http://www.thenewamerican.com/opinion/950-bob-confer/7736-amtrak-the-great-american-train-wreck
Another cunfused writer
Another cunfused writer
Another attack on Amtrak
- Thread starter amtkstn
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
- Status
The Davy Crockett
Engineer
Yep. More whitewashing smear. :help: :help: :help: Why let the facts get in the way of your political agenda? :angry2: :unsure: :blink:
Last edited by a moderator:
bobnabq
Lead Service Attendant
If you click on the home page of that item, you'll quickly see that The New American is a conservative website.
Now, in respect to other posters here, I'll not vent my left wing opinions, except to say the fellow who thinks Amtrak is laying belly up has an agenda,
and it's not one in favor of Amtrak.
{If I did go further I'd probably point out that the demise of Amtrak would result in more sales of gasoline and higher oil company profits......but I won't go there.} :wacko:
Devil's Advocate
⠀⠀⠀
There was nothing in that article that would give any indication the author was "cunfused" about anything. Every wild-eyed accusation, every emotionally charged warning, and every flippant dismissal looked to be written with the utmost intent. Frankly, I'd expecting nothing less from a hyper-partisan sludge tank like the John Birch Society.
the_traveler
Engineer
By his statement, I would assume that he is somewhere between BFX and NFL. Did it not occur to him that most of the passengers on the train (between NYP and BFX) had already gotten off!
PerRock
Engineer
I did a little research & number crunching; and I think I would be safe to say that he even has his tourism fact wrong.
Acording to the World Tourism Rankings; the US is 2nd.
Rank Country # tourists
1
2
3
4
Then based off from Forbes Top American Tourist Attractions (Forbes is the company that does the most research list making out there, things like wealthiest people, etc) Niagara Falls doesn't even place in the top 5.
Making it very unlikely that it will place in the top 10 of the world, and if it does near the very bottom of the list.
peter
VentureForth
Engineer
The list you refer to from Forbes in 2007 actually has Niagara Falls at Place #6 in the World, not just in the US. So, to call it one of the "...most popular tourism destinations on the planet," is in no way inaccurate. I would hardly consider a "country" to be synonomous with "destination".
I shall reference my source:
-->Source<--
I shall reference my source:
-->Source<--
TransitGeek
Service Attendant
Yawn... another "government trains are evil and collectivist, while cars on government roads are the epitome of FREEDOM!" rant from the right. Rail has, inexplicably, become an ideological issue this year. We should expect to see a lot more of this from the libertarian right, and if we see more articles like this one, THAT will be news.
Of course, I personally feel a lot more free when riding transit, either in its rubber-tired or steel-wheeled forms. Free not to deal with traffic, free to sleep, free to get some work done, free to look out the gorram window, free to keep more of my money in my pocket instead of sending it to Conoco-Phillips or Valero, etc...
Of course, I personally feel a lot more free when riding transit, either in its rubber-tired or steel-wheeled forms. Free not to deal with traffic, free to sleep, free to get some work done, free to look out the gorram window, free to keep more of my money in my pocket instead of sending it to Conoco-Phillips or Valero, etc...
I posted the following response to Mr. Cofer's article in the NEW AMERICAN publication.
I appreciate Mr Confer's comments regarding Amtrak and agree somewhat on his premise and facts, however he did fail to mention some significant relative information on the US Transportation entities. Since our Congress never prepared an official budget for the past fiscal year, I have referred to the planned budget for the Transportation Department. Unfortunately, Mr Confer did not mention the Federal Government support for Air Travel, Highways and associated funding for safety and non-operational funding activities. The planned budget for last year for the Transportation Departments was $73.2 Billion. The FRA received $2.7 Billion, of which $1.5 Billion was for Amtrak. That's 2%.
The FAA alone received $16.0 Billion and the Federal Highway Agency received $43.3 Billion. Not included in the Federal budget figures is the local taxes the FAA and our Airports pay - Zero!!
If Amtrak received a comparable level of support for its stations, tracks & dispatching as the airports receive, their breakeven point would be tilted positive. And if the property and business taxes paid by Amtrak were comparable to airlines and airports, that would also provide a significant boost to Amtrak's bottom line. Of course, the amount of money the State and Federal governments subsidize to the highways is completely in another league. The FHA and associated agencies receive 60% of the Federal Transportation budget!! The FAA gets more than 23% and Amtrak gets 2%. I would like to see Mr Confer make a more meaningful and comparable comparison of the use of our country's transportation funding and also look to where other nation's of the world are allocating their transportation resources.
I appreciate Mr Confer's comments regarding Amtrak and agree somewhat on his premise and facts, however he did fail to mention some significant relative information on the US Transportation entities. Since our Congress never prepared an official budget for the past fiscal year, I have referred to the planned budget for the Transportation Department. Unfortunately, Mr Confer did not mention the Federal Government support for Air Travel, Highways and associated funding for safety and non-operational funding activities. The planned budget for last year for the Transportation Departments was $73.2 Billion. The FRA received $2.7 Billion, of which $1.5 Billion was for Amtrak. That's 2%.
The FAA alone received $16.0 Billion and the Federal Highway Agency received $43.3 Billion. Not included in the Federal budget figures is the local taxes the FAA and our Airports pay - Zero!!
If Amtrak received a comparable level of support for its stations, tracks & dispatching as the airports receive, their breakeven point would be tilted positive. And if the property and business taxes paid by Amtrak were comparable to airlines and airports, that would also provide a significant boost to Amtrak's bottom line. Of course, the amount of money the State and Federal governments subsidize to the highways is completely in another league. The FHA and associated agencies receive 60% of the Federal Transportation budget!! The FAA gets more than 23% and Amtrak gets 2%. I would like to see Mr Confer make a more meaningful and comparable comparison of the use of our country's transportation funding and also look to where other nation's of the world are allocating their transportation resources.
Kick this guy off the debate team:
P1:
"It’s patently obvious that public transportation via rail is unpopular, if not useless, in the United States."
P5:
"...losses are occurring even while ridership is increasing. This year’s usage is expected to surpass the record of 28.7 million passengers set last year. "
Ummmmm, patently obvious to whom? Useless to the people filling up the trains and using the system? Go get 'em tiger! :lol:
P1:
"It’s patently obvious that public transportation via rail is unpopular, if not useless, in the United States."
P5:
"...losses are occurring even while ridership is increasing. This year’s usage is expected to surpass the record of 28.7 million passengers set last year. "
Ummmmm, patently obvious to whom? Useless to the people filling up the trains and using the system? Go get 'em tiger! :lol:
bobnabq
Lead Service Attendant
I gave up driving a few years ago because I have Glaucoma and cataracts. Although I felt I was a safe driver (never had an accident and only one speeding ticket in decades) I worried that if I did have an accident, and my vision problems became known, I'd be screwed.
Oldsmoboi
OBS Chief
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2011
- Messages
- 589
This was my reply:
No need for actual facts
It's amazing that an assessment of Amtrak performance can be completed just by gazing out a window in upstate New York with no other need for study or facts. April 2011 was the 18th month in a row of strong ridership gains. Amtrak is currently on track to have over 30 million passengers for this fiscal year.
At this rate of growth, Amtrak is about to have a new problem: Insufficient capacity. For example, The Pennsylvanian (one of the two trains that service my city) was up 7.1% in April 2011 to 16,810 riders. Averaging 280 passengers each direction each day.... which is about 4.6 cars full on a 5 coach train (sixth car is a food car). Obviously, not all of those riders went end to end like I did, but that might explain why all 4 trips I took on that train in April seemed pretty full. Without additional coaches, this train's ability for further growth will soon be capped.
What I don't understand is the insistence by the author that more (any?) funds for high speed rail means we will all be forced to give up our cars. That hasn't been remotely true in any of the countries that have high speed rail. High speed rail can be a welcome alternative to cars for Metro to Metro travel. Airports don't ever drop you in the center of town as anyone who has to schlep from LaGuardia to Manhattan can tell you.
What it seems this author has is fear of the unknown. He should really take the Acela from New York to Washington before he knocks it.
No need for actual facts
It's amazing that an assessment of Amtrak performance can be completed just by gazing out a window in upstate New York with no other need for study or facts. April 2011 was the 18th month in a row of strong ridership gains. Amtrak is currently on track to have over 30 million passengers for this fiscal year.
At this rate of growth, Amtrak is about to have a new problem: Insufficient capacity. For example, The Pennsylvanian (one of the two trains that service my city) was up 7.1% in April 2011 to 16,810 riders. Averaging 280 passengers each direction each day.... which is about 4.6 cars full on a 5 coach train (sixth car is a food car). Obviously, not all of those riders went end to end like I did, but that might explain why all 4 trips I took on that train in April seemed pretty full. Without additional coaches, this train's ability for further growth will soon be capped.
What I don't understand is the insistence by the author that more (any?) funds for high speed rail means we will all be forced to give up our cars. That hasn't been remotely true in any of the countries that have high speed rail. High speed rail can be a welcome alternative to cars for Metro to Metro travel. Airports don't ever drop you in the center of town as anyone who has to schlep from LaGuardia to Manhattan can tell you.
What it seems this author has is fear of the unknown. He should really take the Acela from New York to Washington before he knocks it.
PerRock
Engineer
The problem with your source is that it is 4 years old. I was using the 2010 America's Top Tourist Attractions List.
peter
L
Lurker Tom
Guest
If you click through to the article and the website that published it, you will see that you've landed at the John Birch Society. As far as I am concerned, that says it all.
- Status
