Amtrak long distance

[Amtrakfflyer]

https://ntbraymer.wordpress.com/201...ng-distance-trains-be-taken-away-from-amtrak/

By Noel T. Braymer

<snip>

One advantage of Long Distance rail passenger service is they serve many markets. Long Distance trains stop at major cities and small towns and can run 24 hours a day for days at a time generating income. Running two or three Long Distance Trains on a route gives passengers more options and markets to ride the train. Despite what Amtrak claims, long distance travel markets are generally the most profitable services because ticket prices are higher if passengers go a thousand miles, than if they go 20 miles. This is why most passenger services use their passenger miles to measure their productivity. Amtrak loves to talk about passenger counts. But many of their passengers travel short distances which doesn’t produce much money.

Edited by staff to a fair use portion of the linked blog post.

 

[Just-Thinking-51]

Remove the long distance train from Amtrak is one solution. It would force the accounting part to change. It’s also not need. Amtrak is just a brand of the parent company. Simple spinning off the Long Distance train in to there own internal company would do the same thing. That why I was so interested in the three lines that were going to be operated by a private company for 80% of the subsidy that Amtrak need for those line. It would force Amtrak to release the true cost of those lines. However it was a poorly written law, and the FRA follow it to the letter, so nobody would bid on it.

No clue where Amtrak is going, but it a one way street that seem to be a dead end.

 

[PaulM]

Remove the long distance train from Amtrak is one solution.

And what do you have left? Only the NE corridor since by law the states pay for the other "corridors".

Would the senators and house of representatives from outside the NE corridor be stupid enough to support the billions that it wants for infrastructure requirements?

 

[ehbowen]

And what do you have left? Only the NE corridor since by law the states pay for the other "corridors".

Would the senators and house of representatives from outside the NE corridor be stupid enough to support the billions that it wants for infrastructure requirements?

When you use the words "politicians" and "stupid" in the same sentence, there's no limit to "How low can you go?"

Just call it "Washington Limbo..."

 

[jis]

Besides, the law about states paying for this or that can always be changed. Afterall, same said "stupid" made those laws in the first place. Also operating subsidy and capital construction costs are two different things. Feds can still pay for capital including equipment acquisition while requiring that all needed operating subsidy be locally borne, including the net subsidy for operating and maintenance of the NEC. Again, the same "stupid" can make the necessary changes to the laws to make that happen too. Nothing is etched in stone that was snatched from the "cloud" by one Moses.