QUOTE: Originally posted by SchemerBob Where are they going to get the equipment to make these trains possible?? Amtrak only has a little over 200 mainline locomotives. Illinois may have to chip in and buy some equipment, like California and Oregon has, if they want these trains to roll! Other than the equipment problem, though, the idea sounds great.
"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
Originally posted by Poppa_Zit [ While the value of a house in Naperville is high, so are the prices -- as well as the property taxes. I am not a financial wiz, but it seems to me much of the "gain" in a home's value over five years in Naperville is wiped out by the higher annual real estate taxes (plus interest had those additional taxes been invested). The "Even though you don't have any kids in school, the school system makes your house worth more money" theory works only in an economy where the value of houses continues to spiral upwards and the interest rates on mortgages stays fairly low. Also, to assume that higher school district taxation somehow equates to a better school system is a fallacy." One could also argue that having the better school system would allow your home to lose less of its value, then those with lesser school systems. And in most cases those school systems that have more funding do better than those with less, that is common sense. [ An "expensive model collector" Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, May 17, 2006 10:15 AM Getting back to land use, it would be possible, but downright stupid, to say that a one train a day or four trains a day service doesn't reduce highway land use because obviously a continuous stream of traffic on one lane in each direction is going to top the ridership of the sketchy Amtrak service, even with the average of 1.2 people per car. But the reason it is stupid is that the track is there anyway for freight service in such a situation, and the hope is there for more ridership and then more economicial subsidation of additional service to the point where a second or third track may be necessary and that additional track will then save two or more additional highway lanes from being necessary. One track can handle 80,000 people per hour past a point using the best electric railway technology. On highway lane with 1.2 occupancy can handle about 2,640 people per hour at decent highway speeds, a car every 1.5 seconds, and exceeding that brings the speed down to about 22-25 mph which is the speed at which the maximum number of cars can pass a given point on one lane. The reason slow highway speeds move more traffic is the matter of stopping distances, with higher speeds spacing cars farther apart more than just linear increases with speed. This need not be true with state of the art automatic railway operating, however, with an engineer on board only for emergencies and to pu***he close the doors button at stations. The 80,000 people per hour is a capacity figure that is routinely exceeded on certain New York City subway lines and there involves standees. On a commuter railroad, it would require electric automatic operation and double deck equipment for an all seated load. Twelve-car double deck mu trains running every 1.5 minutes with each car seating about 165 people. Reply Paul Milenkovic Member sinceJuly 2004 2,741 posts Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Wednesday, May 17, 2006 11:12 AM QUOTE: Getting back to land use, it would be possible, but downright stupid, to say that a one train a day or four trains a day service doesn't reduce highway land use because obviously a continuous stream of traffic on one lane in each direction is going to top the ridership of the sketchy Amtrak service, even with the average of 1.2 people per car. QUOTE: Paul Melinkovik needs to be reminded that by far the greatest perecentage of auto use is SINGLE OCCUPANCY, and thus Amtrak does generally come out ahead as more fuel efficient I would like to address the issue of civility of the discussion. I know that everyone wears their ethnic heritage on their sleeves these days (Milenko is a variant of Michael, the "vic" suffix denotes a patronomic, the construction is much like Blagojevich where the "j" is a "y" sound, both names are to be pronounced with the emphasis on the second syllable, and our family opted out of the "h" at the end as a subsitute for the diacritical mark in Roman script or a special character in Cyrillic script), and everyone takes offense at everything, but some boundaries need to be drawn. I am correct that I have been called "downright stupid" on account that I pointed out that a skeleton train service would make a minimum impact on highway congestion? Have I called anyone a name for criticizing a position that I was trying to explain? With that aside, I am a person deeply interested in both the engineering and public-policy issues surrounding transportation of all modes and especially railroads. Railroads are part of my family history ranging from my great-grandfather Viktor Heim, who was a civil engineer in the employ of the Austrian State Railway in Croatia, to my father Veljko Milenkovic, who holds patents on technology related to RRollway, a high-speed car wide-gauge rail car-ferry system once promoted by GATX, and who also engineered a power coupling for the US DOT Pueblo rail test facility. I really like trains and would like them to play a more significant role in transportation. There is also an emotional factor on this forum because many of us, myself too, approach passenger trains as railroad fans and not necessarily as transportation analysts. Metra is of the scale that it makes a major impact on traffic congestion and the vitality of the Chicago downtown. Call me stupid, but two trains a day between, say Rockford and Chicago, are not of that scale. Even if those trains provide a necessary accomodation to people who cannot drive, they are such a small part of the transportation picture that they are more of the form of a demonstration project. There is no shame in a demonstration project -- the Metroliner started out that way. A demonstration project, in exchange for its public expenditure and subsidy, should, demonstrate. If trains are advocated as a means of saving fuel, they should demonstrate fuel efficiency, and the fuel use of such a train should be quantified and reported. If the train is to substitute for car trips, there should be some assessment of ridership and market as to how many people are leaving their cars behind. If trains are to be a cost-effective part of the transportation mix, the costs of running that train should be broken down by route segment -- maybe the subsidy is high on a per-passenger basis because of the small scale, but some reasonable analysis needs to be made to demonstrate that the per-passenger subsidy could be reduced if the operation greatly expanded in scale. This forum is able to discuss the steam-Diesel transition in the 1950's and argue the merits of the Niagra, the Duplex, and the J based on the technology, the numbers, and what happened historically. I know this is hard because a lot of feeling are on the line, but I would like to have discussions of passenger trains, the pros and the cons on that same level. Gas at $3, $4, $5/gallon or more is not going to bring back the passenger train unless people get a handle on passenger train economics. I fully support passenger rail subsidy, but in exchange for that subsidy, the public, the stakeholder in this, should get better information on the fuel economy, capital and labor economics of the subsidized trains. If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks? Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, May 18, 2006 6:01 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by SchemerBob Where are they going to get the equipment to make these trains possible?? Amtrak only has a little over 200 mainline locomotives. Illinois may have to chip in and buy some equipment, like California and Oregon has, if they want these trains to roll! Other than the equipment problem, though, the idea sounds great. Well the cars are a problem, the Locomotives not so much they only need 155 a day. They are going to get there own pool for the new PTC Signal System the units will be 50-65 at the moment but could change. Reply Edit Poppa_Zit Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: West end of Chicago's Famous Racetrack 2,239 posts Posted by Poppa_Zit on Thursday, May 18, 2006 11:51 PM Right now, with interest rates going up, sellers in places like Naperville are having a hard time getting the same home prices they got six months or a year ago. They haven't reduced real estate tax bills, though. "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They are not entitled, however, to their own facts." No we can't. Charter Member J-CASS (Jaded Cynical Ascerbic Sarcastic Skeptics) Notary Sojac & Retired Foo Fighter "Where there's foo, there's fire." Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, May 19, 2006 7:44 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by Poppa_Zit Right now, with interest rates going up, sellers in places like Naperville are having a hard time getting the same home prices they got six months or a year ago. They haven't reduced real estate tax bills, though. The tax issues in towns like Naperville are largely self-induced. The state plays a minimal role in funding education, despite what the state Constitution says, and most funding comes from local property taxes. Naperville is annexing and building faster than they can provide infrastruction to support it. DuPage County has various boundry agreements, but Will county does not and the northern part where Naperville has been annexing farmland in checkerboard fashion is a real mess. All those new subdivisions need new schools, new fire and police, not to mention utilities. The old 2 lane road network quickly becomes gridlocked. The new tax base is insufficient to expand services at the level needed so tax rates go up. I'm fortunate to live in an established part of un-incorporated DuPage that has resisted annexation efforts by 3 different towns and because we didn't vote for any local tax rate increases, my property tax bill went up 4.83% while my property's value went up a whole lot more than that. Illinois Income tax is quite reasonable compared to other midwestern states and unlike Wisconsin, Illinois does not tax retirement income. Instead we are hit with a multitiude of sin taxes, user fees, tollways, utility taxes, etc. IMO we'd actually be better of raising the state income tax, since it is deductible from Federal income tax while all these other taxes and fees are not. Reply Edit oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Friday, May 19, 2006 11:46 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by Paul Milenkovic QUOTE: Getting back to land use, it would be possible, but downright stupid, to say that a one train a day or four trains a day service doesn't reduce highway land use because obviously a continuous stream of traffic on one lane in each direction is going to top the ridership of the sketchy Amtrak service, even with the average of 1.2 people per car. QUOTE: Paul Melinkovik needs to be reminded that by far the greatest perecentage of auto use is SINGLE OCCUPANCY, and thus Amtrak does generally come out ahead as more fuel efficient I would like to address the issue of civility of the discussion. I know that everyone wears their ethnic heritage on their sleeves these days (Milenko is a variant of Michael, the "vic" suffix denotes a patronomic, the construction is much like Blagojevich where the "j" is a "y" sound, both names are to be pronounced with the emphasis on the second syllable, and our family opted out of the "h" at the end as a subsitute for the diacritical mark in Roman script or a special character in Cyrillic script), and everyone takes offense at everything, but some boundaries need to be drawn. I am correct that I have been called "downright stupid" on account that I pointed out that a skeleton train service would make a minimum impact on highway congestion? Have I called anyone a name for criticizing a position that I was trying to explain? With that aside, I am a person deeply interested in both the engineering and public-policy issues surrounding transportation of all modes and especially railroads. Railroads are part of my family history ranging from my great-grandfather Viktor Heim, who was a civil engineer in the employ of the Austrian State Railway in Croatia, to my father Veljko Milenkovic, who holds patents on technology related to RRollway, a high-speed car wide-gauge rail car-ferry system once promoted by GATX, and who also engineered a power coupling for the US DOT Pueblo rail test facility. I really like trains and would like them to play a more significant role in transportation. There is also an emotional factor on this forum because many of us, myself too, approach passenger trains as railroad fans and not necessarily as transportation analysts. Metra is of the scale that it makes a major impact on traffic congestion and the vitality of the Chicago downtown. Call me stupid, but two trains a day between, say Rockford and Chicago, are not of that scale. Even if those trains provide a necessary accomodation to people who cannot drive, they are such a small part of the transportation picture that they are more of the form of a demonstration project. There is no shame in a demonstration project -- the Metroliner started out that way. A demonstration project, in exchange for its public expenditure and subsidy, should, demonstrate. If trains are advocated as a means of saving fuel, they should demonstrate fuel efficiency, and the fuel use of such a train should be quantified and reported. If the train is to substitute for car trips, there should be some assessment of ridership and market as to how many people are leaving their cars behind. If trains are to be a cost-effective part of the transportation mix, the costs of running that train should be broken down by route segment -- maybe the subsidy is high on a per-passenger basis because of the small scale, but some reasonable analysis needs to be made to demonstrate that the per-passenger subsidy could be reduced if the operation greatly expanded in scale. This forum is able to discuss the steam-Diesel transition in the 1950's and argue the merits of the Niagra, the Duplex, and the J based on the technology, the numbers, and what happened historically. I know this is hard because a lot of feeling are on the line, but I would like to have discussions of passenger trains, the pros and the cons on that same level. Gas at $3, $4, $5/gallon or more is not going to bring back the passenger train unless people get a handle on passenger train economics. I fully support passenger rail subsidy, but in exchange for that subsidy, the public, the stakeholder in this, should get better information on the fuel economy, capital and labor economics of the subsidized trains. What a great post! If you can't state rather explicitly and in mostly quantifiable terms, why you're spending money, you probably shouldn't be spending it. It's the whole "problem" of Amtrak. No mission statement. No real goals. Just status quo. I'm all for Amtrak and increased passenger rail subsidy, but lets be clear about what we're trying to do, who we're doing it for, and what it's costing us. I just took a terrific trip from Denver to SF on the Cal. Zephyr. Wonderful train. Great crew. Nice equipment (despite being 20 years old). But, it's not any faster/cheaper/better than 40 years ago. Lots of reasons why, I know, but one BIG one is there is no monetary incentive for Amtrak to pursue improvement. If they save money, they just get their subsidy whacked by that amount. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply Poppa_Zit Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: West end of Chicago's Famous Racetrack 2,239 posts Posted by Poppa_Zit on Friday, May 19, 2006 12:58 PM QUOTE: If you can't state rather explicitly and in mostly quantifiable terms, why you're spending money, you probably shouldn't be spending it. It's the whole "problem" of Amtrak. No mission statement. No real goals. Just status quo. Great thoughts there. But why limit it to Amtrak? How about applying it to ALL government-supported programs, which seem to operate pretty much the same way. "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They are not entitled, however, to their own facts." No we can't. Charter Member J-CASS (Jaded Cynical Ascerbic Sarcastic Skeptics) Notary Sojac & Retired Foo Fighter "Where there's foo, there's fire." Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Friday, May 19, 2006 1:17 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by Poppa_Zit QUOTE: If you can't state rather explicitly and in mostly quantifiable terms, why you're spending money, you probably shouldn't be spending it. It's the whole "problem" of Amtrak. No mission statement. No real goals. Just status quo. Great thoughts there. But why limit it to Amtrak? How about applying it to ALL government-supported programs, which seem to operate pretty much the same way. I can't think of any examples, except maybe the USPS. Most gov't agencies I can think of seem to have well defined missions. Which ones are you thinking about? -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply wallyworld Member sinceJuly 2002 From: A State of Humidity 2,441 posts Posted by wallyworld on Friday, May 19, 2006 1:18 PM One of the apparent problems with a Rockford-Chicago routing seems to be a lack of folks who regularly commute between the two on a regular basis. I could not, even on my best day imagine commuting by car between the two. This may be due to my own ignorance of facts of those that do. Even with the lack of roads in the interurban era, Elgin and Belevidere normally cut cars on westbound runs between the two, at Marengo Shops, down to a single car. Perhaps Class 1's had more frequency. Exoburbia seems to have some limits although its amazing as to the amount of development around IRM. Amtrak tried Janeville on the W&S, but it bombed, much to my disapointment, although it was'nt surprising. In this thread, one question occurred to me-what is the longest commuter run operated by a transit agency outside of Amtrak? LIRR? Good thread. Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has. Reply Poppa_Zit Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: West end of Chicago's Famous Racetrack 2,239 posts Posted by Poppa_Zit on Saturday, May 20, 2006 10:27 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd QUOTE: Originally posted by Poppa_Zit QUOTE: If you can't state rather explicitly and in mostly quantifiable terms, why you're spending money, you probably shouldn't be spending it. It's the whole "problem" of Amtrak. No mission statement. No real goals. Just status quo. Great thoughts there. But why limit it to Amtrak? How about applying it to ALL government-supported programs, which seem to operate pretty much the same way. I can't think of any examples, except maybe the USPS. Most gov't agencies I can think of seem to have well defined missions. Which ones are you thinking about? I decided to save on some typing. But how are these for starters? (Click link for complete details) http://www.heritage.org/Research/Budget/bg1840.cfm The Top 10 List of Egregious Waste. 1. The Missing $25 Billion 2. Unused Flight Tickets Totaling $100 Million 3. Embezzled Funds at the Department of Agriculture 4. Credit Card Abuse at the Department of Defense 5. Medicare Overspending 6. Funding Fictitious Colleges and Students 7. Manipulating Data to Encourage Spending 8. State Abuse of Medicaid Funding Formulas 9. Earned Income Tax Credit Overpayments 10. Redundancy Piled on Redundancy "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They are not entitled, however, to their own facts." No we can't. Charter Member J-CASS (Jaded Cynical Ascerbic Sarcastic Skeptics) Notary Sojac & Retired Foo Fighter "Where there's foo, there's fire." Reply CSSHEGEWISCH Member sinceMarch 2016 From: Burbank IL (near Clearing) 13,540 posts Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Saturday, May 20, 2006 12:27 PM I would look at anything regarding government waste coming from that well-known conservative to libertarian think tank known as the Heritage Foundation with a fair amount of skepticism. They have long tended to view any government spending beyond the Defense budget as wasteful. People will complain about waste and fraud, but only when it involves programs which they do not utilize. Also, government practices are a reflection of the society at large, not an aberration. The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, May 20, 2006 9:43 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by wallyworld One of the apparent problems with a Rockford-Chicago routing seems to be a lack of folks who regularly commute between the two on a regular basis. . LOL, thousands commute daily between the two. the cheap cost of housing and the great Metra Park and Ride in Elgin make if very feasible for Folks to live in Rockford and commute in a relatively fast time to downtown. Drive I-90 between rockford and Elgin any day between 5am and 9am and you'll see it is a very bustling highway full of commuters. Me Personally, I catch the CoachUSA bus to the city, had to go in really early once (aka left my house at 5am) and you wouldn't belive the number of cars on Harrison Ave in Rockford going eastward to the I-90 ramp (for those that don't know this is a major 4 lane through the city and Belvidere) at that time. heck you'd think it was 5pm at night and everyone was going to the mall! The city and State have really been trying for years to get Metra to Rockford to help move these people better. Unfortunatly, the communities between Elgin and Rockford have been fighting it, not to mention some Chicago/suburbs Politicians (obvious reason being the built it and they will move theory). They really don't want to lose that power hold they have right now over the state. Metra to rockford would be a big deal, especially since they want to put it at the airport (where parking is free and they really want the airport linked to O'hare and Midway too). It's a win-win for the state, but some people just don't want to see it that way. Reply Edit Poppa_Zit Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: West end of Chicago's Famous Racetrack 2,239 posts Posted by Poppa_Zit on Sunday, May 21, 2006 3:23 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by CSSHEGEWISCH I would look at anything regarding government waste coming from that well-known conservative to libertarian think tank known as the Heritage Foundation with a fair amount of skepticism. They have long tended to view any government spending beyond the Defense budget as wasteful. People will complain about waste and fraud, but only when it involves programs which they do not utilize. Also, government practices are a reflection of the society at large, not an aberration. I hear that. It is obvious where you stand based on the labels with which you color the Heritage Foundation, which incidentally, I neither condone nor bless. I suppose you have an alternative, more-centered source? I view with skepticism the Heritage Foundation's interpretations of the facts, and the spin applied therewith. I accept no analysis with blind faith, choosing to study the facts and do my own thinking. Included in the Top Ten list (amid some clever editorializing) are some irrefutable facts about waste in government programs, which more than illustrate my point. It is naive to believe that there is no wasteful or unnecessary government spending outside of Amtrak, or the USPS. Just look at any major legislation and see the pork trying to get a free ride. Having a defined "mission statement" is irrelevent to whether a program contains waste. Since you appear to live in the Chicago area, have you missed the evidence in the George Ryan trial? Hired Trucks scandal? I care about these things, yet they do not touch my life in any way. "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They are not entitled, however, to their own facts." No we can't. Charter Member J-CASS (Jaded Cynical Ascerbic Sarcastic Skeptics) Notary Sojac & Retired Foo Fighter "Where there's foo, there's fire." Reply Poppa_Zit Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: West end of Chicago's Famous Racetrack 2,239 posts Posted by Poppa_Zit on Sunday, May 21, 2006 3:42 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd QUOTE: Originally posted by Poppa_Zit QUOTE: If you can't state rather explicitly and in mostly quantifiable terms, why you're spending money, you probably shouldn't be spending it. It's the whole "problem" of Amtrak. No mission statement. No real goals. Just status quo. Great thoughts there. But why limit it to Amtrak? How about applying it to ALL government-supported programs, which seem to operate pretty much the same way. I can't think of any examples, except maybe the USPS. Most gov't agencies I can think of seem to have well defined missions. Which ones are you thinking about? Giving this topic more thought, I think the one well-defined mission common to all government programs is to spend every penny in this year's budget -- whether necessary/wasteful or not -- so they don't cut next year's budget. Or even better, get more money allocated next year, thanks to a granted request for an increase. I have seen this in action. One of my employees, in her previous job, was a government administrator (education) with a large budget. She tried to do the right thing, i.e. be responsible with the tax dollars she was intrusted with. Each year, though, with a few weeks left in the fiscal year, she still had tens of thousands of her budget dollars unspent because they weren't needed. So did many of her fellow administrators. Yet she and the others were ordered -- ORDERED -- by their superiors to spend every dime allocated to those programs before the end of the fiscal year. The reason -- see paragraph above. "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They are not entitled, however, to their own facts." No we can't. Charter Member J-CASS (Jaded Cynical Ascerbic Sarcastic Skeptics) Notary Sojac & Retired Foo Fighter "Where there's foo, there's fire." Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, May 21, 2006 4:03 AM If you are caught in a traffic jam and cannot get an appointment on time, simply because the train service you used to depend upon has been withdrawen, you might very well say that someone who says a sketchy train service has no effect (mind you I did not use the word "stupid" in connection with "major effect", only "No effect" and that is a big difference, so I really wasn't aware of attacking anyone on this thread) on traffic congestion. What I meant to say, is simply that the assumption that a track used for a sketchy passenger service represents bad land use as compared to a highway lane is stupid, because the track may also (probably is) also used or intensive freight service. Otherwise, I agree with your point and I really wasn't attacking anyone, just trying to prevent the stupid comparison of a track being used two or four times a day by a train with a highway with a continuous stream of traffic. I apologize for not making that point clear. Reply CSSHEGEWISCH Member sinceMarch 2016 From: Burbank IL (near Clearing) 13,540 posts Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Sunday, May 21, 2006 6:55 AM Being a lifelong Chicagoan, I have come to the conclusion regarding honesty in government that what people say and what they do are rarely the same thing. People claim they want good government but will go to their precinct captain or alderman rather than deal with bureaucracy, even if said bureaucratic requirements are minimal, such as filling out a form for a fence permit. They will then vote for the village officeholder (assuming that they bother to vote at that level) who helped them out. The public gets the degree of honesty in government that they really want, regardless of what they say. The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, May 21, 2006 7:55 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by Poppa_Zit Giving this topic more thought, I think the one well-defined mission common to all government programs is to spend every penny in this year's budget -- whether necessary/wasteful or not -- so they don't cut next year's budget. Or even better, get more money allocated next year, thanks to a granted request for an increase. Private enterprise is not much better. I've seen plenty of department managers in large corporations spend like crazy at year end because there's money left over in the budget and they don't want next years budget cut. Plus I don't think we can dismiss the health care companies and defense contractors role in government waste. The 'problem' with Amtrak and the USPS might be not enough lobbying $$$ coming back to DC. If Amtrak were privatized, would it be any different than Haliburton? Who really ends up getting the money from those earmarks? But since the topic is Illinois, IMO it's entirely likely that increased Amtrak service to Springfield is a bone to downstate in order to increase metro area funding. Illinois is a lot like DC, with 3 principle players who don't trust each other but do shift alliances as it suits them. The 3rd player is the collar county moderate pro-business Republicans. Both the CTA and Metra are looking for more funding, so the collar couties would ally with Chicago for funding. Adding something for downstate gets the downstate conservative Republicans onboard and doesn't hurt the Democratic governor either. Reply Edit Tharmeni Member sinceJuly 2003 From: Southwestern Florida 501 posts Posted by Tharmeni on Sunday, May 21, 2006 9:13 AM Nice going, Illinois! Now, would someone like to shake the governor of Indiana to wake him up????? Reply Tharmeni Member sinceJuly 2003 From: Southwestern Florida 501 posts Posted by Tharmeni on Sunday, May 21, 2006 9:15 AM Hey, RR Redneck... Let me know when the price of gasoline goes down and stays down for more than 60 days. I used to work in Saudi Arabia and let me tell you, it isn't going to happen. It's also why I own two hybrids. Reply Poppa_Zit Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: West end of Chicago's Famous Racetrack 2,239 posts Posted by Poppa_Zit on Sunday, May 21, 2006 10:45 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by CSSHEGEWISCH Being a lifelong Chicagoan, I have come to the conclusion regarding honesty in government that what people say and what they do are rarely the same thing. People claim they want good government but will go to their precinct captain or alderman rather than deal with bureaucracy, even if said bureaucratic requirements are minimal, such as filling out a form for a fence permit. They will then vote for the village officeholder (assuming that they bother to vote at that level) who helped them out. The public gets the degree of honesty in government that they really want, regardless of what they say. I couldn't agree more. We do not live in a democracy. We live in a bureaucracy, where ostensibly we elect officials who will make decisions based on what is best for the majority. But it don't always work out that way in Illinois. One hand doesn't only wa***he other, it hands over cash and jobs to friends, relatives and political sponsors. The ability to perform these functions is what's known as "clout." I saw this operate with extreme hubris when as a reporter I covered the political beat. I came away with the conclusion that the Illinois State Motto is: "Where's mine?" And while the City of Chicago and Cook County are guilty of more than their share of corruption, the suburbs aren't immune. It's everywhere, in varying degrees, and unfortunately in Illinois we have the longstanding concept that once elected, our officials (they even call themselves "public servants" -- ha, ha, ha!) can do whatever they please -- and whatever pleases those who financed their campaign. It's that simple. All you have to do is follow the money. For years, those with "clout" were able to operate at will because the entire system was corrupt, with no one willing to investigate and prosecute because those entrusted with that duty were involved themselves. The deeper you were in, the more "clout" you had. Which adds up to a lot of wasted taxpayer money, but why worry? They could always raise taxes on us dummies. The corruption rose to a level where some of it was in the open, for everyone to see. Our officials got so arrogant, some got careless and didn't bother covering their tracks. Now the piper is being paid. Makes me smile that the Feds are involved and that local and state politicians who deserve it are going to prison. It will continue. Can the system you refer to ever be totally cleaned up? I doubt it, but it's still fun for us tax-paying grunts to watch those arrogant slobs who gorged themselves at the public trough get one last gift from us taxpayers, courtesy of Federal Prosector Patrick Fitzgerald -- three hots and a flop, plus an orange jumpsuit. "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They are not entitled, however, to their own facts." No we can't. Charter Member J-CASS (Jaded Cynical Ascerbic Sarcastic Skeptics) Notary Sojac & Retired Foo Fighter "Where there's foo, there's fire." Reply Poppa_Zit Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: West end of Chicago's Famous Racetrack 2,239 posts Posted by Poppa_Zit on Sunday, May 21, 2006 11:03 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by up829 QUOTE: Originally posted by Poppa_Zit Giving this topic more thought, I think the one well-defined mission common to all government programs is to spend every penny in this year's budget -- whether necessary/wasteful or not -- so they don't cut next year's budget. Or even better, get more money allocated next year, thanks to a granted request for an increase. QUOTE: Private enterprise is not much better. I've seen plenty of department managers in large corporations spend like crazy at year end because there's money left over in the budget and they don't want next years budget cut. You are correct, but private enterprise isn't wasting MY money. THAT'S the difference here. QUOTE: Plus I don't think we can dismiss the health care companies and defense contractors role in government waste. Correct again, but why are you trying to put the blame on private business? It ultimately is the government's responsibility -- and fault. Don't blame government contractors for not being closely monitored by those doling out our money. That's ludicrous.. QUOTE: The 'problem' with Amtrak and the USPS might be not enough lobbying $$$ coming back to DC. If Amtrak were privatized, would it be any different than Haliburton? Who really ends up getting the money from those earmarks? Maybe. Maybe not. This scenario is pure speculation based on speculation. Not salient to this discussion. QUOTE: But since the topic is Illinois, IMO it's entirely likely that increased Amtrak service to Springfield is a bone to downstate in order to increase metro area funding. Illinois is a lot like DC, with 3 principle players who don't trust each other but do shift alliances as it suits them. The 3rd player is the collar county moderate pro-business Republicans. Both the CTA and Metra are looking for more funding, so the collar couties would ally with Chicago for funding. Adding something for downstate gets the downstate conservative Republicans onboard and doesn't hurt the Democratic governor either. Interesting opinion, but again more unbased speculation. You seem to believe there is some sort of complex conspiracy here, but there isn't even any hearsay to back that up. I live in the western suburbs of Chicago. I wonder where you live, based on your interesting theories. I ask this because when I lived Downstate for four years, nearly every native I met was convinced that all of their tax dollars were being hijacked and sent straight to Chicago. And even if I showed them documentation to the contrary, they went on to insist that the conspirators also were cooking the books, and therefore my state reports were falsified to cover up the hijacking. That is where I learned you cannot use reason and facts to change some people's minds, which is one of the ultimate goals of any debate/discussion. "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They are not entitled, however, to their own facts." No we can't. Charter Member J-CASS (Jaded Cynical Ascerbic Sarcastic Skeptics) Notary Sojac & Retired Foo Fighter "Where there's foo, there's fire." Reply Poppa_Zit Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: West end of Chicago's Famous Racetrack 2,239 posts Posted by Poppa_Zit on Sunday, May 21, 2006 11:04 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by Tharmeni Hey, RR Redneck... Let me know when the price of gasoline goes down and stays down for more than 60 days. I used to work in Saudi Arabia and let me tell you, it isn't going to happen. It's also why I own two hybrids. Of course, you know RR Redneck isn't old enough to drive yet.[;)] "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They are not entitled, however, to their own facts." No we can't. Charter Member J-CASS (Jaded Cynical Ascerbic Sarcastic Skeptics) Notary Sojac & Retired Foo Fighter "Where there's foo, there's fire." Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Monday, May 22, 2006 4:53 AM All democracies the world over have some share of corruption. Possibly the Swiss live in the most clean political environment but maybe we don't hear about their scandals. But I think all of us would prefer the democracy we have to the alternative systems that exist now or have existed in the past. Moussolini may have made the trains run on time, but I would not want to live under a Fascist dictatorship or, for that matter, be part of one either! Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, May 22, 2006 8:27 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by Poppa_Zit QUOTE: Originally posted by up829 QUOTE: Originally posted by Poppa_Zit QUOTE: Private enterprise is not much better. I've seen plenty of department managers in large corporations spend like crazy at year end because there's money left over in the budget and they don't want next years budget cut. You are correct, but private enterprise isn't wasting MY money. THAT'S the difference here. It costs you every time you go to the store. Almost every large bureaucratic organization has internal politics and waste. A major difference is it's largely hidden from public scrutiny until something really big like Enron or Worldcom occurs. How much are banks loosing on credit card fraud, why are they unwilling to talk about it, and what does it cost the public in higher interest rates and fees? And corporations aren't involved in bribery and kickbacks, especially to foreign interests???? QUOTE: Plus I don't think we can dismiss the health care companies and defense contractors role in government waste. Correct again, but why are you trying to put the blame on private business? It ultimately is the government's responsibility -- and fault. Don't blame government contractors for not being closely monitored by those doling out our money. That's ludicrous.. QUOTE: The 'problem' with Amtrak and the USPS might be not enough lobbying $$$ coming back to DC. If Amtrak were privatized, would it be any different than Haliburton? Who really ends up getting the money from those earmarks? Maybe. Maybe not. This scenario is pure speculation based on speculation. Not salient to this discussion. One ethics reform measure that received brief coverage on CNBC before it quietly died was a ban on a form of insider trading by elected representatives and their staff(trading on knowledge of pending legislation). This can't happen with public agencies like Amtrak, but when a contractor is involved our elected reps can and do make a lot of money. According to the CNBC story, the Senate as a whole got a 12% better return than the S&P 500, beating most mutual fund managers. Quite a number of Congressional staffers, based on their IP addresses, are active online traders. Another huge loophole for abuse is attorney client privledge. Want to bribe a politician who has a law firm or get a zoning change passed? Hire the 'right' firm and have them do some 'legal work' and send the bill. The problem with most corruption investigations is we only see the small time players who are stupid enough to get caught, the others have their behinds well covered. But since the topic is Illinois, IMO it's entirely likely that increased Amtrak service to Springfield is a bone to downstate in order to increase metro area funding. Illinois is a lot like DC, with 3 principle players who don't trust each other but do shift alliances as it suits them. The 3rd player is the collar county moderate pro-business Republicans. Both the CTA and Metra are looking for more funding, so the collar couties would ally with Chicago for funding. Adding something for downstate gets the downstate conservative Republicans onboard and doesn't hurt the Democratic governor either. Interesting opinion, but again more unbased speculation. You seem to believe there is some sort of complex conspiracy here, but there isn't even any hearsay to back that up. I live in the western suburbs of Chicago. I wonder where you live, based on your interesting theories. I ask this because when I lived Downstate for four years, nearly every native I met was convinced that all of their tax dollars were being hijacked and sent straight to Chicago. And even if I showed them documentation to the contrary, they went on to insist that the conspirators also were cooking the books, and therefore my state reports were falsified to cover up the hijacking. That is where I learned you cannot use reason and facts to change some people's minds, which is one of the ultimate goals of any debate/discussion. Generally if you asked the same question of DuPage county residents you'd get the same answer, until they want a new Metra station or expanded PACE service. Likewise for Chicago when it comes to school funding. The relationships between the various factions over RTA funding and service are extremely complex, but I'm not suggesting a massive conspiracy, just politics as usual in an election year where everyone has to get something. I lived in Chicago and suburban Cook for about 10 years and saw it from that side, Downers Grove for 10 years and saw it there to, Unincorporated DuPage for about 15 now and it's almost as bad as Chicago. One party rule so strong that the Dems don't even bother to slate candidates. A major difference is there's not a very active press when it comes to investigating corruption. True, there was the DuPage County 7 case, but the main player in that is currently running for Lt Governor. IMO Ryan went way over the line with voters over selling CDLs and indrectly getting people killed. He hasn't been prosecuted for that, and I don't know what legal charge would even be appropriate, but I won't be a bit surprised if politics as usual prevails and he doesn't spend a day in jail. Maybe we should just skip these corruption trials and plea bargain these guys to 1 month in the presidential suite of the Drake hotel[:)] Reply Edit oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Monday, May 22, 2006 9:22 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by Poppa_Zit QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd QUOTE: Originally posted by Poppa_Zit QUOTE: If you can't state rather explicitly and in mostly quantifiable terms, why you're spending money, you probably shouldn't be spending it. It's the whole "problem" of Amtrak. No mission statement. No real goals. Just status quo. Great thoughts there. But why limit it to Amtrak? How about applying it to ALL government-supported programs, which seem to operate pretty much the same way. I can't think of any examples, except maybe the USPS. Most gov't agencies I can think of seem to have well defined missions. Which ones are you thinking about? I decided to save on some typing. But how are these for starters? (Click link for complete details) http://www.heritage.org/Research/Budget/bg1840.cfm The Top 10 List of Egregious Waste. 1. The Missing $25 Billion 2. Unused Flight Tickets Totaling $100 Million 3. Embezzled Funds at the Department of Agriculture 4. Credit Card Abuse at the Department of Defense 5. Medicare Overspending 6. Funding Fictitious Colleges and Students 7. Manipulating Data to Encourage Spending 8. State Abuse of Medicaid Funding Formulas 9. Earned Income Tax Credit Overpayments 10. Redundancy Piled on Redundancy I was talking about the problem of an agency not having a mission and goals. Wasteful spending is a problem in any large organization. Now, what other gov't agency can't tell you rather explicitly why they exist? Here is the IRS's, for example: The IRS mission is to "provide America's taxpayers top quality service by helping them understand and meet their tax responsibilities and by applying the tax law with integrity and fairness to all." -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Monday, May 22, 2006 9:25 AM ...and a bit more.... Here's a page from the EPA web site. Tells you EXACTLY what they are trying to do and how the go about doing it. http://www.epa.gov/epahome/aboutepa.htm#mission I'd like to see something like this for Amtrak as the FIRST step in reform. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply Poppa_Zit Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: West end of Chicago's Famous Racetrack 2,239 posts Posted by Poppa_Zit on Monday, May 22, 2006 12:34 PM QUOTE: I lived in Chicago and suburban Cook for about 10 years and saw it from that side, Downers Grove for 10 years and saw it there to, Unincorporated DuPage for about 15 now and it's almost as bad as Chicago. One party rule so strong that the Dems don't even bother to slate candidates. A major difference is there's not a very active press when it comes to investigating corruption. True, there was the DuPage County 7 case, but the main player in that is currently running for Lt Governor. Boy, you are right about the suburban press not actively ferreting out corruption. You'll NEVER see it in a neighborhood paper, because the publisher usually is chummy with local elected officials, hoping to peacefully coexisit with politicians from all parties (the papers instead assume the role of "town cheerleader") so they don't lose any political advertising or village legal notices. Or make any business people/advertisers angry. I've seen this happen firsthand when I got started in the business, where the publisher of a tri-weekly killed a great corruption piece on the town mayor -- because the mayor was his drinking buddy. "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They are not entitled, however, to their own facts." No we can't. Charter Member J-CASS (Jaded Cynical Ascerbic Sarcastic Skeptics) Notary Sojac & Retired Foo Fighter "Where there's foo, there's fire." Reply Poppa_Zit Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: West end of Chicago's Famous Racetrack 2,239 posts Posted by Poppa_Zit on Monday, May 22, 2006 12:44 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd I was talking about the problem of an agency not having a mission and goals. Wasteful spending is a problem in any large organization. Now, what other gov't agency can't tell you rather explicitly why they exist? Here is the IRS's, for example: The IRS mission is to "provide America's taxpayers top quality service by helping them understand and meet their tax responsibilities and by applying the tax law with integrity and fairness to all." Okay, you asked. Jeez, it was tough to find. I googled "Amtrak" and "mission statement" and voila! This appeared: Beset by woes, fighting for a future, Amtrak rolls on to its 35th birthday By Donna De La Cruz, Associated Press | April 30, 2006 WASHINGTON -- Last year, President Bush proposed no federal aid for Amtrak, its highly touted high-speed train was sidelined for months with brake problems, and its president was fired. Still, the passenger railroad chugs on toward its 35th birthday tomorrow. To mark the occasion, a group of analysts who have followed Amtrak's woes over the years will gather in Washington to discuss what critics call the railroad's ''35 years of subsidies, waste, and deception." ''Amtrak keeps making promises that things would get better, one promise after another," said Joseph Vranich, a former Amtrak spokesman and onetime member of the Amtrak Reform Council. ''But people fall for the promises, and Amtrak survives." Keith Ashdown with the group Taxpayers for Common Sense said Congress shoulders some of the blame for Amtrak's financial woes. The railroad always seems to teeter on the brink of failure, only to be pulled back by a last-minute infusion of cash from Capitol Hill. Amtrak has debt of more than $3.5 billion, and its operating loss for 2005 topped $550 million. ''Congress has been practicing schizophrenic leadership, trying to give Amtrak tough love, but then giving them the money anyway but no real clear consensus opinion on how they want Amtrak to change," Ashdown said. ''There's never been any real direction given to Amtrak except saying that they have to be more fiscally responsible." David Hughes, Amtrak's acting president, said the railroad's future is bright. It has begun a host of initiatives to revamp some long-distance routes, streamline its finances, and boost customer service while looking at several cost-cutting initiatives such as revamping its food and beverage service. Hughes said one important thing Amtrak has accomplished was agreeing on a mission statement with its management, board of directors, and the Transportation Department. The mission is to provide the country with a ''safe, reliable intercity passenger service in an economically sound manner that will exceed customer expectations." ''We have some common ground here that hasn't existed in a long time for Amtrak," he said. "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They are not entitled, however, to their own facts." No we can't. Charter Member J-CASS (Jaded Cynical Ascerbic Sarcastic Skeptics) Notary Sojac & Retired Foo Fighter "Where there's foo, there's fire." Reply 123 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
An "expensive model collector"
QUOTE: Getting back to land use, it would be possible, but downright stupid, to say that a one train a day or four trains a day service doesn't reduce highway land use because obviously a continuous stream of traffic on one lane in each direction is going to top the ridership of the sketchy Amtrak service, even with the average of 1.2 people per car.
QUOTE: Paul Melinkovik needs to be reminded that by far the greatest perecentage of auto use is SINGLE OCCUPANCY, and thus Amtrak does generally come out ahead as more fuel efficient
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
QUOTE: Originally posted by Poppa_Zit Right now, with interest rates going up, sellers in places like Naperville are having a hard time getting the same home prices they got six months or a year ago. They haven't reduced real estate tax bills, though.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Paul Milenkovic QUOTE: Getting back to land use, it would be possible, but downright stupid, to say that a one train a day or four trains a day service doesn't reduce highway land use because obviously a continuous stream of traffic on one lane in each direction is going to top the ridership of the sketchy Amtrak service, even with the average of 1.2 people per car. QUOTE: Paul Melinkovik needs to be reminded that by far the greatest perecentage of auto use is SINGLE OCCUPANCY, and thus Amtrak does generally come out ahead as more fuel efficient I would like to address the issue of civility of the discussion. I know that everyone wears their ethnic heritage on their sleeves these days (Milenko is a variant of Michael, the "vic" suffix denotes a patronomic, the construction is much like Blagojevich where the "j" is a "y" sound, both names are to be pronounced with the emphasis on the second syllable, and our family opted out of the "h" at the end as a subsitute for the diacritical mark in Roman script or a special character in Cyrillic script), and everyone takes offense at everything, but some boundaries need to be drawn. I am correct that I have been called "downright stupid" on account that I pointed out that a skeleton train service would make a minimum impact on highway congestion? Have I called anyone a name for criticizing a position that I was trying to explain? With that aside, I am a person deeply interested in both the engineering and public-policy issues surrounding transportation of all modes and especially railroads. Railroads are part of my family history ranging from my great-grandfather Viktor Heim, who was a civil engineer in the employ of the Austrian State Railway in Croatia, to my father Veljko Milenkovic, who holds patents on technology related to RRollway, a high-speed car wide-gauge rail car-ferry system once promoted by GATX, and who also engineered a power coupling for the US DOT Pueblo rail test facility. I really like trains and would like them to play a more significant role in transportation. There is also an emotional factor on this forum because many of us, myself too, approach passenger trains as railroad fans and not necessarily as transportation analysts. Metra is of the scale that it makes a major impact on traffic congestion and the vitality of the Chicago downtown. Call me stupid, but two trains a day between, say Rockford and Chicago, are not of that scale. Even if those trains provide a necessary accomodation to people who cannot drive, they are such a small part of the transportation picture that they are more of the form of a demonstration project. There is no shame in a demonstration project -- the Metroliner started out that way. A demonstration project, in exchange for its public expenditure and subsidy, should, demonstrate. If trains are advocated as a means of saving fuel, they should demonstrate fuel efficiency, and the fuel use of such a train should be quantified and reported. If the train is to substitute for car trips, there should be some assessment of ridership and market as to how many people are leaving their cars behind. If trains are to be a cost-effective part of the transportation mix, the costs of running that train should be broken down by route segment -- maybe the subsidy is high on a per-passenger basis because of the small scale, but some reasonable analysis needs to be made to demonstrate that the per-passenger subsidy could be reduced if the operation greatly expanded in scale. This forum is able to discuss the steam-Diesel transition in the 1950's and argue the merits of the Niagra, the Duplex, and the J based on the technology, the numbers, and what happened historically. I know this is hard because a lot of feeling are on the line, but I would like to have discussions of passenger trains, the pros and the cons on that same level. Gas at $3, $4, $5/gallon or more is not going to bring back the passenger train unless people get a handle on passenger train economics. I fully support passenger rail subsidy, but in exchange for that subsidy, the public, the stakeholder in this, should get better information on the fuel economy, capital and labor economics of the subsidized trains.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
QUOTE: If you can't state rather explicitly and in mostly quantifiable terms, why you're spending money, you probably shouldn't be spending it. It's the whole "problem" of Amtrak. No mission statement. No real goals. Just status quo.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Poppa_Zit QUOTE: If you can't state rather explicitly and in mostly quantifiable terms, why you're spending money, you probably shouldn't be spending it. It's the whole "problem" of Amtrak. No mission statement. No real goals. Just status quo. Great thoughts there. But why limit it to Amtrak? How about applying it to ALL government-supported programs, which seem to operate pretty much the same way.
Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has.
QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd QUOTE: Originally posted by Poppa_Zit QUOTE: If you can't state rather explicitly and in mostly quantifiable terms, why you're spending money, you probably shouldn't be spending it. It's the whole "problem" of Amtrak. No mission statement. No real goals. Just status quo. Great thoughts there. But why limit it to Amtrak? How about applying it to ALL government-supported programs, which seem to operate pretty much the same way. I can't think of any examples, except maybe the USPS. Most gov't agencies I can think of seem to have well defined missions. Which ones are you thinking about?
QUOTE: Originally posted by wallyworld One of the apparent problems with a Rockford-Chicago routing seems to be a lack of folks who regularly commute between the two on a regular basis. .
QUOTE: Originally posted by CSSHEGEWISCH I would look at anything regarding government waste coming from that well-known conservative to libertarian think tank known as the Heritage Foundation with a fair amount of skepticism. They have long tended to view any government spending beyond the Defense budget as wasteful. People will complain about waste and fraud, but only when it involves programs which they do not utilize. Also, government practices are a reflection of the society at large, not an aberration.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Poppa_Zit Giving this topic more thought, I think the one well-defined mission common to all government programs is to spend every penny in this year's budget -- whether necessary/wasteful or not -- so they don't cut next year's budget. Or even better, get more money allocated next year, thanks to a granted request for an increase.
QUOTE: Originally posted by CSSHEGEWISCH Being a lifelong Chicagoan, I have come to the conclusion regarding honesty in government that what people say and what they do are rarely the same thing. People claim they want good government but will go to their precinct captain or alderman rather than deal with bureaucracy, even if said bureaucratic requirements are minimal, such as filling out a form for a fence permit. They will then vote for the village officeholder (assuming that they bother to vote at that level) who helped them out. The public gets the degree of honesty in government that they really want, regardless of what they say.
QUOTE: Originally posted by up829 QUOTE: Originally posted by Poppa_Zit Giving this topic more thought, I think the one well-defined mission common to all government programs is to spend every penny in this year's budget -- whether necessary/wasteful or not -- so they don't cut next year's budget. Or even better, get more money allocated next year, thanks to a granted request for an increase. QUOTE: Private enterprise is not much better. I've seen plenty of department managers in large corporations spend like crazy at year end because there's money left over in the budget and they don't want next years budget cut. You are correct, but private enterprise isn't wasting MY money. THAT'S the difference here. QUOTE: Plus I don't think we can dismiss the health care companies and defense contractors role in government waste. Correct again, but why are you trying to put the blame on private business? It ultimately is the government's responsibility -- and fault. Don't blame government contractors for not being closely monitored by those doling out our money. That's ludicrous.. QUOTE: The 'problem' with Amtrak and the USPS might be not enough lobbying $$$ coming back to DC. If Amtrak were privatized, would it be any different than Haliburton? Who really ends up getting the money from those earmarks? Maybe. Maybe not. This scenario is pure speculation based on speculation. Not salient to this discussion. QUOTE: But since the topic is Illinois, IMO it's entirely likely that increased Amtrak service to Springfield is a bone to downstate in order to increase metro area funding. Illinois is a lot like DC, with 3 principle players who don't trust each other but do shift alliances as it suits them. The 3rd player is the collar county moderate pro-business Republicans. Both the CTA and Metra are looking for more funding, so the collar couties would ally with Chicago for funding. Adding something for downstate gets the downstate conservative Republicans onboard and doesn't hurt the Democratic governor either. Interesting opinion, but again more unbased speculation. You seem to believe there is some sort of complex conspiracy here, but there isn't even any hearsay to back that up. I live in the western suburbs of Chicago. I wonder where you live, based on your interesting theories. I ask this because when I lived Downstate for four years, nearly every native I met was convinced that all of their tax dollars were being hijacked and sent straight to Chicago. And even if I showed them documentation to the contrary, they went on to insist that the conspirators also were cooking the books, and therefore my state reports were falsified to cover up the hijacking. That is where I learned you cannot use reason and facts to change some people's minds, which is one of the ultimate goals of any debate/discussion.
QUOTE: Private enterprise is not much better. I've seen plenty of department managers in large corporations spend like crazy at year end because there's money left over in the budget and they don't want next years budget cut.
QUOTE: Plus I don't think we can dismiss the health care companies and defense contractors role in government waste.
QUOTE: The 'problem' with Amtrak and the USPS might be not enough lobbying $$$ coming back to DC. If Amtrak were privatized, would it be any different than Haliburton? Who really ends up getting the money from those earmarks?
QUOTE: But since the topic is Illinois, IMO it's entirely likely that increased Amtrak service to Springfield is a bone to downstate in order to increase metro area funding. Illinois is a lot like DC, with 3 principle players who don't trust each other but do shift alliances as it suits them. The 3rd player is the collar county moderate pro-business Republicans. Both the CTA and Metra are looking for more funding, so the collar couties would ally with Chicago for funding. Adding something for downstate gets the downstate conservative Republicans onboard and doesn't hurt the Democratic governor either.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Tharmeni Hey, RR Redneck... Let me know when the price of gasoline goes down and stays down for more than 60 days. I used to work in Saudi Arabia and let me tell you, it isn't going to happen. It's also why I own two hybrids.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Poppa_Zit QUOTE: Originally posted by up829 QUOTE: Originally posted by Poppa_Zit QUOTE: Private enterprise is not much better. I've seen plenty of department managers in large corporations spend like crazy at year end because there's money left over in the budget and they don't want next years budget cut. You are correct, but private enterprise isn't wasting MY money. THAT'S the difference here. It costs you every time you go to the store. Almost every large bureaucratic organization has internal politics and waste. A major difference is it's largely hidden from public scrutiny until something really big like Enron or Worldcom occurs. How much are banks loosing on credit card fraud, why are they unwilling to talk about it, and what does it cost the public in higher interest rates and fees? And corporations aren't involved in bribery and kickbacks, especially to foreign interests???? QUOTE: Plus I don't think we can dismiss the health care companies and defense contractors role in government waste. Correct again, but why are you trying to put the blame on private business? It ultimately is the government's responsibility -- and fault. Don't blame government contractors for not being closely monitored by those doling out our money. That's ludicrous.. QUOTE: The 'problem' with Amtrak and the USPS might be not enough lobbying $$$ coming back to DC. If Amtrak were privatized, would it be any different than Haliburton? Who really ends up getting the money from those earmarks? Maybe. Maybe not. This scenario is pure speculation based on speculation. Not salient to this discussion. One ethics reform measure that received brief coverage on CNBC before it quietly died was a ban on a form of insider trading by elected representatives and their staff(trading on knowledge of pending legislation). This can't happen with public agencies like Amtrak, but when a contractor is involved our elected reps can and do make a lot of money. According to the CNBC story, the Senate as a whole got a 12% better return than the S&P 500, beating most mutual fund managers. Quite a number of Congressional staffers, based on their IP addresses, are active online traders. Another huge loophole for abuse is attorney client privledge. Want to bribe a politician who has a law firm or get a zoning change passed? Hire the 'right' firm and have them do some 'legal work' and send the bill. The problem with most corruption investigations is we only see the small time players who are stupid enough to get caught, the others have their behinds well covered. But since the topic is Illinois, IMO it's entirely likely that increased Amtrak service to Springfield is a bone to downstate in order to increase metro area funding. Illinois is a lot like DC, with 3 principle players who don't trust each other but do shift alliances as it suits them. The 3rd player is the collar county moderate pro-business Republicans. Both the CTA and Metra are looking for more funding, so the collar couties would ally with Chicago for funding. Adding something for downstate gets the downstate conservative Republicans onboard and doesn't hurt the Democratic governor either. Interesting opinion, but again more unbased speculation. You seem to believe there is some sort of complex conspiracy here, but there isn't even any hearsay to back that up. I live in the western suburbs of Chicago. I wonder where you live, based on your interesting theories. I ask this because when I lived Downstate for four years, nearly every native I met was convinced that all of their tax dollars were being hijacked and sent straight to Chicago. And even if I showed them documentation to the contrary, they went on to insist that the conspirators also were cooking the books, and therefore my state reports were falsified to cover up the hijacking. That is where I learned you cannot use reason and facts to change some people's minds, which is one of the ultimate goals of any debate/discussion. Generally if you asked the same question of DuPage county residents you'd get the same answer, until they want a new Metra station or expanded PACE service. Likewise for Chicago when it comes to school funding. The relationships between the various factions over RTA funding and service are extremely complex, but I'm not suggesting a massive conspiracy, just politics as usual in an election year where everyone has to get something. I lived in Chicago and suburban Cook for about 10 years and saw it from that side, Downers Grove for 10 years and saw it there to, Unincorporated DuPage for about 15 now and it's almost as bad as Chicago. One party rule so strong that the Dems don't even bother to slate candidates. A major difference is there's not a very active press when it comes to investigating corruption. True, there was the DuPage County 7 case, but the main player in that is currently running for Lt Governor. IMO Ryan went way over the line with voters over selling CDLs and indrectly getting people killed. He hasn't been prosecuted for that, and I don't know what legal charge would even be appropriate, but I won't be a bit surprised if politics as usual prevails and he doesn't spend a day in jail. Maybe we should just skip these corruption trials and plea bargain these guys to 1 month in the presidential suite of the Drake hotel[:)] Reply Edit oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Monday, May 22, 2006 9:22 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by Poppa_Zit QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd QUOTE: Originally posted by Poppa_Zit QUOTE: If you can't state rather explicitly and in mostly quantifiable terms, why you're spending money, you probably shouldn't be spending it. It's the whole "problem" of Amtrak. No mission statement. No real goals. Just status quo. Great thoughts there. But why limit it to Amtrak? How about applying it to ALL government-supported programs, which seem to operate pretty much the same way. I can't think of any examples, except maybe the USPS. Most gov't agencies I can think of seem to have well defined missions. Which ones are you thinking about? I decided to save on some typing. But how are these for starters? (Click link for complete details) http://www.heritage.org/Research/Budget/bg1840.cfm The Top 10 List of Egregious Waste. 1. The Missing $25 Billion 2. Unused Flight Tickets Totaling $100 Million 3. Embezzled Funds at the Department of Agriculture 4. Credit Card Abuse at the Department of Defense 5. Medicare Overspending 6. Funding Fictitious Colleges and Students 7. Manipulating Data to Encourage Spending 8. State Abuse of Medicaid Funding Formulas 9. Earned Income Tax Credit Overpayments 10. Redundancy Piled on Redundancy I was talking about the problem of an agency not having a mission and goals. Wasteful spending is a problem in any large organization. Now, what other gov't agency can't tell you rather explicitly why they exist? Here is the IRS's, for example: The IRS mission is to "provide America's taxpayers top quality service by helping them understand and meet their tax responsibilities and by applying the tax law with integrity and fairness to all." -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Monday, May 22, 2006 9:25 AM ...and a bit more.... Here's a page from the EPA web site. Tells you EXACTLY what they are trying to do and how the go about doing it. http://www.epa.gov/epahome/aboutepa.htm#mission I'd like to see something like this for Amtrak as the FIRST step in reform. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply Poppa_Zit Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: West end of Chicago's Famous Racetrack 2,239 posts Posted by Poppa_Zit on Monday, May 22, 2006 12:34 PM QUOTE: I lived in Chicago and suburban Cook for about 10 years and saw it from that side, Downers Grove for 10 years and saw it there to, Unincorporated DuPage for about 15 now and it's almost as bad as Chicago. One party rule so strong that the Dems don't even bother to slate candidates. A major difference is there's not a very active press when it comes to investigating corruption. True, there was the DuPage County 7 case, but the main player in that is currently running for Lt Governor. Boy, you are right about the suburban press not actively ferreting out corruption. You'll NEVER see it in a neighborhood paper, because the publisher usually is chummy with local elected officials, hoping to peacefully coexisit with politicians from all parties (the papers instead assume the role of "town cheerleader") so they don't lose any political advertising or village legal notices. Or make any business people/advertisers angry. I've seen this happen firsthand when I got started in the business, where the publisher of a tri-weekly killed a great corruption piece on the town mayor -- because the mayor was his drinking buddy. "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They are not entitled, however, to their own facts." No we can't. Charter Member J-CASS (Jaded Cynical Ascerbic Sarcastic Skeptics) Notary Sojac & Retired Foo Fighter "Where there's foo, there's fire." Reply Poppa_Zit Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: West end of Chicago's Famous Racetrack 2,239 posts Posted by Poppa_Zit on Monday, May 22, 2006 12:44 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd I was talking about the problem of an agency not having a mission and goals. Wasteful spending is a problem in any large organization. Now, what other gov't agency can't tell you rather explicitly why they exist? Here is the IRS's, for example: The IRS mission is to "provide America's taxpayers top quality service by helping them understand and meet their tax responsibilities and by applying the tax law with integrity and fairness to all." Okay, you asked. Jeez, it was tough to find. I googled "Amtrak" and "mission statement" and voila! This appeared: Beset by woes, fighting for a future, Amtrak rolls on to its 35th birthday By Donna De La Cruz, Associated Press | April 30, 2006 WASHINGTON -- Last year, President Bush proposed no federal aid for Amtrak, its highly touted high-speed train was sidelined for months with brake problems, and its president was fired. Still, the passenger railroad chugs on toward its 35th birthday tomorrow. To mark the occasion, a group of analysts who have followed Amtrak's woes over the years will gather in Washington to discuss what critics call the railroad's ''35 years of subsidies, waste, and deception." ''Amtrak keeps making promises that things would get better, one promise after another," said Joseph Vranich, a former Amtrak spokesman and onetime member of the Amtrak Reform Council. ''But people fall for the promises, and Amtrak survives." Keith Ashdown with the group Taxpayers for Common Sense said Congress shoulders some of the blame for Amtrak's financial woes. The railroad always seems to teeter on the brink of failure, only to be pulled back by a last-minute infusion of cash from Capitol Hill. Amtrak has debt of more than $3.5 billion, and its operating loss for 2005 topped $550 million. ''Congress has been practicing schizophrenic leadership, trying to give Amtrak tough love, but then giving them the money anyway but no real clear consensus opinion on how they want Amtrak to change," Ashdown said. ''There's never been any real direction given to Amtrak except saying that they have to be more fiscally responsible." David Hughes, Amtrak's acting president, said the railroad's future is bright. It has begun a host of initiatives to revamp some long-distance routes, streamline its finances, and boost customer service while looking at several cost-cutting initiatives such as revamping its food and beverage service. Hughes said one important thing Amtrak has accomplished was agreeing on a mission statement with its management, board of directors, and the Transportation Department. The mission is to provide the country with a ''safe, reliable intercity passenger service in an economically sound manner that will exceed customer expectations." ''We have some common ground here that hasn't existed in a long time for Amtrak," he said. "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They are not entitled, however, to their own facts." No we can't. Charter Member J-CASS (Jaded Cynical Ascerbic Sarcastic Skeptics) Notary Sojac & Retired Foo Fighter "Where there's foo, there's fire." Reply 123 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 up829 QUOTE: Originally posted by Poppa_Zit QUOTE: Private enterprise is not much better. I've seen plenty of department managers in large corporations spend like crazy at year end because there's money left over in the budget and they don't want next years budget cut. You are correct, but private enterprise isn't wasting MY money. THAT'S the difference here. It costs you every time you go to the store. Almost every large bureaucratic organization has internal politics and waste. A major difference is it's largely hidden from public scrutiny until something really big like Enron or Worldcom occurs. How much are banks loosing on credit card fraud, why are they unwilling to talk about it, and what does it cost the public in higher interest rates and fees? And corporations aren't involved in bribery and kickbacks, especially to foreign interests???? QUOTE: Plus I don't think we can dismiss the health care companies and defense contractors role in government waste. Correct again, but why are you trying to put the blame on private business? It ultimately is the government's responsibility -- and fault. Don't blame government contractors for not being closely monitored by those doling out our money. That's ludicrous.. QUOTE: The 'problem' with Amtrak and the USPS might be not enough lobbying $$$ coming back to DC. If Amtrak were privatized, would it be any different than Haliburton? Who really ends up getting the money from those earmarks? Maybe. Maybe not. This scenario is pure speculation based on speculation. Not salient to this discussion. One ethics reform measure that received brief coverage on CNBC before it quietly died was a ban on a form of insider trading by elected representatives and their staff(trading on knowledge of pending legislation). This can't happen with public agencies like Amtrak, but when a contractor is involved our elected reps can and do make a lot of money. According to the CNBC story, the Senate as a whole got a 12% better return than the S&P 500, beating most mutual fund managers. Quite a number of Congressional staffers, based on their IP addresses, are active online traders. Another huge loophole for abuse is attorney client privledge. Want to bribe a politician who has a law firm or get a zoning change passed? Hire the 'right' firm and have them do some 'legal work' and send the bill. The problem with most corruption investigations is we only see the small time players who are stupid enough to get caught, the others have their behinds well covered. But since the topic is Illinois, IMO it's entirely likely that increased Amtrak service to Springfield is a bone to downstate in order to increase metro area funding. Illinois is a lot like DC, with 3 principle players who don't trust each other but do shift alliances as it suits them. The 3rd player is the collar county moderate pro-business Republicans. Both the CTA and Metra are looking for more funding, so the collar couties would ally with Chicago for funding. Adding something for downstate gets the downstate conservative Republicans onboard and doesn't hurt the Democratic governor either. Interesting opinion, but again more unbased speculation. You seem to believe there is some sort of complex conspiracy here, but there isn't even any hearsay to back that up. I live in the western suburbs of Chicago. I wonder where you live, based on your interesting theories. I ask this because when I lived Downstate for four years, nearly every native I met was convinced that all of their tax dollars were being hijacked and sent straight to Chicago. And even if I showed them documentation to the contrary, they went on to insist that the conspirators also were cooking the books, and therefore my state reports were falsified to cover up the hijacking. That is where I learned you cannot use reason and facts to change some people's minds, which is one of the ultimate goals of any debate/discussion. Generally if you asked the same question of DuPage county residents you'd get the same answer, until they want a new Metra station or expanded PACE service. Likewise for Chicago when it comes to school funding. The relationships between the various factions over RTA funding and service are extremely complex, but I'm not suggesting a massive conspiracy, just politics as usual in an election year where everyone has to get something. I lived in Chicago and suburban Cook for about 10 years and saw it from that side, Downers Grove for 10 years and saw it there to, Unincorporated DuPage for about 15 now and it's almost as bad as Chicago. One party rule so strong that the Dems don't even bother to slate candidates. A major difference is there's not a very active press when it comes to investigating corruption. True, there was the DuPage County 7 case, but the main player in that is currently running for Lt Governor. IMO Ryan went way over the line with voters over selling CDLs and indrectly getting people killed. He hasn't been prosecuted for that, and I don't know what legal charge would even be appropriate, but I won't be a bit surprised if politics as usual prevails and he doesn't spend a day in jail. Maybe we should just skip these corruption trials and plea bargain these guys to 1 month in the presidential suite of the Drake hotel[:)]
QUOTE: Originally posted by Poppa_Zit QUOTE: Private enterprise is not much better. I've seen plenty of department managers in large corporations spend like crazy at year end because there's money left over in the budget and they don't want next years budget cut. You are correct, but private enterprise isn't wasting MY money. THAT'S the difference here. It costs you every time you go to the store. Almost every large bureaucratic organization has internal politics and waste. A major difference is it's largely hidden from public scrutiny until something really big like Enron or Worldcom occurs. How much are banks loosing on credit card fraud, why are they unwilling to talk about it, and what does it cost the public in higher interest rates and fees? And corporations aren't involved in bribery and kickbacks, especially to foreign interests???? QUOTE: Plus I don't think we can dismiss the health care companies and defense contractors role in government waste. Correct again, but why are you trying to put the blame on private business? It ultimately is the government's responsibility -- and fault. Don't blame government contractors for not being closely monitored by those doling out our money. That's ludicrous.. QUOTE: The 'problem' with Amtrak and the USPS might be not enough lobbying $$$ coming back to DC. If Amtrak were privatized, would it be any different than Haliburton? Who really ends up getting the money from those earmarks? Maybe. Maybe not. This scenario is pure speculation based on speculation. Not salient to this discussion. One ethics reform measure that received brief coverage on CNBC before it quietly died was a ban on a form of insider trading by elected representatives and their staff(trading on knowledge of pending legislation). This can't happen with public agencies like Amtrak, but when a contractor is involved our elected reps can and do make a lot of money. According to the CNBC story, the Senate as a whole got a 12% better return than the S&P 500, beating most mutual fund managers. Quite a number of Congressional staffers, based on their IP addresses, are active online traders. Another huge loophole for abuse is attorney client privledge. Want to bribe a politician who has a law firm or get a zoning change passed? Hire the 'right' firm and have them do some 'legal work' and send the bill. The problem with most corruption investigations is we only see the small time players who are stupid enough to get caught, the others have their behinds well covered. But since the topic is Illinois, IMO it's entirely likely that increased Amtrak service to Springfield is a bone to downstate in order to increase metro area funding. Illinois is a lot like DC, with 3 principle players who don't trust each other but do shift alliances as it suits them. The 3rd player is the collar county moderate pro-business Republicans. Both the CTA and Metra are looking for more funding, so the collar couties would ally with Chicago for funding. Adding something for downstate gets the downstate conservative Republicans onboard and doesn't hurt the Democratic governor either. Interesting opinion, but again more unbased speculation. You seem to believe there is some sort of complex conspiracy here, but there isn't even any hearsay to back that up. I live in the western suburbs of Chicago. I wonder where you live, based on your interesting theories. I ask this because when I lived Downstate for four years, nearly every native I met was convinced that all of their tax dollars were being hijacked and sent straight to Chicago. And even if I showed them documentation to the contrary, they went on to insist that the conspirators also were cooking the books, and therefore my state reports were falsified to cover up the hijacking. That is where I learned you cannot use reason and facts to change some people's minds, which is one of the ultimate goals of any debate/discussion.
But since the topic is Illinois, IMO it's entirely likely that increased Amtrak service to Springfield is a bone to downstate in order to increase metro area funding. Illinois is a lot like DC, with 3 principle players who don't trust each other but do shift alliances as it suits them. The 3rd player is the collar county moderate pro-business Republicans. Both the CTA and Metra are looking for more funding, so the collar couties would ally with Chicago for funding. Adding something for downstate gets the downstate conservative Republicans onboard and doesn't hurt the Democratic governor either.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Poppa_Zit QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd QUOTE: Originally posted by Poppa_Zit QUOTE: If you can't state rather explicitly and in mostly quantifiable terms, why you're spending money, you probably shouldn't be spending it. It's the whole "problem" of Amtrak. No mission statement. No real goals. Just status quo. Great thoughts there. But why limit it to Amtrak? How about applying it to ALL government-supported programs, which seem to operate pretty much the same way. I can't think of any examples, except maybe the USPS. Most gov't agencies I can think of seem to have well defined missions. Which ones are you thinking about? I decided to save on some typing. But how are these for starters? (Click link for complete details) http://www.heritage.org/Research/Budget/bg1840.cfm The Top 10 List of Egregious Waste. 1. The Missing $25 Billion 2. Unused Flight Tickets Totaling $100 Million 3. Embezzled Funds at the Department of Agriculture 4. Credit Card Abuse at the Department of Defense 5. Medicare Overspending 6. Funding Fictitious Colleges and Students 7. Manipulating Data to Encourage Spending 8. State Abuse of Medicaid Funding Formulas 9. Earned Income Tax Credit Overpayments 10. Redundancy Piled on Redundancy
QUOTE: I lived in Chicago and suburban Cook for about 10 years and saw it from that side, Downers Grove for 10 years and saw it there to, Unincorporated DuPage for about 15 now and it's almost as bad as Chicago. One party rule so strong that the Dems don't even bother to slate candidates. A major difference is there's not a very active press when it comes to investigating corruption. True, there was the DuPage County 7 case, but the main player in that is currently running for Lt Governor.
QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd I was talking about the problem of an agency not having a mission and goals. Wasteful spending is a problem in any large organization. Now, what other gov't agency can't tell you rather explicitly why they exist? Here is the IRS's, for example: The IRS mission is to "provide America's taxpayers top quality service by helping them understand and meet their tax responsibilities and by applying the tax law with integrity and fairness to all."
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.