Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="CMStPnP"] [quote user="Sam1"]The GAO, which is arguably the most objective U.S. Government Agency, looked at 16 domestic high and moderate speed passenger rail projects.  That strikes me as more than a single spoke.  I spent more than 40 years working for corporate America, including 33 years in Dallas.  I was an accounting and audit manager.  The only government agency that we looked to for best practice ideas was the GAO, primarily because of its objectivity and the excellent quality of its work.  [/quote] Your right, it is a series of single spokes spread across the country, still not a integrated or intermodal system though, is it? Based on the corridor proposals put up by the U.S. DOT, the proposed moderate or high speed rail systems will never be an integrated whole.  I don't get your point. [quote user="Sam1"]These is scant evidence to support this point.  For example, the Union Pacific said that it would cost more than $1.86 billion to route freight traffic off of its line from Taylor to San Antonio to enable the Austin to San Antonio commuter rail project.  That is just the cost of the relocation work.  It does not include the financing.  Depending on the length and terms of the financing, it could easily double the total cost over the life of the debt financing, which usually runs in the neighborhood of 30 years.[/quote], I think the point was it's cheaper to re-engineer the frieght system where it traverses our congested cities and use those lines for high speed rail then it is to build new high speed rail systems entirely from the ground up in those congested areas.     Your earlier argument was that HSR could never be achieved on a system mixing frieght with passenger.    While that is true you neglect to point out in many of those cases where the ROW is shared, frieght carriers would probably benefit with increased transit times if they were located elsewhere.     The UP's estimate is probably inflated because it knows the consumer is the government and it assumes purchase vs eminent domain probably among other things.     I'd be curious to know what a independent organization assesses the costs are.    I'm pretty sure the costs of relocating frieght are cheaper then building a seperate HSR line through the congested area so that frieght and passenger traffic is not mixed.     Just a hunch though.      The other point your missing here and by using the Texas example you avoid discussing it.     Is in some cases the shift of the frieght can take place on a competing rail line or slightly more circuitous rail line.  I don't recall saying anything about mixing freight and moderate or high speed passenger service.  I don't think the country can afford to build separate moderate and high speed rail networks, California to the contrary notwithstanding.  The U.P. cost estimate to shift its freight traffic to the east of Austin, on an existing line, has been submitted to the Texas DOT.  Presumably it will be examined closely the the state auditors, amongst others.  There is no evidence that it is inflated. [quote user="Sam1"]The cost of the airways system has been paid for by the commercial airlines, general aviation, and the military operatiing in civilian airspace.  All modes of transport, however, recieve some subsidy from the federal, state, and local governments.  But nothing comes close to the amount of subsidy required by passenger rail.  In FY2008 Amtrak, as an example, received an average federal subsidy of 22.61 cents per passenger mile compared to .42 cents for the airlines and .026 cents for vehicle miles travelled.  Closer to home, Trinity Railway Express (TRE) received an average subsidy of 20.5 cents per passenger mile.  [/quote]      Again though your looking at passenger rail as "Amtrak".      Not a hub and spoke system with intermodalism as it was before the Private Industry exited the Passenger Rail sphere.    I understand NARP's arguments are flawed and I don't believe them either but I see a whole lot of new airport infrastructure in place thats paid for by taxpayer money.     Lots of first class airports in rural areas where the air traffic doesn't cover their cost and ostensibly they are built for political reasons or for the reason of increasing tourism.      You should be able to Google "AIRLINE" and "SUBSIDY" and come up with a list of recent non-9-11 related misc direct subsidies.     Likewise subsidies to serve rural airports to the airlines. I have looked at various arguments regarding airline subsidies.  Many of them are flawed.  Each year I download the budget and financial information for Amtrak, FAA, DOT, Homeland Security, Benefit Guarantee Corporation, etc., and calculate the federal subsidies for the various modes of transportation covered by these organizations or agencies.    For those who know how to read the federal reports, as well as the state and local government reports, the picture is clear.  Passenger rail requires a greater subsidy than any other form of common transport in the U.S. Airports, highways, etc. are built using government financing.  The interest associated with this financing is usually lower than the interest charged in the private capital markets, although the spreads are not as great as many people imagine.  Most people seem to miss the key point that the costs of building airports, highways, etc., for the most part, is recoved through user fees.  The essential air services program, which requires approximately $114 million per year, is a direct and relatively large subsidy to support air service to outback communities.  It is the one subsidy that approximates the subsidy received by Amtrak on a per passenger miles basis.  [quote user="Sam1"]The FAA is replacing the air traffic control system.  Although the current system is outmoded, it is not dysfunctional.  Monies for Next Gen, which will cost approximately $20 billion, is in the FY10 and FY11 budgets.[/quote]  I heard the assurance since the 1980's that the FAA was about to fix the Air Traffic Control system.   It's great your still hanging onto that.     I'll believe it when I see it.     Not dysfunctional.....what? The FAA budget has monies to modernize the air traffic control system.      [quote user="Sam1"]I spent more than 40 years working for corporate America, including 33 years in Dallas.  I was an accounting and audit manager.  The only government agency that we looked to for best practice ideas was the GAO, primarily because of its objectivity and the excellent quality of its work.  [/quote] Yeah again though your avoiding the whole argument I tried to make which rail does increase mobility and does add to GDP.     GAO is NOT an Economics body.    In fact, it very much analyzes things in a silo using a strict bean counter perspective.      We would not have Airlines today if the GAO was in charge of analyzing the situation in the 1940's and 1950's.      Having worked on a Economics Staff myself we would look at the GAO findings at arms length.     Very much the PhD Economists on the staff I supported viewed the GAO findings with suspicion because their premise was flawed in some way.      BTW, I have a BBA in Finance, really can't see why a Private Firm would use Government Accounting by the GAO as a example to follow maybe you were looking at a small subset of what they do because.......Public Accounting <> Private Accounting.[/quote] The GAO has a variety of in-house experts, including economists.  It is, however, primarily an auditing organization known for the thoroughness and objectivity of its work.  You assessment of the the GAO is wrong.  I can only suspect that you have never had any dealings with the GAO executives.  I see nothing in your writing that suggest that you have deal with the GAO or understand its methodologies. If you have a BBA in Finance, then you should know that the busines community and governments use somewhat different accounting rules and standards.  Most businesses use GAAP, as do most governments, except government accounting is moderated by the Government Accounting Standards Board.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag