tendency to "hit the dirt" so they go down and your bullets are going up. Very inefficient use of ammo. Personally, I think they should teach marksmanship more in the military to the regular grunts. My opinion too. Think how much money would be saved on ammo. Andrew Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, November 19, 2005 10:08 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by Big_Boy_4005 QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 QUOTE: Originally posted by jeaton Lotus098 You really ought to stop putting on headphones and listening to tapes of Rush Limbaugh while you sleep. It will cause your brain to atrophy... from left to right. So that's why it's called the fastest three hours in media. [:D][zzz] At least I hear both sides of the story.[;)] Yes James, but you only listen to one side. It's a condition called selective hearing. When you take your brain out of the wash, make sure you get the RIGHT one.[:0][banghead][;)] I can only take so much of this. Why am I the brainwashed one; you fellers are just spouting out of your play-book. Is it merely the fact most teenagers belive the news, their school teachers; and later become conservative? Are you people any less like talking to trees? We know you are not "righ", yet you've "left" us to be the one's who are so unusuall; forgeting the country agrees with us. Why I can do plenty of free thought, my dad and I have agured on and on about if the gold standard was better. JunctionFan, How so, I didn't say I wanted to nuke the Chinese like Mr. Geek; what did I say? Isn't it funny America didn't get into any wars with him president, he was feared by our enemies. James, using Teddy Roosevelt diplomacy. TR a real cowboy. Reply Edit vsmith Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Smoggy L.A. 10,743 posts Posted by vsmith on Saturday, November 19, 2005 11:36 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by ironken Hey Benham, Rush is a lying moron. If you don't want shots to be taken at you, don't shoot at others ie Liberals. You may go back to your Conservative hole.....I'm done. You lefty types can't aim and can only shoot blanks, so there's no need to fear such potshots. BTW, when has Rush Limbaugh ever lied? You may not like his POV, and if you want to call him a moron that is your subjective opinion, but to call someone a liar you need objective proof, otherwise you turn out to be the moron. Wasnt there something about not being addicted to popping painkillers until he was busted? or is that just a river in Egypt. Listening to Rush Limburger is like computer programming: Garbage In-Garbage Out [:D] Have fun with your trains Reply Big_Boy_4005 Member sinceDecember 2003 From: St Paul, MN 6,218 posts Posted by Big_Boy_4005 on Saturday, November 19, 2005 11:56 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard Actually James, The AR15 is not the same as a M16...I know, I own one of the original AR15s, with the stubby composite front stock, and one of the later ones with the full stock. Also have a M16, and 1861 Springfield 45.70 trapdoor Carbine, several Model 1911 Colt Commanders, and number of original black powder weapons...well, enough guns to fill two gun safes and a chest. But I did get want I needed from your response...so thank you for being so prompt. Ed Man, I wish I had those. What's the difference between an AR, and an M-16, is it just that the M-16 can fire three rounds with one pull of the trigger? OMG James, a legitimate question. Too bad it isn't about trains. I'm back! Follow the progress: http://ogrforum.ogaugerr.com/displayForumTopic/content/12129987972340381/page/1 Reply Big_Boy_4005 Member sinceDecember 2003 From: St Paul, MN 6,218 posts Posted by Big_Boy_4005 on Saturday, November 19, 2005 12:10 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 QUOTE: Originally posted by Big_Boy_4005 QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 QUOTE: Originally posted by jeaton Lotus098 You really ought to stop putting on headphones and listening to tapes of Rush Limbaugh while you sleep. It will cause your brain to atrophy... from left to right. So that's why it's called the fastest three hours in media. [:D][zzz] At least I hear both sides of the story.[;)] Yes James, but you only listen to one side. It's a condition called selective hearing. When you take your brain out of the wash, make sure you get the RIGHT one.[:0][banghead][;)] I can only take so much of this. Why am I the brainwashed one; you fellers are just spouting out of your play-book. Is it merely the fact most teenagers belive the news, their school teachers; and later become conservative? Are you people any less like talking to trees? We know you are not "righ", yet you've "left" us to be the one's who are so unusuall; forgeting the country agrees with us. Why I can do plenty of free thought, my dad and I have agured on and on about if the gold standard was better. James, the reason I, and many of the others here pick on you (and Dave), is because you continually push a viewpoint that is so far away from the center. It is so unrealistic, as to be laughable. My recommendation is to leave politics, and stick to trains, but you keep coming back for more politics. If it wasn't for Dave, you would be the sound of one hand clapping. Take a hint, and give it a rest. (before Bergie has to do it for you) I'm back! Follow the progress: http://ogrforum.ogaugerr.com/displayForumTopic/content/12129987972340381/page/1 Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, November 19, 2005 12:27 PM QUOTE: Wasnt there something about not being addicted to popping painkillers until he was busted? He never said he didn't take them, he admitted it. Big Blowhard 4005, Far from normal, you need two things, take a trip to Idaho to start with. You also need to stop denying the majority of the population agrees with us. Bush poll numbers are still higher than the Democrats in congress. Why look at what congress voted on yesterday.[(-D] I have had Ed, Old Timer, Murphy Siding, antigaites, and other agree with me before. I will take a hint and get back to trains, now though. James, unilateral as America in this war. And proud of it. Reply Edit Junctionfan Member sinceFebruary 2004 From: St.Catharines, Ontario 3,770 posts Posted by Junctionfan on Saturday, November 19, 2005 12:53 PM Well James, if the U.S were to engage a conventional war with China, you would been in MAJOR trouble. They can conscript, train and maybe even arm an army larger than than the total population of the U.S. So what does the U.S have to fall back on-nuclear weapons perhaps-however; Russia is in close proximity to China. If Russia gets effected by the nuclear blast, China and Russia will now be allied against the U.S. Russia still has a tremendous amount of nuclear weapons. Plus, you end up seeing Russia and a number of anti-American nations suppling weapons and supplies to China just because. You need to look at the big picture here. The art of war has gone-its now a matter of survival and destruction. Andrew Reply selector Member sinceFebruary 2005 From: Vancouver Island, BC 23,330 posts Posted by selector on Saturday, November 19, 2005 1:00 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by photogeek88 Keep jobs in America! The Chinese aren't going to get any stronger if we don't stop feeding the fire! Outlaw trade with China, and when they put up a fight, nuke 'em! That should be reasonable in your eyes. Now, let's be honest and fair, here. You don't want to trade with China, and you don't want fair trade with Canada (if you follow the news), so who will buy goods manufactured in the USA with inflated union wages behind them. Ghana? Maybe Burundi? How about Singapore....oh wait, they do pretty well building and selling their own goods. Hmmmmm..... is puzzlement. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, November 19, 2005 1:06 PM Again, vsmith, when has Rush ever lied? The best you can up with is his unfortunate addiction to pain killers which resulted from his loss of hearing? And that's your example of a Rush "lie"? Actually, that was what I expeced from you - ad hominen attacks. You cannot compete on substance, so you resort to slimeballing. Thanks for confirming everything we know about the folks on your extreme side of the political aisle. Big Boy, I wasn't aware you consider your pathetic responses as "picking" on me. That's hilarious. It's more like me having to swat at a couple of worthless gnats. You have yet to provide even one retort worthy of the tiniest shred of credibility. The mice that roared, that's vsmith and Big Boy. C'mon, try to come up with one legitimate POV, can't you? Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, November 19, 2005 1:29 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by greyhounds QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl Is it just me or did we "lose" Futuremodal? Maybe he couldn't argue with my "liberal" comment. 3 for 3 We just ain't that lucky. He got what he wanted, a good p-ss-n contest. He makes up a few "facts" and "statistics" then you call him on it, he calls you an idiot and gives an answer that has nothing to do with the question. You call him on that and he runs and hides. Talk about him being full of BS Tom, This is why you are an extreme leftist, not a *moderate*. You have been provided plenty of references for my statements, yet somehow you completely ignore them and make the libelous contention that I make them up. There is no hope for you, you are a lost soul. I notice you've never provided a single reference for your absurd statements. You are the epitome of BS. The only reason this post and others degrade into a p i s s i n g contest is that folks like you and the pup make it so. I provide a topic of discussion, and instead of providing reasoned sound rebuttals you right away slip into true leftist mode aka name calling, insults, etc. Once again, here is the gist of the topic: BNSF is spending the revenues it receives from it's captive US customers (whose rates are well above the STB's RVC ratios), and is spending that revenue increasing capacity for it's foreign customers (whose rail rates are well below the RVC standard). This is well documented. Only a complete moron would allege that such a statement is made up. You could very well argue that it is taking things out of context, or that there might be an exaggeration here or there, but you absolutely cannot refute the basic truth of the statement. Neither you, the pup, or anyone else slightly to the right of vsmith and Big Boy has offered a single rebuttal of this argument. Not one. I've asked it before, and I'll ask it again. Is there any sound reason for BNSF to subsidize the importation of Asian goods on the backs of US producers, given that the US producers provide the bulk of the income for BNSF, while the importers sap revenue from the railroad? I'm waiting patiently for someone from the left to be a worthy debate foe. Apparently, it's gonna be a long, long wait. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, November 19, 2005 1:38 PM Dave, it's over. Stop agruing with the furnitrure. They don't have any facts never will. Reply Edit zardoz Member sinceJanuary 2003 From: Kenosha, WI 6,567 posts Posted by zardoz on Saturday, November 19, 2005 1:41 PM [V][:(][sigh][zzz][zzz][zzz][soapbox] C'mon guys, this supposed to be (I thought) a place where we could come to share our common interest in railroading, relax, and have fun. Not too long ago, I almost got caught up in a political blabering session, but I quickly tired of the constant bickering, and just gave up. Politics is what it is; and do you not agree that perhaps we would be better off here on the TRAINS forums without it, unless it is truly relevant to the topic at hand. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, November 19, 2005 1:55 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 QUOTE: Originally posted by jeaton Lotus098 You really ought to stop putting on headphones and listening to tapes of Rush Limbaugh while you sleep. It will cause your brain to atrophy... from left to right. So that's why it's called the fastest three hours in media. [:D][zzz] At least I hear both sides of the story.[;)] B O T H sides of the story from Rush. You have to be kidding ! ! ! Man have you been brain washed. Rush is NEVER wrong, just ask him. I think David Gunn's comments about this administration said it all the other day, you know, the one Vic quoted. [;)] Reply Edit edblysard Member sinceMarch 2002 9,265 posts Posted by edblysard on Saturday, November 19, 2005 2:05 PM The original M16 in production had a cruddy barrel, and a plain, non chromed receiver...jammed quite easily from powder fouling with a standard cartridge, was too light for it's firepower, (see the post about climbing) and had a short, composite one piece front stock. The barrel tended to warp if you used it a lot in continuous firing... Later mods included chromed receiver, (and a better powder, cleaner/cooler powder in the ammunition) built in cleaning kit in the rear stock/butt, and a two piece plastic coated aluminum front stock, with a tension rod, quick change barrel. Later mods include the 3 bullet burst, to conserve ammo. The AR15 was released, with all the above mentioned faults, before the M16, as a test bed for civilians...production ceased with the military orders...and resumed for a few years after, in some instances the excess stock of the military version was de rated to a civilian version...close checking of the serial number will let you find out if you have a M16 set up as a late model AR15... Many, many mods exist for the AR15, from some superb barrels, to a smoother ejector, and a kit to change the top carry handle to an excellent scope mount. For a target gun on the less expensive side it is a excellent weapon, if you hand load, then perfectly flat 100 yard shots in a two inch group are quite easy with the stock peep sights...as a hunting gun, its ok, but not as good as I like in brush...give me my old 30-30 or the Springfield for shooting through brush...the Springfield’s bullet is slow, but when it hits something, you can count on it going down hard. Ed QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard Actually James, The AR15 is not the same as a M16...I know, I own one of the original AR15s, with the stubby composite front stock, and one of the later ones with the full stock. Also have a M16, and 1861 Springfield 45.70 trapdoor Carbine, several Model 1911 Colt Commanders, and number of original black powder weapons...well, enough guns to fill two gun safes and a chest. But I did get want I needed from your response...so thank you for being so prompt. Ed Man, I wish I had those. What's the difference between an AR, and an M-16, is it just that the M-16 can fire three rounds with one pull of the trigger? Just what did you want from my response? 23 17 46 11 Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, November 19, 2005 2:19 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by jhhtrainsplanes QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 So that's why it's called the fastest three hours in media. [:D][zzz] At least I hear both sides of the story.[;)] B O T H sides of the story from Rush. You have to be kidding ! ! ! As you can see, he didn't say he got both sides of the story from Rush. Even the most ardent listener of Rush's show can admit that he is coming soley from the side of conservatism. I think what Lotus is refering to is getting the left side of the issue from the usual suspects aka ABC/CBS/NBC/CNN/NPR/NYT/et al, and then balancing that with Rush/FoxNews/Hannity/Medved/ et al. That's actually what most of us conservatives do, we take in both sides to get the complete picture, then make our own independent decisions regarding the issues of the day. I seriously doubt any of the lefties on this forum do the same. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, November 19, 2005 2:34 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by jhhtrainsplanes QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 So that's why it's called the fastest three hours in media. [:D][zzz] At least I hear both sides of the story.[;)] B O T H sides of the story from Rush. You have to be kidding ! ! ! As you can see, he didn't say he got both sides of the story from Rush. Even the most ardent listener of Rush's show can admit that he is coming soley from the side of conservatism. I think what Lotus is refering to is getting the left side of the issue from the usual suspects aka ABC/CBS/NBC/CNN/NPR/NYT/et al, and then balancing that with Rush/FoxNews/Hannity/Medved/ et al. That's actually what most of us conservatives do, we take in both sides to get the complete picture, then make our own independent decisions regarding the issues of the day. I seriously doubt any of the lefties on this forum do the same. You THINK?!? MY GOD!! My kids said the sky was falling, but they did just come back from watching that new Disney flick...perhaps I discounted it too quickly. FM thought... Watch out folks, we may be witnessing the end of the world...LOL... LC Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, November 19, 2005 2:39 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz [V][:(][sigh][zzz][zzz][zzz][soapbox] C'mon guys, this supposed to be (I thought) a place where we could come to share our common interest in railroading, relax, and have fun. Not too long ago, I almost got caught up in a political blabering session, but I quickly tired of the constant bickering, and just gave up. Politics is what it is; and do you not agree that perhaps we would be better off here on the TRAINS forums without it, unless it is truly relevant to the topic at hand. I agree. When we are reduced to discussing the merits of the AR-15 and the M-16 with 14 year olds on the TRAINS forum and the "merits" of Rush Limbaugh and his Liberal counterparts we have strayed WAY too far from the purpose of this forum. LC Reply Edit TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Saturday, November 19, 2005 3:01 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by greyhounds QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl Is it just me or did we "lose" Futuremodal? Maybe he couldn't argue with my "liberal" comment. 3 for 3 We just ain't that lucky. He got what he wanted, a good p-ss-n contest. He makes up a few "facts" and "statistics" then you call him on it, he calls you an idiot and gives an answer that has nothing to do with the question. You call him on that and he runs and hides. Talk about him being full of BS Tom, This is why you are an extreme leftist, not a *moderate*. You have been provided plenty of references for my statements, yet somehow you completely ignore them and make the libelous contention that I make them up. There is no hope for you, you are a lost soul. I notice you've never provided a single reference for your absurd statements. You are the epitome of BS. The only reason this post and others degrade into a p i s s i n g contest is that folks like you and the pup make it so. I provide a topic of discussion, and instead of providing reasoned sound rebuttals you right away slip into true leftist mode aka name calling, insults, etc. Once again, here is the gist of the topic: BNSF is spending the revenues it receives from it's captive US customers (whose rates are well above the STB's RVC ratios), and is spending that revenue increasing capacity for it's foreign customers (whose rail rates are well below the RVC standard). This is well documented. Only a complete moron would allege that such a statement is made up. You could very well argue that it is taking things out of context, or that there might be an exaggeration here or there, but you absolutely cannot refute the basic truth of the statement. Neither you, the pup, or anyone else slightly to the right of vsmith and Big Boy has offered a single rebuttal of this argument. Not one. I've asked it before, and I'll ask it again. Is there any sound reason for BNSF to subsidize the importation of Asian goods on the backs of US producers, given that the US producers provide the bulk of the income for BNSF, while the importers sap revenue from the railroad? I'm waiting patiently for someone from the left to be a worthy debate foe. Apparently, it's gonna be a long, long wait. You're so extreme rightwing you're starting to come over to the left. First, you NEVER answered a simple question of numbers about how a simple 65% breaks down. You admitted you pulled the breakdown out of your butt (not what I consider a valid reference), so I stand by the statement "you have no idea what you're talking about," and you continue to prove it in each post. Maybe you should actually read what you write and see if it has any semblence of answering the question placed in front of you. So I'm an "extreme leftist, not a moderate?" Seems like you're the one doing the name calling here. As narrow minded and mixed up as your views are, it would seem more like you are the lost soul. And exactly which "statements" of mine do you need references for? The fact that companies use profits and assets on hand to expand business into new areas? The fact that a transportation company should pursue new business? The fact that the business will be here whether BNSF takes it or it's left for one of their competitors to take it? The fact that BNSF doesn't give a rat's butt whether you think the business is legit or not? The fact that they're not providing this service at a loss to the company? Funny, I thought we had a Capitolist economic system. You seem to be the complete moron by arguing with yourself here. At no point did I say that the rates for the transport of the potential new intermodal were the same or higher than the rates charged for any other type of freight. What I did say (now try to read this S-L-O-W-L-Y so you understand it this time) is that you failed to prove that BNSF is providing this service at a financial loss to the company. Different types of freight have different rates dependant on many factors, amount of handling the RR provides, switching, point of origin and point of destination on a heavily or lightly traveled line, whether it's handled as unit train or individual carload, just to name a few. They can afford to charge less per ton on some freight because of the high volume of that freight. It's called the economy of scale. As far as "any sound reason for BNSF to subsidize Asian goods," you are implying that they are providing the service at a loss. THIS you have failed to prove and have avoided answering this question. You're right about one thing, this hasn't even become a debate. You keep restating the original news release with your narrow minded views, and never answer a direct question posed to you on the subject. This is like arguing with a parrot. I'll see if I can find another parrot to give you a worthy debate. Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, November 19, 2005 3:15 PM I found this on the Model Railroader forum. Here is my analysis of us. Big-Boy 4005: http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/godfather.htm Vsmith: http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/filibuster.htm Ironken: http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/compost.htm Tom: http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/ferouscranus.htm Put them together: http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/cybersisters.htm Dave: http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/rottweilerpuppy.htm Murphy Siding: http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/ent.htm Me: http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/capitalista.htm Old Timer: http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/kungfumaster.htm Mr. Geek: http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/propellerhead.htm Reply Edit TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Saturday, November 19, 2005 3:22 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 I found this on the Model Railroader forum. Here is my analysis of us. Big-Boy 4005: http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/godfather.htm Vsmith: http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/filibuster.htm Ironken: http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/compost.htm Tom: http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/ferouscranus.htm Put them together: http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/cybersisters.htm Dave: http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/rottweilerpuppy.htm Murphy Siding: http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/ent.htm Me: http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/capitalista.htm Sorry James, but that title you gave to me belongs to Futuremodal. He's the one with an inability to even answer a question about his original post. Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, November 19, 2005 4:00 PM You just won't excpert any answer but what you want to hear. I should have given you this one. http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/pinko.htm Reply Edit TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Saturday, November 19, 2005 4:11 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 You just won't excpert any answer but what you want to hear. I should have given you this one. http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/ego.htm What would be a pleasant change would be if Futuremodal would actually answer the question posed to him. Unfortunately, casting us as cartoon/video game characters shows that you're still pretty much a teenager. Futuremodal's problem is that he takes offence at being asked a question, like we're questioning his opinion. In his narrow, concrete minded opinion, this is probably how he sees it since he can't come up with original thought and can't explain the one's he's heard from others. Questions can also mean: 2. Your statement was incomplete 3. Your statement wasn't clear 4. Your statement piques my interest, but I'd like to know more He immediately goes on the defensive rather than take an opportunity to educate. PS: Possibility 1. is Questioning his opinion Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, November 19, 2005 4:24 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 You just won't excpert any answer but what you want to hear. I should have given you this one. http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/ego.htm What would be a pleasant change would be if Futuremodal would actually answer the question posed to him. Unfortunately, casting us as cartoon/video game characters shows that you're still pretty much a teenager. Futuremodal's problem is that he takes offence at being asked a question, like we're questioning his opinion. In his narrow, concrete minded opinion, this is probably how he sees it since he can't come up with original thought and can't explain the one's he's heard from others. Questions can also mean: 2. Your statement was incomplete 3. Your statement wasn't clear 4. Your statement piques my interest, but I'd like to know more He immediately goes on the defensive rather than take an opportunity to educate. PS: Possibility 1. is Questioning his opinion Tom - You are too kind to FM. He is simply afraid. He is afraid all of us will learn he doesn't know very much at all despite his wide dissemination of his claims of expertise. He only plays one tune "OA, OA, OOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooo Ayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy, FM Land... because it is the limit of his repertoire.... Those of us in the industry and those who have a brain know well the fallacy of FM's views. I often get sick of listening to his sludge (thus my occasional jabs at him). In reality he isn't worth the effort. He lashes out at anyone who doesn't immediately take his side because of his unreasoning fear, in some cases panic, because he has no real response or thought capability that would enable him to accept any idea not within his tunnel vision of reality. LC Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, November 19, 2005 5:00 PM I don't agree with his ideas of what BNSF is doing either, you know. I think BNSF is smart enough to make good investments, however. It would make you wonder why; if what Dave said is true, they are expanding into a lower profit business, than otherwise. I don't know, but you have yet to dispute his facts about the income of US freight vs. intermodal. Let's get back on track, and be civil; or Bergie is just going to have to clean up this place Monday Morning. A couple of question I have been wondering. When Dave said this on page 2. QUOTE: As usual, most of you who defend BNSF's actions have missed the point. What BNSF is doing is taking money made from captive US shippers (where revenues can be as high as 200+% of variable costs), and using those monopoly profits to invest in the import intermodal business (where revenues are usually as low as 106% of variable costs). The STB defines revenue adaquacy as revenues that are 180% of variable costs. Are these numbers accurate, and if so why is BNSF not expanding into a higher paying exploits? I am not agreeing with the above, quote far from it. These may be the key factors to this debate (war?). Instead however both sides began getting wrapped up in the last post almost forgetting what we were talking about. I had the opportunity to talk to my economics teacher yesterday after school. He said that wages were a big part of the reason for outsourcing, though government regulations, and taxes are big too; he went on however to explain that some jobs are not profitable to outsource. Such as High-tech, jobs that need to be done in a timely fashion, and others. I have mentioned this before on these forums I worked for a print shop that was investigating doing a large job, so the manager looked into the cost of gasp outsourcing, and we discovered that once you ordered enough it was cheaper to have a company in Texas print them that the Chinese companies. Don’t forget that it does take people to unload the ships, and ship the goods, that’s where BNSF comes in. My teacher also mention something else you might find surprising, if you account for all the copyright/trademark infringement (i.e. Theft of intellectual property), there is would be no trade deficit. We should look to history for an example; there was a time when everyone was afraid that cheap British goods would pu***he American goods of the market (outsourcing). I notice that didn’t happened so I would not be too concerned it now. P.S. The cartoon charter thing was merely a joke, to try and lighten up the thread. Reply Edit Kurn Member sinceJanuary 2005 From: Akron,OH 229 posts Posted by Kurn on Saturday, November 19, 2005 5:02 PM This is getting absolutely ridiculous.BNSF is a business.Businesses solicit other business to make money.In today's topsy turvy economy,sometimes ya gotta dance with the devil.There are a lot of factors concerning the Chinese.In the plastic injection mold manufacturing business,they will underbid and even take a loss to get the mold making business from the major plastic manufacturers.We cannot compete at all with them.And the big companies(just like the average consumer)wants to pay less.But we want to keep the jobs here,but we won't and should not work for minimum wage or less.So it seems to be a big conundrum.And I am a small businessman,and 80% of the freight I hauled was molds.Now it's about 20%.So it effects everybody in some way.As far as BNSF goes,more power to 'em.Maybe one of their shareholders will profit and open a business or something,and put some people to work. Now back to the Right Wing Militia Forum................................... If there are no dogs in heaven,then I want to go where they go. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, November 19, 2005 5:06 PM QUOTE: In the plastic injection mold manufacturing business,they will underbid and even take a loss to get the mold making business from the major plastic manufacturers. If my memory serves me right, that would be the monopolistic tactics, not what BSNF is doing. Back in the day Standard oil would undercut the price of hometown oil dealers to put them out of business then jack up the price. Reply Edit Kurn Member sinceJanuary 2005 From: Akron,OH 229 posts Posted by Kurn on Saturday, November 19, 2005 5:18 PM They probably did take a page or two from the railroad and oil baron playbook............. If there are no dogs in heaven,then I want to go where they go. Reply jeaton Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: Rockton, IL 4,821 posts Posted by jeaton on Saturday, November 19, 2005 5:19 PM James Your econ teacher raised some good points about outsourcing. I will add healthcare as another factor or element of labor costs that impacts our competitive position with other countries, including Canada. He may well be on the mark about the cost to our economy of theft of intellectual property. By the way, if you keep the tone of your posts to what you have shown above you will get some respect. There is more experience and knowledge floating around this forum than might be appearant. Anyone who goes with the attitude of I am right and everybody else is wrong is going to get slammed around pretty hard. Jay "We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics Reply espeefoamer Member sinceNovember 2003 From: West Coast 4,122 posts Posted by espeefoamer on Saturday, November 19, 2005 5:26 PM This thread is not long for this world.it is soon to be removed from the consist,set out on the RIP track,waybilled for the scrapyard. Ride Amtrak. Cats Rule, Dogs Drool. Reply vsmith Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Smoggy L.A. 10,743 posts Posted by vsmith on Saturday, November 19, 2005 6:07 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Again, vsmith, when has Rush ever lied? The best you can up with is his unfortunate addiction to pain killers which resulted from his loss of hearing? And that's your example of a Rush "lie"? The mice that roared, that's vsmith and Big Boy. Its called Sarcastic Wit... but I guess it went right over your head. There's an old saying "Never have a battle of Wits with an unarmed person." Oscar Wilde I beleive...maybe its time to put the sarchasm mines back in the box. If you actually read my post you'll see it posed that in the form of a question, I was ASKING about whether he had lied prior to his admittal or was just hiding behind that river in Egypt ...that is not stating it as a fact. You jumped to gun. The second part is mearly my heart-felt opinion of Rush Kill All The Druggies Except ME Limbaugh. I dont care if you dont like my opinion of Flush, that doesnt matter anymore than I care about your opinion about anyone else. BTW if you ever actually saw the movie "The Mouse That Roared" with Peter Sellers, just remember, the Mouse won! Squeek Squeek, ROAR![;)] Get off me Cheese, Grommit![:D] Have fun with your trains Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, November 19, 2005 6:51 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by samfp1943 Popcorn, Beer, ..Pretty soon the gloves will come off and the duel will start....Popcorn, Peanuts![(-D][(-D][oops] Time to trot out the boxing gloves. All right vsmith that's it. Gloves shcmoves, break out the dueling pistols. Reply Edit andrewjonathon Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: US 304 posts Posted by andrewjonathon on Saturday, November 19, 2005 9:08 PM Wow, there is sure is a lot of name calling and accusations flying back and forth in this thread. Putting that and all the left/right politics surrounding this topic aside, it is easy to accuse the Chinese of all kinds of things. However, are the Chinese forcing anyone to buy their goods? As far as I can tell the only time the Chinese sell anything to anyone in the US is when an American (or may be an illegal immigrant [:)] ) makes a conscious decision to buy it. Is it fair to blame the Chinese (or BNSF for that matter) for decisions made here by American consumers? I don't think so. Reply TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Saturday, November 19, 2005 9:28 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 I don't agree with his ideas of what BNSF is doing either, you know. I think BNSF is smart enough to make good investments, however. It would make you wonder why; if what Dave said is true, they are expanding into a lower profit business, than otherwise. I don't know, but you have yet to dispute his facts about the income of US freight vs. intermodal. Let's get back on track, and be civil; or Bergie is just going to have to clean up this place Monday Morning. They are expanding into what he seems to think is a lower profit margin business (which it is on a price per ton-mile basis) because the ones he lists as higher profit margin have no more shipping business to offer the railroads. Even though they make less per ton-mile on the intermodal business (I noticed FM did not compare current intermodal rates to the proposed new business intermodal rates. Hmmmm, I wonder why?) the sheer volume of the new business will contribute more to the corporate "bottom line" at the end of the fiscal year than the small quantity of the higher profit margin business. He also didn't define what he meant by BNSF "subsidizing" the business. Simply because shipper A, with a small quantity of freight is charged one price and shipper B, with a LOT of freight to ship receives a lower rate doesn't mean that the rates charged to shipper A is subsidizing the rates for shipper B. The same thing happens in the trucking business. You pay more per ton-mile of LTL freight than for a full trailer load. Again, it's the economy of scale. Many business, not just transportation, will offer lower rates for high quantities of business, be it services or products. FM seems intent on comparing US carload freight rates with the proposed new intermodal business of shipping goods from China. This brings two questions to mind: 1. Why isn't he comparing the rates for the new intermodal business to the rates for existing intermodal business? (like the old expression, comparing apples to apples) and 2. Why isn't he complaining about the rates charged on ALL intermodal business as compared to the carload rates? A round-about way of expressing his anti-Chinese prejudice? Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply Big_Boy_4005 Member sinceDecember 2003 From: St Paul, MN 6,218 posts Posted by Big_Boy_4005 on Saturday, November 19, 2005 10:11 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by andrewjonathon Wow, there is sure is a lot of name calling and accusations flying back and forth in this thread. Putting that and all the left/right politics surrounding this topic aside, it is easy to accuse the Chinese of all kinds of things. However, are the Chinese forcing anyone to buy their goods? As far as I can tell the only time the Chinese sell anything to anyone in the US is when an American (or may be an illegal immigrant [:)] ) makes a conscious decision to buy it. Is it fair to blame the Chinese (or BNSF for that matter) for decisions made here by American consumers? I don't think so. Well said. The deeper issue is that in most cases there are not domesticly made alternatives. American manufacturing jobs have moved off shore due to high labor costs, and our economy turns from production to service. Ultimately, we are the ones paying the freight, and the Chineese have to give back a small amount of what we gave them. BNSF is not sending dollars to China. They are recovering a few dollars form the Chinese products we consume, and putting it back into the US economy. American consumers and businesses are the guilty parties. We can't have it both ways people. Cheap goods come from cheap labor. The American standard of living is too high, and something has to give. I'm back! Follow the progress: http://ogrforum.ogaugerr.com/displayForumTopic/content/12129987972340381/page/1 Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, November 19, 2005 10:42 PM Well, Tom, if you have a question for me just ask me straight out. I don't do third person inquiries. Reply Edit TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Saturday, November 19, 2005 10:56 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Well, Tom, if you have a question for me just ask me straight out. I don't do third person inquiries. Boy, talk about dense. I hope you can read questions better than this when it comes time to take your SAT's. FM's aviodance tactics are in full swing now. Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Saturday, November 19, 2005 11:03 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by Limitedclear QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 You just won't excpert any answer but what you want to hear. I should have given you this one. http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/ego.htm What would be a pleasant change would be if Futuremodal would actually answer the question posed to him. Unfortunately, casting us as cartoon/video game characters shows that you're still pretty much a teenager. Futuremodal's problem is that he takes offence at being asked a question, like we're questioning his opinion. In his narrow, concrete minded opinion, this is probably how he sees it since he can't come up with original thought and can't explain the one's he's heard from others. Questions can also mean: 2. Your statement was incomplete 3. Your statement wasn't clear 4. Your statement piques my interest, but I'd like to know more He immediately goes on the defensive rather than take an opportunity to educate. PS: Possibility 1. is Questioning his opinion Tom - You are too kind to FM. He is simply afraid. He is afraid all of us will learn he doesn't know very much at all despite his wide dissemination of his claims of expertise. He only plays one tune "OA, OA, OOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooo Ayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy, FM Land... because it is the limit of his repertoire.... Those of us in the industry and those who have a brain know well the fallacy of FM's views. I often get sick of listening to his sludge (thus my occasional jabs at him). In reality he isn't worth the effort. He lashes out at anyone who doesn't immediately take his side because of his unreasoning fear, in some cases panic, because he has no real response or thought capability that would enable him to accept any idea not within his tunnel vision of reality. LC You're right LC, it is obvious. He certainly can't stand up in the light of the truth and is expending more energy at giving nonanswers to questions and outright avioding them than it would take to actually answer them. Probably because, as you say, lack of thought capability, he's just parroting what he hears in some far-rightwing source. Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Saturday, November 19, 2005 11:13 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Well, Tom, if you have a question for me just ask me straight out. I don't do third person inquiries. Boy, talk about dense. I hope you can read questions better than this when it comes time to take your SAT's. FM's aviodance tactics are in full swing now. OK, let's see if I can dumb them down enough for you. I'll only ask one at a time so I don't overload your mind. You stated in the original post that the BNSF charges a higher rate for captive shippers than they are proposing for the anticipated intermodal business from China. Now, this is the question: How does the rate that BNSF currently charges for intermodal service to existing customers compare with the rate for the potential new intermodal business? Sort of comparing apples to apples Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply dharmon Member sinceAugust 2003 From: Bottom Left Corner, USA 3,420 posts Posted by dharmon on Sunday, November 20, 2005 1:29 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 QUOTE: Originally posted by samfp1943 Popcorn, Beer, ..Pretty soon the gloves will come off and the duel will start....Popcorn, Peanuts![(-D][(-D][oops] Time to trot out the boxing gloves. All right vsmith that's it. Gloves shcmoves, break out the dueling pistols. Vic...I'll gladly be your second on this one......besides I've got more time firing black powder than he's been alive. Dan Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, November 20, 2005 1:38 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Well, Tom, if you have a question for me just ask me straight out. I don't do third person inquiries. Boy, talk about dense. I hope you can read questions better than this when it comes time to take your SAT's. FM's aviodance tactics are in full swing now. OK, let's see if I can dumb them down enough for you. I'll only ask one at a time so I don't overload your mind. You stated in the original post that the BNSF charges a higher rate for captive shippers than they are proposing for the anticipated intermodal business from China. Now, this is the question: How does the rate that BNSF currently charges for intermodal service to existing customers compare with the rate for the potential new intermodal business? Sort of comparing apples to apples No, it is nothing like comparing apples to apples. The framing of your question is illogical if you are basing that question on my previous post regarding the fact that BNSF (and all Class I's) charge rates for captive customers that are usually twice those of non-captive customers. So if the "potential new intermodal business" is of the same non-captive status as all other Asian import business, the rate for the new business will also be on the low side of the RVC equation. It's a given. You could have figured this out if you had thought it through. Why would you think differently? Do you have any evidence that this new import business from China will be a higher rate than other Asian import business? There is no way BNSF or any other railroad can make any Asian imports captive, because there are always other options available. BTW, why not try to ask questions of a more intellectual nature? Your last question was not "dumbed down" so much as it was just plain dumb, because the answer was so blatantly obvious. If you can't ask intelligent questions, then stop wasting my time. And if you can't ask a question without throwing in an insult, then don't bother. Reply Edit zardoz Member sinceJanuary 2003 From: Kenosha, WI 6,567 posts Posted by zardoz on Sunday, November 20, 2005 8:21 AM It's not enough to understand what the experts tell you. You also need to understand cognitive dissonance to understand how the experts and even you could be completely wrong about something that seems so completely true. Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Sunday, November 20, 2005 9:05 AM Me thinks you have never worked in a steamship line therefore you have no idea how rates are established between a RR & the steamship line to move both the import & export containers inland once they either arrive in the USA or at the inland city in the USA to go export overseas. While Walmart bashing is in favor these days all I will say is you are way, way, way off based base with your theories that you posted in this thread. [:(] Originally posted by futuremodal [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, November 20, 2005 9:46 AM Dave, I don't understand either. How exactly are the US shippers captive, and the Chinese ones aren't? What exactly do you mean by a captive shipper, or this an open access problem? While Tom may not be correct on his thinking, his question seemed valid; without this knowledge how do we know who is a “captive” shipper. Could you enlighten us dummies to the answer of that question? Reply Edit daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, November 20, 2005 11:02 AM Thge Chinese don't teach people a religion that makes them want to fly airplanes into buildings. Reply TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Sunday, November 20, 2005 11:44 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Well, Tom, if you have a question for me just ask me straight out. I don't do third person inquiries. Boy, talk about dense. I hope you can read questions better than this when it comes time to take your SAT's. FM's aviodance tactics are in full swing now. OK, let's see if I can dumb them down enough for you. I'll only ask one at a time so I don't overload your mind. You stated in the original post that the BNSF charges a higher rate for captive shippers than they are proposing for the anticipated intermodal business from China. Now, this is the question: How does the rate that BNSF currently charges for intermodal service to existing customers compare with the rate for the potential new intermodal business? Sort of comparing apples to apples No, it is nothing like comparing apples to apples. The framing of your question is illogical if you are basing that question on my previous post regarding the fact that BNSF (and all Class I's) charge rates for captive customers that are usually twice those of non-captive customers. So if the "potential new intermodal business" is of the same non-captive status as all other Asian import business, the rate for the new business will also be on the low side of the RVC equation. It's a given. You could have figured this out if you had thought it through. Why would you think differently? Do you have any evidence that this new import business from China will be a higher rate than other Asian import business? There is no way BNSF or any other railroad can make any Asian imports captive, because there are always other options available. BTW, why not try to ask questions of a more intellectual nature? Your last question was not "dumbed down" so much as it was just plain dumb, because the answer was so blatantly obvious. If you can't ask intelligent questions, then stop wasting my time. And if you can't ask a question without throwing in an insult, then don't bother. I guess in your feeble, narrow minded Socialist view, there isn't a difference. To admit that the rates charged for different types of freight might be (shock of shocks) DIFFERENT would throw you "argument" right out the window. You're so intent on pushing a Chinese bigoted agenda I guess you wouldn't see that rates for current intermodal business would be compared to the proposed rates for new intermodal business for an acurate comparison. Since you can't answer the question placed before you, I guess you would consider it "dumb." You say yourself that the rates they charge for "captive customers" is different by a large factor compared to intermodal business. Since the potential new business is intermodal, the question was "why aren't you comparing current intermodal rates to proposed new business intermodal rates?" And if this WEREN'T an anti Chinese rant, why then would your title be "BNSF Prostrates Itself Before the Feet of it's Chinese Overlords?" rather than "BNSF Charges Excessive Rates to Captive Shippers?" As far as evidence of the new rates, you were the one that brought it up in the first place, but curiously, compared the existing rates for "captive shippers" to potential new intermodal business. The fact that they have different rates for different types of business is a given in all facets of the transportation business, not just railroads or just the BNSF. If BNSF is "prostrating itself at the feet of it's Chinese overlords" they would also be "prostrating themselves at the feet" of all their intermodal customers. Existing intermodal business compared to potential new intermodal business would definately be comparing apples to apples in terms of transportation rates. Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply vsmith Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Smoggy L.A. 10,743 posts Posted by vsmith on Sunday, November 20, 2005 11:47 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by dharmon QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 QUOTE: Originally posted by samfp1943 Popcorn, Beer, ..Pretty soon the gloves will come off and the duel will start....Popcorn, Peanuts![(-D][(-D][oops] Time to trot out the boxing gloves. All right vsmith that's it. Gloves shcmoves, break out the dueling pistols. Vic...I'll gladly be your second on this one......besides I've got more time firing black powder than he's been alive. Dan HHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA [(-D] Dan thats funny, thanks for the offer...How about giving the little punka$$ a good spanking and sending him to bed without his supper! and no allowance for a month![;)] The thing these guys dont understand is that for me, this is like watching "Beavis and B_tthead" , where your not laughing along with the main characters because their funny or witty, no, your laughing because their such idiots and do and say such stupid things that you cant help laughing AT them.[(-D] Nice set of pistols though! Early American dueling flintlock's, 50cal likely, walnut stocks. Cooool, keep your assault rifle ***-extenders, I'll take a Kentucky long rifle anyday of the week, actually that Sharps Ed mentioned also sound really interesting. I like early American firearms up to the close of the frontier, like to get a Sharps dropbolt carbine, the early Calvary version, but I got into model trains instead. Less expensive.[8)] Com'on Lotus buddy, be our Beavis and say it for us ... ".. I AM CORNHOLIO, I need TP for my Bunghooool...."[D)] LMAO in LA Vic[(-D] Have fun with your trains Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, November 20, 2005 12:26 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Well, Tom, if you have a question for me just ask me straight out. I don't do third person inquiries. Boy, talk about dense. I hope you can read questions better than this when it comes time to take your SAT's. FM's aviodance tactics are in full swing now. OK, let's see if I can dumb them down enough for you. I'll only ask one at a time so I don't overload your mind. You stated in the original post that the BNSF charges a higher rate for captive shippers than they are proposing for the anticipated intermodal business from China. Now, this is the question: How does the rate that BNSF currently charges for intermodal service to existing customers compare with the rate for the potential new intermodal business? Sort of comparing apples to apples No, it is nothing like comparing apples to apples. The framing of your question is illogical if you are basing that question on my previous post regarding the fact that BNSF (and all Class I's) charge rates for captive customers that are usually twice those of non-captive customers. So if the "potential new intermodal business" is of the same non-captive status as all other Asian import business, the rate for the new business will also be on the low side of the RVC equation. It's a given. You could have figured this out if you had thought it through. Why would you think differently? Do you have any evidence that this new import business from China will be a higher rate than other Asian import business? There is no way BNSF or any other railroad can make any Asian imports captive, because there are always other options available. BTW, why not try to ask questions of a more intellectual nature? Your last question was not "dumbed down" so much as it was just plain dumb, because the answer was so blatantly obvious. If you can't ask intelligent questions, then stop wasting my time. And if you can't ask a question without throwing in an insult, then don't bother. I guess in your feeble, narrow minded Socialist view, there isn't a difference. To admit that the rates charged for different types of freight might be (shock of shocks) DIFFERENT would throw you "argument" right out the window. You're so intent on pushing a Chinese bigoted agenda I guess you wouldn't see that rates for current intermodal business would be compared to the proposed rates for new intermodal business for an acurate comparison. Since you can't answer the question placed before you, I guess you would consider it "dumb." You say yourself that the rates they charge for "captive customers" is different by a large factor compared to intermodal business. Since the potential new business is intermodal, the question was "why aren't you comparing current intermodal rates to proposed new business intermodal rates?" And if this WEREN'T an anti Chinese rant, why then would your title be "BNSF Prostrates Itself Before the Feet of it's Chinese Overlords?" rather than "BNSF Charges Excessive Rates to Captive Shippers?" As far as evidence of the new rates, you were the one that brought it up in the first place, but curiously, compared the existing rates for "captive shippers" to potential new intermodal business. The fact that they have different rates for different types of business is a given in all facets of the transportation business, not just railroads or just the BNSF. If BNSF is "prostrating itself at the feet of it's Chinese overlords" they would also be "prostrating themselves at the feet" of all their intermodal customers. Existing intermodal business compared to potential new intermodal business would definately be comparing apples to apples in terms of transportation rates. I am concluding that it is impossible for you to have insult-free conversation. Well, no one can say I didn't go out of my way to give you that opportunity. So because my topic is titled provacatively, that makes me an anti-Chinese bigot? A classic far left tactic to try and demean the POV, yet if you looked at the title carefully, you will see that there is no explicit or implicit degradation of China or it's people, rather I do explicitly demean that great American corporation known as BNSF. Therefore, you would have every right to call me an anti-BNSF bigot based on the topic title. What I am regarding China is opposed to their lack of civil and religious liberties, their constant threats over Tawian, etc. That is beside the point of this topic. What is relevent is that comparative rates for US captive goods moving from plant to US port are higher than rates for overseas goods being hauled from US port to US consumption markets. This is reflected in the relative RVC ratios, where the highest RVC's are for US produced goods, while the lowest RVC's are for international double stacks. BTW, the grain hauling market is hardly tapped out, otherwise why would grain hopper orders be tending toward more and more delays. The demand for moving grain is exceeding the willingness or ability of the railroads to meet that demand. Since grain offers some of the highest RVC ratios, you would think the railroads would use those excess profits to expand capacity to move that grain. But instead they use their excess domestic profits to expand capacity for import intermodal. I'll set you straight on one of your tangents: There will be no difference in the rates being charged now for Asian imports and the "new" business proposed from China. There is ample competition for the movement of overseas goods to US consumption markets, and competition is what keeps rates down. No Chinese exporter would be so dumb as to allow a captive movement of those US imports. It was a dumb question to begin with. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, November 20, 2005 12:50 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 Dave, I don't understand either. How exactly are the US shippers captive, and the Chinese ones aren't? What exactly do you mean by a captive shipper, or this an open access problem? While Tom may not be correct on his thinking, his question seemed valid; without this knowledge how do we know who is a “captive” shipper. Could you enlighten us dummies to the answer of that question? CURE defines rail captivity based on the STB's 180% RVC standard, wherein rates where the RVC is above 180% are considered captive. For a general definition, rail captivity occurs wherein a rail shipper (those whose product moves logically by rail, e.g. chemicals, mt of coal or grain, et al) has a physical connection (e.g. a spur or siding) to only one Class I, and/or where certain areas of the country have only one Class I available within a medium to short truck haul to the nearest railhead, e.g. a captive intermodal terminal. Your part of the Great State of Idaho is captive to UP both physically and geographically. If a grain shipper wants to move a thousand tons a month to Portland and doesn't like the rate being offered by UP, he has no other choice. Trucking that much grain would be too expensive. If one of those proposed coal fired power plants are actually built in Southern Idaho, they will be captive to UP and will end up paying a rate that is twice that of coal plants with competitive rail access. Overseas importers are for the most part immune to US rail captivity, because most of the major US seaside ports have more than one Class I to provide service. Furthermore, most US consumption markets are also in areas with access to two or more Class I's as well as barge and shortsea shipping. I'm not completely sure, but I think the only major US consumption market that is captive to one Class I is the Phoenix-Tuscon area, which is now captive to UP if it's true that BNSF no longer has a branch down to Phoenix. Okay, I guess you can count Boise if you want to call your area a major US consumption market, but I don't think the Boise-Caldwell corridor is considered a major US consumption market by most marketing professionals (otherwise you guys would have a professional sports team or two!) Therefore, it is basically impossible for overseas imports into the US to be subject to captive rates, while most captive rail customers are US producers, and all captive shippers in the world are located in North America. No where else in the world do you see the monopolistic tactics being exhibited by the US railroads, such as differential pricing, bottleneck gouging, paper barriers to shortlines, etc. Reply Edit arbfbe Member sinceFebruary 2002 910 posts Posted by arbfbe on Sunday, November 20, 2005 1:57 PM I do find it amazing that all these vetted business gurus on the railroads are spending tremendous efforts in increasing the volume of their low return business as in intermodal when the railroads major problem for the time being is their limited capacity to handle the volume they have now. Both the UP and the BNSF have tracks and yards so plugged with traffic they can hardly move trains at times and the trains that do move are days behind their schedules. So the top level managers, all those guys with the big picture view of the company are out looking for more volume at low profit to add to the mess they now have on their hands. I suppose a business trip to China is far more exotic than another trip to Gillette, WY to solicit traffic.. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, November 20, 2005 2:02 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Well, Tom, if you have a question for me just ask me straight out. I don't do third person inquiries. Boy, talk about dense. I hope you can read questions better than this when it comes time to take your SAT's. FM's aviodance tactics are in full swing now. OK, let's see if I can dumb them down enough for you. I'll only ask one at a time so I don't overload your mind. You stated in the original post that the BNSF charges a higher rate for captive shippers than they are proposing for the anticipated intermodal business from China. Now, this is the question: How does the rate that BNSF currently charges for intermodal service to existing customers compare with the rate for the potential new intermodal business? Sort of comparing apples to apples No, it is nothing like comparing apples to apples. The framing of your question is illogical if you are basing that question on my previous post regarding the fact that BNSF (and all Class I's) charge rates for captive customers that are usually twice those of non-captive customers. So if the "potential new intermodal business" is of the same non-captive status as all other Asian import business, the rate for the new business will also be on the low side of the RVC equation. It's a given. You could have figured this out if you had thought it through. Why would you think differently? Do you have any evidence that this new import business from China will be a higher rate than other Asian import business? There is no way BNSF or any other railroad can make any Asian imports captive, because there are always other options available. BTW, why not try to ask questions of a more intellectual nature? Your last question was not "dumbed down" so much as it was just plain dumb, because the answer was so blatantly obvious. If you can't ask intelligent questions, then stop wasting my time. And if you can't ask a question without throwing in an insult, then don't bother. I guess in your feeble, narrow minded Socialist view, there isn't a difference. To admit that the rates charged for different types of freight might be (shock of shocks) DIFFERENT would throw you "argument" right out the window. You're so intent on pushing a Chinese bigoted agenda I guess you wouldn't see that rates for current intermodal business would be compared to the proposed rates for new intermodal business for an acurate comparison. Since you can't answer the question placed before you, I guess you would consider it "dumb." You say yourself that the rates they charge for "captive customers" is different by a large factor compared to intermodal business. Since the potential new business is intermodal, the question was "why aren't you comparing current intermodal rates to proposed new business intermodal rates?" And if this WEREN'T an anti Chinese rant, why then would your title be "BNSF Prostrates Itself Before the Feet of it's Chinese Overlords?" rather than "BNSF Charges Excessive Rates to Captive Shippers?" As far as evidence of the new rates, you were the one that brought it up in the first place, but curiously, compared the existing rates for "captive shippers" to potential new intermodal business. The fact that they have different rates for different types of business is a given in all facets of the transportation business, not just railroads or just the BNSF. If BNSF is "prostrating itself at the feet of it's Chinese overlords" they would also be "prostrating themselves at the feet" of all their intermodal customers. Existing intermodal business compared to potential new intermodal business would definately be comparing apples to apples in terms of transportation rates. I am concluding that it is impossible for you to have insult-free conversation. FM, you insult our intelligence EVERY TIME YOU POST... Your very existence is an insult to every thinking person reading this board. LC Reply Edit TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Sunday, November 20, 2005 2:05 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Well, Tom, if you have a question for me just ask me straight out. I don't do third person inquiries. Boy, talk about dense. I hope you can read questions better than this when it comes time to take your SAT's. FM's aviodance tactics are in full swing now. OK, let's see if I can dumb them down enough for you. I'll only ask one at a time so I don't overload your mind. You stated in the original post that the BNSF charges a higher rate for captive shippers than they are proposing for the anticipated intermodal business from China. Now, this is the question: How does the rate that BNSF currently charges for intermodal service to existing customers compare with the rate for the potential new intermodal business? Sort of comparing apples to apples No, it is nothing like comparing apples to apples. The framing of your question is illogical if you are basing that question on my previous post regarding the fact that BNSF (and all Class I's) charge rates for captive customers that are usually twice those of non-captive customers. So if the "potential new intermodal business" is of the same non-captive status as all other Asian import business, the rate for the new business will also be on the low side of the RVC equation. It's a given. You could have figured this out if you had thought it through. Why would you think differently? Do you have any evidence that this new import business from China will be a higher rate than other Asian import business? There is no way BNSF or any other railroad can make any Asian imports captive, because there are always other options available. BTW, why not try to ask questions of a more intellectual nature? Your last question was not "dumbed down" so much as it was just plain dumb, because the answer was so blatantly obvious. If you can't ask intelligent questions, then stop wasting my time. And if you can't ask a question without throwing in an insult, then don't bother. I guess in your feeble, narrow minded Socialist view, there isn't a difference. To admit that the rates charged for different types of freight might be (shock of shocks) DIFFERENT would throw you "argument" right out the window. You're so intent on pushing a Chinese bigoted agenda I guess you wouldn't see that rates for current intermodal business would be compared to the proposed rates for new intermodal business for an acurate comparison. Since you can't answer the question placed before you, I guess you would consider it "dumb." You say yourself that the rates they charge for "captive customers" is different by a large factor compared to intermodal business. Since the potential new business is intermodal, the question was "why aren't you comparing current intermodal rates to proposed new business intermodal rates?" And if this WEREN'T an anti Chinese rant, why then would your title be "BNSF Prostrates Itself Before the Feet of it's Chinese Overlords?" rather than "BNSF Charges Excessive Rates to Captive Shippers?" As far as evidence of the new rates, you were the one that brought it up in the first place, but curiously, compared the existing rates for "captive shippers" to potential new intermodal business. The fact that they have different rates for different types of business is a given in all facets of the transportation business, not just railroads or just the BNSF. If BNSF is "prostrating itself at the feet of it's Chinese overlords" they would also be "prostrating themselves at the feet" of all their intermodal customers. Existing intermodal business compared to potential new intermodal business would definately be comparing apples to apples in terms of transportation rates. I am concluding that it is impossible for you to have insult-free conversation. Well, no one can say I didn't go out of my way to give you that opportunity. So because my topic is titled provacatively, that makes me an anti-Chinese bigot? A classic far left tactic to try and demean the POV, yet if you looked at the title carefully, you will see that there is no explicit or implicit degradation of China or it's people, rather I do explicitly demean that great American corporation known as BNSF. Therefore, you would have every right to call me an anti-BNSF bigot based on the topic title. What I am regarding China is opposed to their lack of civil and religious liberties, their constant threats over Tawian, etc. That is beside the point of this topic. What is relevent is that comparative rates for US captive goods moving from plant to US port are higher than rates for overseas goods being hauled from US port to US consumption markets. This is reflected in the relative RVC ratios, where the highest RVC's are for US produced goods, while the lowest RVC's are for international double stacks. BTW, the grain hauling market is hardly tapped out, otherwise why would grain hopper orders be tending toward more and more delays. The demand for moving grain is exceeding the willingness or ability of the railroads to meet that demand. Since grain offers some of the highest RVC ratios, you would think the railroads would use those excess profits to expand capacity to move that grain. But instead they use their excess domestic profits to expand capacity for import intermodal. I'll set you straight on one of your tangents: There will be no difference in the rates being charged now for Asian imports and the "new" business proposed from China. There is ample competition for the movement of overseas goods to US consumption markets, and competition is what keeps rates down. No Chinese exporter would be so dumb as to allow a captive movement of those US imports. It was a dumb question to begin with. I beg to differ, you're the one who started the insults. So refering to them as "Chinese overlords" is NOT degrading? And saying BNSF "prostrates itself" is not demeaning? The grain hauling market is hardly tapped out BUT very seasonal. The railroads payments for financing and purchasing the specialized rolling stock for grain shipment is NOT seasonal, they have to pay year round for assets that are used at the most half the year. Based on this one fact, they SHOULD charge a higher rate when the shipping actually takes place. Rolling stock that sits idle for such a large percentage of the year is hardly as good an investment of assets as compared to rolling stock that moves freight year round. So yes, it's easy to see WHY BNSF, (or any railroad for that matter) is reluctant to expand their capacity to haul grain. The RVC figure you quote is based on when the grain actually moves, and does not include the losses incurred by having to make payments on rolling stock that sits idle for so long. The railroads will be looking more at the return on investment when deciding what type rolling stock to purchase. THANK YOU, I see in your final paragraph you've finally answered the first question. BNSF will be charging the same rate for all intermodal business. This is the "apples to apples" comparison I was talking about. That wasn't one of "my tangents," that was the question as to why you didn't compare these two rates. As far as the "Chinese allowing themselves to be captive to movement" this is the nature of the international freight movement. Intermodal is the prefered method of shipment, and not just from China. No other intermodal shipper, regardless of country of origin, is captive, so the Chinese shippers are simply following established shipping procedures, not being "Overlords" to BNSF, or any other shipping company. What you haven't explained is how "BNSF has prostrated themselves" by pursuing new business that is a steady, year round income, which will be coming to this country wheter BNSF move is or some other shipper does. Seems more a "getting the jump on the competition" type thing to me. Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, November 20, 2005 2:14 PM Considering the resentment among many USA citizens about the amount of consumer products used in America but manufactured overseas, perhaps the best thing BNSF could have done would have been to downplay and not trumpet this expansion of their business. Of course they do want to look successful, and that is the basis of their PR in this case, but they have lots of other successes to point to and might have not made such a fuss over this one. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, November 20, 2005 2:23 PM Lotus, why do you refer to guns so much? Do you view them as a power symbol? Consider this....any woman can pull the trigger. Do they make an otherwise weak little boy feel tough? A scared person hides behind a gun (barring military and people actually defending their lives and sportsmen). In fact in a toe to toe situation with you and a person who can defend themselves without a weapon, you doubtfully would use the weapon and proceed to get your little butt beaten. Your little computer geek likeness of me is cute, made me smile. Now stop playing with the computer so much and start looking at girls and establish yourself as a boy. Kid, you badly need to get into a non weapon oriented altercation......get your little butt kicked in and learn some humility. I strongly doubt you pop off to your peers face to face without the cover and anonimity of the internet. It would be a charachter building excercise for you. Man up kid. Reply Edit rvos1979 Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Burlington, WI 1,418 posts Posted by rvos1979 on Sunday, November 20, 2005 8:02 PM If I'd have known this was going to turn into a barbeque, I would have brought ribs. Just brought another batch of popcorn over from the Diner, hope it doesen't go as fast as the last batch. Randy Randy Vos "Ever have one of those days where you couldn't hit the ground with your hat??" - Waylon Jennings "May the Lord take a liking to you and blow you up, real good" - SCTV Reply TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Sunday, November 20, 2005 8:35 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by rvos1979 If I'd have known this was going to turn into a barbeque, I would have brought ribs. Just brought another batch of popcorn over from the Diner, hope it doesen't go as fast as the last batch. Randy Careful Randy, I think either Limitedclear or Mookie have the current popcorn concession. [:D] Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply rvos1979 Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Burlington, WI 1,418 posts Posted by rvos1979 on Sunday, November 20, 2005 8:49 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by rvos1979 If I'd have known this was going to turn into a barbeque, I would have brought ribs. Just brought another batch of popcorn over from the Diner, hope it doesen't go as fast as the last batch. Randy Careful Randy, I think either Limitedclear or Mookie have the current popcorn concession. [:D] I brought my own popcorn, I just used the machine!! Honest!! Randy Randy Vos "Ever have one of those days where you couldn't hit the ground with your hat??" - Waylon Jennings "May the Lord take a liking to you and blow you up, real good" - SCTV Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, November 20, 2005 9:39 PM No problem, with this thread I'm on to marshmallows anyhow. Plenty of flames to toast 'em here...lol... LC Reply Edit Murphy Siding Member sinceMay 2005 From: S.E. South Dakota 13,569 posts Posted by Murphy Siding on Sunday, November 20, 2005 10:30 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by rvos1979 QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by rvos1979 If I'd have known this was going to turn into a barbeque, I would have brought ribs. Just brought another batch of popcorn over from the Diner, hope it doesen't go as fast as the last batch. Randy Careful Randy, I think either Limitedclear or Mookie have the current popcorn concession. [:D] I brought my own popcorn, I just used the machine!! Honest!! Randy Open Access Popcorn![:O] Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar. Reply nanaimo73 Member sinceApril 2005 From: Nanaimo BC Canada 4,117 posts Posted by nanaimo73 on Sunday, November 20, 2005 10:46 PM Futuremodal, BNSF management works for the shareholders, and their job is to make BNSF stock rise. Isn't that how capitalism is supposed to work ? Dale Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, November 20, 2005 11:13 PM QUOTE: Lotus, why do you refer to guns so much? Do you view them as a power symbol? Consider this....any woman can pull the trigger. Do they make an otherwise weak little boy feel tough? A scared person hides behind a gun (barring military and people actually defending their lives and sportsmen). Shee, is everything in life that complicated for you? I just have a fascination with weaponry the same way I do with trains. You know guns are referred to as great equalizers, so no it isn’t because I am pretending to be a man. You are the one who seems to think you are some high and might authority over me; you are the one who has to prove you are tough. QUOTE: In fact in a toe to toe situation with you and a person who can defend themselves without a weapon, you doubtfully would use the weapon and proceed to get your little butt beaten. Don’t bet your life on it! QUOTE: Your little computer geek likeness of me is cute, made me smile. Now stop playing with the computer so much and start looking at girls and establish yourself as a boy. Glad you have a sense of humor. Man, where do you guys get off thinking you know all of what I do? Maybe I chase girls, maybe I don’t; what skin is it off you nose, anyways. I thought you wanted me to stop with the guns, no it’s the computer, make up your mind. QUOTE: Kid, you badly need to get into a non weapon oriented altercation...... Like railroads maybe! Maybe it comes from watching too many cowboy movies, maybe I inherited it, maybe it doesn’t matter to the topic of this thread a hill of beans. James, now look what you did Reply Edit oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Monday, November 21, 2005 7:46 AM Bonk! P1: Ouch! Why'd ya hit me? I came here for an OA agruement! P2: Oh, sorry, it's "getting hit on the head leasons", here. P1: How can I tell the difference? ...with appologies to Monty Pyton. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply Bergie Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: US 1,431 posts Posted by Bergie on Monday, November 21, 2005 8:58 AM I'm locking this so the flamefest doesn't get completely out of control. Bergie Erik Bergstrom Reply 123456 Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub
She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw
QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith Your profile is very vague, I assume your in college? To be honest with you-I think somewhere Lotus said he was 14. (That's not a slap. I have a 14 year old son. They're just wired differently than a 44 year old dad[;)])
QUOTE: Originally posted by selector . Gotta hate those darned Chinese who will work for $1.00/hr and save for their old age out of that....with or without a single colour TV.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Mookie I can kill a thread just by showing up on it. Pass the popcorn? Mookie
QUOTE: Originally posted by Junctionfan Well this is just a dandy thread.......... As far as the railroad BNSF goes, the problem lies with the governments. They are the ones allowing outsourcing-BNSF is just adapting by increasing its intermodal profits to make up for its loss in general merchandise profits in my opinion.
QUOTE: Originally posted by PBenham QUOTE: Originally posted by jeaton Lotus098 You really ought to stop putting on headphones and listening to tapes of Rush Limbaugh while you sleep. It will cause your brain to atrophy... from left to right. Your brain, if you have one, will not atrophy after six weeks of prelimimary listening to the greatness for the full three hours daily. If anything you, will feel stronger, more intelligent, and confident in yourself and others who think like you will after the preliminary period. But it may be rough at first. The Lib Dogma is difficult to break away from, once you do my friend, you will have become a better person than you could have imagined you could be. The Chicoms are having problems now, since they can't keep the truth out like they used to. Eastern Europe and the asian parts of the old Soviet empire "fell" under the weight of the truth about communisim. So too will China. The people there are on the cusp of an awakening that will be very profound, indeed.
QUOTE: Rush is a lying moron.
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal I'll make this simple so that even the lefties can understand: Import intermodal < revenue adequacy captive domestic production > revenue adequacy
QUOTE: Originally posted by ironken Hey Benham, Rush is a lying moron. If you don't want shots to be taken at you, don't shoot at others ie Liberals. You may go back to your Conservative hole.....I'm done.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Limitedclear I knew if we got Andrew and Lotus Blossom on the same thread we'd have fireworks...LOL... Pass the popcorn back here willya? LC
QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal I'll make this simple so that even the lefties can understand: Import intermodal < revenue adequacy captive domestic production > revenue adequacy I find it funny that a so called "conservative" doesn't understand the concept of a company making money, even after using the term "revenue" after the less than and more than signs. The key word is "Revenue" as in "the company making money" (wow, you'd almost think we had an economic system that encourages such a thing). Like it or not, the powers that be in DC have pushed us into the trade with China, and the freight will have to be moved (IIRC that's what the BNSF does). Do you honestly think that them turning down the business will suddenly make your world all rosy again? A small business reality: another transportation company will take the business of moving the freight. If the money is there to pay the transportation bill, it will be moved. BNSF sounds like they're going after the business first.
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal So, it's only conservatives who have an attitude problem, eh JF? The lefties *NEVER* exhibit a hostile attitude on these forums, do they. Back to the topic at hand: Juxtapose BNSF's capacity improvements for it's import intermodal corridor with CP's Mt. MacDonanld project last decade. The CP project was intended to improve the westward flow of export goods by rail, e.g. coal, grain, et al, and it has. It seems the Canadian railroad hierarchy has more of a clue than the US railroad hierarchy.
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal I'll make this simple so that even the lefties can understand: Import intermodal < revenue adequacy captive domestic production > revenue adequacy I find it funny that a so called "conservative" doesn't understand the concept of a company making money, even after using the term "revenue" after the less than and more than signs. The key word is "Revenue" as in "the company making money" (wow, you'd almost think we had an economic system that encourages such a thing). Like it or not, the powers that be in DC have pushed us into the trade with China, and the freight will have to be moved (IIRC that's what the BNSF does). Do you honestly think that them turning down the business will suddenly make your world all rosy again? A small business reality: another transportation company will take the business of moving the freight. If the money is there to pay the transportation bill, it will be moved. BNSF sounds like they're going after the business first. Tom, Do you even have a clue as to the reference to "revenue adequacy"? And who said anything about BNSF turning down business? Certainly in past threads I have provided evidence of such. No, what we're talking about here is the fact that the lowest ratios of revenues to variable costs occur in the import intermodal business. They are barely covering their variable costs with this import "business", which means under STB definitions import intermodal actually loses money for the railroads. That's probably why they have to use revenues from captive grain and coal shippers to further expand this money losing import intermodal business. We all know that they could never use the *revenues* from import intermodal to pay for the capacity expansions of these corridors. Also, it might shock you to learn that we are not engaged in "trade" with China, so much as we are engaged in a permanent act of trade deficit expansion with China. That doesn't mean China wouldn't gladly accept our grain exports if it was the most price competitive, but because of US rail captivity the price of US grain overseas is higher than the prices of Canadian and Australian wheat. Canada addresses rail captivity by subsidizing grain exports, Australia has an open access rail system so grain exports get a competitive rail rate to port, while we in the US get the shaft from the STB with their steadfast refusal to implement the vague dust-covered competition caveats of the Staggers Act. I don't mind Chinese imports being gifted by competitive rail rates, as long as our domestic producers get the same gift. If the railroads are going to give it away, they should give it away to their fellow Americans, not a neo-communist regime.
QUOTE: I am proud to be leftist socialist
QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 QUOTE: I am proud to be leftist socialist If only Tom and Jeaton, and vsmith would be so honest. James, 'tater munching, coke guzzlng, flag wavin, American. And proud of it.
QUOTE: ...starting with Nixon and finalized by Dubya and his boys.
QUOTE: As far as Canada goes. Our government is much more relaxed and we aren't as big on capitalism as you are. That is why the railroads are the way they are; because the society of Canada will not allow the railroads the same privalages as the U.S because we are Canada just like you won't be like Canada because you are the U.S.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 QUOTE: ...starting with Nixon and finalized by Dubya and his boys. Just what did they do? [?]Tom, what the hell is a Liberal Conservative?[?] Liberals are on one side conservatives are on the other. James, A Liberty lovin, SUV drivin, American. And proud of it.
QUOTE: Originally posted by ironken Lotus, yes I have listened to ex-druggie Rush. He is a ***! I am a "Democrat," you accidentally misspelled the word. About train trivia....you know squat about railroading. You are proficient at reading and regurgitating.....that's all. Now go back to your room before I spank your little butt and make you cry.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 Tom, So other than visit China we have "done" nothing. Maybe if we could get the governement out of the way and let the free market work things would work. Ah, so your one of those moderates, a middle of the roader. Well you know the old saying the only thing you find in the middle of the roads are white lines, and road kill.
QUOTE: Originally posted by ironken Lotus, yes I have listened to ex-druggie Rush. He is a ***! I am a "Democrat," you accidentally misspelled the word. About train trivia....you know squat about railroading. You are proficient at reading and regurgitating.....that's all.
QUOTE: Now go back to your room before I spank your little butt and make you cry.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 QUOTE: Originally posted by ironken Lotus, yes I have listened to ex-druggie Rush. He is a ***! I am a "Democrat," you accidentally misspelled the word. About train trivia....you know squat about railroading. You are proficient at reading and regurgitating.....that's all. So, smarty, what did Rush say when you listened that was a lie? QUOTE: Now go back to your room before I spank your little butt and make you cry. Go ahead make my day! Well, do ya feel lucky? Well do ya, punk. James, a real American, and proud of it.
QUOTE: Originally posted by photogeek88 I would think you would support the idea of helping employees here in AMERICA, Lotus098...seeing as you're all keen on patriotism. The last time I checked, the American Dream was not, "screw everyone else, as long as you're fine." I'm seventeen, and a Union member of Local 881 UFCW. It might not be a great idea for a part-time student only making $7.20, with $7 a week going to the union. But I know for certain that some seventeen year old making tennis shoes in China isn't going to be able to save enough money to go to a first rate university, like I am. Nor is he going to transfer to another branch of that factory in the town where his university is, be able to work part time while in school, and stay in the union to keep some basic health benefits while he tries to support himself away from his family. 'Oh, those commies in China will pay for his health benefits and education' I hear you thinking. Well, let me tell you, China is a pretty sore excuse for Communism. I know it might be a little off topic, but hopefully it will give you something to think about. If you don't like the government spending money, maybe you shouldn't support companies that drain our national treasury because they don't pay their employees enough to get off of food stamps. What happened to "help your fellow man?"
QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 I know that, but that one is much more impressive, just look at those revolvers.
QUOTE: Originally posted by photogeek88 Keep jobs in America! The Chinese aren't going to get any stronger if we don't stop feeding the fire! Outlaw trade with China, and when they put up a fight, nuke 'em! That should be reasonable in your eyes.
QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl Is it just me or did we "lose" Futuremodal? Maybe he couldn't argue with my "liberal" comment. 3 for 3
QUOTE: Originally posted by greyhounds QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl Is it just me or did we "lose" Futuremodal? Maybe he couldn't argue with my "liberal" comment. 3 for 3 We just ain't that lucky. He got what he wanted, a good p-ss-n contest.
QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard James, Not an engineer alive would be caught dead wearing that dorky cap...
QUOTE: You’re made in China Wal-Mart shirt doesn’t quite hide you’re baby fat... And you are standing in the middle of the tracks, with your back to a piece of live equipment, minus blue flag protection, looking like you have a corn cob or a potato in an uncomfortable and personal location. (Which puts lie to your middle of the road comment earlier, sometimes even wanna be men like you stand in the middle of the road with their thumb up their tailpipe). All of which means you’re too fooli***o get out of the way of something that is going to run over you, and too young to know to tuck in your shirt so it doesn’t get caught on something.
QUOTE: If the best you can come up with is an AR15 and a pair of old Army ball and cap 36s, then I doubt today’s Marines have much use for you.
QUOTE: Stay home picking taters and listening to Rush on your made in Taiwan headphones, watching old movies on cable TV, it’s safer that way.
QUOTE: You have yet to introduce anything original here, other that spouting off second hand garbage you hear at the dinner table from your disgruntled parents/cousins and the ramblings of a radio host who’s only skill is to talk enough tra***o keep his advertisers happy; after all, their target audience is the lower half of the IQ and income charts... Ed
QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 QUOTE: Originally posted by jeaton Lotus098 You really ought to stop putting on headphones and listening to tapes of Rush Limbaugh while you sleep. It will cause your brain to atrophy... from left to right. So that's why it's called the fastest three hours in media. [:D][zzz] At least I hear both sides of the story.[;)]
I'm back!
Follow the progress:
http://ogrforum.ogaugerr.com/displayForumTopic/content/12129987972340381/page/1
QUOTE: Originally posted by edbenton Actually china has a grand total of 12 ICBM's and 16 SLBM the rest are cruise missles and gravity bombs. The Wia is the boomer and my friends in the navy say the shrimp cover their ears when it is out at sea. The ICBM's are titan 2 clones and have to be kept defueled all the time. A titan 2 can only be fueled for 2 days before it has to be serviced its fuels eat thru the tanks. As for Wal-mart paying good they are the ony company that has personal dedicated to helping you get on Medicaid.
QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 Tom, So other than visit China we have "done" nothing. Maybe if we could get the governement out of the way and let the free market work things would work. Ah, so your one of those moderates, a middle of the roader. Well you know the old saying the only thing you find in the middle of the roads are white lines, and road kill. No, a Moderate never takes sides. I thought my last 100 or so comments would have proven that point. Of course there are times I enjoy playing "Devil's Advocate." When a head of state visits another country, it's not like you or me going on a sightseeing vacation. There is, at the very least, diplomatic reasons behind the visit.
QUOTE: Originally posted by dharmon QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 Tom, So other than visit China we have "done" nothing. Maybe if we could get the governement out of the way and let the free market work things would work. Ah, so your one of those moderates, a middle of the roader. Well you know the old saying the only thing you find in the middle of the roads are white lines, and road kill. No, a Moderate never takes sides. I thought my last 100 or so comments would have proven that point. Of course there are times I enjoy playing "Devil's Advocate." When a head of state visits another country, it's not like you or me going on a sightseeing vacation. There is, at the very least, diplomatic reasons behind the visit. A moderate can take sides, it's just that it seeks to be the side of reason. I am generally conservative, but moderately so...what they used to call a Dixiecrat, conservative democrats, which seem to have been turned into moderate Republicans over the past twenty years or so... ...the far right and far left seem to be getting closer together on the other side of the circle though..[:D] Dan
QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard Actually James, The AR15 is not the same as a M16...I know, I own one of the original AR15s, with the stubby composite front stock, and one of the later ones with the full stock. Also have a M16, and 1861 Springfield 45.70 trapdoor Carbine, several Model 1911 Colt Commanders, and number of original black powder weapons...well, enough guns to fill two gun safes and a chest. But I did get want I needed from your response...so thank you for being so prompt. Ed
QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard Actually James, The AR15 is not the same as a M16...I know, I own one of the original AR15s, with the stubby composite front stock, and one of the later ones with the full stock. Also have a M16, and 1861 Springfield 45.70 trapdoor Carbine, several Model 1911 Colt Commanders, and number of original black powder weapons...well, enough guns to fill two gun safes and a chest. But I did get want I needed from your response...so thank you for being so prompt. Ed Man, I wish I had those. What's the difference between an AR, and an M-16, is it just that the M-16 can fire three rounds with one pull of the trigger? Just what did you want from my response?
QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard Actually James, The AR15 is not the same as a M16...I know, I own one of the original AR15s, with the stubby composite front stock, and one of the later ones with the full stock. Also have a M16, and 1861 Springfield 45.70 trapdoor Carbine, several Model 1911 Colt Commanders, and number of original black powder weapons...well, enough guns to fill two gun safes and a chest. But I did get want I needed from your response...so thank you for being so prompt. Ed Man, I wish I had those. What's the difference between an AR, and an M-16, is it just that the M-16 can fire three rounds with one pull of the trigger? Just what did you want from my response? James, that's the M16A1 that shoots in 3 shot bursts, a modification from around the end of the Vietnam war. The Original M-16 would empty the clip in full automatic, which only took a few seconds. The problem is the rifle had a tendency to "climb" (barrel end would come up due to the kick of firing) and made it hard for the user to even "spray" an area. When being fired on, people have a tendency to "hit the dirt" so they go down and your bullets are going up. Very inefficient use of ammo. Personally, I think they should teach marksmanship more in the military to the regular grunts.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Big_Boy_4005 QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 QUOTE: Originally posted by jeaton Lotus098 You really ought to stop putting on headphones and listening to tapes of Rush Limbaugh while you sleep. It will cause your brain to atrophy... from left to right. So that's why it's called the fastest three hours in media. [:D][zzz] At least I hear both sides of the story.[;)] Yes James, but you only listen to one side. It's a condition called selective hearing. When you take your brain out of the wash, make sure you get the RIGHT one.[:0][banghead][;)]
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by ironken Hey Benham, Rush is a lying moron. If you don't want shots to be taken at you, don't shoot at others ie Liberals. You may go back to your Conservative hole.....I'm done. You lefty types can't aim and can only shoot blanks, so there's no need to fear such potshots. BTW, when has Rush Limbaugh ever lied? You may not like his POV, and if you want to call him a moron that is your subjective opinion, but to call someone a liar you need objective proof, otherwise you turn out to be the moron.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard Actually James, The AR15 is not the same as a M16...I know, I own one of the original AR15s, with the stubby composite front stock, and one of the later ones with the full stock. Also have a M16, and 1861 Springfield 45.70 trapdoor Carbine, several Model 1911 Colt Commanders, and number of original black powder weapons...well, enough guns to fill two gun safes and a chest. But I did get want I needed from your response...so thank you for being so prompt. Ed Man, I wish I had those. What's the difference between an AR, and an M-16, is it just that the M-16 can fire three rounds with one pull of the trigger?
QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 QUOTE: Originally posted by Big_Boy_4005 QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 QUOTE: Originally posted by jeaton Lotus098 You really ought to stop putting on headphones and listening to tapes of Rush Limbaugh while you sleep. It will cause your brain to atrophy... from left to right. So that's why it's called the fastest three hours in media. [:D][zzz] At least I hear both sides of the story.[;)] Yes James, but you only listen to one side. It's a condition called selective hearing. When you take your brain out of the wash, make sure you get the RIGHT one.[:0][banghead][;)] I can only take so much of this. Why am I the brainwashed one; you fellers are just spouting out of your play-book. Is it merely the fact most teenagers belive the news, their school teachers; and later become conservative? Are you people any less like talking to trees? We know you are not "righ", yet you've "left" us to be the one's who are so unusuall; forgeting the country agrees with us. Why I can do plenty of free thought, my dad and I have agured on and on about if the gold standard was better.
QUOTE: Wasnt there something about not being addicted to popping painkillers until he was busted?
QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by greyhounds QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl Is it just me or did we "lose" Futuremodal? Maybe he couldn't argue with my "liberal" comment. 3 for 3 We just ain't that lucky. He got what he wanted, a good p-ss-n contest. He makes up a few "facts" and "statistics" then you call him on it, he calls you an idiot and gives an answer that has nothing to do with the question. You call him on that and he runs and hides. Talk about him being full of BS
QUOTE: Originally posted by jhhtrainsplanes QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 So that's why it's called the fastest three hours in media. [:D][zzz] At least I hear both sides of the story.[;)] B O T H sides of the story from Rush. You have to be kidding ! ! !
QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 So that's why it's called the fastest three hours in media. [:D][zzz] At least I hear both sides of the story.[;)]
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by jhhtrainsplanes QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 So that's why it's called the fastest three hours in media. [:D][zzz] At least I hear both sides of the story.[;)] B O T H sides of the story from Rush. You have to be kidding ! ! ! As you can see, he didn't say he got both sides of the story from Rush. Even the most ardent listener of Rush's show can admit that he is coming soley from the side of conservatism. I think what Lotus is refering to is getting the left side of the issue from the usual suspects aka ABC/CBS/NBC/CNN/NPR/NYT/et al, and then balancing that with Rush/FoxNews/Hannity/Medved/ et al. That's actually what most of us conservatives do, we take in both sides to get the complete picture, then make our own independent decisions regarding the issues of the day. I seriously doubt any of the lefties on this forum do the same.
QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz [V][:(][sigh][zzz][zzz][zzz][soapbox] C'mon guys, this supposed to be (I thought) a place where we could come to share our common interest in railroading, relax, and have fun. Not too long ago, I almost got caught up in a political blabering session, but I quickly tired of the constant bickering, and just gave up. Politics is what it is; and do you not agree that perhaps we would be better off here on the TRAINS forums without it, unless it is truly relevant to the topic at hand.
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by greyhounds QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl Is it just me or did we "lose" Futuremodal? Maybe he couldn't argue with my "liberal" comment. 3 for 3 We just ain't that lucky. He got what he wanted, a good p-ss-n contest. He makes up a few "facts" and "statistics" then you call him on it, he calls you an idiot and gives an answer that has nothing to do with the question. You call him on that and he runs and hides. Talk about him being full of BS Tom, This is why you are an extreme leftist, not a *moderate*. You have been provided plenty of references for my statements, yet somehow you completely ignore them and make the libelous contention that I make them up. There is no hope for you, you are a lost soul. I notice you've never provided a single reference for your absurd statements. You are the epitome of BS. The only reason this post and others degrade into a p i s s i n g contest is that folks like you and the pup make it so. I provide a topic of discussion, and instead of providing reasoned sound rebuttals you right away slip into true leftist mode aka name calling, insults, etc. Once again, here is the gist of the topic: BNSF is spending the revenues it receives from it's captive US customers (whose rates are well above the STB's RVC ratios), and is spending that revenue increasing capacity for it's foreign customers (whose rail rates are well below the RVC standard). This is well documented. Only a complete moron would allege that such a statement is made up. You could very well argue that it is taking things out of context, or that there might be an exaggeration here or there, but you absolutely cannot refute the basic truth of the statement. Neither you, the pup, or anyone else slightly to the right of vsmith and Big Boy has offered a single rebuttal of this argument. Not one. I've asked it before, and I'll ask it again. Is there any sound reason for BNSF to subsidize the importation of Asian goods on the backs of US producers, given that the US producers provide the bulk of the income for BNSF, while the importers sap revenue from the railroad? I'm waiting patiently for someone from the left to be a worthy debate foe. Apparently, it's gonna be a long, long wait.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 I found this on the Model Railroader forum. Here is my analysis of us. Big-Boy 4005: http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/godfather.htm Vsmith: http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/filibuster.htm Ironken: http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/compost.htm Tom: http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/ferouscranus.htm Put them together: http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/cybersisters.htm Dave: http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/rottweilerpuppy.htm Murphy Siding: http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/ent.htm Me: http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/capitalista.htm
QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 You just won't excpert any answer but what you want to hear. I should have given you this one. http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/ego.htm
QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 You just won't excpert any answer but what you want to hear. I should have given you this one. http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/ego.htm What would be a pleasant change would be if Futuremodal would actually answer the question posed to him. Unfortunately, casting us as cartoon/video game characters shows that you're still pretty much a teenager. Futuremodal's problem is that he takes offence at being asked a question, like we're questioning his opinion. In his narrow, concrete minded opinion, this is probably how he sees it since he can't come up with original thought and can't explain the one's he's heard from others. Questions can also mean: 2. Your statement was incomplete 3. Your statement wasn't clear 4. Your statement piques my interest, but I'd like to know more He immediately goes on the defensive rather than take an opportunity to educate. PS: Possibility 1. is Questioning his opinion
QUOTE: As usual, most of you who defend BNSF's actions have missed the point. What BNSF is doing is taking money made from captive US shippers (where revenues can be as high as 200+% of variable costs), and using those monopoly profits to invest in the import intermodal business (where revenues are usually as low as 106% of variable costs). The STB defines revenue adaquacy as revenues that are 180% of variable costs.
If there are no dogs in heaven,then I want to go where they go.
QUOTE: In the plastic injection mold manufacturing business,they will underbid and even take a loss to get the mold making business from the major plastic manufacturers.
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Again, vsmith, when has Rush ever lied? The best you can up with is his unfortunate addiction to pain killers which resulted from his loss of hearing? And that's your example of a Rush "lie"? The mice that roared, that's vsmith and Big Boy.
QUOTE: Originally posted by samfp1943 Popcorn, Beer, ..Pretty soon the gloves will come off and the duel will start....Popcorn, Peanuts![(-D][(-D][oops] Time to trot out the boxing gloves.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 I don't agree with his ideas of what BNSF is doing either, you know. I think BNSF is smart enough to make good investments, however. It would make you wonder why; if what Dave said is true, they are expanding into a lower profit business, than otherwise. I don't know, but you have yet to dispute his facts about the income of US freight vs. intermodal. Let's get back on track, and be civil; or Bergie is just going to have to clean up this place Monday Morning.
QUOTE: Originally posted by andrewjonathon Wow, there is sure is a lot of name calling and accusations flying back and forth in this thread. Putting that and all the left/right politics surrounding this topic aside, it is easy to accuse the Chinese of all kinds of things. However, are the Chinese forcing anyone to buy their goods? As far as I can tell the only time the Chinese sell anything to anyone in the US is when an American (or may be an illegal immigrant [:)] ) makes a conscious decision to buy it. Is it fair to blame the Chinese (or BNSF for that matter) for decisions made here by American consumers? I don't think so.
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Well, Tom, if you have a question for me just ask me straight out. I don't do third person inquiries.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Limitedclear QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 You just won't excpert any answer but what you want to hear. I should have given you this one. http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/ego.htm What would be a pleasant change would be if Futuremodal would actually answer the question posed to him. Unfortunately, casting us as cartoon/video game characters shows that you're still pretty much a teenager. Futuremodal's problem is that he takes offence at being asked a question, like we're questioning his opinion. In his narrow, concrete minded opinion, this is probably how he sees it since he can't come up with original thought and can't explain the one's he's heard from others. Questions can also mean: 2. Your statement was incomplete 3. Your statement wasn't clear 4. Your statement piques my interest, but I'd like to know more He immediately goes on the defensive rather than take an opportunity to educate. PS: Possibility 1. is Questioning his opinion Tom - You are too kind to FM. He is simply afraid. He is afraid all of us will learn he doesn't know very much at all despite his wide dissemination of his claims of expertise. He only plays one tune "OA, OA, OOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooo Ayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy, FM Land... because it is the limit of his repertoire.... Those of us in the industry and those who have a brain know well the fallacy of FM's views. I often get sick of listening to his sludge (thus my occasional jabs at him). In reality he isn't worth the effort. He lashes out at anyone who doesn't immediately take his side because of his unreasoning fear, in some cases panic, because he has no real response or thought capability that would enable him to accept any idea not within his tunnel vision of reality. LC
QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Well, Tom, if you have a question for me just ask me straight out. I don't do third person inquiries. Boy, talk about dense. I hope you can read questions better than this when it comes time to take your SAT's. FM's aviodance tactics are in full swing now.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 QUOTE: Originally posted by samfp1943 Popcorn, Beer, ..Pretty soon the gloves will come off and the duel will start....Popcorn, Peanuts![(-D][(-D][oops] Time to trot out the boxing gloves. All right vsmith that's it. Gloves shcmoves, break out the dueling pistols.
QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Well, Tom, if you have a question for me just ask me straight out. I don't do third person inquiries. Boy, talk about dense. I hope you can read questions better than this when it comes time to take your SAT's. FM's aviodance tactics are in full swing now. OK, let's see if I can dumb them down enough for you. I'll only ask one at a time so I don't overload your mind. You stated in the original post that the BNSF charges a higher rate for captive shippers than they are proposing for the anticipated intermodal business from China. Now, this is the question: How does the rate that BNSF currently charges for intermodal service to existing customers compare with the rate for the potential new intermodal business? Sort of comparing apples to apples
Originally posted by futuremodal [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, November 20, 2005 9:46 AM Dave, I don't understand either. How exactly are the US shippers captive, and the Chinese ones aren't? What exactly do you mean by a captive shipper, or this an open access problem? While Tom may not be correct on his thinking, his question seemed valid; without this knowledge how do we know who is a “captive” shipper. Could you enlighten us dummies to the answer of that question? Reply Edit daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, November 20, 2005 11:02 AM Thge Chinese don't teach people a religion that makes them want to fly airplanes into buildings. Reply TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Sunday, November 20, 2005 11:44 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Well, Tom, if you have a question for me just ask me straight out. I don't do third person inquiries. Boy, talk about dense. I hope you can read questions better than this when it comes time to take your SAT's. FM's aviodance tactics are in full swing now. OK, let's see if I can dumb them down enough for you. I'll only ask one at a time so I don't overload your mind. You stated in the original post that the BNSF charges a higher rate for captive shippers than they are proposing for the anticipated intermodal business from China. Now, this is the question: How does the rate that BNSF currently charges for intermodal service to existing customers compare with the rate for the potential new intermodal business? Sort of comparing apples to apples No, it is nothing like comparing apples to apples. The framing of your question is illogical if you are basing that question on my previous post regarding the fact that BNSF (and all Class I's) charge rates for captive customers that are usually twice those of non-captive customers. So if the "potential new intermodal business" is of the same non-captive status as all other Asian import business, the rate for the new business will also be on the low side of the RVC equation. It's a given. You could have figured this out if you had thought it through. Why would you think differently? Do you have any evidence that this new import business from China will be a higher rate than other Asian import business? There is no way BNSF or any other railroad can make any Asian imports captive, because there are always other options available. BTW, why not try to ask questions of a more intellectual nature? Your last question was not "dumbed down" so much as it was just plain dumb, because the answer was so blatantly obvious. If you can't ask intelligent questions, then stop wasting my time. And if you can't ask a question without throwing in an insult, then don't bother. I guess in your feeble, narrow minded Socialist view, there isn't a difference. To admit that the rates charged for different types of freight might be (shock of shocks) DIFFERENT would throw you "argument" right out the window. You're so intent on pushing a Chinese bigoted agenda I guess you wouldn't see that rates for current intermodal business would be compared to the proposed rates for new intermodal business for an acurate comparison. Since you can't answer the question placed before you, I guess you would consider it "dumb." You say yourself that the rates they charge for "captive customers" is different by a large factor compared to intermodal business. Since the potential new business is intermodal, the question was "why aren't you comparing current intermodal rates to proposed new business intermodal rates?" And if this WEREN'T an anti Chinese rant, why then would your title be "BNSF Prostrates Itself Before the Feet of it's Chinese Overlords?" rather than "BNSF Charges Excessive Rates to Captive Shippers?" As far as evidence of the new rates, you were the one that brought it up in the first place, but curiously, compared the existing rates for "captive shippers" to potential new intermodal business. The fact that they have different rates for different types of business is a given in all facets of the transportation business, not just railroads or just the BNSF. If BNSF is "prostrating itself at the feet of it's Chinese overlords" they would also be "prostrating themselves at the feet" of all their intermodal customers. Existing intermodal business compared to potential new intermodal business would definately be comparing apples to apples in terms of transportation rates. Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply vsmith Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Smoggy L.A. 10,743 posts Posted by vsmith on Sunday, November 20, 2005 11:47 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by dharmon QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 QUOTE: Originally posted by samfp1943 Popcorn, Beer, ..Pretty soon the gloves will come off and the duel will start....Popcorn, Peanuts![(-D][(-D][oops] Time to trot out the boxing gloves. All right vsmith that's it. Gloves shcmoves, break out the dueling pistols. Vic...I'll gladly be your second on this one......besides I've got more time firing black powder than he's been alive. Dan HHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA [(-D] Dan thats funny, thanks for the offer...How about giving the little punka$$ a good spanking and sending him to bed without his supper! and no allowance for a month![;)] The thing these guys dont understand is that for me, this is like watching "Beavis and B_tthead" , where your not laughing along with the main characters because their funny or witty, no, your laughing because their such idiots and do and say such stupid things that you cant help laughing AT them.[(-D] Nice set of pistols though! Early American dueling flintlock's, 50cal likely, walnut stocks. Cooool, keep your assault rifle ***-extenders, I'll take a Kentucky long rifle anyday of the week, actually that Sharps Ed mentioned also sound really interesting. I like early American firearms up to the close of the frontier, like to get a Sharps dropbolt carbine, the early Calvary version, but I got into model trains instead. Less expensive.[8)] Com'on Lotus buddy, be our Beavis and say it for us ... ".. I AM CORNHOLIO, I need TP for my Bunghooool...."[D)] LMAO in LA Vic[(-D] Have fun with your trains Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, November 20, 2005 12:26 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Well, Tom, if you have a question for me just ask me straight out. I don't do third person inquiries. Boy, talk about dense. I hope you can read questions better than this when it comes time to take your SAT's. FM's aviodance tactics are in full swing now. OK, let's see if I can dumb them down enough for you. I'll only ask one at a time so I don't overload your mind. You stated in the original post that the BNSF charges a higher rate for captive shippers than they are proposing for the anticipated intermodal business from China. Now, this is the question: How does the rate that BNSF currently charges for intermodal service to existing customers compare with the rate for the potential new intermodal business? Sort of comparing apples to apples No, it is nothing like comparing apples to apples. The framing of your question is illogical if you are basing that question on my previous post regarding the fact that BNSF (and all Class I's) charge rates for captive customers that are usually twice those of non-captive customers. So if the "potential new intermodal business" is of the same non-captive status as all other Asian import business, the rate for the new business will also be on the low side of the RVC equation. It's a given. You could have figured this out if you had thought it through. Why would you think differently? Do you have any evidence that this new import business from China will be a higher rate than other Asian import business? There is no way BNSF or any other railroad can make any Asian imports captive, because there are always other options available. BTW, why not try to ask questions of a more intellectual nature? Your last question was not "dumbed down" so much as it was just plain dumb, because the answer was so blatantly obvious. If you can't ask intelligent questions, then stop wasting my time. And if you can't ask a question without throwing in an insult, then don't bother. I guess in your feeble, narrow minded Socialist view, there isn't a difference. To admit that the rates charged for different types of freight might be (shock of shocks) DIFFERENT would throw you "argument" right out the window. You're so intent on pushing a Chinese bigoted agenda I guess you wouldn't see that rates for current intermodal business would be compared to the proposed rates for new intermodal business for an acurate comparison. Since you can't answer the question placed before you, I guess you would consider it "dumb." You say yourself that the rates they charge for "captive customers" is different by a large factor compared to intermodal business. Since the potential new business is intermodal, the question was "why aren't you comparing current intermodal rates to proposed new business intermodal rates?" And if this WEREN'T an anti Chinese rant, why then would your title be "BNSF Prostrates Itself Before the Feet of it's Chinese Overlords?" rather than "BNSF Charges Excessive Rates to Captive Shippers?" As far as evidence of the new rates, you were the one that brought it up in the first place, but curiously, compared the existing rates for "captive shippers" to potential new intermodal business. The fact that they have different rates for different types of business is a given in all facets of the transportation business, not just railroads or just the BNSF. If BNSF is "prostrating itself at the feet of it's Chinese overlords" they would also be "prostrating themselves at the feet" of all their intermodal customers. Existing intermodal business compared to potential new intermodal business would definately be comparing apples to apples in terms of transportation rates. I am concluding that it is impossible for you to have insult-free conversation. Well, no one can say I didn't go out of my way to give you that opportunity. So because my topic is titled provacatively, that makes me an anti-Chinese bigot? A classic far left tactic to try and demean the POV, yet if you looked at the title carefully, you will see that there is no explicit or implicit degradation of China or it's people, rather I do explicitly demean that great American corporation known as BNSF. Therefore, you would have every right to call me an anti-BNSF bigot based on the topic title. What I am regarding China is opposed to their lack of civil and religious liberties, their constant threats over Tawian, etc. That is beside the point of this topic. What is relevent is that comparative rates for US captive goods moving from plant to US port are higher than rates for overseas goods being hauled from US port to US consumption markets. This is reflected in the relative RVC ratios, where the highest RVC's are for US produced goods, while the lowest RVC's are for international double stacks. BTW, the grain hauling market is hardly tapped out, otherwise why would grain hopper orders be tending toward more and more delays. The demand for moving grain is exceeding the willingness or ability of the railroads to meet that demand. Since grain offers some of the highest RVC ratios, you would think the railroads would use those excess profits to expand capacity to move that grain. But instead they use their excess domestic profits to expand capacity for import intermodal. I'll set you straight on one of your tangents: There will be no difference in the rates being charged now for Asian imports and the "new" business proposed from China. There is ample competition for the movement of overseas goods to US consumption markets, and competition is what keeps rates down. No Chinese exporter would be so dumb as to allow a captive movement of those US imports. It was a dumb question to begin with. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, November 20, 2005 12:50 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 Dave, I don't understand either. How exactly are the US shippers captive, and the Chinese ones aren't? What exactly do you mean by a captive shipper, or this an open access problem? While Tom may not be correct on his thinking, his question seemed valid; without this knowledge how do we know who is a “captive” shipper. Could you enlighten us dummies to the answer of that question? CURE defines rail captivity based on the STB's 180% RVC standard, wherein rates where the RVC is above 180% are considered captive. For a general definition, rail captivity occurs wherein a rail shipper (those whose product moves logically by rail, e.g. chemicals, mt of coal or grain, et al) has a physical connection (e.g. a spur or siding) to only one Class I, and/or where certain areas of the country have only one Class I available within a medium to short truck haul to the nearest railhead, e.g. a captive intermodal terminal. Your part of the Great State of Idaho is captive to UP both physically and geographically. If a grain shipper wants to move a thousand tons a month to Portland and doesn't like the rate being offered by UP, he has no other choice. Trucking that much grain would be too expensive. If one of those proposed coal fired power plants are actually built in Southern Idaho, they will be captive to UP and will end up paying a rate that is twice that of coal plants with competitive rail access. Overseas importers are for the most part immune to US rail captivity, because most of the major US seaside ports have more than one Class I to provide service. Furthermore, most US consumption markets are also in areas with access to two or more Class I's as well as barge and shortsea shipping. I'm not completely sure, but I think the only major US consumption market that is captive to one Class I is the Phoenix-Tuscon area, which is now captive to UP if it's true that BNSF no longer has a branch down to Phoenix. Okay, I guess you can count Boise if you want to call your area a major US consumption market, but I don't think the Boise-Caldwell corridor is considered a major US consumption market by most marketing professionals (otherwise you guys would have a professional sports team or two!) Therefore, it is basically impossible for overseas imports into the US to be subject to captive rates, while most captive rail customers are US producers, and all captive shippers in the world are located in North America. No where else in the world do you see the monopolistic tactics being exhibited by the US railroads, such as differential pricing, bottleneck gouging, paper barriers to shortlines, etc. Reply Edit arbfbe Member sinceFebruary 2002 910 posts Posted by arbfbe on Sunday, November 20, 2005 1:57 PM I do find it amazing that all these vetted business gurus on the railroads are spending tremendous efforts in increasing the volume of their low return business as in intermodal when the railroads major problem for the time being is their limited capacity to handle the volume they have now. Both the UP and the BNSF have tracks and yards so plugged with traffic they can hardly move trains at times and the trains that do move are days behind their schedules. So the top level managers, all those guys with the big picture view of the company are out looking for more volume at low profit to add to the mess they now have on their hands. I suppose a business trip to China is far more exotic than another trip to Gillette, WY to solicit traffic.. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, November 20, 2005 2:02 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Well, Tom, if you have a question for me just ask me straight out. I don't do third person inquiries. Boy, talk about dense. I hope you can read questions better than this when it comes time to take your SAT's. FM's aviodance tactics are in full swing now. OK, let's see if I can dumb them down enough for you. I'll only ask one at a time so I don't overload your mind. You stated in the original post that the BNSF charges a higher rate for captive shippers than they are proposing for the anticipated intermodal business from China. Now, this is the question: How does the rate that BNSF currently charges for intermodal service to existing customers compare with the rate for the potential new intermodal business? Sort of comparing apples to apples No, it is nothing like comparing apples to apples. The framing of your question is illogical if you are basing that question on my previous post regarding the fact that BNSF (and all Class I's) charge rates for captive customers that are usually twice those of non-captive customers. So if the "potential new intermodal business" is of the same non-captive status as all other Asian import business, the rate for the new business will also be on the low side of the RVC equation. It's a given. You could have figured this out if you had thought it through. Why would you think differently? Do you have any evidence that this new import business from China will be a higher rate than other Asian import business? There is no way BNSF or any other railroad can make any Asian imports captive, because there are always other options available. BTW, why not try to ask questions of a more intellectual nature? Your last question was not "dumbed down" so much as it was just plain dumb, because the answer was so blatantly obvious. If you can't ask intelligent questions, then stop wasting my time. And if you can't ask a question without throwing in an insult, then don't bother. I guess in your feeble, narrow minded Socialist view, there isn't a difference. To admit that the rates charged for different types of freight might be (shock of shocks) DIFFERENT would throw you "argument" right out the window. You're so intent on pushing a Chinese bigoted agenda I guess you wouldn't see that rates for current intermodal business would be compared to the proposed rates for new intermodal business for an acurate comparison. Since you can't answer the question placed before you, I guess you would consider it "dumb." You say yourself that the rates they charge for "captive customers" is different by a large factor compared to intermodal business. Since the potential new business is intermodal, the question was "why aren't you comparing current intermodal rates to proposed new business intermodal rates?" And if this WEREN'T an anti Chinese rant, why then would your title be "BNSF Prostrates Itself Before the Feet of it's Chinese Overlords?" rather than "BNSF Charges Excessive Rates to Captive Shippers?" As far as evidence of the new rates, you were the one that brought it up in the first place, but curiously, compared the existing rates for "captive shippers" to potential new intermodal business. The fact that they have different rates for different types of business is a given in all facets of the transportation business, not just railroads or just the BNSF. If BNSF is "prostrating itself at the feet of it's Chinese overlords" they would also be "prostrating themselves at the feet" of all their intermodal customers. Existing intermodal business compared to potential new intermodal business would definately be comparing apples to apples in terms of transportation rates. I am concluding that it is impossible for you to have insult-free conversation. FM, you insult our intelligence EVERY TIME YOU POST... Your very existence is an insult to every thinking person reading this board. LC Reply Edit TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Sunday, November 20, 2005 2:05 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Well, Tom, if you have a question for me just ask me straight out. I don't do third person inquiries. Boy, talk about dense. I hope you can read questions better than this when it comes time to take your SAT's. FM's aviodance tactics are in full swing now. OK, let's see if I can dumb them down enough for you. I'll only ask one at a time so I don't overload your mind. You stated in the original post that the BNSF charges a higher rate for captive shippers than they are proposing for the anticipated intermodal business from China. Now, this is the question: How does the rate that BNSF currently charges for intermodal service to existing customers compare with the rate for the potential new intermodal business? Sort of comparing apples to apples No, it is nothing like comparing apples to apples. The framing of your question is illogical if you are basing that question on my previous post regarding the fact that BNSF (and all Class I's) charge rates for captive customers that are usually twice those of non-captive customers. So if the "potential new intermodal business" is of the same non-captive status as all other Asian import business, the rate for the new business will also be on the low side of the RVC equation. It's a given. You could have figured this out if you had thought it through. Why would you think differently? Do you have any evidence that this new import business from China will be a higher rate than other Asian import business? There is no way BNSF or any other railroad can make any Asian imports captive, because there are always other options available. BTW, why not try to ask questions of a more intellectual nature? Your last question was not "dumbed down" so much as it was just plain dumb, because the answer was so blatantly obvious. If you can't ask intelligent questions, then stop wasting my time. And if you can't ask a question without throwing in an insult, then don't bother. I guess in your feeble, narrow minded Socialist view, there isn't a difference. To admit that the rates charged for different types of freight might be (shock of shocks) DIFFERENT would throw you "argument" right out the window. You're so intent on pushing a Chinese bigoted agenda I guess you wouldn't see that rates for current intermodal business would be compared to the proposed rates for new intermodal business for an acurate comparison. Since you can't answer the question placed before you, I guess you would consider it "dumb." You say yourself that the rates they charge for "captive customers" is different by a large factor compared to intermodal business. Since the potential new business is intermodal, the question was "why aren't you comparing current intermodal rates to proposed new business intermodal rates?" And if this WEREN'T an anti Chinese rant, why then would your title be "BNSF Prostrates Itself Before the Feet of it's Chinese Overlords?" rather than "BNSF Charges Excessive Rates to Captive Shippers?" As far as evidence of the new rates, you were the one that brought it up in the first place, but curiously, compared the existing rates for "captive shippers" to potential new intermodal business. The fact that they have different rates for different types of business is a given in all facets of the transportation business, not just railroads or just the BNSF. If BNSF is "prostrating itself at the feet of it's Chinese overlords" they would also be "prostrating themselves at the feet" of all their intermodal customers. Existing intermodal business compared to potential new intermodal business would definately be comparing apples to apples in terms of transportation rates. I am concluding that it is impossible for you to have insult-free conversation. Well, no one can say I didn't go out of my way to give you that opportunity. So because my topic is titled provacatively, that makes me an anti-Chinese bigot? A classic far left tactic to try and demean the POV, yet if you looked at the title carefully, you will see that there is no explicit or implicit degradation of China or it's people, rather I do explicitly demean that great American corporation known as BNSF. Therefore, you would have every right to call me an anti-BNSF bigot based on the topic title. What I am regarding China is opposed to their lack of civil and religious liberties, their constant threats over Tawian, etc. That is beside the point of this topic. What is relevent is that comparative rates for US captive goods moving from plant to US port are higher than rates for overseas goods being hauled from US port to US consumption markets. This is reflected in the relative RVC ratios, where the highest RVC's are for US produced goods, while the lowest RVC's are for international double stacks. BTW, the grain hauling market is hardly tapped out, otherwise why would grain hopper orders be tending toward more and more delays. The demand for moving grain is exceeding the willingness or ability of the railroads to meet that demand. Since grain offers some of the highest RVC ratios, you would think the railroads would use those excess profits to expand capacity to move that grain. But instead they use their excess domestic profits to expand capacity for import intermodal. I'll set you straight on one of your tangents: There will be no difference in the rates being charged now for Asian imports and the "new" business proposed from China. There is ample competition for the movement of overseas goods to US consumption markets, and competition is what keeps rates down. No Chinese exporter would be so dumb as to allow a captive movement of those US imports. It was a dumb question to begin with. I beg to differ, you're the one who started the insults. So refering to them as "Chinese overlords" is NOT degrading? And saying BNSF "prostrates itself" is not demeaning? The grain hauling market is hardly tapped out BUT very seasonal. The railroads payments for financing and purchasing the specialized rolling stock for grain shipment is NOT seasonal, they have to pay year round for assets that are used at the most half the year. Based on this one fact, they SHOULD charge a higher rate when the shipping actually takes place. Rolling stock that sits idle for such a large percentage of the year is hardly as good an investment of assets as compared to rolling stock that moves freight year round. So yes, it's easy to see WHY BNSF, (or any railroad for that matter) is reluctant to expand their capacity to haul grain. The RVC figure you quote is based on when the grain actually moves, and does not include the losses incurred by having to make payments on rolling stock that sits idle for so long. The railroads will be looking more at the return on investment when deciding what type rolling stock to purchase. THANK YOU, I see in your final paragraph you've finally answered the first question. BNSF will be charging the same rate for all intermodal business. This is the "apples to apples" comparison I was talking about. That wasn't one of "my tangents," that was the question as to why you didn't compare these two rates. As far as the "Chinese allowing themselves to be captive to movement" this is the nature of the international freight movement. Intermodal is the prefered method of shipment, and not just from China. No other intermodal shipper, regardless of country of origin, is captive, so the Chinese shippers are simply following established shipping procedures, not being "Overlords" to BNSF, or any other shipping company. What you haven't explained is how "BNSF has prostrated themselves" by pursuing new business that is a steady, year round income, which will be coming to this country wheter BNSF move is or some other shipper does. Seems more a "getting the jump on the competition" type thing to me. Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, November 20, 2005 2:14 PM Considering the resentment among many USA citizens about the amount of consumer products used in America but manufactured overseas, perhaps the best thing BNSF could have done would have been to downplay and not trumpet this expansion of their business. Of course they do want to look successful, and that is the basis of their PR in this case, but they have lots of other successes to point to and might have not made such a fuss over this one. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, November 20, 2005 2:23 PM Lotus, why do you refer to guns so much? Do you view them as a power symbol? Consider this....any woman can pull the trigger. Do they make an otherwise weak little boy feel tough? A scared person hides behind a gun (barring military and people actually defending their lives and sportsmen). In fact in a toe to toe situation with you and a person who can defend themselves without a weapon, you doubtfully would use the weapon and proceed to get your little butt beaten. Your little computer geek likeness of me is cute, made me smile. Now stop playing with the computer so much and start looking at girls and establish yourself as a boy. Kid, you badly need to get into a non weapon oriented altercation......get your little butt kicked in and learn some humility. I strongly doubt you pop off to your peers face to face without the cover and anonimity of the internet. It would be a charachter building excercise for you. Man up kid. Reply Edit rvos1979 Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Burlington, WI 1,418 posts Posted by rvos1979 on Sunday, November 20, 2005 8:02 PM If I'd have known this was going to turn into a barbeque, I would have brought ribs. Just brought another batch of popcorn over from the Diner, hope it doesen't go as fast as the last batch. Randy Randy Vos "Ever have one of those days where you couldn't hit the ground with your hat??" - Waylon Jennings "May the Lord take a liking to you and blow you up, real good" - SCTV Reply TomDiehl Member sinceFebruary 2001 From: Poconos, PA 3,948 posts Posted by TomDiehl on Sunday, November 20, 2005 8:35 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by rvos1979 If I'd have known this was going to turn into a barbeque, I would have brought ribs. Just brought another batch of popcorn over from the Diner, hope it doesen't go as fast as the last batch. Randy Careful Randy, I think either Limitedclear or Mookie have the current popcorn concession. [:D] Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to. Chief of Sanitation; Clowntown Reply rvos1979 Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Burlington, WI 1,418 posts Posted by rvos1979 on Sunday, November 20, 2005 8:49 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by rvos1979 If I'd have known this was going to turn into a barbeque, I would have brought ribs. Just brought another batch of popcorn over from the Diner, hope it doesen't go as fast as the last batch. Randy Careful Randy, I think either Limitedclear or Mookie have the current popcorn concession. [:D] I brought my own popcorn, I just used the machine!! Honest!! Randy Randy Vos "Ever have one of those days where you couldn't hit the ground with your hat??" - Waylon Jennings "May the Lord take a liking to you and blow you up, real good" - SCTV Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, November 20, 2005 9:39 PM No problem, with this thread I'm on to marshmallows anyhow. Plenty of flames to toast 'em here...lol... LC Reply Edit Murphy Siding Member sinceMay 2005 From: S.E. South Dakota 13,569 posts Posted by Murphy Siding on Sunday, November 20, 2005 10:30 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by rvos1979 QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by rvos1979 If I'd have known this was going to turn into a barbeque, I would have brought ribs. Just brought another batch of popcorn over from the Diner, hope it doesen't go as fast as the last batch. Randy Careful Randy, I think either Limitedclear or Mookie have the current popcorn concession. [:D] I brought my own popcorn, I just used the machine!! Honest!! Randy Open Access Popcorn![:O] Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar. Reply nanaimo73 Member sinceApril 2005 From: Nanaimo BC Canada 4,117 posts Posted by nanaimo73 on Sunday, November 20, 2005 10:46 PM Futuremodal, BNSF management works for the shareholders, and their job is to make BNSF stock rise. Isn't that how capitalism is supposed to work ? Dale Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, November 20, 2005 11:13 PM QUOTE: Lotus, why do you refer to guns so much? Do you view them as a power symbol? Consider this....any woman can pull the trigger. Do they make an otherwise weak little boy feel tough? A scared person hides behind a gun (barring military and people actually defending their lives and sportsmen). Shee, is everything in life that complicated for you? I just have a fascination with weaponry the same way I do with trains. You know guns are referred to as great equalizers, so no it isn’t because I am pretending to be a man. You are the one who seems to think you are some high and might authority over me; you are the one who has to prove you are tough. QUOTE: In fact in a toe to toe situation with you and a person who can defend themselves without a weapon, you doubtfully would use the weapon and proceed to get your little butt beaten. Don’t bet your life on it! QUOTE: Your little computer geek likeness of me is cute, made me smile. Now stop playing with the computer so much and start looking at girls and establish yourself as a boy. Glad you have a sense of humor. Man, where do you guys get off thinking you know all of what I do? Maybe I chase girls, maybe I don’t; what skin is it off you nose, anyways. I thought you wanted me to stop with the guns, no it’s the computer, make up your mind. QUOTE: Kid, you badly need to get into a non weapon oriented altercation...... Like railroads maybe! Maybe it comes from watching too many cowboy movies, maybe I inherited it, maybe it doesn’t matter to the topic of this thread a hill of beans. James, now look what you did Reply Edit oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Monday, November 21, 2005 7:46 AM Bonk! P1: Ouch! Why'd ya hit me? I came here for an OA agruement! P2: Oh, sorry, it's "getting hit on the head leasons", here. P1: How can I tell the difference? ...with appologies to Monty Pyton. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply Bergie Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: US 1,431 posts Posted by Bergie on Monday, November 21, 2005 8:58 AM I'm locking this so the flamefest doesn't get completely out of control. Bergie Erik Bergstrom Reply 123456 Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Well, Tom, if you have a question for me just ask me straight out. I don't do third person inquiries. Boy, talk about dense. I hope you can read questions better than this when it comes time to take your SAT's. FM's aviodance tactics are in full swing now. OK, let's see if I can dumb them down enough for you. I'll only ask one at a time so I don't overload your mind. You stated in the original post that the BNSF charges a higher rate for captive shippers than they are proposing for the anticipated intermodal business from China. Now, this is the question: How does the rate that BNSF currently charges for intermodal service to existing customers compare with the rate for the potential new intermodal business? Sort of comparing apples to apples No, it is nothing like comparing apples to apples. The framing of your question is illogical if you are basing that question on my previous post regarding the fact that BNSF (and all Class I's) charge rates for captive customers that are usually twice those of non-captive customers. So if the "potential new intermodal business" is of the same non-captive status as all other Asian import business, the rate for the new business will also be on the low side of the RVC equation. It's a given. You could have figured this out if you had thought it through. Why would you think differently? Do you have any evidence that this new import business from China will be a higher rate than other Asian import business? There is no way BNSF or any other railroad can make any Asian imports captive, because there are always other options available. BTW, why not try to ask questions of a more intellectual nature? Your last question was not "dumbed down" so much as it was just plain dumb, because the answer was so blatantly obvious. If you can't ask intelligent questions, then stop wasting my time. And if you can't ask a question without throwing in an insult, then don't bother.
QUOTE: Originally posted by dharmon QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 QUOTE: Originally posted by samfp1943 Popcorn, Beer, ..Pretty soon the gloves will come off and the duel will start....Popcorn, Peanuts![(-D][(-D][oops] Time to trot out the boxing gloves. All right vsmith that's it. Gloves shcmoves, break out the dueling pistols. Vic...I'll gladly be your second on this one......besides I've got more time firing black powder than he's been alive. Dan
QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Well, Tom, if you have a question for me just ask me straight out. I don't do third person inquiries. Boy, talk about dense. I hope you can read questions better than this when it comes time to take your SAT's. FM's aviodance tactics are in full swing now. OK, let's see if I can dumb them down enough for you. I'll only ask one at a time so I don't overload your mind. You stated in the original post that the BNSF charges a higher rate for captive shippers than they are proposing for the anticipated intermodal business from China. Now, this is the question: How does the rate that BNSF currently charges for intermodal service to existing customers compare with the rate for the potential new intermodal business? Sort of comparing apples to apples No, it is nothing like comparing apples to apples. The framing of your question is illogical if you are basing that question on my previous post regarding the fact that BNSF (and all Class I's) charge rates for captive customers that are usually twice those of non-captive customers. So if the "potential new intermodal business" is of the same non-captive status as all other Asian import business, the rate for the new business will also be on the low side of the RVC equation. It's a given. You could have figured this out if you had thought it through. Why would you think differently? Do you have any evidence that this new import business from China will be a higher rate than other Asian import business? There is no way BNSF or any other railroad can make any Asian imports captive, because there are always other options available. BTW, why not try to ask questions of a more intellectual nature? Your last question was not "dumbed down" so much as it was just plain dumb, because the answer was so blatantly obvious. If you can't ask intelligent questions, then stop wasting my time. And if you can't ask a question without throwing in an insult, then don't bother. I guess in your feeble, narrow minded Socialist view, there isn't a difference. To admit that the rates charged for different types of freight might be (shock of shocks) DIFFERENT would throw you "argument" right out the window. You're so intent on pushing a Chinese bigoted agenda I guess you wouldn't see that rates for current intermodal business would be compared to the proposed rates for new intermodal business for an acurate comparison. Since you can't answer the question placed before you, I guess you would consider it "dumb." You say yourself that the rates they charge for "captive customers" is different by a large factor compared to intermodal business. Since the potential new business is intermodal, the question was "why aren't you comparing current intermodal rates to proposed new business intermodal rates?" And if this WEREN'T an anti Chinese rant, why then would your title be "BNSF Prostrates Itself Before the Feet of it's Chinese Overlords?" rather than "BNSF Charges Excessive Rates to Captive Shippers?" As far as evidence of the new rates, you were the one that brought it up in the first place, but curiously, compared the existing rates for "captive shippers" to potential new intermodal business. The fact that they have different rates for different types of business is a given in all facets of the transportation business, not just railroads or just the BNSF. If BNSF is "prostrating itself at the feet of it's Chinese overlords" they would also be "prostrating themselves at the feet" of all their intermodal customers. Existing intermodal business compared to potential new intermodal business would definately be comparing apples to apples in terms of transportation rates.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098 Dave, I don't understand either. How exactly are the US shippers captive, and the Chinese ones aren't? What exactly do you mean by a captive shipper, or this an open access problem? While Tom may not be correct on his thinking, his question seemed valid; without this knowledge how do we know who is a “captive” shipper. Could you enlighten us dummies to the answer of that question?
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Well, Tom, if you have a question for me just ask me straight out. I don't do third person inquiries. Boy, talk about dense. I hope you can read questions better than this when it comes time to take your SAT's. FM's aviodance tactics are in full swing now. OK, let's see if I can dumb them down enough for you. I'll only ask one at a time so I don't overload your mind. You stated in the original post that the BNSF charges a higher rate for captive shippers than they are proposing for the anticipated intermodal business from China. Now, this is the question: How does the rate that BNSF currently charges for intermodal service to existing customers compare with the rate for the potential new intermodal business? Sort of comparing apples to apples No, it is nothing like comparing apples to apples. The framing of your question is illogical if you are basing that question on my previous post regarding the fact that BNSF (and all Class I's) charge rates for captive customers that are usually twice those of non-captive customers. So if the "potential new intermodal business" is of the same non-captive status as all other Asian import business, the rate for the new business will also be on the low side of the RVC equation. It's a given. You could have figured this out if you had thought it through. Why would you think differently? Do you have any evidence that this new import business from China will be a higher rate than other Asian import business? There is no way BNSF or any other railroad can make any Asian imports captive, because there are always other options available. BTW, why not try to ask questions of a more intellectual nature? Your last question was not "dumbed down" so much as it was just plain dumb, because the answer was so blatantly obvious. If you can't ask intelligent questions, then stop wasting my time. And if you can't ask a question without throwing in an insult, then don't bother. I guess in your feeble, narrow minded Socialist view, there isn't a difference. To admit that the rates charged for different types of freight might be (shock of shocks) DIFFERENT would throw you "argument" right out the window. You're so intent on pushing a Chinese bigoted agenda I guess you wouldn't see that rates for current intermodal business would be compared to the proposed rates for new intermodal business for an acurate comparison. Since you can't answer the question placed before you, I guess you would consider it "dumb." You say yourself that the rates they charge for "captive customers" is different by a large factor compared to intermodal business. Since the potential new business is intermodal, the question was "why aren't you comparing current intermodal rates to proposed new business intermodal rates?" And if this WEREN'T an anti Chinese rant, why then would your title be "BNSF Prostrates Itself Before the Feet of it's Chinese Overlords?" rather than "BNSF Charges Excessive Rates to Captive Shippers?" As far as evidence of the new rates, you were the one that brought it up in the first place, but curiously, compared the existing rates for "captive shippers" to potential new intermodal business. The fact that they have different rates for different types of business is a given in all facets of the transportation business, not just railroads or just the BNSF. If BNSF is "prostrating itself at the feet of it's Chinese overlords" they would also be "prostrating themselves at the feet" of all their intermodal customers. Existing intermodal business compared to potential new intermodal business would definately be comparing apples to apples in terms of transportation rates. I am concluding that it is impossible for you to have insult-free conversation.
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Well, Tom, if you have a question for me just ask me straight out. I don't do third person inquiries. Boy, talk about dense. I hope you can read questions better than this when it comes time to take your SAT's. FM's aviodance tactics are in full swing now. OK, let's see if I can dumb them down enough for you. I'll only ask one at a time so I don't overload your mind. You stated in the original post that the BNSF charges a higher rate for captive shippers than they are proposing for the anticipated intermodal business from China. Now, this is the question: How does the rate that BNSF currently charges for intermodal service to existing customers compare with the rate for the potential new intermodal business? Sort of comparing apples to apples No, it is nothing like comparing apples to apples. The framing of your question is illogical if you are basing that question on my previous post regarding the fact that BNSF (and all Class I's) charge rates for captive customers that are usually twice those of non-captive customers. So if the "potential new intermodal business" is of the same non-captive status as all other Asian import business, the rate for the new business will also be on the low side of the RVC equation. It's a given. You could have figured this out if you had thought it through. Why would you think differently? Do you have any evidence that this new import business from China will be a higher rate than other Asian import business? There is no way BNSF or any other railroad can make any Asian imports captive, because there are always other options available. BTW, why not try to ask questions of a more intellectual nature? Your last question was not "dumbed down" so much as it was just plain dumb, because the answer was so blatantly obvious. If you can't ask intelligent questions, then stop wasting my time. And if you can't ask a question without throwing in an insult, then don't bother. I guess in your feeble, narrow minded Socialist view, there isn't a difference. To admit that the rates charged for different types of freight might be (shock of shocks) DIFFERENT would throw you "argument" right out the window. You're so intent on pushing a Chinese bigoted agenda I guess you wouldn't see that rates for current intermodal business would be compared to the proposed rates for new intermodal business for an acurate comparison. Since you can't answer the question placed before you, I guess you would consider it "dumb." You say yourself that the rates they charge for "captive customers" is different by a large factor compared to intermodal business. Since the potential new business is intermodal, the question was "why aren't you comparing current intermodal rates to proposed new business intermodal rates?" And if this WEREN'T an anti Chinese rant, why then would your title be "BNSF Prostrates Itself Before the Feet of it's Chinese Overlords?" rather than "BNSF Charges Excessive Rates to Captive Shippers?" As far as evidence of the new rates, you were the one that brought it up in the first place, but curiously, compared the existing rates for "captive shippers" to potential new intermodal business. The fact that they have different rates for different types of business is a given in all facets of the transportation business, not just railroads or just the BNSF. If BNSF is "prostrating itself at the feet of it's Chinese overlords" they would also be "prostrating themselves at the feet" of all their intermodal customers. Existing intermodal business compared to potential new intermodal business would definately be comparing apples to apples in terms of transportation rates. I am concluding that it is impossible for you to have insult-free conversation. Well, no one can say I didn't go out of my way to give you that opportunity. So because my topic is titled provacatively, that makes me an anti-Chinese bigot? A classic far left tactic to try and demean the POV, yet if you looked at the title carefully, you will see that there is no explicit or implicit degradation of China or it's people, rather I do explicitly demean that great American corporation known as BNSF. Therefore, you would have every right to call me an anti-BNSF bigot based on the topic title. What I am regarding China is opposed to their lack of civil and religious liberties, their constant threats over Tawian, etc. That is beside the point of this topic. What is relevent is that comparative rates for US captive goods moving from plant to US port are higher than rates for overseas goods being hauled from US port to US consumption markets. This is reflected in the relative RVC ratios, where the highest RVC's are for US produced goods, while the lowest RVC's are for international double stacks. BTW, the grain hauling market is hardly tapped out, otherwise why would grain hopper orders be tending toward more and more delays. The demand for moving grain is exceeding the willingness or ability of the railroads to meet that demand. Since grain offers some of the highest RVC ratios, you would think the railroads would use those excess profits to expand capacity to move that grain. But instead they use their excess domestic profits to expand capacity for import intermodal. I'll set you straight on one of your tangents: There will be no difference in the rates being charged now for Asian imports and the "new" business proposed from China. There is ample competition for the movement of overseas goods to US consumption markets, and competition is what keeps rates down. No Chinese exporter would be so dumb as to allow a captive movement of those US imports. It was a dumb question to begin with.
QUOTE: Originally posted by rvos1979 If I'd have known this was going to turn into a barbeque, I would have brought ribs. Just brought another batch of popcorn over from the Diner, hope it doesen't go as fast as the last batch. Randy
QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by rvos1979 If I'd have known this was going to turn into a barbeque, I would have brought ribs. Just brought another batch of popcorn over from the Diner, hope it doesen't go as fast as the last batch. Randy Careful Randy, I think either Limitedclear or Mookie have the current popcorn concession. [:D]
QUOTE: Originally posted by rvos1979 QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl QUOTE: Originally posted by rvos1979 If I'd have known this was going to turn into a barbeque, I would have brought ribs. Just brought another batch of popcorn over from the Diner, hope it doesen't go as fast as the last batch. Randy Careful Randy, I think either Limitedclear or Mookie have the current popcorn concession. [:D] I brought my own popcorn, I just used the machine!! Honest!! Randy
QUOTE: Lotus, why do you refer to guns so much? Do you view them as a power symbol? Consider this....any woman can pull the trigger. Do they make an otherwise weak little boy feel tough? A scared person hides behind a gun (barring military and people actually defending their lives and sportsmen).
QUOTE: In fact in a toe to toe situation with you and a person who can defend themselves without a weapon, you doubtfully would use the weapon and proceed to get your little butt beaten.
QUOTE: Your little computer geek likeness of me is cute, made me smile. Now stop playing with the computer so much and start looking at girls and establish yourself as a boy.
QUOTE: Kid, you badly need to get into a non weapon oriented altercation......
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.