henry6 Sam1 schlimmSam1: "Many of the people who participate in these forums, as well as organizations like NARP, point out the upside of passenger rail but fail to mention the downsides. That is dishonest." That remark is, quite simply, rude. Advocates are not expected to show all sides of a positional question. That is the responsibility of the other points of view to present in the "marketplace of ideas." In my judgement people who present only part of the story are being dishonest or at least not candid. If people find this insulting, that is their perogative. I believe it is important, at least from time to time, to call a spade a spade. Actually that is propagandizing, advertising, making one's arguement, a lot more things than bieng dishonest. I find name calling and mud slinging like this to be more dishonest: instead of arguing with facts or saying you don't have a defense, you instead make fun or degrade others. That's not honest aruguing. Hit me with facts, reasons, and thruths, not with mud and defamitory names.
Sam1 schlimmSam1: "Many of the people who participate in these forums, as well as organizations like NARP, point out the upside of passenger rail but fail to mention the downsides. That is dishonest." That remark is, quite simply, rude. Advocates are not expected to show all sides of a positional question. That is the responsibility of the other points of view to present in the "marketplace of ideas." In my judgement people who present only part of the story are being dishonest or at least not candid. If people find this insulting, that is their perogative. I believe it is important, at least from time to time, to call a spade a spade.
schlimmSam1: "Many of the people who participate in these forums, as well as organizations like NARP, point out the upside of passenger rail but fail to mention the downsides. That is dishonest." That remark is, quite simply, rude. Advocates are not expected to show all sides of a positional question. That is the responsibility of the other points of view to present in the "marketplace of ideas."
In my judgement people who present only part of the story are being dishonest or at least not candid. If people find this insulting, that is their perogative. I believe it is important, at least from time to time, to call a spade a spade.
Actually that is propagandizing, advertising, making one's arguement, a lot more things than bieng dishonest. I find name calling and mud slinging like this to be more dishonest: instead of arguing with facts or saying you don't have a defense, you instead make fun or degrade others. That's not honest aruguing. Hit me with facts, reasons, and thruths, not with mud and defamitory names.
I have presented more financial information from primary sources than any other person posting to this forum. And most of my arguments have been buttressed with detailed information drawn from Amtrak's financial records, as well as those of the FAA, USDOT, Homeland Security, etc. If you go back and read my posts, you would see that this is the case.
Sam1 I have presented more financial information from primary sources than any other person posting to this forum. And most of my arguments have been buttressed with detailed information drawn from Amtrak's financial records, as well as those of the FAA, USDOT, Homeland Security, etc. If you go back and read my posts, you would see that this is the case.
All the more reason that you need not call people names.
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
Sam1In addition, numerous studies have shown that a major cause of the mortgage mess was brought on by Americans who did not understand the terms of the mortgages that they took on. A read of several of the authoritative books describing the financial crisis points to a low level of financial education as being a major contributor to the problem.
Yes, go ahead and blame the victims. Your cold logic reminds me of the people who blame rape victims for the crime because of their attire or where they were, or blaming rail crossing victims for the accident when the fault lies in crossing gates that do not block the entire crossing (perhaps to save costs?).
And several times you have mentioned how you don't like riding public transit because of sitting near people who do not bathe and shout on cell phones. Although you portray yourself as "presenting both sides of the story" your words betray both your underlying elitist feelings about mixing with the general public, as well as your not-very-well hidden political agenda.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Sam1Sam1: "Most Americans are financially illiterate." ...Illiterate means, according to Webster, "showing or marked by a lack of acquaintance with the fundamentals of a particular field of knowledge". According to a study published last year by the U.S. Department of Education, 40 per cent of America's graduating high school seniors cannot even calculate simple interest. In addition, numerous studies have shown that a major cause of the mortgage mess was brought on by Americans who did not understand the terms of the mortgages that they took on. A read of several of the authoritative books describing the financial crisis points to a low level of financial education as being a major contributor to the problem. My comment on financial literacy was directed to an embedded generic reference to the public and not to anyone posting to this forum. However, it is clear that many of the people who post to this forum don’t understand finance, just as it is clear that I am not an engineer. That is one of the reasons that I don’t comment on technical matters, although I am better versed on them than many people might imagine.
I agree that too many Americans are financially illiterate; and I'm not the brightest bulb in the house. While some advocates may be uncomfortable with the hard truths of finances, that is no excuse to hide behind some other aspect, be it mobility, environment, energy, or nostalgia. Finances are important, if not to all advocates, at least to the public generally and rail opponents particularly. Most of us don't want the Pentagon buying $600 toilet seats because these things add up to higher taxes.
However, the mortgage mess isn't entirely the fault of financially illiterate and irresponsible borrowers as your readings might conclude. Investigations, some by state agencies, found that some lenders systematically misled borrowers in agreeing to terms that were known by the lender to be doomed to fail but yielded handsome profits and bonuses.
A couple of questions.
Considering that a lot of Americans--heck, even a lot of Canadians as well well--did NOT know a lot of this stuff how are we to talk about this historical bit then? The fact still remains that if we KNEW about these financial matters better than we DID we would not have been those very victims. Besides, didn't we just stomp all over this GREED issue---that WE ALL HAVE?!?
The fellows who set a lot off those multi-tranched derivatives that the real estate sector became clogged up with also did NOT understand THEMSELVES what the ------ they were playing with. Hence all the garbage that flapped out of there.
And on and on----
Me. I'd rather we just deal with those facts as they are. There were a lot of people who were hoodwinked into these deals by others who were just as ignorant of those things being lead by those who really did not know about those very things themselves. Greed, being a HUMAN trait that we ALL have makes us ALL prey. Like it or not.
Financial Illiteracy makes victims of us ALL. What SAM1 is pointing out are the very elements we must come to grips with
Any argument carried far enough will end up in Semantics--Hartz's law of rhetoric Emerald. Leemer and Southern The route of the Sceptre Express Barry
I just started my blog site...more stuff to come...
http://modeltrainswithmusic.blogspot.ca/
schlimm Sam1In addition, numerous studies have shown that a major cause of the mortgage mess was brought on by Americans who did not understand the terms of the mortgages that they took on. A read of several of the authoritative books describing the financial crisis points to a low level of financial education as being a major contributor to the problem. Yes, go ahead and blame the victims. Your cold logic reminds me of the people who blame rape victims for the crime because of their attire or where they were, or blaming rail crossing victims for the accident when the fault lies in crossing gates that do not block the entire crossing (perhaps to save costs?). And several times you have mentioned how you don't like riding public transit because of sitting near people who do not bathe and shout on cell phones. Although you portray yourself as "presenting both sides of the story" your words betray both your underlying elitist feelings about mixing with the general public, as well as your not-very-well hidden political agenda.
I suspect that there may be a bit of difference between me and many if not most of the folks who post to this forum. I ride the bus practically every day. Moreover, in the past twelve months I have taken Amtrak from Denver to San Francisco, Pittsburgh to New York, New York to Baltimore, New York to Washington and return, Austin to San Diego and back, and Austin to Dallas/Fort Worth (4). I also took the train from Adelaide, South Australia to Melbourne, Victoria, and from Melbourne to Sydney.
Most of the people that I meet on the bus and train are OK. But I have encountered enough bad apples to understand why the majority of Americans (88 per cent according to USDOT) prefer to commute in their personal vehicle as well as use it for short to medium intercity travel.
I am an independent with nary a political bone in my body. I do, however, believe that people should pay for what they use and, moreover, believe the market place should be used to allocate limited economic resources whenever possible. If that's political, so be it.
Sam1, you remind me one of my college political science profs almost 50 years ago told us: "America is a classless society". And I think you have found that to be true.
But American's prefer their own personal cars because they have been led to believe they have freedom by choosing the automobile and not because they cannot stand their fellow Americans. They are exercising their independence if you will. In reality they have become slaves to the automobile lifestyle.
And yes, you are political in your beliefs. We all are political in our beliefs.
HarveyK400However, the mortgage mess isn't entirely the fault of financially illiterate and irresponsible borrowers as your readings might conclude. Investigations, some by state agencies, found that some lenders systematically misled borrowers in agreeing to terms that were known by the lender to be doomed to fail but yielded handsome profits and bonuses.
One fact concerning the "toxic loans" that is usually ignored is that until a law was enacted, in the late seventies, forbidding denying loans that the lender knew could not be repaid, few such loans were made. This law enabled the venal lenders to legally do that which should not have been done. Everyone who voted for that law is responsible for the result, and should be held financially accountable. Before this law was enacted, there were areas in which responsible lenders refused to do business because they knew that the residents did not have the income necessary to repay the loans.
Now, back to the subject.
Johnny
henry6But American's prefer their own personal cars because they have been led to believe they have freedom by choosing the automobile and not because they cannot stand their fellow Americans. They are exercising their independence if you will. In reality they have become slaves to the automobile lifestyle.
Since we are ALL political then what YOU just said is also political.
Can't have that both ways.
Me. I'd love it if someone could fund a passenger van to get from, say, Walter's Falls ON to Alvinston ON. Know anyone who does that? Not very many do. And, no, it isn't JUST because of our ADDICTION to our car. So you say we ALL are slaves to the car---if you are going to criticise people about their comments then don't be flinging those ones around There has t be a better way to 'change' behaviour than using shame or guilt--
I work in a field---healthcare---wherein a lot of my clients are all over the map up here-----last year alone I stuffed about 8,800 km just driving around in an area from Sarnia to K-W to Owen Sound to Paris ON. There are a lot of rural areas that have my clientele.
There are some who would rather have me not drive my car and have the clients I have living in long term homes in the Big City
henry6 Sam1 I have presented more financial information from primary sources than any other person posting to this forum. And most of my arguments have been buttressed with detailed information drawn from Amtrak's financial records, as well as those of the FAA, USDOT, Homeland Security, etc. If you go back and read my posts, you would see that this is the case. All the more reason that you need not call people names.
Here is the complete statement that I included in my post:
"Most Americans are financially illiterate. They are clueless when it comes to understanding how transport in the U.S. or anywhere for that matter is funded. On several occasions, whilst riding Amtrak, I have chatted with my fellow passengers about Amtrak's finances. What I get, more often than not, is a deer in the headlights look. They don't have a clue how passenger rail in this country or any other country is funded. Most of them don't even understand the costs associated with driving their automobile."
In part my comment was in response to this statement:
"I don't think most folks expect train revenues to cover the operating costs, because there are other benefits. Ditto with transit systems. Another way of putting it is that the full cost to society of many endeavors is not found on a corporate balance sheet. There are many hidden subsidies. You disparage other countries' accounting standards, but the example of Arthur Anderson and Enron and others makes that sound like the kettle..."
My comments did not refer to any person. They are generic and descriptive, but they don't fit the criteria for name calling.
According to my Webster Dictionary, clueless means, amongst other things, bewildered, unaware, ignorant, foolish, i.e. clueless about what they want. If you think clueless is name calling, by all means pick out a word that is more palatable. But at the end of the day, I maintain that most people on the bus or train or plane tomorrow, not to mention their car, have little idea how they are financed. Also, please note that the references to illiterate and clueless were taken out of context. Putting comments in perspective means, amongst other things, reading the complete paragraph and taking the entire paragraph into consideration in crafting any rebuttal comments.
I'll be out of pocket for the next week. I am taking the train from Austin to San Francisco and then back to Denver.
Sam1 The December YTD report, which covers the first quarter of FY10, shows a loss of 13.1 cents per passenger mile. These numbers exclude depreciation and interest, which would increase the loss. Amtrak does not tell us how much. Again, this information is found on Page C-1.
The December YTD report, which covers the first quarter of FY10, shows a loss of 13.1 cents per passenger mile. These numbers exclude depreciation and interest, which would increase the loss. Amtrak does not tell us how much. Again, this information is found on Page C-1.
Sam ; Hold off on that analysis. Unfortunately the report mixes FY 2010 and FY2009 figures. I know it did on pages A3.1 - A3.3 and also C-2 I cannot tell about C-1. Send AMTRAK an e-mail I did.
Sam1On several occasions, whilst riding Amtrak, I have chatted with my fellow passengers about Amtrak's finances. What I get, more often than not, is a deer in the headlights look. They don't have a clue how passenger rail in this country or any other country is funded. Most of them don't even understand the costs associated with driving their automobile."
FWIW I can't find anywhere you've called anybody a name, but when you show someone that something they value is built on a house of cards, their reaction isn't generally going to be, "Gee, thanks!"
I, for one, appreciate the work you've done here developing facts and analysis from the available material. I think passenger rail's dirty little secret is that it is, at least as far as the current US state of the art goes, expensive, and you've pointed that out to a few more significant digits than I'm comfortable with, but so be it (difference between and accountant and an engineer, I suppose...). Whether it has to be that expensive or not is interesting to debate.
Sam1I'll be out of pocket for the next week. I am taking the train from Austin to San Francisco and then back to Denver.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
I think some of what sam1 says is of value. The problem is misusing her facts to look forward. Accounting is useful/essential in society but primarily for telling us where we have been and how we are doing. Cost accounting can guide planning by showing the various costs of what you are doing. But accounting gets pretty far out of its depth when asked to predict the future. Witness conflicting predictions by well-meaning, honest accountants at CBO, GAO and other organizations when asked to estimate costs, savings, etc., on something like health care. If you talk to corporate types at companies that are always moving forward, they will tell you that if they had listened just to the "bean-counters" nothing new and no growth would have occurred.
Insults? sam1 uses the usual defense of certain people when called on it and tries to weasle out from accepting responsibility. Her statement:
"Most Americans are financially illiterate. They are clueless when it comes to understanding how transport in the U.S. or anywhere for that matter is funded. "
How does that sound if we change a few nouns and adjectives?
Americans rely on a clueless and lazy media for information, a media that uses handouts for source material without further investigation. Some promulgated by owner-management lack of financing or wanting that message to be blurred to the public. The American public is also easily swayed by their own political bent convinced that their own party is 100% correct and truthful. Keeping America so divided will help anyone who wants to take advantage of us to do so: while we fight amongst ourselves outsiders or others coveting our country and its resources, can control. Chinese money being lent to us to get us out of debt is one example. The French and the Japanese paying for gas exploration via American umbrella companies for another.
So if we can't come to a consensus on how an integrated, intermodal, interstate transportation is going to benefit all Americans, others will take control. I like the idea of regional rail networks but advocate overlapping and intergrating of those networks. But any progress...the future of American...has to be done by Americans for Americans and not dictated by foreign powers be they commecial companies or governments. Stop the divisive infighting on all matters and get to work!
henry6Americans rely on a clueless and lazy media for information, a media that uses handouts for source material without further investigation. Some promulgated by owner-management lack of financing or wanting that message to be blurred to the public. The American public is also easily swayed by their own political bent convinced that their own party is 100% correct and truthful. Keeping America so divided will help anyone who wants to take advantage of us to do so: while we fight amongst ourselves outsiders or others coveting our country and its resources, can control. Chinese money being lent to us to get us out of debt is one example. The French and the Japanese paying for gas exploration via American umbrella companies for another. So if we can't come to a consensus on how an integrated, intermodal, interstate transportation is going to benefit all Americans, others will take control. I like the idea of regional rail networks but advocate overlapping and intergrating of those networks. But any progress...the future of American...has to be done by Americans for Americans and not dictated by foreign powers be they commecial companies or governments. Stop the divisive infighting on all matters and get to work!
That all may be true about the so called insults--if one is ASSUMING that the INTENT was to insult. I'd like someone to prove that one.
As for generic comments about overall knowledge of one's health---heck, that's done all the time in the media. No one seems upset then--but if someone makes a generic comment here---oh boy watch the feathers fly
If the reality is that one does not know something then let us assume then that that is all it means. No reason to get into the rant mode then--
The idea that people are only doing things because media tells them to is related to the idea that we only have mediated experiences. Not actual experiences.
I find this very odd myself but there we be. In this case then I would be doing what I'm doing not because I WANT to do this but because I've been programmed into doing this. This ends up begging the question then of who the master manipulator is/was. IIRC did we not end up with this debate before? Since everything we say is, at base, political then there is a politics of central planning within this chestnut, as it necessitates a person who could centrally control the scene. And around the bush we end up going.
As long as we ignore certain geographical issues---such as those who have to GROW our food and their needs---rural communities that DO support these 'farmers' and their families through local industry and such that bush we run around will end up with a very deep trench. The car--being at times seen as the radical other to communal modes of transportation--still has a use out here. Maybe more so than in the BIG CITY pairs but then again----?
We might want to think about what it means when we say "Cost" and what it entails when we think of "Investing In"---something.
blownout cylinder The idea that people are only doing things because media tells them to is related to the idea that we only have mediated experiences. Not actual experiences. I find this very odd myself but there we be. In this case then I would be doing what I'm doing not because I WANT to do this but because I've been programmed into doing this. This ends up begging the question then of who the master manipulator is/was. IIRC did we not end up with this debate before? Since everything we say is, at base, political then there is a politics of central planning within this chestnut, as it necessitates a person who could centrally control the scene. And around the bush we end up going. As long as we ignore certain geographical issues---such as those who have to GROW our food and their needs---rural communities that DO support these 'farmers' and their families through local industry and such that bush we run around will end up with a very deep trench. The car--being at times seen as the radical other to communal modes of transportation--still has a use out here. Maybe more so than in the BIG CITY pairs but then again----? We might want to think about what it means when we say "Cost" and what it entails when we think of "Investing In"---something.
Then you agree with me that 1) rural and urban areas have different needs and those living in either area don't fully understand the other's problems; 2) people are social and political but it is the political convictions that motivate or define their positions; 3) that costs (and thus benefits) of certain things like transportation and other utilties cannot always be measured in one dollar and cent line. As for media...no, we're not mediated...we are bombarded by messages. I remember inthe 50's watching the likes of Donna Reed and I Love Lucy and seeing the posessions and live styles portrayed and realizing that not too many American's at that time lived like they did, that between the portrayals and the advertising push, discontent was afoot from many and there would be social changes. The Civil Rights Movement was close on the heels of that observation along with more women in the work place and women's rights, and the need and greed for one, two, three cars and having it all. Journalism and entertainment combine in the media to send messages and create mind sets. It may not all be politics but it is political and economic. The automobile and appliance business thrived because of what the TV portrayed in our own living rooms. Which, to be on topic here, is what led to the further demise of the passenger train as a means of travel for business, pleasure, or getting to and from work (yeah, I know the plane had a big impact, and I accept that but for sake of argument here let it be).
Sam1 am an independent with nary a political bone in my body. I do, however, believe that people should pay for what they use and, moreover, believe the market place should be used to allocate limited economic resources whenever possible. If that's political, so be it.
That comment indicates a strong political ideology - unrestrained market economics. In these times, when so many people are angry at politicians, those of a certain political stripe have come up with the clever strategy of denying that what they are proposing or attacking is inspired by their ideology (read: political). Clever politics, but not very forthright.
blownout cylinderhe idea that people are only doing things because media tells them to is related to the idea that we only have mediated experiences. Not actual experiences. I find this very odd myself but there we be. In this case then I would be doing what I'm doing not because I WANT to do this but because I've been programmed into doing this.
he idea that people are only doing things because media tells them to is related to the idea that we only have mediated experiences. Not actual experiences. I find this very odd myself but there we be. In this case then I would be doing what I'm doing not because I WANT to do this but because I've been programmed into doing this.
As you know, I am not an engineer, accountant, railroader or politician. I am a psychologist. To deny the influence of external factors on shaping one's opinions, beliefs and behaviors appears to run against years of research in social psychology and the cognitive sciences. As well, it calls into question why so many companies would spend multi-billions of dollars, euros, yen, etc. on advertising?
blownout cylinder As long as we ignore certain geographical issues---such as those who have to GROW our food and their needs---rural communities that DO support these 'farmers' and their families through local industry and such that bush we run around will end up with a very deep trench. The car--being at times seen as the radical other to communal modes of transportation--still has a use out here.
schlimm As you know, I am not an engineer, accountant, railroader or politician. I am a psychologist. To deny the influence of external factors on shaping one's opinions, beliefs and behaviors appears to run against years of research in social psychology and the cognitive sciences. As well, it calls into question why so many companies would spend multi-billions of dollars, euros, yen, etc. on advertising?
To that end you will understand my questoning why TV claims not to influence society with the sex, violence, or anything else they do in programming while holding out the other hand asking for money to influence the audience into buying your product. Or like the pundits calling the media liberal while it is a business owned by huge corporations paying the mouthpiecs to make statements like that; look what I say not hear what I'm doing.
henry6 schlimm As you know, I am not an engineer, accountant, railroader or politician. I am a psychologist. To deny the influence of external factors on shaping one's opinions, beliefs and behaviors appears to run against years of research in social psychology and the cognitive sciences. As well, it calls into question why so many companies would spend multi-billions of dollars, euros, yen, etc. on advertising? To that end you will understand my questoning why TV claims not to influence society with the sex, violence, or anything else they do in programming while holding out the other hand asking for money to influence the audience into buying your product. Or like the pundits calling the media liberal while it is a business owned by huge corporations paying the mouthpiecs to make statements like that; look what I say not hear what I'm doing.
What we have here is an example of what happens when "The Media" is placed in an all powerful deterministic position. Are they not human as well? We all have needs, wants, desires and all that. But to say we are nothing but that is also misleading.
AACH!! Determinism. Such a wonderful thing....
What if we went back to how we are going to approach this multi headed issue? I have wondered about how one could influence---geeesh. look at this. This word shares much with influenza, eeerrgh---discussions around cost by thinking in terms of "investing". I think a mindset that has peppered much of business in the past 50-60 years might also be mucking things up. That mindset, started off by a strictly beancounting determinism, can be just as crippling as the one currently plaguing much debate---willy nilly spending without forethought as to just how this is supposed to work together. Especially in areas currently experiencing huge budget shortfalls and all that.
I'd really like to see a discussion that avoids all these determinisms---political and otherwise
I put this by mistake on the Ohio thread:
Whatever killed passenger trains in the 60's (IMO, mostly it was the railroads' own doing, like the SP), the unfortunate consequence for those of us who would like to see a viable corridor, etc. system in the future is rather bleak. When polls are taken concerning support for HSR, etc., the results show at best lukewarm support. Not too surprising when you consider that there are very few people under the age of 70 who experienced a decent rail network (pre-1960). Most Americans have had no experience or have any idea of what good passenger service could be like, unless they are old or have traveled/lived in Europe or Japan. When most Americans think about trains, the image is of a steam engine, a slow freight or maybe a graffiti-covered subway car. So for many of them, suggesting riding the train as a serious travel option causes them to look at you in bewilderment or as though you are deranged or that you are engaging in nostalgia for the "good ol' days." It is going to be a hard sell.
Just like the freight train, the passenger train of 2010 ain't like the Chatanooga Choo of grandpa's day; the Oldsmobile is dead! But the passenger train's death in the 60's had more to do with highways and automobiles, and airports and jet planes than anything any railroad did. Railroads were not able by rules, politics, and economics to compete; often it was as much the loss of freight trafffic (and U.S. Mail) that pushed the passenger train toward the grave. So we turned our back on railroads in general and passenger services in particular. Elsewhere in the world economics, politics, and geography were of a different nature allowing for, and dictating, the use and expansion of passenger services. I don't believe HSR is the only rail solution for us; but it has to be considered as part of the solution. I like the idea of regional and interregional or overlapping regional systems being developed with appropriate service appplied to travel and traffic solutions. When I talk about and advocate the return of rail passenger service between here (Binghamton, NY) and the NY City area I have to caution people, that no, niether the Phoebe Snow nor the Erie Limited-Lake Cities should be revived but a new concept in rail travel implimented.
If you remember the time when railroads were begging to drop passenger service, the railroads themselves were dropping like flies.
Remember how many railroads there used to be?
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
My point wasn't to provoke an examination of the causes of the decline in passenger rail. Rather, how to bring a positive image of the rails into the public consciousness beyond advertising? Perhaps building a real HSR corridor (I don't consider the existing NEC as a very appealing example for the public) where a good number of out-of-area Americans might gain first-hand experience and become supporters for routes in their home states/regions.
I don't think HSR is as important in the big picture as much as a passenger rail service that is clean, efficient, on time, consistant, and reasonably priced that does what it is supposed to do. That is success and that's the best advertisement and endorsement for rail passenger trains. HSR is too likely not to deliver what is most wanted, needed, or usable by a vocal (and maybe majority) group. California's got the right idea: provide service as needed where needed. The upper Northwest seems to be doing in quite well, too. ACELA seems to be working ok but is always being bashed as not really high speed, the the Boston-Washington-Richmond-Norfolk Corridor is emerging as an Eastern corridor which will benefit by any well run and consistant service...HSR will eventually come but not imperataive.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.