Privatizing USA Passenger Rail

[sparky15]

Been about five years since I was in your neck of the woods. I know of the VAT tax. I'm sure we have similar taxes on taxis and tickets, but the federal government makes more per gallon than the actual oil companies due on gas. I think that would be hard to make up through ticket prices. Not to mention subsidies already paid out to airlines and Amtrak is a money pit now.

Also, each state has their own tax on gas, cities add theirs to it. Do a little digging around and it would amaze you how deep gas is into our tax structure on all levels.

Dave.....

 

[kws4000]

I saw a few people get kind of mad at me.
Sorry, I forgive you.

I am a REPUBLICAN and CONSERVATIVE. I SUPPORT funding Amtrak. I am OPPOSED to total privatization now. I do want to DOWNSIZE the US government. I am MAD at the lack of funding for the PTC MANDATE.

Yeah, will someone gag me with a spoon?

So what if the highways drop in maintinence levels? More people save money as they move to rail because they don't want to fly. Good references means rising ridership, higher revenue, less subsidies!!! Besides, I still want some sort of retribution made by the truckers back to the citizens who pay the most and cause the least damage to the highways.

Where I live, the Pere Marquette (Amtrak 370/371) has enjoyed increased ridership by a minimun of 5%, sometimes as much as 11% over the past 10 years. Waiting lines for tickets are two months long, despite the accident in Chicago a few years ago.

 

[sparky15]

You do realize commercial truckers pay higher licensing fees to maintain the roads, right? Several times over what the average car owner pays.

 

[StorkNest]

Just thought I would inject a bit of humour. Hope those of you as Americans don't mind us Brits And others joining in such a great thread, as it started as your thread after all.

I don't mind people joining, I just don't want most of the politics, not mainly because of CoC, on my local news site I have to deal with and read to political types including the crazies and the mere mention of American politics makes me think the crazy stuff will come here.

That's why the FOX News mentions and certain things kws4000 said got me leery, if it keeps up the crazy people come out.

 

[wholbr]

Hi Everybody.

I don't mind people joining, I just don't want most of the politics, not mainly because of CoC, on my local news site I have to deal with and read to political types including the crazies and the mere mention of American politics makes me think the crazy stuff will come here.

That's why the FOX News mentions and certain things kws4000 said got me leery, if it keeps up the crazy people come out.

StorkNest, thank you for allowing non-Americans to stay on the thread

However, as the opening poster you asked the question " should USA passenger rail be privatized "

That is a political question, Answers to that question are bound to involve politics through the individual views on privatization.

As long as those answers revolve around the question of railways, subsidies and privatization and do not involve anything else then they are perfectly valid.

Sorry, but if you do not like the answers you may receive, do not ask the question.

Bill

 

[StorkNest]

Bill, I understood all that and expected it.
Here's clarity on the parts that don't belong and are not related.
I will not point people out, just put all the items together.
These items also when mentioned tend to start flame wars.

but cut back on secret military funding.
Tun SS ... (SS=Social Security)
Stop paying farmers not to grow food.
Pull out of G8 and G20, or whatever they have now.
Maintain hype about GREEN, but stop subsidizing it.
AND GIVE MY COUNTRY BACK TO ME, I DON"T WANT TO PAY ALL OF YOU OLD FARTS BILLS! :'(
On the Fox News webpage ....

None of this is acceptable politics to the discussion.
And if anyone wants to claim the last is, I know that is wrong and so do certain others in the USA, mentioning FOX news or any NBC affiliate plus certain other news outlets IS unacceptable politics and the mere mention of such news sites are know to be considered insults and start the stuff not considered acceptable.

 

[psferg]

Well First of all, Who would run it? Freight operators don't want to have anything to do with passenger operations. That is why most commuter operations own the tracks they run on, and lease them back to the freight operators. It's a fact that if a freight operator runs commuter/amtrak on their lines, the passenger takes a back seat. You aren't going to force them to take back passengers, because that would be something other than "free enterprise". They aren't going to willfully take them back, because if they wanted them in the first place, they wouldn't have given them up to Amtrak. So that leaves a third person type of situation. And what are they going to do? This might surprise you, but they are NOT going to build a new system specifically for passenger service. So what are they going to do? They are going to go to the freight operators and run on freight lines, subjected to freight dispatchers and freight schedules. The bottom line is that hauling freight makes money. Hauling people loses money (at least in the U.S.).


And anyway, is there ANY privatized passenger operation on the planet?
just wondering.

 

[JCitron]

Well First of all, Who would run it? Freight operators don't want to have anything to do with passenger operations. That is why most commuter operations own the tracks they run on, and lease them back to the freight operators. It's a fact that if a freight operator runs commuter/amtrak on their lines, the passenger takes a back seat. You aren't going to force them to take back passengers, because that would be something other than "free enterprise". They aren't going to willfully take them back, because if they wanted them in the first place, they wouldn't have given them up to Amtrak. So that leaves a third person type of situation. And what are they going to do? This might surprise you, but they are NOT going to build a new system specifically for passenger service. So what are they going to do? They are going to go to the freight operators and run on freight lines, subjected to freight dispatchers and freight schedules. The bottom line is that hauling freight makes money. Hauling people loses money (at least in the U.S.).


And anyway, is there ANY privatized passenger operation on the planet?
just wondering.

Supposedly in the UK, but I think the government owns the rails and the different passenger agencies/companies run the trains. This is sort of like what we have in Mass. The state (MBTA) owns most of the rails and maintains them, and MassCommuter Rail runs the trains. Guilford gets a free maintenance out of it on a good part of their freight lines out as far as Fitchburg and up to the Portland Maine because of the North American Passenger Association.

John

 

[rjhowie]

Yes John,

As has already been said in Britain the companies don't own the track like in the earlier private days pre-1948. There is only one place in Great Britain where this does not happen and that is over in Ulster which has the additonal cost of maintaining stations and tracks unlike on the mainland. It is most unfair as the NIR gets less of a subsidy than in Scotland/England/Wales per mile.

An earlier reference to the old Brish Rail the State enterprise that was a bloated system and had little vision for my view. I pointed out that any shade of government could have done something with BR but didn't and it was a cumbersome headache as many State industries were until passed back to private hands. In the USA that is what lacks - a sense of vision for national rail. Other countries in the world have it including ones as big as America. Indeed I think it even lost the art of loco or train design during the years of decline in passenger trains. Even some small contries like S. Ireland have had rail revolutions and vastly increased ridership. Yep, it is the lack of vision but when you have lost out on something it is awfully hard to get it back.

 

[wholbr]

Yes John,
An earlier reference to the old Brish Rail the State enterprise that was a bloated system and had little vision for my view. I pointed out that any shade of government could have done something with BR but didn't and it was a cumbersome headache as many State industries were until passed back to private hands. In the USA that is what lacks - a sense of vision for national rail. Other countries in the world have it including ones as big as America. Indeed I think it even lost the art of loco or train design during the years of decline in passenger trains. Even some small contries like S. Ireland have had rail revolutions and vastly increased ridership. Yep, it is the lack of vision but when you have lost out on something it is awfully hard to get it back.

Hi rjhowie2 And Everybody.
I have to agree 100% with what you say there rjhowie2. For the first time in well over 100 years there is vision and ideas in the British railway system. Tomorrow I have to travel once more up to London which I shall do by rail. I will take my laptop with me and work on the train sending e-mails etc.

Can you imagine the above taking place under any nationalized system. Well I certainly cannot and it seems it is that sort of initiative which is bringing people back to the railways in their droves. Alongside me will be hundreds of others working and communicating as they travel. It does away with the " dead time" that is incurred when you are traveling by car or even air.

Don't get me wrong I am no great supporter of this coalition. In fact I am signed up along with 1 million more already committed to take part in the rally and "March for the alternative" in London on 26 March. Many of my former workmates in the road haulage industry are going due to the number of redundancies and close downs going on in the industry. Therefore I shall support them in joining the March.

Can you imagine me at 67 joining such a March.I have not done anything like that since the mid-1970s when we marched for the nurses pay rise.

However, at my age this march could well be the last thing I ever do, but I am determined to do it.

Bill

 

[IsambardKingdomBrunel]

The only reason that nothing constructive was done with British Rail. Is because successive governments from 1948 ( particularly the Tories ) were anti railways and pro roads.

Bloody Marples was an active supporter of the Road Haulage Association.

There is certainly no vision in the mish mash that we have in todays privatised abortion of a system.

British Rail in its last 10 - 15 years of existence was deliberatley run down in the run up to privatisation.

The obsession with having everything on the roads, is the reason we have the conjestion and pollution everyone has to put up with in the 21st century.

In regards passenger numbers, they were already starting to climb under BR. They have nothing to do with privatisation, it is due to economic and social conditions and would have risen by the same amount. If BR was in existence today.

IKB.

 

[wholbr]

Hi IKB And Everybody.

The only reason that nothing constructive was done with British Rail. Is because successive governments from 1948 ( particularly the Tories ) were anti railways and pro roads.

Bloody Marples was an active supporter of the Road Haulage Association.

There is certainly no vision in the mish mash that we have in todays privatised abortion of a system.

British Rail in its last 10 - 15 years of existence was deliberatley run down in the run up to privatisation.

The obsession with having everything on the roads, is the reason we have the conjestion and pollution everyone has to put up with in the 21st century.

In regards passenger numbers, they were already starting to climb under BR. They have nothing to do with privatisation, it is due to economic and social conditions and would have risen by the same amount. If BR was in existence today.

IKB.

I agree with much of what you have to say in your posting IKB. However, the fact that successive governments either deliberately tried to run down the nationalized system or just starved it of funds very much proves the point that successful industries (including rail) cannot operate with this sort of long-term uncertainty constantly hampering it.

With regard to freight it is in fact many of the big road haulage companies such as Eddie Stobart, Wincanton and others that are transferring long-distance freight (known as trunking vehicles) to the rail system where bulk delivery to central warehousing systems is necessary. The foregoing promises to rapidly increase the amount of tonnage carried on the British rail network dramatically over the next few years.

Portbury Docks near Bristol is now one of the biggest car import terminals in Europe, but in the last four years cars transported out of the terminal by rail have slowly but steadily increased until now the majority of vehicles leaving that site are on rail car transporters. (Something I always find rather ironic when I see them) However, it is in fact the road transport car haulage companies that have put this traffic on the rail. Something I think we all want to see.

The above is giving rail freight the future and the future where it will not have to suffer interference by changes of government policy. I believe the same can now be said for rail passenger transport. Surely what we all want to see is a rail network and system that has a more certain future together with a vision of how the road and rail transport systems can work together.

That is now happening not through government policy but through external costs, environmental concerns and large-scale rethinking with regard to transport logistics.

I will not be marching in London against any of the above. I will be marching in support of the many long-standing family owned businesses in the road haulage industry that are being driven out of business by excessive taxation and unfair competition from European Hauliers along with many other things

Let's have an end to the fluff jobs and support for those who really are prepared to work in industries that will pay for themselves and not rely on handouts from anyone including road and rail.

where we do have to have services operated by the state such as the health service then lets support them to the top degree and those that work in them.

Bill

 

[IsambardKingdomBrunel]

All of which would have happened if BR still existed.

Plus with respect Bill, i find it insulting to refer to my years with BR as a "fluff job", just because i worked in a nationalised industry.

IKB.

 

[wholbr]

Hi Everybody.

All of which would have happened if BR still existed.

Plus with respect Bill, i find it insulting to refer to my years with BR as a "fluff job", just because i worked in a nationalised industry.

IKB.

fluff jobs in no way referred to your employment with British rail IKB. Fluff jobs these days refers to the sort of advertisements you see in the national press for such posts as " whatever Council requires children's five a day coordinator salary £60,000 per year". They are known widely throughout the country as fluff jobs.

Regarding whether the advances we have seen in rail passenger transport would have been carried out under British rail, well there I think we will have to agree to disagree for the reasons I have given in my earlier posting. However, if you find up my arguments are not valid in your opinion please by all means feel free to broaden your argument in support of the nationalized industry.

I will try to post any response while I am traveling on first Great Western to London or on the return journey ( I wonder if anybody's done that on the Trainz forum before)

Bill

 

[IsambardKingdomBrunel]

I beg your pardon Bill, i misunderstand your use of the phrase "fluff jobs".

Agree to disagree is what it is all about Bill.

My late father always used to tell me, only a fool or a liar says he is right all the time.

First Great Western, that is a travesty of the use of a name. Once linked so proudly to a great railway company.

IKB.

 

[wholbr]

Hi IKb and everybody.

I beg your pardon Bill, i misunderstand your use of the phrase "fluff jobs".

Agree to disagree is what it is all about Bill.

My late father always used to tell me, only a fool or a liar says is right all the time.

First Great Western, that is a travesty of the use of a name. Once linked so proudly to a great railway company.

IKB.

I too apologize IKB if my reference to " fluff jobs" could be misunderstood in any way.

I definitely think we can agree on one point the name " first Great Western" definitely degrades the name of Brunel and the great railway he built for us.

The way that company treats not only its railway employees but also its bus and coach crews means that it should never have been allowed to use the name of Great Western.

Privatization yes, degrading treatment of employees and reducing terms and conditions of the same, No

I will also be marching for that in London on 26 March. Hopefully with over 1 million others.

Bill

 

[gfisher]

Perhaps you guys should look up the term "fluffer" on Google before going any further with this.

 

[Euphod]

Perhaps you guys should look up the term "fluffer" on Google before going any further with this.

Yes, I agree, but make sure "Safe Search" is set to "Off"!:hehe:

 

[Retro00064]

Perhaps you guys should look up the term "fluffer" on Google before going any further with this.

Eeh, I just looked it up on Wiktionary instead (rather than face the possibility of awful garbage in a Google search ), and I get the picture.

Regards.

 

[wholbr]

Hi Everybody.

Perhaps you guys should look up the term "fluffer" on Google before going any further with this.

Just looked it up, and i am thinking that perhaps whoever came up with the " label" was taking a sideswipe at people in the Sort of jobs I described.

Anyway, never realized that it could be interpreted in that way:hehe:

I am posting this from a first Great Western HST 125 approaching London. Therefore I am claiming the record for being the first member on the forum to post from an actual moving train.

Train to Trainz so to speak

Bill
( just been informed that we will be a few minutes late getting into Paddington)