Roads in the place where our in our society right now is a neccessaity, Amtrak isn't. Amtrak could stop operations tomorrow and our way of ife wouldn't have any change to it. Remove or stop the upkeep of our roads where the majority of individuals travel and goods are moved, you have problems.
But obviously it was not always that way. Without massive government expenditures that favored the auto and aviation industries, beginning in the 1920s and again in the 1950s, there would be no auto or airline industries as we know them, and therefore no need for roads, highways or airports--nearly all of which are financed by the government. Private industry was, of course, the spark that created these needs, but without governmnent expenditure propping them up (to many times the tune of Amtrak's budget), just as had been the case with railroads, these industries would not exist today. Ditto the cruise shop industry, whose ports are constructed and maintained by government funds. Where is your outrage about these industries having a huge part of their infrastructure being financed by the government? Shouldn't they be made to pay their own way, or cease to exist?
Roads in the place where our in our society right now is a So you are saying Amtrak trains stop and go at each stop within 10-15 minutes?
You really don't know anything about Amtrak or trains, do you? Most trains stop only for a minute or two
at most stations. A few stop 3-4 minutes at large stations. The only 15-20 minute stops are the very rare service stops, when the train is rewatered and the enginers/conductors change. But most are only momentary stops.
Private industry used to operate commuter and regional trains, too, such as the New York Subway system, the Long Island Railroad, New York and New Haven RR, etc. But over time all of these proved unprofitable and government, usually local or state, stepped in and took them over, because transportation is seen as a necessary government function. Unlike local commuter trains, Amtrak is government-subsidized, but not government run.
According to your statements, the airlines should never have been bailed out after 9-11, nor should their airports be financed by the federal government, which supplies ninety percent of the finanacing, or local (the remainder). We pay air traffic controllers to guide private flights--why shouldn't the airlines do this? Should public bus terminals expel Greyhound and the many regional bus companies? After all, these are private companies and if they cannot afford to construct and maintain their own terminals, then obviously we don't need them. And why are we running federal port operations for pleasure cruise passengers?