Suggested rebuttals for common criticisms of additional train service Added for the edification of forum members.
I just skimmed it a few minutes ago. It's worth a look. There are a few points in there I might disagree with, but there's a lot of pretty detailed information in there. It's geared toward HSR, but much of it also can relate to rail passenger transportation policy in general.Maybe it is meant to put the critical person to sleep. I thought it was going to be short and sweet. Have to read it later when I am more awake.
Huge? I have a standard dsl connection and it took less than a minute to load. 88 pages is not an unusually large PDF. We routinely download 300+ page service manuals for stuff we work on.This huge document almost froze up my computer. No way I'm reading it!
Yes, but around here we are converts. These criticisms find fertile ground in the many parts of the US where there is little to no train service. The criticisms also find considerable support among those who see no need to spend any funding on anything other than driving (E. g. many parts of Wisconsin, Florida, Ohio, and other states). If there is to be expanded train service in more parts of the nation, then we will have to confront and defeat the numerous distortions and lies about train service.I don't have to read 88 pages to justify my argument for additional and improved train service.
1. It serves the public interest
2. Its the most energy efficient means of transporting people and it saves energy.
3. It helps alleviate traffic congestion and saves you from being stuck in it.
4. It can be a vital transportation link in case of natural and man made disasters. Trains run when the planes can't. During the blizzard of 2009 the NEC was "standing room only".
5. Its a stress free, relaxing and enjoyable mode of transportation.
6. It helps the economy of the towns and cities that it serves, and creates jobs both within and outside of the system.
But the transportation budget only gives roads and airports a pittance of the total transportation subsidy. Amtrak is the real problem behind the deficit. Eliminate the service and all of America's problems are solved. Its also common knowledge in Washington that those who ride the trains are either old fashioned or subhuman."But we taxpayers do not subsidize driving and flying - like we do Amtrak!"
I know that that was tongue-in-cheek. But, by chance, I just wrote this in Afigg's ridership forum, on the topic of air subsidies:"But we taxpayers do not subsidize driving and flying - like we do Amtrak!"
Enter your email address to join: