It doesn’t need more taxpayer cash, it needs to be sold off, or given away. Actually, it’s not so much what it needs, but what the taxpayer needs. As noted, it’s primarily an income transfer scheme from lower-income taxpayers all over the country to the wealthy in the northeast corridor and union members.
[Update a few minutes later]
“‘Amtrak doesn’t get enough government money,’ is the kind of thing someone says when that person doesn’t understand anything about Amtrak, or government, or money.”
Heh.
I’m just grateful that I don’t have to rely on Amtrak and will be vigilant in maintaining my independence from Amtrak.
it’s primarily an income transfer scheme from lower-income taxpayers all over the country to the wealthy in the northeast corridor
Actually, in terms of geography it’s precisely the other way around: Amtrak makes a profit in the Northeast Corridor, but loses money on the long-haul routes it keeps running for the benefit of “taxpayers all over the country.”
Great news Jim. So we can eliminate the federal subsidy to Amtrak (and other industries). They’ll drop service in parts of the country where it is not wanted anyway. And they can be a profitable concern for Acela Cooridor. I’m glad you got that figured out.
They’ll drop service in parts of the country where it is not wanted anyway
Amtrak is wanted in those areas. Wanted enough, that is, for their elective representatives to block any move to drop it. Just not enough to generate the ridership numbers it would take for Amtrak to operate those routes without subsidies.
Translation:
“Representatives like free government cheese”.
Who knew?
Great job Jim identifying the problem. If only there were people interested in stopping this problem.
When I finish my PhD, my present to myself will be trip on the City of New Orleans; the entire route, from Chicago to New Orleans. I hope Amtrak sticks around that long.
I’m glad you’ll start in Chicago.
Many years ago, before I got old and ugly, a girl proposed marriage to me in Chicago. I was on the train from NY to Seattle. She was going from NY to LA. We had a 4 hr. wait in Chicago for our next train.
Before we got to Chicago, in one car a band was playing (their mom was their manager) but I wandered back to my car while they were going at it. The girl was talking to an older couple and I mentioned the band to them. She went to see it and I got to talking to the couple.
Since we had this time in Chicago, the four of us decided to see a museum. We saw paintings I’d only seen in books before and had a nice time. As we left the museum I bought the girl a coffee table book of impressionist art. Back at the station, we talked about where we were going. The girl was going to her sister’s wedding. That’s when she asked me if I’d like to make it a double!
Ah, the road less traveled. Somewhere, in an alternate universe I’m married to an art collector. I loved riding trains.
The article has several blatantly wrong facts. Just like Amtrak says it is true that it was forced to accept those bankrupt loss making private companies.
The article is completely wrong. Amtrak has never been about passenger travel. It is a state subsidy to low cost continental USA cargo freight. Passenger travel is mostly an afterthought.
The article is also wrong, like Jim said, in that it is the passengers in the Northeastern corridor who subsidize the rest of Amtrak and not the opposite. That is one of the few economically viable lines that can pay for itself and have a profit. Most of the rest is bulk freight lines which cannot pay for themselves. If you privatized those lines they would likely end up in scrap. Which would probably not be a bad thing but then that bulk freight would start coming by paved road instead (also state subsidized) and you know how well asphalt takes to heavy bulk loads crossing it over and over.
Most of the costs in any railroad system in any country are related to track maintenance costs. AFAIK the USA has a lot more track than any other country around and that is quite expensive and yes it does require a lot of people, which need to be paid salaries, to perform track inspection and repair. It has nothing to do with unions.
The system should be rationalized and lines cut to save on maintenance and staffing costs but politics prevent that.
Japan privatized a lot of their lines a couple of decades ago but IMO it provided no benefit. One thing that the Japanese do well with their railway system though is that they put shopping centers in the train stations and make most of their money not from selling tickets but from leasing these commercial spaces.
So I just read the latest rumor to go along with the engineer doesn’t remember anything. Now there is speculation that his cab may have been hit by something, maybe even shot at. I have problems with all this. Number 1, they have the engineer and thus his body. If he was hit by something that knocked him out, that should be noticeable, even with the trauma from the crash itself. Number 2, how would getting hit by something cause acceleration? Number 3, why would his reaction to being hit by something while travelling 50-80 mph be to go even faster? Number 4, how was he alert enough to speed up, but then not alert to slow down until already well over 100 mph and about to enter the curve?
I ask these questions, because they are simple enough to come up with to make this rumor something not worth reporting. But there is an even more simple reason not to report it, the data recorder has already been recovered. It should show when the train accelerated, when the brakes were applied (news that came out very early), and unless Amtrak trains are as badly regulated as IRS email data centers; then they should track the position of all the primary controls like aircraft, particularly since there are far fewer controls. The police do need to investigate the accident, because people died while an engineer seemed to neglect his work either intentionally or unintentionally, and the police can help figure out which.