Romney's plan for Amtrak

[Ryan]

I give you two citations....

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/15/technology/15cell.html?_r=1

They don't complain because they seem to think that the road fairy just comes along and makes all the roads appear for free.

 

[sldispatcher]

Whether you call it a fee or a tax, it is still taking something from someone for the direct benefit of someone else. Whether the funds are used appropriately or not, air service is supplemented by taxes and fees paid for by those who use it.

The fact that huge portions of this country have no passenger rail service makes my point about people not seeing the direct benefit. Surely even you can admit that significant towns and metropolitan areas have no reliable/regular/frequent rail service. That's not my fault or yours. However, it is reality.

As far as upgraded service, I could easily compare a typical Amtrak experience to a nice day at the DOT or IRS office. you can be greeted with a smile, but that's about it. Spartan is the key word. I love riding the rails. But I tolerate many of the shortcomings because of it.

I simply argue that the current business model for Amtrak is doomed to mediocrity. There is no way I can see Amtrak empowered to make onboard/equipment changes necessary on most long haul service to appeal to the income movers who don't even blink over $1500 per person cruise fares/$750 air fares/$300 night hotel stays or $50 per person steaks.

There are many, many of those people. They are not, however, stupid, uninformed or lacking in some insight. You give them the choice of a $300 per person rail trip from Longview, TX to Denver colorado over a $450 per person airfare...and guess what? They'll choose rail if it is at the right price.

Cruise ships make a living doing this....but they cannot do it under the constraints of high priced US labor laws. They pack value into a resort/dining/entertainment combination. I say that you can blend an efficient long distance transportation system combined with a resort type atmosphere...and see what happens.

Slap "Disney Train" on something out of New York...an overnight transport to the Magic Kingdom pinned on the back of the Silver trains.... Would it take 6 cars/8 cars/10 cars for breakeven? Would the loads be there? Yep.

All I'm saying...and apologize for the wordiness....is that something has got to change if the goal of a more complete passenger rail transportation system is to be realized. It has to be funded at higher levels for capital investment..and a realistic business model with "normalized" salaries commensurate for the product delivered...and a much higher level of customer service.

No business would ever stay in business long running the way Amtrak does.

 

[Bob Dylan]

That is all fair. I think there's a secondary concern in a lot of areas...namely, that to get the same level of accessibility with rail that you have with buses, you need to put a lot more into the rail system for dedicated alignments. To take an example, the VRE uses a pre-existing alignment (in that case, the old RF&P Main, run by CSX, for the Fredericksburg line; and the NS main for the Manassas Line). However, to go beyond those lines and put a VRE line in somewhere else would be far more expensive (witness the Silver Line). In Norfolk, while The Tide was able to more or less take advantage of an existing alignment and some workable space (as I understand it), there are plenty of places that you simply can't get a line going without removing lanes on highways or knocking through neighborhoods.

Phoenix just built an entire 20 mile long light rail line without using an existing ROW. Yes, no doubt that's why their line cost more per mile than did The Tide. But still the point remains that already it costs less to move people by light rail. Yes, right now overall costs still show light rail as the most expensive, but it is rapidly making inroads on the bus numbers. Already as of 2010, it opened right at the very end of 2008 so it's first full year was 2009, it costs Phoenix taxpayers $1.96 for the average ride on light rail and $3.74 for the average ride on a bus.

None of this is to suggest that buses should just be tossed away. That's not practical either. The key is to have a balanced system with buses feeding rail options. This is the only, and best way, to keep the overall costs to taxpayers low.

Also, on SLC, how much was supplemented by federal funding (or is that included there)? In most cases, local (and state) governments simply can't fork over the full tab for a rail line (in fact, absent meeting the criteria for federal funding, it's bluntly stated that nothing will be happening on the Peninsula).* Part of that could be, perhaps, chalked up to an unwillingness to raise taxes below the federal level...but I will note that if I was faced with New York City-level taxes (for example, though those are probably the most egregious ones I can think of), I would be seriously looking at moving elsewhere.
*I'll avoid a lengthy rant and just say that there's something to be criticized in the form of how many things states simply can't afford without federal funding.

The numbers supplied include all expenses without regard to where the money came from to pay said expenses.

By the way, while I suspect that my taxes here in NYC are greater than your's, NYC isn't the worst. In fact, it's not even in the top 10 for most "egregious" tax rates, per this list.

When it comes to Lists like this I tend to be from Missouri! If you include things like School and Property Taxes, Hospital and Community College and Fire and Water District(known as MUDs)and Insurance and Governement "Fees" on Everything! Id suggest that lots of Californias Cities, especially around the San Francisco Bay Area would be on the List along with Austin, Texas ( ), now the Most expensive Cty in Texas! Lest Jis and Dick feel left out, New Jersey should probably be on that List also! :lol: bet Penny, our Resient Tax-Attorney/Accountant will have Info on this! :help:

 

[George Harris]

The high speed rail funding....9.95 billion allocated to California for the first part of a 89 billion dollar railway. That 9.95 billion is enough to buy 66 million..MILLION one way $150 tickets between San Fran and LAX. That's enough to send 3000 people a day one way on the route for the next 60 years....by air.

There are a lot more points served by the HSR than SF and LA. There are such places as Fresno and Bakersfield, plus there will be "local" trains that hit such places as Hanford, Palmdale, Gilroy, etc. And, I suspect the 89 billion would be full system build out which is a lot more than SF to LA.

Then there is the what do you need to do if you don't build the HSR? You must build more roads and runways. Also, the HSR is of real benefit to the non-user. How about all the people going down roads that have fewer cars on them than would be on them if the HSR did not exist? How about all the people making easier trips through airports than they would if the HSR not exist? These people are benefiting from the HSR even though they are not riding the trains.

 

[Ryan]

As far as upgraded service, I could easily compare a typical Amtrak experience to a nice day at the DOT or IRS office. you can be greeted with a smile, but that's about it. Spartan is the key word. I love riding the rails. But I tolerate many of the shortcomings because of it.

You could make that comparison, but I doubt that you'd find many people to agree with it. All 20,000+ miles of my Amtrak experience have been considerably better.

I simply argue that the current business model for Amtrak is doomed to mediocrity. There is no way I can see Amtrak empowered to make onboard/equipment changes necessary on most long haul service to appeal to the income movers who don't even blink over $1500 per person cruise fares/$750 air fares/$300 night hotel stays or $50 per person steaks.

Those people aren't the target market for Amtrak.

There are many, many of those people.

Really? In this economy? Those people are a fraction of the 1%, if that.

They are not, however, stupid, uninformed or lacking in some insight. You give them the choice of a $300 per person rail trip from Longview, TX to Denver colorado over a $450 per person airfare...and guess what? They'll choose rail if it is at the right price.

And there won't be that kind of service at those prices.

Cruise ships make a living doing this....but they cannot do it under the constraints of high priced US labor laws. They pack value into a resort/dining/entertainment combination. I say that you can blend an efficient long distance transportation system combined with a resort type atmosphere...and see what happens.

Repeat after me: "Amtrak is not a cruise line". Taxpayers aren't in this to subsidize a land cruise. You're going to complain about the government taking money to provide telecommunications services for the poor, but expect the government to pick up the tab so some 1%er can have a land cruise? I don't think so. Think that the service can pay for itself? The graveyard of companies that tried it before and went out of business tend to indicate otherwise.

Slap "Disney Train" on something out of New York...an overnight transport to the Magic Kingdom pinned on the back of the Silver trains.... Would it take 6 cars/8 cars/10 cars for breakeven? Would the loads be there? Yep.

Have any data to back up that assertion?

No business would ever stay in business long running the way Amtrak does.

Nor have any businesses stayed in business running the way that you suggest. If you're going to make a case otherwise, you're going to have to come up with some compelling evidence as to why you think it'll be different this time.

 

[mfastx]

He's just saying this to cater to typical conservatives who like to use Amtrak as an example of "wasteful" spending. If he gets voted in and actually looks at facts, he wouldn't be stupid enough to actaully go through with it. Even George Bush realized it, lol.

That being said, I don't plan on voting for him.

 

[Bob Dylan]

He's just saying this to cater to typical conservatives who like to use Amtrak as an example of "wasteful" spending. If he gets voted in and actually looks at facts, he wouldn't be stupid enough to actaully go through with it. Even George Bush realized it, lol.

That being said, I don't plan on voting for him.

Smartest thing that has been said about this Clown, even W Believed in SOMETHING!!! (Bet you $10,000 he Loses!!! :giggle: ) Wonder if he'll Ride to the Republican Convention on the Circus Train, what a Joke!!! :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Shanghai]

He's just saying this to cater to typical conservatives who like to use Amtrak as an example of "wasteful" spending. If he gets voted in and actually looks at facts, he wouldn't be stupid enough to actaully go through with it. Even George Bush realized it, lol.

That being said, I don't plan on voting for him.

Smartest thing that has been said about this Clown, even W Believed in SOMETHING!!! (Bet you $10,000 he Loses!!! :giggle: ) Wonder if he'll Ride to the Republican Convention on the Circus Train, what a Joke!!! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Jim,

He could have ridden the train that Obama rode into Washington three years ago, but that train is a wreck!!

 

[jb64]

He's just saying this to cater to typical conservatives who like to use Amtrak as an example of "wasteful" spending. If he gets voted in and actually looks at facts, he wouldn't be stupid enough to actaully go through with it. Even George Bush realized it, lol.

That being said, I don't plan on voting for him.

Smartest thing that has been said about this Clown, even W Believed in SOMETHING!!! (Bet you $10,000 he Loses!!! :giggle: ) Wonder if he'll Ride to the Republican Convention on the Circus Train, what a Joke!!! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Jim,

He could have ridden the train that Obama rode into Washington three years ago, but that train is a wreck!!

+1 (I'm voting third party)

 

[sldispatcher]

Nor have any businesses stayed in business running the way that you suggest. If you're going to make a case otherwise, you're going to have to come up with some compelling evidence as to why you think it'll be different this time.

No businesses that deliver service, quality, fair price? You are right! There are no such business that exist!!!!

As far as what I suggested above, I would never suggest that the operational costs of higher end service be covered by the taxpayer. Quite the contrary, as you relentlessly point out sleeper service can and should supplement the coach class service.

This happens daily...thousands upon thousands of times in the airline industry through yield management.

It happens daily with thousands and thousands of purchases in department stores.

But you know what, I bet you and I agree on more than what is seen as our differences....we want the same thing.

Now the question for you, (without the name calling), is how do you persuade a politician to embrace a sensible passenger rail future?

What areas do you feel need the most attention?

What areas, being specific to this topic, would you think a Mitt Romney could communicate to the sensible base and the broader American public in terms of rational rail network? (don't worry about the radical right-cut-everything-for-votes)

 

[Anderson]

I'll go ahead and say that my biggest rub with the CAHSR is that for the listed price, you could give Amtrak a trust fund that would pump $2-4 billion per year into operating subsidies and capital costs simply by holding mid-term Treasuries. Put another way, for the cost of that project you could build SEHSR on the interest....or you could just buy out UP and CSX (not that I advocate doing so, but the point is more a description of scale here) and have billions left over. Basically, the problem with CA's plan is that it tends to pull all of the oxygen out of the room, and if it were to get fully funded and then flop...well, I don't think we'd see another major HSR project for a generation or two while it had spent the previous decade vacuuming up money that could go to...well, frankly a reasonably close to national network of 90-125 MPH lines.

As to taxes: Alan, you're right...though I'm surprised that New York doesn't make the list. I'm guessing that the state has a high personal exemption on the income tax? (I say this because IIRC, the middle brackets come to something like 10% on their own, state and local combined.)

I'm also legitimately surprised that only Bridgeport makes that list (i.e. nothing else in CT).

 

[cirdan]

While this seems to be largely true, here's the funny part. The things that some Republican's seem to support, roads & buses, require many more union workers than do trains. For example, out in Salt Lake City, their bus division required 1,023 workers in 2009 while the light rail division required 314 workers. And it's not like the buses are moving two or three times more people to warrant a larger staff. In fact the buses barely move 7 million more rides than light rail did. They needed 1 employee for every 20,192 rides provided on a bus and 1 employee for every 42,627 rides provided by light rail. A Republican wanting a smaller union would actually be better off voting for more rail.

Um, so which part is the funny part again?

I don't think Republicans are really against unions. In fact I don't believe they even understand what a union is and wouldn't even recognise one if it came by another name. They are against an abstract concept representing what they imagine a union to be. A bit like the way they rant about Keynesian economics and socialism, also things whose names they hate without actually knowing what they mean.

 

[Ryan]

Nor have any businesses stayed in business running the way that you suggest. If you're going to make a case otherwise, you're going to have to come up with some compelling evidence as to why you think it'll be different this time.

No businesses that deliver service, quality, fair price? You are right! There are no such business that exist!!!!

As far as what I suggested above, I would never suggest that the operational costs of higher end service be covered by the taxpayer. Quite the contrary, as you relentlessly point out sleeper service can and should supplement the coach class service.

This happens daily...thousands upon thousands of times in the airline industry through yield management.

It happens daily with thousands and thousands of purchases in department stores.

You are aware that private companies have tried to offer rail travel in the manner you describe and gone out of business, right?. Saying that other businesses provide good service and make a profit is meaningless noise, unless you're prepared to discuss how a private company can pay the costs associated with hauling a sufficient number of passengers around in the style you describe at a price that will be sufficient to make a profit.

But you know what, I bet you and I agree on more than what is seen as our differences....we want the same thing. Now the question for you, (without the name calling), is how do you persuade a politician to embrace a sensible passenger rail future?

Convince them to spend the money to make the investment in passenger rail.

What areas do you feel need the most attention?

The fact that rail is not the only transportation method that is subsidized by the government and that a fiscal case can be made for investing in passenger rail instead of building road after road after road.

What areas, being specific to this topic, would you think a Mitt Romney could communicate to the sensible base and the broader American public in terms of rational rail network? (don't worry about the radical right-cut-everything-for-votes)

If someone were to light Mitt Romney on fire, he would have trouble communicating the fact that he was hot to people watching him. Then after 2 minutes, he would try to convince people that he was cold. 2 minutes after that he would be trying to convince people that he's always been on fire. Then he would just give up and try to convince the people watching by saying that it doesn't really matter if he's hot or cold, because he's rich enough that it won't matter.

 

[jphjaxfl]

The railroads we have today were built in the 19th to early 20th century before we had modern equipment. In order to build something like CAHSR, you have to start from scratch. Just purchasing Right of Way is many times more expensive than when existing rail lines were built. As a progressive that comes from a railroad family heritage, I want to modern world class high speed rail lines built like Europe, Japan and China. I know it will cost high dollars, but we need to do it right! My forefathers built and operated rail lines that were good for the times they lived in, but they have not been maintained by several generations. Some has been due to opposition by big oil, automobile companies and the air industry. We need to bring American system into the station 21st century. CAHSR will be the first attempt to do that. If it is built, it will be successful. Then hopefully we rebuild the NEC straightening out the Baltimore tunnels among other things for a 1.5 hour NY-Was trip and a 3 hours OBS-Was trip.