blue streak 1 here is an interesting quote from deggesty on the wash union station thread. " Columbus Circle is also being completely redesigned and rebuilt to accomodate buses, taxi/livery, and the hugely popular tour buses that originate from the front of Union Station." Now I know why Columbus Circle appeared as it did when I was in Washington in April and May this year. I trust that work will have been finished when I next expect to be in Washington (2014?) I have no quarrel with the current first class accomodations in the station, but I wish there were a little more variety in the snack food available." there has been much argument about getting food at stations instead of on trains. If the above opinion is prevelant at our second busiest train station what can we expect at many of the smaller stations ? SANTA FE was sucessful with their harvey houses because of their mostly on time operation and frequency of trains. That in anyone's opinion is not the case with just a single pair of AMTRAK trains on most long distance routes ( exceptions part of the routes of florida trains and empire service using a 7 hrs break point ) .
here is an interesting quote from deggesty on the wash union station thread.
" Columbus Circle is also being completely redesigned and rebuilt to accomodate buses, taxi/livery, and the hugely popular tour buses that originate from the front of Union Station."
Now I know why Columbus Circle appeared as it did when I was in Washington in April and May this year. I trust that work will have been finished when I next expect to be in Washington (2014?)
I have no quarrel with the current first class accomodations in the station, but I wish there were a little more variety in the snack food available."
there has been much argument about getting food at stations instead of on trains. If the above opinion is prevelant at our second busiest train station what can we expect at many of the smaller stations ? SANTA FE was sucessful with their harvey houses because of their mostly on time operation and frequency of trains. That in anyone's opinion is not the case with just a single pair of AMTRAK trains on most long distance routes ( exceptions part of the routes of florida trains and empire service using a 7 hrs break point ) .
If the future for passenger trains in the U.S. is in relatively short, high density corridors, such as NYC to Washington, where the end points trip takes approximately three hours, the need for on-board food is minimal at most. It could easily be gotten in New York, Newark, Trenton, Philadelphia, Wilmington, Baltimore, and Washington.
If the future for passenger trains in the U.S. includes continuation of the existing long distance trains, which is a mistake, the operator will have to include on-board food service. In that case, I would discontinue the traditional dining car and upgrade the offerings in the lounge car. I would also discontinue the sleepers and substitute 2 and 1 across business class with deep hollow, nearly fully reclining seats. Works on the Tilt Train in Australia.
In regards to the compensation packages for Amtrak's train employees, it is the total compensation package, not just wages, that is important. Most employees get a shift and an away from home differential. Whether Amtrak's employees, who receive tips, should have a compensation package that is two to three times what a ground based wait person gets is debatable.
When Amtrak's employees are away from home, their room and board is covered. Last year, I took the Crescent from Washington to New Orleans. The Amtrak crew stayed at the same hotel where I stayed. I can assure you it was not Motel 6.
On board crews don't give up their home life. It is true that they are away for several nights on end, but they are compensated by more nights at home. For example, the Chicago based crew for the Texas Eagle is away from home for four nights. But when they clock off the train they are home for six or seven nights, unless they are commuting from outside of the Chicago area. I met one wait person who commutes from Pittsburgh to Chicago to work the Eagle or one of the other trains crewed out of Chicago. Job can't be too bad if he is willing to do that.
Sam1 When Amtrak's employees are away from home, their room and board is covered. Last year, I took the Crescent from Washington to New Orleans. The Amtrak crew stayed at the same hotel where I stayed. I can assure you it was not Motel 6.
Hotels deeply discount their rates for transportation employees, employees that work for large companies with a large pool of traveling sales employees, etc.. I can assure you that the Amtrak employees paid probably 35-40% less than you did at that Hotel. I work for a very small consulting company by the nature of our business partnerships I can choose between an IBM rate, Oracle rate, Microsoft rate, etc. Hotel / Rental car very deeply discounted compared to what Joe Traveler pays.
CMStPnP Sam1 When Amtrak's employees are away from home, their room and board is covered. Last year, I took the Crescent from Washington to New Orleans. The Amtrak crew stayed at the same hotel where I stayed. I can assure you it was not Motel 6. Hotels deeply discount their rates for transportation employees, employees that work for large companies with a large pool of traveling sales employees, etc.. I can assure you that the Amtrak employees paid probably 35-40% less than you did at that Hotel. I work for a very small consulting company by the nature of our business partnerships I can choose between an IBM rate, Oracle rate, Microsoft rate, etc. Hotel / Rental car very deeply discounted compared to what Joe Traveler pays.
Your are correct. Amtrak buys blocks of rooms for a select period. It pays for the overnight accommodations. They are not paid for by the employees.
My point is that Amtrak's employees who are away from home are not on hardship duty. Irrespective of what Amtrak paid for the hotel, their digs are very comfortable.
As an aside, when I was growing up in Altoona, which was a crew change point for all passenger and freight crews, the PRR had its own accommodations for the Harrisburg and Pittsburgh crews. It included a nice cafeteria.
henry6 Ok Don, walk into a fine hotel. Open the door and go the the front desk. Enter your name and information into a computer, insert your credit card number, take your reciept and extract your room swipe card. Then carry your luggage over to the elevator, press the buttons and fly to your floor remebering to pick uo your bed linins on the way to your room so you can make your bed. Or, Don, what if you are met at the door by one who takes your bags, opens the door, guides you to the front desk and signs you in then takes you up to your room, bringing linin with him so as to make up your room when you get there? Or, Don, walk into to a fine hotel the door opened and held by a doorman, a porter carrying your luggage. A person greets you at the front desk, handles your check in eye to eye, hands you a room keyswipe card as the porter accomanies you to the elevator to your room where a maid has already made the bed complete with a chocolate on the pillow. Which is service you won't return to and which is service you'll never forget? Why in this country do we demean the value of people and service in the name of profit instead of holding it up the name of value? Do we think so little of our fellow citizens, our customers, that one's profit is ahead of properly servicing our customers and tending to needs and qaulity?
Ok Don, walk into a fine hotel. Open the door and go the the front desk. Enter your name and information into a computer, insert your credit card number, take your reciept and extract your room swipe card. Then carry your luggage over to the elevator, press the buttons and fly to your floor remebering to pick uo your bed linins on the way to your room so you can make your bed.
Or, Don, what if you are met at the door by one who takes your bags, opens the door, guides you to the front desk and signs you in then takes you up to your room, bringing linin with him so as to make up your room when you get there?
Or, Don, walk into to a fine hotel the door opened and held by a doorman, a porter carrying your luggage. A person greets you at the front desk, handles your check in eye to eye, hands you a room keyswipe card as the porter accomanies you to the elevator to your room where a maid has already made the bed complete with a chocolate on the pillow.
Which is service you won't return to and which is service you'll never forget? Why in this country do we demean the value of people and service in the name of profit instead of holding it up the name of value? Do we think so little of our fellow citizens, our customers, that one's profit is ahead of properly servicing our customers and tending to needs and qaulity?
All three don't come at the same price. Oh, wait a minute! You are going to subsidize #3 down to the #1 price? I'll take it!
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
DwightBranch Yep. Amtrak workers, as with long haul truck drivers, are essentially at work 24 hours a day, on top of needing to learn how to work on a train, you can't expect to pay them the same as the maids at the Super 8 if you want to keep them. A lot of the objections to Amtrak almost seem as though they are coming from people who know nothing about trains: "Why can't they just eat when their trip ends?" (Do you want to go without food for 16 hours?) "Why can't they eat a cold sandwich prepared beforehand as with an airplane?" (Do you want to subsist on that for 16 hours?") "Airlines don't have food prepared on the spot, why must trains?" (That is actually an advantage for Amtrak, that they have room for a kitchen on a train, Airlines are also like riding in a culvert, looking out at nothing but sky.) "Why must the workers be paid more than normal hotel staff?" (Would you work for that if you had to give up your home life?) ETC. Forcing a square peg (the rules of other modes of transport) into a round hole (rail transport).
Yep. Amtrak workers, as with long haul truck drivers, are essentially at work 24 hours a day, on top of needing to learn how to work on a train, you can't expect to pay them the same as the maids at the Super 8 if you want to keep them. A lot of the objections to Amtrak almost seem as though they are coming from people who know nothing about trains:
"Why can't they just eat when their trip ends?" (Do you want to go without food for 16 hours?)
"Why can't they eat a cold sandwich prepared beforehand as with an airplane?" (Do you want to subsist on that for 16 hours?")
"Airlines don't have food prepared on the spot, why must trains?" (That is actually an advantage for Amtrak, that they have room for a kitchen on a train, Airlines are also like riding in a culvert, looking out at nothing but sky.)
"Why must the workers be paid more than normal hotel staff?" (Would you work for that if you had to give up your home life?)
ETC. Forcing a square peg (the rules of other modes of transport) into a round hole (rail transport).
Yes, they work bad, long hours and work hard. The problem is that they don't generate much value - at least value commensurate with the effort it takes. I can get a guy with a back-hoe to dig me a trench in an hour for $50. It a guy with a shovel 12 hours to do the same - $100.
This is what needs fixed!
Why can't the trainman sell sandwiches during the 40 minutes of slack time between stations? Or, push a snack cart down the aisle?
Why does the car attendant have to have a room on the train? Why not rotate them on and off with the "hours of service" guys? Then, nobody has to work a 16 hour day. Nobody is tired and grouchy by the end of the trip. And you have more space on the train to sell.
Why couldn't food on a train be of the "to go" variety ala Chili's and other chains? This is not airline food. Most "dinner trains" do exactly this (and charge big bucks!)
And, most importantly, why can't I have that scheduled transatlantic steamer service that I want! (at Amtrak prices) Why did we let United States Lines get out of the passenger business without creating AmSea?
Sam1 As an aside, when I was growing up in Altoona, which was a crew change point for all passenger and freight crews, the PRR had its own accommodations for the Harrisburg and Pittsburgh crews. It included a nice cafeteria.
RR operated crew hotels are making a comeback. NS has opened or upgraded at least 3 in the past few years. Enola, Bellevue, and New Orleans. The issue is food. Most hotels these days don't have dining rooms and the crews need to have a place to eat. These places are generally run by contract, though, by outfits that are in the hospitality business.
Sam1The problem lies in a business model that is broken, i.e. long distance trains with diners, lounges, and sleeping cars. It is not the fault of the employees; it is the fault of the management.
This is the problem, exactly. They are asleep.
oltmannd DwightBranch Yep. Amtrak workers, as with long haul truck drivers, are essentially at work 24 hours a day, on top of needing to learn how to work on a train, you can't expect to pay them the same as the maids at the Super 8 if you want to keep them. A lot of the objections to Amtrak almost seem as though they are coming from people who know nothing about trains: "Why can't they just eat when their trip ends?" (Do you want to go without food for 16 hours?) "Why can't they eat a cold sandwich prepared beforehand as with an airplane?" (Do you want to subsist on that for 16 hours?") "Airlines don't have food prepared on the spot, why must trains?" (That is actually an advantage for Amtrak, that they have room for a kitchen on a train, Airlines are also like riding in a culvert, looking out at nothing but sky.) "Why must the workers be paid more than normal hotel staff?" (Would you work for that if you had to give up your home life?) ETC. Forcing a square peg (the rules of other modes of transport) into a round hole (rail transport). Yes, they work bad, long hours and work hard. The problem is that they don't generate much value - at least value commensurate with the effort it takes. I can get a guy with a back-hoe to dig me a trench in an hour for $50. It a guy with a shovel 12 hours to do the same - $100. This is what needs fixed! Why can't the trainman sell sandwiches during the 40 minutes of slack time between stations? Or, push a snack cart down the aisle? Why does the car attendant have to have a room on the train? Why not rotate them on and off with the "hours of service" guys? Then, nobody has to work a 16 hour day. Nobody is tired and grouchy by the end of the trip. And you have more space on the train to sell. Why couldn't food on a train be of the "to go" variety ala Chili's and other chains? This is not airline food. Most "dinner trains" do exactly this (and charge big bucks!) And, most importantly, why can't I have that scheduled transatlantic steamer service that I want! (at Amtrak prices) Why did we let United States Lines get out of the passenger business without creating AmSea?
Not a good analogy, as Henry has pointed out, over and over again, the food service on any mode of transportation in which the passengers are essentially prisoners, cannot be operated as a money-providing service, nor can it be fairly compared to an entity that provides such a service while not holding its customers hostage. A better analogy would be a prison chain gang hired by a private company to build a lane out in the country. The prisoners will need food but cannot be expected to pay for it, but the operation cannot exist without it, no matter how much it costs. So there would be those who say: "Why must we pay to bring food out to these prisoners? That is a loss-generating service, and not a part of the road-building operation. It's like I am buying their lunches for them. Can't they just buy their own food at McDonald's or Subway?" Absurd.
DwightBranch Not a good analogy, as Henry has pointed out, over and over again, the food service on any mode of transportation in which the passengers are essentially prisoners, cannot be operated as a money-providing service, nor can it be fairly compared to an entity that provides such a service while not holding its customers hostage.
Not a good analogy, as Henry has pointed out, over and over again, the food service on any mode of transportation in which the passengers are essentially prisoners, cannot be operated as a money-providing service, nor can it be fairly compared to an entity that provides such a service while not holding its customers hostage.
Amtrak passengers are prisoners? Hostages?
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
It almost seems to me that the people railing against the food on the trains don't fall into the situations that require it, versus people like me that do.
I take the Capitol Limited from DC to Pittsburgh a lot. If "eat before you get on the train and take something with you" was a thing, here's how my trips would work:
Get up in the morning and eat breakfast. Lunch comes as normal around noon. Then I'd have to find something around 3 PM to take on the train with me. This precludes anything that needs to be refrigerated or warmed. Which, in turn, rules out anything more substantial than a sandwich and some chips. Or I could hold off on lunch until 2:30-3:00 and then wait until after midnight for dinner. Lovely.
On the way back to DC, I'd have to have breakfast some time around 3:30 in the morning. At 4 AM, I'd have to find somewhere to get a lunch to take with me. Which may prove difficult. It IS 4 AM. I'd be able to get lunch at around 2 PM at Union Station. Somehow this seems even less appealing than the trip to Pittsburgh.
Perhaps the prisoners or hostage analogy is pretty accurate for Amtrak LD trains like the EB, which often is several hours late on arrival on a run that is scheduled for ~45 hours or the CZ which takes over 50.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
When I fly to Europe (more than 10 hours the last time, plus a stop at an airport gate in Gatwick, altogether around 12 hours without access to commercial food vendors) it isn't possible for me to step off the plane in the middle of the Atlantic to buy lunch and dinner, nor is it practical for various food vendors, McDonalds, Subway, etc.. to set up shops on the airplane. Nor is it fair to charge the passengers a price for food that reflects the constrained supply. The "free market" system for keeping food costs low will not work in the context of rail or air transportation, it is, as I have said, an attempt to put a square peg in a round hole.
Paul Milenkovic DwightBranch Not a good analogy, as Henry has pointed out, over and over again, the food service on any mode of transportation in which the passengers are essentially prisoners, cannot be operated as a money-providing service, nor can it be fairly compared to an entity that provides such a service while not holding its customers hostage. Amtrak passengers are prisoners? Hostages?
You can't be that dense, to not understand an analogy. Or at least I hope not.
And apparently your talents include a rather rude attempt at condescension, which belongs neither here nor in academia..
schlimm And apparently your talents include a rather rude attempt at condescension, which belongs neither here nor in academia..
Sophistry is considered dishonest in academics, and interpreting an analogy literally and then falsely claiming to be outraged is considered sophistry. I am not at all hesitant to point out sophistry when I see it.
I can only say your analogy was loaded with apparently unintended irony.
schlimm I can only say your analogy was loaded with apparently unintended irony.
Why are you here? Are you sure you wouldn't be happier on this board?
You are really seem to be unable to discern different positions. You seem to conclude if someone does not support your notion of a revival of long distance passenger train service as it last was back in the 1950's, you label them as anti-passenger rail, or pro-bus or rightists or whatever. If you want to continue with your dichotomous thinking, fine, but the result is (as it almost always is with people who try to "reason" that way) that your judgment of others' positions is distorted and wrong. I (and others on here) support a modern, very much expanded and qualitatively improved passenger rail service that a large number of people can rely upon for transportation.
schlimm I (and others on here) support a modern, very much expanded and qualitatively improved passenger rail service that a large number of people can rely upon for transportation.
I (and others on here) support a modern, very much expanded and qualitatively improved passenger rail service that a large number of people can rely upon for transportation.
The part you leave out is that this "qualitatively improved passenger service" will only be available for those traveling within urban corridors, while anyone traveling in the other 90% of US geography will be left out, or at the very least go without prepared meals for hours at a time.
Those corridors are where most Americans live these days. 170 million Americans live in just the largest 50 metro areas (MSA). If you look at the Primary Statistical Areas, counting only the top 50, you account for 184 million. If you go on through the next 50, you account for another 58 million. That's ~242 million people. Those are the areas that should receive service. And many PSA's in the next 100 are getting service. Why should many millions of Americans be without any train service so a few can ride land cruise sleeper trains in those "wide open spaces"? You think services should go to places ranked #700 and #710 with a combined 36,500 total population, while leaving out #14 (Phoenix) with 4,263,236? Not very democratic nor very sensible.
schlimm Those corridors are where most Americans live these days. 170 million Americans live in just the largest 50 metro areas (MSA). If you look at the Primary Statistical Areas, counting only the top 50, you account for 184 million. If you go on through the next 50, you account for another 58 million. That's ~242 million people. Those are the areas that should receive service. And many PSA's in the next 100 are getting service. Why should many millions of Americans be without any train service so a few can ride land cruise sleeper trains in those "wide open spaces"? You think services should go to places ranked #700 and #710 with a combined 36,500 total population, while leaving out #14 (Phoenix) with 4,263,236? Not very democratic nor very sensible.
It doesn't need to be an either/or, and the pittance provided for rail passenger service for most US territory (i.e. long distance trains) won't stretch far even if you are able to raid it for corridors. And as I have said before, so long as each state gets two US Senators regardless of population, so that North Dakota, Montana, Nebraska etc. gets as many as California, New York or Illinois, I am confident that Amtrak long distance trains will continue. Regarding Phoenix, the reason it lost passenger service is that SP shut the line down west of Phoenix and forced the Sunset Limited to use the line to the south, and UP hasn't yet reopened it (though it has been discussed), not Amtrak's fault.
DwightBranchAnd as I have said before, so long as each state gets two US Senators regardless of population, so that North Dakota, Montana, Nebraska etc. gets as many as California, New York or Illinois, I am confident that Amtrak...
And as you know, our apportionment of senators is not democratic at all. As long as Amtrak has to continue to "buy votes" by providing trains to get the support of key senators, (Byrd and the Cardinal come to mind) it will continue to struggle to be relevant.
But the facts of the matter are that each state does get two U. S. Senators and one function of government is to provide certain services because of social needs of all Americans. All institutions have lived with and functioned under a system which provides 2 senators per state since the country began. Shall we close schools in remote rural areas because it costs more to provide education there than in cities? Shall we close hospitals in those areas for the same reason? Should we abandon our interstate highways in those areas? If we should require a population density threshold before providing any government service then we should consistently do the same thing for Amtrak. But until the day when we do make that change in national policy we should treat Amtrak the same way we treat other services in rural areas.
In 1862 a Republican Administration provided subsidies to build our transcontinental railroads. This was in fact a bipartisan decision and it would have been made earlier but for the fact that the north and south disagreed about the route of the railroad. From that day to this the Federal Government has never denied the right of rural areas to rail transportation. In fact, the Government has often required it when private companies wanted to abandon it. Just as we maintain other services in rural areas we should maintain Amtrak on the same bases as one of the essential building blocks of a strong national economy in a nation where equal rights of all Americans are important.
John WR But the facts of the matter are that each state does get two U. S. Senators and one function of government is to provide certain services because of social needs of all Americans. All institutions have lived with and functioned under a system which provides 2 senators per state since the country began. Shall we close schools in remote rural areas because it costs more to provide education there than in cities? Shall we close hospitals in those areas for the same reason? Should we abandon our interstate highways in those areas? If we should require a population density threshold before providing any government service then we should consistently do the same thing for Amtrak. But until the day when we do make that change in national policy we should treat Amtrak the same way we treat other services in rural areas. In 1862 a Republican Administration provided subsidies to build our transcontinental railroads. This was in fact a bipartisan decision and it would have been made earlier but for the fact that the north and south disagreed about the route of the railroad. From that day to this the Federal Government has never denied the right of rural areas to rail transportation. In fact, the Government has often required it when private companies wanted to abandon it. Just as we maintain other services in rural areas we should maintain Amtrak on the same bases as one of the essential building blocks of a strong national economy in a nation where equal rights of all Americans are important.
Hear, Hear!
Schools are run locally, so whether or not they continue is up to the local area. In point of fact, many rural school districts have consolidated because of depopulation. Again, that is a local decision, not federal. Those lightly-populated states whose residents desire to have passenger train services have the option of doing what several other states have done, namely provide state-subsidized services with Amtrak as the operator, instead of insisting on Amtrak providing it to them without any state contribution. Or, they could provide bus services.
schlimm Those lightly-populated states whose residents desire to have passenger train services have the option of doing what several other states have done, namely provide state-subsidized services with Amtrak as the operator, instead of insisting on Amtrak providing it to them without any state contribution.
Those lightly-populated states whose residents desire to have passenger train services have the option of doing what several other states have done, namely provide state-subsidized services with Amtrak as the operator, instead of insisting on Amtrak providing it to them without any state contribution.
Completely impractical. So, a taxpaying Illinois citizen wants to travel to Denver, but Colorado doesn't want to pay, does the passenger need to jump off the moving train Butch Cassidy style? You display a complete ignorance about and hostility toward how people outside of cities live and travel.
The USA is a nation, not a collection of individual fiefdoms.
My reference was obviously for primarily within-state services. You should realize those services are limited to within states or going on to adjoining states.
from Amtrak: "In FY 2011, 20 of the 27 state-supported corridor services set annual ridership records."
Fifteen states provide some level of operating support for 21 different routes, with payments totaling over $191 million in FY 2011. Many states (including California, Illinois, Oregon, New York, Pennsylvania and Washington) recognize the benefits of investing in corridor development and have spent substantial state funds to improve services with positive ridership results.
Amtrak currently operates 21 state-supported routes in 15 states across the country. The states that contract with Amtrak are California, Illinois, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Oklahoma, Oregon, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin. Section 209 of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA) required Amtrak to work with its state partners to establish a consistent cost-sharing methodology across all corridor routes of less than 750 miles, in order to ensure fair and equitable treatment of all states. "
That Illinois resident, whether a citizen or not, can easily take a flight from many regional airports in the state besides St. Louis or Chicago (Champaign, Bloomington, Springfield). Long distance trains make little sense as practical transportation. And for whatever reason, you continue to display your total lack of civility.
schlimm My reference was obviously for primarily within-state services. You should realize those services are limited to within states or going on to adjoining states. from Amtrak: "In FY 2011, 20 of the 27 state-supported corridor services set annual ridership records." Fifteen states provide some level of operating support for 21 different routes, with payments totaling over $191 million in FY 2011. Many states (including California, Illinois, Oregon, New York, Pennsylvania and Washington) recognize the benefits of investing in corridor development and have spent substantial state funds to improve services with positive ridership results. Amtrak currently operates 21 state-supported routes in 15 states across the country. The states that contract with Amtrak are California, Illinois, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Oklahoma, Oregon, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin. Section 209 of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA) required Amtrak to work with its state partners to establish a consistent cost-sharing methodology across all corridor routes of less than 750 miles, in order to ensure fair and equitable treatment of all states. " That Illinois resident, whether a citizen or not, can easily take a flight from many regional airports in the state besides St. Louis or Chicago (Champaign, Bloomington, Springfield). Long distance trains make little sense as practical transportation. And for whatever reason, you continue to display your total lack of civility.
I have said all I intend to say to you , except that I still think you and the other shills should hang out on busride.com and stay off the long distance passenger train board.
As a former school board member I can assure you that our public schools operated within a framework of state and Federal laws. Amtrak trains are run by on board employees and are also subject to state and Federal laws.
Many states do provide funds for particular trains to run and I certainly do not rule that out. And many states operate their own railroad trains. My own state, New Jersey, operates several rail lines.
States also operate National Guard units but we also need a national military and we have them. The National Government exists to do what states themselves cannot do. Having a a National military service is one of them. Having a National passenger rail system is another.
Indeed one reason for a National passenger rail system is that it can be needed for defense in time of war. It has been used for that purpose during other wars and we could need it again.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.