Hi!
I've tried to find statistics on what kind of people and in what purpose ride on Amtrak long-distance trains, especially on the transcontinental routes: business/tourism/other private/demographics/socio-economical etc. Where to look? Thanks for help.
My own experience: (1) On-off small town passengers for whom air is too expensive or too inconvenient. (2) those who want to enjoy the travel as well as destination, including both business and vacation travel, and who want the the travel to be pleasant and the ability to see the country. (3) those with psychological or physical impairment who cannot or won't fly. (3) Coach passengers who want economical transportation but are unwilling to put up with general discomforts of bus travel. (4) Tourists for whom the train trip is the experience. (5) Railfans (6) Nostalgia, wanting to experience what they did as a child or what their parents or grandparents told them they did.
This is based on many conversations I had when on-board trains
My grandchildren, ages 3 through 12 love to travel by train. They would go everywhere by train if they could. The 12 year old is pouting because she got to travel between DC & Baltimore by train but it wasn't the Acela. She REALLY wants to ride the Acela. She likes taking the Crescent between Charlotte and DC.
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
daveklepper My own experience: (1) On-off small town passengers for whom air is too expensive or too inconvenient. (2) those who want to enjoy the travel as well as destination, including both business and vacation travel, and who want the the travel to be pleasant and the ability to see the country. (3) those with psychological or physical impairment who cannot or won't fly. (3) Coach passengers who want economical transpotation but are unwilling to put up with general discomforts of bus travel. (4) Tourists for whom the train trip is the experience. (5) Railfans (6) Nostalgia, wanting to experience what they did as a child or what their parents or grandparents told them they did. This is based on many conversations I had when on-board trains
My own experience: (1) On-off small town passengers for whom air is too expensive or too inconvenient. (2) those who want to enjoy the travel as well as destination, including both business and vacation travel, and who want the the travel to be pleasant and the ability to see the country. (3) those with psychological or physical impairment who cannot or won't fly. (3) Coach passengers who want economical transpotation but are unwilling to put up with general discomforts of bus travel. (4) Tourists for whom the train trip is the experience. (5) Railfans (6) Nostalgia, wanting to experience what they did as a child or what their parents or grandparents told them they did.
Your categorization of those who ride Amtrak's long distance trains is seconded by my experiences. I have taken annually at least three long distance train trips since retiring nearly six years ago. I ride coach class if I am only on the train during daylight hours. However, for overnight travel I book a roomette.
Most of the people that I have encountered on the sleepers are well off. Many of them were retired or foreign nationals traveling in the U.S. on holiday. I have not encountered many people who confessed to being afraid of air travel. Some have told me that they were taking the train for the experience; others said that they did not like to drive.
Traveling sleeper class is expensive. Only reasonably well off people can afford it. For example, the fare plus roomette charges on the Texas Eagle and Lakeshore Limited from Austin to New York on March 15th and 16th would cost $870 one way. The room charges would average $341.50 per night. This is more than double the average cost of a hotel room in the United States, although it includes meals. In fact, the cost of a room at the LaQuinta Inn on West 33rd Street is only $239 plus taxes.
According to Amtrak, in FY08 a typical long distance passenger traveled 626 miles, which supports my observation that most sleeping car passengers are on the train for just one night. Moreover, in the case of the long haul western trains, i.e. California Zephyr, Empire Builder, etc., only four per cent of the passengers travel from end point to end point, according to an article that I read somewhere. I cannot remember where I saw it.
Coach passengers tend to be a mixed bag. Most of them appear to be traveling on a tight budget, although I have seen exceptions. Many of the coach passengers that I have encountered on the long distance trains were relatively young (20s) or old (60+). Some were students traveling on holiday; many were retired. Most of them probably could not afford a sleeper. On the other hand, I have talked to a few coach passengers, who were probably solidly middle class, e.g. lawyers, doctors, engineers, etc. On one occasion, on the Empire Builder, I encountered a large group of coach passengers who were returning to Minneapolis after attending an arts function in Chicago. Most people who go to arts functions are middle class.
The coach fare from Austin to New York would be $197. In addition, the cost of meals could add another $75 to the cost. Yes, I know, they would have to eat somewhere if they were not on the train, so the true cost of eating on the train would be the marginal cost of the train meals over similar meals at home or an outside eatery. No need to go there.
The cost to fly to New York from Austin on March 15th would be $172 for a non-stop flight or $165 for a two stop flight. Assuming the passenger checks one bag, the total cost for the non-stop flight would be $197. The train ride to New York would take more than 48 hours. The flight would take approximately 3.5 hours.
So from both dave's and sam1's perspectives, most of the passengers are not seeking regular transportation on long distance trains. In most cases, flying would be as cheap as coach and much faster. So that leaves some small town (most not served by rail either) folks, people seeking a land cruise or nostalgia, the infirm and those who don't like driving or the bus. That does not seem to warrant having a sketchy, heavily-subsidized long-distance route structure on Amtrak, given limited resources.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
I agree with Dave and Sam--and I will add another category: people who do not want to put with the experience of dealing with TSA employees at airports or of the discomfort of coach class seats on an airplane.
For my wife and me, by rail is the way to travel across the country, even if it means renting a car here and there to get to places no longer served by passenger trains. We enjoy seeing the country without having to worry about weather or other traffic along the way. I do admit that my wife has enjoyed travel by rail since she was about nine years old and I since I was fifteen (my first trip, when I was two, began with my screaming from Plant City to Lakeland on the local; my attitude has changed a little since then)
On our last trip, we met a couple who were both traveling by rail for the first time; as I recall they were trying rail travel out.
As to accommodations, we travel first class (we live more or less abstemiously otherwise) because of the comfort of sleeping in a berth at night; only once have we spent a night sitting up in a coach--and that was because the train from New Orleans/Memphis to St. Louis/Kansas City had no sleeper. We acknowledge that this is not a choice available to many, but we agree that a night in a railroad coach is far better than a night in a bus ( I recall only two utterly miserable nights riding coach; once in 1961 and once in 1982). And- whether day or night, whether riding coach or first class, rail travel is far more comfortable than air travel (I cannot speak of the comfort of first class air travel, but only of coach air travel).
Johnny
I just went to both Amtrak and USAirways websites and priced a round trip between DC & NYC Traveling next week on Tuesday and returning a week later on Tuesday to avoid the extra that the airlines charge on their busiest days.
Amtrak was $152 and takes about 3 hours and 20 Minutes each way.
USAirways was $822 and takes 4 hours and 18 minutes each way.
Now add the baggage fees and the time required to get through the idiotic security play at the airport...
Define long distance. Define long distance train.
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.
My wife and I take the train for "fun", and relaxation. We get a bedroom and when we get the "urge" we visit our kids and grand kids in Seattle and Dallas. We leave from LA and find the experience wonderful and have met really great fellow passengers who have become friends. O' and yes, we can afford to fly, yes we do also drive, and yes we are older and retired. We have found great service, good food, and NO hassle getting on and off the train. I guess we just love to travel by train!
henry6 Define long distance. Define long distance train.
Long distance trains are routes over 500 miles in length. An incomplete list of current Amtrak routes to eliminate would include the SW Chief, Sunset Ltd., EB, CZ, Lakeshore Ltd., Cardinal, Capital Ltd., among others. Of course, for some people they are fun, more enjoyable than flying, a trip down memory lane, etc., but those are not adequate justifications for running a highly subsidized, non-essential program.
I suspect the equation will change over the next couple of years with the inevitable rise in fuel prices which will affect the airline industry more than the motorist. Flying will once again become the domain of the rich and beautiful as it was in the 60's. Just today, Delta announced $120 price increases on some routes. If you take away the "highly subsidized" Amtrak long distance service, should we also start charging airlines the true cost of operating airports. Wichita, Kansas would not have air service, but for a subsidy. How much? I can't say. How many other smaller cities are beneficiaries of these hidden dollars?. One week after 9/11, Congress couldn't wait to hand the industry $15 billion for security. There is also the "$400 million airport to nowhere" in Illinois built to relieve congestion in St. Louis' Lambert field which sits empty," a monument to stupidity". If you take away such subsidies from Amtrak and the airline industry, then, I shall stay home and shut my mouth.That might also make the Libertarians happy.
Phoebe Vet I just went to both Amtrak and USAirways websites and priced a round trip between DC & NYC Traveling next week on Tuesday and returning a week later on Tuesday to avoid the extra that the airlines charge on their busiest days. Amtrak was $152 and takes about 3 hours and 20 Minutes each way. USAirways was $822 and takes 4 hours and 18 minutes each way. Now add the baggage fees and the time required to get through the idiotic security play at the airport...
Tthe round trip fare on Frontier, Delta and American for the dates indicated would be $404 to JFK or $587 to LGA. There is no charge for carry-ons, which is what most people do when flying between the nation's capital and the Big Apple. However, the cost of checked baggage would add approximately $50 to the cost of flying, assuming that the passenger was only checking one bag.
Waiting until the last minute or only checking one airline for fares is not an effective search scheme. By planning ahead, e.g. March 15th to NYC and March 17th back to Washington, the round trip air fare could be as low as $195.
The gate to gate airline time from Washington to LGA is approximately one hour and five minutes. The average amount of time to clear security at both airports is less than 30 to 45 minutes. In fact, last year, when I passed through the security at both airports, I only had to stand in line for approximately 10 minutes. I was not searched, and the TSA folks were very pleasant.
Those traveling by air would receive a federal subsidy of less than a penny per passenger mile. Those taking the Bolt or similar bus would receive an indeterminate federal subsidy, i.e. highway costs not covered by fuel and other taxes, but it probably would be less than a penny a mile.
The Amtrak passenger on a regional train, which appears to be your benchmark, would receive a subsidy of 4.5 cents per passenger mile or $20.34 for the round trip. This is before allocation of interest, depreciation, and management pass through charges. The interest and depreciation associated with the Northeast corridor is steep. It would probably double or triple the federal subsidy if it were allocated by route and train.
Taking the train between Washington and New York, at least from center city to center city, is a good choice providing time is not critical, which is rarely the case for business people. Planning ahead and shopping all the airlines is key to getting a good deal. Using a last minute walk-up price from one airline is not reflective of the cost of flying for most people.
I wouldn't categorize the trip between DC and NYC as an Amtrak "long distance" route. Clearly, the Northeast Corridor is competitive with air both in cost and time, which is why it carries the volume of passengers it does. The situation gets much different if you are comparing an Amtrak overnight tain with air travel, especially if you ride in a sleeper. I like travelling by train, and I may be a little eccentric in other respects, but I'm not enough of a masochist to ride an overnight train in a coach.
By the way, when I fly, I normally take Southwest, so I don't have to deal with "baggage fees". I regard the security stuff as a pretty minor annoyance. Riding an overnight train in a coach is infinitely worse than anything airport security can dish out and paying the extra money for a sleeper just to avoid airport security is a huge waste of money. If I take a sleeper, it's because I want to ride the train, not because that's the best choice from a transportation standpoint.
My experience with people who ride Amtrak long distance (i.e., overnight) trains is the same as described in some of the earlier posts. The one thing I woudl add is that there seem to be a good number of passengers on some long distance trains who are part of organized tour goups.
I don't consider wanting to take a flight next week and return a week later to be "last minute walk up". Nor do I believe having to make your travel plans more than a month in advance to be "convenient travel", and is also rarely the case for business people.
You most certainly did get searched, what you mean is you didn't get singled out for an additional, more intensive search. Having to empty your pockets and put your carry on items through an x-ray machine most definitely is "getting searched".
I did not search multiple airlines, I just picked the carrier that provides 90% of the flights from here, but I did choose the non refundable coach fare from the airline. There were fares for the same trip that were well over a thousand dollars.
Falcon:
I have never defended the 800 mile once a day through rural America Amtrak plan. I advocate service like the NE corridor be expanded into other corridors. I am in favor of long distance trains only if it is feasable to interconnect contiguous high density corridors where the equipment just continues on from where the corridors interconnect.
Phoebe Vet I don't consider wanting to take a flight next week and return a week later to be "last minute walk up". Nor do I believe having to make your travel plans more than a month in advance to be "convenient travel", and is also rarely the case for business people. You most certainly did get searched, what you mean is you didn't get singled out for an additional, more intensive search. Having to empty your pockets and put your carry on items through an x-ray machine most definitely is "getting searched". I did not search multiple airlines, I just picked the carrier that provides 90% of the flights from here, but I did choose the non refundable coach fare from the airline. There were fares for the same trip that were well over a thousand dollars.
I understood from your first post that the trip was from DC to NYC. U.S. Airways does not provide 90% of the flights between the nation's capital and NYC. It is as you claim the dominant carrier out of Charlotte. Sorry if I misunderstood your initial post.
I spent more than 40 years working for big corporations. On rare occasions we had emergency travel, which meant that we had to take the walk-up fares, but 98% of the time we had two to three weeks to plan our travel. That's what effective management required. The fares 14 to 21 days out are approximately the same as they would be for 30 days away. I traveled extensively whilst I was working, including more than 22 trips to and from Australia. I have got a pretty good idea how to navigate the commercial airlines.
I posed the definition question knowning the many answers. Railroading and railfanning aside, long distance travel is in the need of the traveler, how it is percieved by one doing the travelling.
ALSO...I see where Congressional Republicans haved a committe report to eliminate financial allocations to smaller airports. Couple that with thier already stated opposition to Amtrak and other rail related allocations and what do you have left? HIghways, oil and gas, auto and truck manufacturers. I think you can see where they are coming from and who their own financial backers are. Is there enough broad thinking in Congress and governments in terms of a rational transportation system for both freight and passengers that the auto-concrete-oil lobbies won't win out?
The previous posts in this thread are congruent with my own observations and considerable experience. Bedroom accommodations, if affordable, provide the only pleasant way to travel long-distance any more. ALL other forms of transportation (car, bus, plane) are anathema, with considerable discourtesies, disrespect, intrusions, and inhuman conditions.
For me, the journey is more interesting than the destination.
Phoebe Vet Falcon: I have never defended the 800 mile once a day through rural America Amtrak plan. I advocate service like the NE corridor be expanded into other corridors. I am in favor of long distance trains only if it is feasable to interconnect contiguous high density corridors where the equipment just continues on from where the corridors interconnect.
Exactly. it is very clear from the posts in this thread that long distance trains are very different than shorter corridor services, such as, but not limited to the NEC. Riding the train from NYC to Boston or DC is very different than a train running once a day from Chicago to Seattle. The first is for basic transportation; the second seems to be primarily for the pleasure of scenery, nostalgia, etc. Hardly anyone in business needing to get from St. Louis to Los Angeles would ride by train: too much time and probably far more expensive. But from Charlotte to DC, the train becomes increasingly competitive and therefore is a viable means of transportation in a national infrastructure worth the money. In Illinois, the three state-funded corridors have ridership increases up by 10-15%, and even more this winter.
Of course, many of us are convinced that the airlines get far more support (much of it hidden) than is generally recognized. But using that as the basis of an argument doesn't work. Nor does arguing about the highway lobby - true, but that does not advance the cause. Nor does the Green argument. All of that just comes across as whining; "They're getting it so the rails should, too." Outside of a few areas in the US, passenger rail is irrelevant.
So my point is that we need to set priorities as to what should be funded in a realistic, logical way.
Over the past couple of years I have come to agree with posters such as sam1 and schlimm who argue that LD trains such as the Builder and Chief cannot be justified on economic grounds.
I would also say, regarding their cost to the taxpayer, that Washington spills more money than that in one day between 12 o'clock and noon. And that the price is small to preserve a rather large thing that has so much to do with our history as a people: rail connectivity coast to coast.
These trains may be "expensive" but they are used. When the day comes that they are as lightly patronized as the "essential air service" flights out of my state's smaller airports, I will say let 'em go.
Irrespective of the opaqueness of the transactions, all legitimate accounting entries, including legitimate cash transfers, can be traced eventually. This is true for all modes of transport. Thus, the amount of support for the airlines, as well as Amtrak, can be found if one knows where to look and has the tools to dig it out. There is no evidence that the nation's airports and airlines have been the beneficiaries of fraudulent government transactions.
Getting the information can be a daunting challenge. It took me months to understand how federal dollars are shifted from the general fund to the Highway Trust Fund, the Airport and Airways Trust Fund, Amtrak, etc. I have a pretty good idea of how these dollars flow into and out of these funds. Moreover, I have looked closely at the financials for Love Field in Dallas, although to get a crystal picture of them I had to ask a couple of friends in the city for clarification on several items.
To know the total cash flows to all of the airports and airlines, as well as Amtrak, one would have to look at the financials and accounting records for every airport and train station in America. This would be a daunting task. It would take a small army of auditors to flush out all the information. But it could be done. Accordingly, although the so-called subsidies may be unknown to the public, they are not hidden from people who know where to look for them.
Sam1 Irrespective of the opaqueness of the transactions, all legitimate accounting entries, including legitimate cash transfers, can be traced eventually. This is true for all modes of transport. Thus, the amount of support for the airlines, as well as Amtrak, can be found if one knows where to look and has the tools to dig it out. There is no evidence that the nation's airports and airlines have been the beneficiaries of fraudulent government transactions. Getting the information can be a daunting challenge. It took me months to understand how federal dollars are shifted from the general fund to the Highway Trust Fund, the Airport and Airways Trust Fund, Amtrak, etc. I have a pretty good idea of how these dollars flow into and out of these funds. Moreover, I have looked closely at the financials for Love Field in Dallas, although to get a crystal picture of them I had to ask a couple of friends in the city for clarification on several items. To know the total cash flows to all of the airports and airlines, as well as Amtrak, one would have to look at the financials and accounting records for every airport and train station in America. This would be a daunting task. It would take a small army of auditors to flush out all the information. But it could be done. Accordingly, although the so-called subsidies may be unknown to the public, they are not hidden from people who know where to look for them.
That would cover the direct cost side. Then you'd have one more huge task before you could make any rational judgement. What are the benefits? There are the direct revenues, but then, are there any benefits that wind up other places, like public health, surrounding land valuation, industrial development opportunities, etc.
Once done, you can accurately assess what you're getting for the subsidy.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
oltmannd Sam1: Irrespective of the opaqueness of the transactions, all legitimate accounting entries, including legitimate cash transfers, can be traced eventually. This is true for all modes of transport. Thus, the amount of support for the airlines, as well as Amtrak, can be found if one knows where to look and has the tools to dig it out. There is no evidence that the nation's airports and airlines have been the beneficiaries of fraudulent government transactions. Getting the information can be a daunting challenge. It took me months to understand how federal dollars are shifted from the general fund to the Highway Trust Fund, the Airport and Airways Trust Fund, Amtrak, etc. I have a pretty good idea of how these dollars flow into and out of these funds. Moreover, I have looked closely at the financials for Love Field in Dallas, although to get a crystal picture of them I had to ask a couple of friends in the city for clarification on several items. To know the total cash flows to all of the airports and airlines, as well as Amtrak, one would have to look at the financials and accounting records for every airport and train station in America. This would be a daunting task. It would take a small army of auditors to flush out all the information. But it could be done. Accordingly, although the so-called subsidies may be unknown to the public, they are not hidden from people who know where to look for them. That would cover the direct cost side. Then you'd have one more huge task before you could make any rational judgement. What are the benefits? There are the direct revenues, but then, are there any benefits that wind up other places, like public health, surrounding land valuation, industrial development opportunities, etc. Once done, you can accurately assess what you're getting for the subsidy.
Sam1: Irrespective of the opaqueness of the transactions, all legitimate accounting entries, including legitimate cash transfers, can be traced eventually. This is true for all modes of transport. Thus, the amount of support for the airlines, as well as Amtrak, can be found if one knows where to look and has the tools to dig it out. There is no evidence that the nation's airports and airlines have been the beneficiaries of fraudulent government transactions. Getting the information can be a daunting challenge. It took me months to understand how federal dollars are shifted from the general fund to the Highway Trust Fund, the Airport and Airways Trust Fund, Amtrak, etc. I have a pretty good idea of how these dollars flow into and out of these funds. Moreover, I have looked closely at the financials for Love Field in Dallas, although to get a crystal picture of them I had to ask a couple of friends in the city for clarification on several items. To know the total cash flows to all of the airports and airlines, as well as Amtrak, one would have to look at the financials and accounting records for every airport and train station in America. This would be a daunting task. It would take a small army of auditors to flush out all the information. But it could be done. Accordingly, although the so-called subsidies may be unknown to the public, they are not hidden from people who know where to look for them.
Your correct. The costs can be traced. The benefits, however, are usually a function of estimates based on a variety of inputs. Many of them are difficult to quantify. Or just downright impossible! And many of them are difficult to relate to a specific cause or effect.
I used to ride Amtrak from Aldershot, Ontario to Rennselaer when I had busines with Amrak. It was pleasant , economical and just about as fast as flying since the air connections from Toronto to Albany vary from torturous to non-existant.and Toronto is 35 miles from my home and Aldershot is only 10 miles Also took the same train to Washington DC ( with a change in Penn Station) when I was giving a paper there. A 13 hour trip but pleasant..
I just returned to Tucson from Little Rock to visit my family and celebrate my son in laws return from deployment to Afganistan and my daughters and granddaughters birthdays. I sit in the dome car upper or lower on Amtrak to really get close and personal with the freight trains going in the opposite direction. At night I like the tremendous rush I get next to the window in the coach seat and the trains run more steady in the evenings. I'm a retired auto engineer with plenty of time. I take Amtrak from Tucson to AnnArbor MI and return through San Antonio , St Louis, and Chicago, all hot spots. Tower 55 in Fort Worth is a great sight as is the Mississippi river , and the Chicago railyards. I have'nt flown since 9/11 and don't plan on it unless in an emergency. I would rather take the Sunset Limited,Texas Eagle,and Wolverine. For any rail fan a cross country trip is an adventure.
to daveklepper: I generally agree. I am a #4 and #5 and have ridden almost all of amtrak's LD trains over the years. another category I have frequently seen riding the trains are amish/mennonite (especially on the 'cardinal' and the 'broadway limited'). the importance of the small town on/off loadings is usually overlooked by anti-amtrak people. yes, it is cheaper and better to fly, rather than train, new york-chicago; new york-miami; chicago-los angeles, etc., but there are dozens of small towns along the way where amtrak offers transportation to many people that don't/can't drive and flying is way too expensive or distant to an airport.
Which type of transporation service should be subsidized by a soon to be bankrupt country? Let's look at the big picture! Would love to ask the more "fiscal conservatives" on here how they feel about the whooshing sound they hear caused by money handed to foreign dictators or the $700 billion spent on Iraq. The $26 billion provided to Mubarak might have built airports, fixed highways, replaced Amtraks aging fleet, etc. Maybe, some of these funds should be directed to aid Wisconsin and other states, so public employees don't have to protest in the streets of Madison?
Muralist0221 Which type of transporation service should be subsidized by a soon to be bankrupt country? Let's look at the big picture! Would love to ask the more "fiscal conservatives" on here how they feel about the whooshing sound they hear caused by money handed to foreign dictators or the $700 billion spent on Iraq. The $26 billion provided to Mubarak might have built airports, fixed highways, replaced Amtraks aging fleet, etc. Maybe, some of these funds should be directed to aid Wisconsin and other states, so public employees don't have to protest in the streets of Madison?
Let's be fair and ask "why sould any type of transportation be subsidized by a soon to be bankrupt country?" rather than "which type of transportation"? Why should one be subsidized more than another? We know the answere: lobbyists, we'eve always done its, conservatives, and the niave!
Muralist0221The $26 billion provided to Mubarak might have built airports, fixed highways, replaced Amtraks aging fleet, etc.
There's a few things you have to look at first.
This makes an assumption that that money would exist in the first place. The aid to Egypt is a complicated beast. A lot of the aid provided to Egypt under the terms of their ceasefire with Israel returns to the United States in arms purchases. This has amounted to a total of $32b since 1979. Those sales then provide the revenue that is taxed so that the government can send a check to Egypt. Egypt receives $2b a year from the United States and $1.3b of that must be spent on US made defense systems or they don't get the money at all. But as it stands right now, at least 65% of the money we provided to Egypt has returned to the United States. Its an oddly self-sustaining device. And it does provide jobs in the various sectors that received contracts from Egypt. But the circular nature of the money's cycle makes it difficult, if not impossible, to assume that the money being spent on Egyptian aid would even exist to spend on other projects, if not for the Egyptian aid program. You run into some pretty heavy duty number work when you have to figure out what price Egypt gets on an F-16, how much of that money is returned to the US government through taxes on Boeing, income taxes on the workers that built the fighter, and so on, and what percentage of a dollar sent to Egypt is based on revenue directly received from the sale to Egypt. A portion of the deal is that we also get priority access to the Suez canal, which I'm figuring is a pretty good thing to have. I'm not saying that this is good or bad. Just that it is. And realistically the percentage is quite low. But it must still be accounted for. That dollar sent to Egypt had to come from somewhere, after all.Since 1975, Egypt has also received $28b in humanitarian and economic aid. Hundreds of millions of those dollars (I don't have a figure) are used to provide financing for the Egyptian private sector to import US goods. So there's a fraction coming back to the US when Egypt buys America made...I don't know what Egypt buys. Tires or something who knows. The number sounds big and scary: $60b to Egypt. If we make the assumption that 100% the money sent to Egypt would have existed, that's $1.6b a year over the last 36 years that would have been spent on other projects inside the US. And that number sounds big too. But how far could you actually spread around $1.6b a year. Not very. In DC alone, they're spending $6.8b to build 23 miles of Metrorail. I don't know if that number includes the $1.27b in new Metro cars or not. That project could range between $6.8b and $8.1b (4.25 to 5 years of Egyptian aid). Once you start spreading out that $1.6b over 50 states or hundreds of cities, its going to disappear into nothingness before you even realize it. They also are in the process of spending close to $3b on the Beltway in VA (The 495 HOT lanes and the I-95/495 interchange, totaling 14 miles of freeway). Three ongoing projects in Northern VA, right now, are totaling between $9.8b and $11.1b
I'd be remiss to point out that these costs are spread over several years, but so are the foreign aid dollars. The Metro silver line project is going to take 11 years to build, so you could look at that as around $700m a year. Which is still pretty close to half the money we send to Egypt.To be completely frank and answer your question: we could have built 280 miles of freeway (out of 46,876 miles in the US), built about 11 runways (based on the $5.3b spent on Philly's one runway they added), but could have bought 25,800 single level passenger cars. Not sure what we'd do with 25,000 passenger cars though. Of course, this would all be over the course of 36 years.
Why should one be subsidized more than another?
Um, because one provides 10 times more passenger miles per dollar of subsidy than another?
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.