Railroads, Republicans Muscling Out Amtrak.

[lilbluefoxie]

The problem with Amtrak is this: If you need to get anywhere, Amtrak is always going to be slower than an Airplane. Now Amtrak doesn't have the TSA annoyances (not yet at least, I have a bad feeling they'e going to find their way down there too eventually)

 

There just isn't much of a reason to take amtrak over an airplane, especially since the price is similar. I looked on Orbitz, LGA to Pittsburgh is about $63 with Delta airlines, Amtrak wants $70 to take you from Penn to Pittsburgh and takes 8 hours longer.

 

Also Amtrak doesn't advertise much if at all, if they marketed themselves better, provided some sort of price advantage over the time disadvantage, they could make themselves a more attractive way to get around.

 

Theres still the third option, the freeways and your car. A rough estimate on google from a random point in NE Queens to a random point in Pittsburgh outside of downtown comes out to 7 hours or so, and about 380 miles, if your car gets 30mpg on the highway, that means that trip will take you about 13-14 gallons of fuel. Even at $3.99 a gallon that comes to $55.86, still cheaper than both options.

[MTARegional Bus]

The problem with Amtrak is this: If you need to get anywhere, Amtrak is always going to be slower than an Airplane. Now Amtrak doesn't have the TSA annoyances (not yet at least, I have a bad feeling they'e going to find their way down there too eventually)

 

There just isn't much of a reason to take amtrak over an airplane, especially since the price is similar. I looked on Orbitz, LGA to Pittsburgh is about $63 with Delta airlines, Amtrak wants $70 to take you from Penn to Pittsburgh and takes 8 hours longer.

 

 

You do realize there some people are afraid of flying right? Also don't forget about the Baggage fees.

 

 

 

Also Amtrak doesn't advertise much if at all, if they marketed themselves better, provided some sort of price advantage over the time disadvantage, they could make themselves a more attractive way to get around.

 

 

I do agree that Amtrak needs more advertisement.

 

 

Theres still the third option, the freeways and your car. A rough estimate on google from a random point in NE Queens to a random point in Pittsburgh outside of downtown comes out to 7 hours or so, and about 380 miles, if your car gets 30mpg on the highway, that means that trip will take you about 13-14 gallons of fuel. Even at $3.99 a gallon that comes to $55.86, still cheaper than both options.

 

 

 

Here's The problem, the traffic Jams, good luck waiting cause that is going to waste your fuel.also finding parking will be a crazy to find if your going to a city,if you can't there always the parking garages which the parking rate will be $50 or more a day depending on garage. If Amtrak gets cut good luck there will be more car on the roads,which we don't need.

 

But what do they care, Republicans Hate trains to begin with.

[lilbluefoxie]

You do realize there some people are afraid of flying right? Also don't forget about the Baggage fees.

 

 

Not every airline has baggage fees, for example Southwest airlines doesnt and Delta if you have their credit card the baggage fees are waived. Someones personal fears aren't my concern, Airlines get you there a lot faster than Amtrak and in some cases for less. Not every Amtrak train has a baggage car so you're going to be limited anyway in what you can bring.

 

 

Here's The problem, the traffic Jams, good luck waiting cause that is going to waste your fuel.also finding parking will be a crazy to find if your going to a city,if you can't there always the parking garages which the parking rate will be $50 or more a day depending on garage. If Amtrak gets cut good luck there will be more car on the roads,which we don't need.

 

But what do they care, Republicans Hate trains to begin with.

 

 

traffic jams - if you go at the right time and you plan your route carefully that isnt a problem.

 

parking - even if you flew or took amtrak, depending on where you are going you are still going to need to get a cab to take you to your destination, since not every city has a proper public transportation network, and who really wants to deal with the hassle of lugging luggage onto a city bus or metro system. Plus you are making an assumption the final destination is in the city center to begin with. When I went to San Francisco, my hotel was located just outside of the city limits and therefore parking was free in the hotel lot. (note: I did not drive all the way from new york, I had a rental car)

 

Amtrak cuts and traffic - I just don't see that being the case, people who are taking Amtrak somewhere, probably cant drive there to begin with. You're likely to see crowding on the airplanes and greyhound and those other random bus services.

 

I know myself personally, if my destination is less than 4-5 hours away by car, I prefer to just drive such as Connecticut or Massachusetts, Amtrak would be an option if its a day trip and parking is difficult in the destination, like Philadelphia for example. If the destination is over 5-6 hours away by car, then I would fly there. I would not consider Greyhound, or one of those death trap low budget bus companies like Fung Wah.

[Q10 Airport]

The government is supposed to provide services that are not profitable as private entities. That's why local and regional mass transit systems here in the states (NJ Transit and are two good examples) get public funding. That's why the military is funded by the government and is not contracted out to some private corporation.

 

Now the debate about high-speed rail is legit, because I'm not sure if the population west of the Mississippi (with the exceptions of Texas and the West Coast) is high enough to justify high-speed rail.

[lilbluefoxie]

high speed rail still has to compete with the airlines, if and when its actually finished and built. The cheapest LA to San Fran flight I could find on Orbitz was around $60. So the ticket prices cant be too much more from that, exsisting amtrak takes 11 hours and is around the same price. All things considered I cant see HSR being as cheap as amtrak and Delta.

[Engr08]

Amtrak will never be important if the goverment keeps overlooking it. Amtrak played a vital role in the wake of 9/11 and people seem to forget that. I remember there were so many times when in bad weather and certain planes were grounded people flocked to Amtrak as an alternative. Also you have to look at it this way certain trains go throught certain towns where there is no airports or whatever. Poeple use the train to get from town to town where as in a plane that will take you from big city to big city. All in all Amtrak plays a very important role in the US and if the government decide to eliminate it then there will be lots of problems, believe me when I tell you.

[lilbluefoxie]

what is the ridership on those routes that serve those small middle of nowhere towns? Is there significant people using Amtrak there? Is there alternatives that will work such as coach bus service like Greyhound? What if portions of Amtrak were privatized, have Veolia or one of the freight companies operate the service on their trackage rights.

[kentsfield]

Well if anyone took the time to actually look at the big picture you would see amtrak's cost to the country is almost nothing compared to other federal outlays. Amtrak loses about a billion a year.The sacred cow F-35 is going to cost 1.5 trillion dollars over its lifetime. Enough to build multiple transcontinental, east coast, west coast HSR systems numerous times over. What really needs to take cut are defense,social security and medicare. They have had ballooning costs for decades and nobody gives a damn about real "boondoggles" as the anti rail people love to say. Rail dollars provide a return on an investment that SS and medicare dollars could never provide. Amtrak is a public good. After all once upon a time fire and police departments were private for profit companies. Anyone want to go back to those days? and i really do love the idea that businessmen make good government leaders. Do you want government to run a profit on you?

 

Amtrak needs to be run like a BUSINESS, not a government arm.

 

Privatize the railroad. If there is demand, supply it. Simple economics.

 

Everyone wants all these trains for all of these places, but these services need to be paid for. Throwing tax money at it is NOT a sustainable solution.

 

Heres some simple economics for you. if the government is subsidizing your competitors; their competitiveness has been artificially increased. Hi congressmen raiding the mass transit account for the highway trust fund to avoid raising the gasoline tax to pay for roads. The rise of the freight railroads using their own capital to compete against subsidized trucking companies is a testament to the superiority of railroad transportation. Here's a fun fact too; the transportation department,the National Science Foundation and NASA combined dont even come close to the money the department of agriculture gets ahold of.

[lilbluefoxie]

Amtrak screws over Virginia Railway Express

 

http://washingtonexaminer.com/rep.-mica-soviet-style-amtrak-costs-states-up-to-93m-per-year/article/2507637?custom_click=rss#.UE-UA1HqwYs

 

Amtrak costs individual States almost $100 million per year on commuter rail contracts that private companies can more efficiently fulfill, according to a new House committee report. What's more, the report faults Amtrak for trying to thwart competitors with "frivolous" lawsuits rather than beat them in the market.

 

“Amtrak is a highly subsidized, Soviet-style rail system, but despite every ticket being underwritten nearly $50 by the taxpayers, Amtrak is an absolute failure in competing with the cost-effectiveness and level of service provided by the private sector," said House Transportation Committee chairman John Mica, R-Fla., in a statement on the report.

 

Mica was responding to Amtrak's attempt to provide commuter rail service between cities within the same state -- an expensive proposition that costs states up to $91.3 million in taxpayer money annually because "States cover the cost of Amtrak operations" in that scenario, the report explained.

When the agencies that operate the intrastate commuter rail systems use private contractors, they save $107.8 million annually. The House report noted that's an 11.5 percent savings compared to contracts operated by Amtrak.

 

House investigators found that Amtrak and its union responds poorly to defeats at the hands of private companies. "We know that when Amtrak has lost competitive bids, it has tried to retaliate against the winning bidders in efforts to stifle competition,” Mica said.

 

For instance, Amtrak filed a lawsuit against Veolia Transportation after it lost out on a commuter contract in Florida, alleging that Veolia had somehow gamed the system by offering jobs to Amtrak employees who weren't even in Florida. After five years of legal wrangling, a jury sided with the private company and refused to award Amtrak any damages. But financial damage had already been done to Veolia and to taxpayers alike.

 

Finally, Amtrak refused to allow VRE engineers to ride with Amtrak crews to learn

 

"Amtrak spent $2.1 million on the litigation and forced Veolia to spend approximately $3 million to defend itself, an amount that represents a substantial portion of its profits from the contract," the committee report explains.

 

When Amtrak lost out on another bid to operate the Virginia Railway Express in 2009, "it reportedly interfered with the transition to the winning bidder, Keolis," so much so that VRE officials began exploring legal action that could be taken against Amtrak."

 

In the fight against Keolis, Amtrak management and labor were in agreement. As Amtrak made it more difficult for Keolis train crews to work out of Union Station and other Amtrak properties, "Amtrak's union allegedly told its workers they would be fired by Amtrak and blacklisted if they took a job with Keolis to operate Keolis's trains on the line," the report states. "Finally, Amtrak refused to allow VRE engineers to ride with Amtrak crews to learn the route."

 

Rep. Bill Shuster, R-Penn., reminded Amtrak that such activity is not productive. “Competition can and does save money and offers significant benefits to passengers and taxpayers,” the Railroads, Pipelines and Hazardous Materials Subcommittee chairman said in his statement on the report.

[GojiMet86]

Ah yes, the "Soviet-style rail system" cliche, because after all, it was Amtrak's Soviet-style system that caused the collapse of the private-rail companies during the '60s, never mind the highly subsidized highway infrastructure or the crappy service Penn-Central provided that drove away customers.

[lilbluefoxie]

Ah yes, the "Soviet-style rail system" cliche, because after all, it was Amtrak's Soviet-style system that caused the collapse of the private-rail companies during the '60s, never mind the highly subsidized highway infrastructure or the crappy service Penn-Central provided that drove away customers.

 

 

Did you even read the article? Ignore the politican in the first paragraph. Amtrak was being uncooperative and trying to mess up VRE operations. They wouldnt let new VRE engineers learn the route, and Amtrak's union threatened people who went to work for VRE.

 

They also started trouble in Florida with Veolia about a commuter rail service there.

 

Times are different than the 1960s, back then rail travel was down all across the board. I think its time if private companies can operate commuter service cheaper than amtrak, and according to the article states save 11% when they get a private company to operate the rail service. If Amtrak was around in the 50s and 60s at the height of the automobile age they would have been in big financial trouble as well.

[compobus fan]

I don't know how you took my last post. It seems you took it sarcastically when I was seriously speaking. Anyway this isn't going to put citizens back to work. You shut down Amtrak tommorow and how would one would benefit. Where would these monies be shifted to benefit YOU, I, the average U.S. citizen?

 

 

At the very least, it would keep it from the large incinerator called bureaucratic bumbling. ANY entity suffers when chronic thieves (read that politicians and hacks) run a public entity, it is like giving Dracula the keys to the blood bank. Privately run, I believe efficiency would improve simply because they are already through the bottom of the barrel.

[MTARegional Bus]

Times are different than the 1960s, back then rail travel was down all across the board. I think its time if private companies can operate commuter service cheaper than amtrak, and according to the article states save 11% when they get a private company to operate the rail service. If Amtrak was around in the 50s and 60s at the height of the automobile age they would have been in big financial trouble as well.

 

 

But even today I don't think Private interest wouldn't even invest in the rail travel system like they did in the 1800s and in early 1900s,they will probably convince you to take cars or buses cause that's were the money is at.

[lilbluefoxie]

But even today I don't think Private interest wouldn't even invest in the rail travel system like they did in the 1800s and in early 1900s,they will probably convince you to take cars or buses cause that's were the money is at.

 

 

They already have private companies operating commuter rail services in the USA, Veolia also runs MBTA Commuter Rail

[MTARegional Bus]

They already have private companies operating commuter rail services in the USA, Veolia also runs MBTA Commuter Rail

 

 

I know that but The MBTA is small scale Commuter Rail.

 

Am taking about large scale like Penn or New york central use to do, you know the long distance Rail from NYC to buffalo or NYC to Florida ,I don't think Private rail company's of today are willing to invest

long distance rail, I hope am wrong.

[GojiMet86]

I know that but The MBTA is small scale Commuter Rail.

 

Am taking about large scale like Penn or New york central use to do, you know the long distant's Rail from NYC to buffalo or NYC to Florida , I don't think Private rail company's of today are willing to invest long distant's rail, I hope am wrong.

 

 

The way I see it, or know of, is that freight is much more profitable than passengers. If I remember correctly, that's basically always been the case. However, I could see the private freight carriers carrying out some passenger service by using its profits to cover for the expenses.

[MTARegional Bus]

I could see the private freight carriers carrying out some passenger service by using its profits to cover for the expenses.

 

 

Then they will go out of Business and leave the passenger rail to there state governments...wait what LOL.

[kentsfield]

They already have private companies operating commuter rail services in the USA, Veolia also runs MBTA Commuter Rail

 

The MBTA is sinking in debt while the operators are making money. Socialize the costs and privatize the profits. That's not running an above the rail system; its merely creating the illusion. The british split their rail into infrastructure and operations companies. The operations companies do fine because they aren't paying for rail maintence. Railtrack, the british rail infrastructure maintenance company went bankrupt only to be purchased by a government owned company. You can't make money off rail infrastructure. Either you're lying and you're taking payment for deferring maintenance or you're on the fast track to bankruptcy.

[qjtransitmaster]

Not every airline has baggage fees, for example Southwest airlines doesnt and Delta if you have their credit card the baggage fees are waived. Someones personal fears aren't my concern, Airlines get you there a lot faster than Amtrak and in some cases for less. Not every Amtrak train has a baggage car so you're going to be limited anyway in what you can bring.

 

 

 

traffic jams - if you go at the right time and you plan your route carefully that isnt a problem.

 

parking - even if you flew or took amtrak, depending on where you are going you are still going to need to get a cab to take you to your destination, since not every city has a proper public transportation network, and who really wants to deal with the hassle of lugging luggage onto a city bus or metro system. Plus you are making an assumption the final destination is in the city center to begin with. When I went to San Francisco, my hotel was located just outside of the city limits and therefore parking was free in the hotel lot. (note: I did not drive all the way from new york, I had a rental car)

 

Amtrak cuts and traffic - I just don't see that being the case, people who are taking Amtrak somewhere, probably cant drive there to begin with. You're likely to see crowding on the airplanes and greyhound and those other random bus services.

 

I know myself personally, if my destination is less than 4-5 hours away by car, I prefer to just drive such as Connecticut or Massachusetts, Amtrak would be an option if its a day trip and parking is difficult in the destination, like Philadelphia for example. If the destination is over 5-6 hours away by car, then I would fly there. I would not consider Greyhound, or one of those death trap low budget bus companies like Fung Wah.

 

True the rail is not competitive at all it's slower than a bus that is sad.

what is the ridership on those routes that serve those small middle of nowhere towns? Is there significant people using Amtrak there? Is there alternatives that will work such as coach bus service like Greyhound? What if portions of Amtrak were privatized, have Veolia or one of the freight companies operate the service on their trackage rights.

 

The sooner rail realizes fares will never make it profitable the sooner they will create innovative money making concepts.

 

However the subsidy to let private companies run rail service may be cheaper than subsidizing amtrak as the privates have profitable side businesses to reduce overall cost. In order to privatize amtrak successfully the gov't should be responsible for infrastructure and separate it from rail operating costs increase funding so trains won't run like shit. Customize it so it can actually benefit others as well by removing the 1935 public works act then create an intercity rail / electric grid highway network and let the rail companies charge drivers to charge up at several charge stations that also feed electricity to the rails then with GOV't handling that let rail service become private allowing profitable businesses to thrive however they will pay a fee to the gov't towards the infrastructure it will lose less money and the operating costs won't be on the taxpayer dime.

[mfs NJT459]

Tonight is the Vice Presidential Debate, "Amtrak Joe" vs. Paul Ryan, and it looks like the future subsidies of Amtrak may be in discussion tonight!!

 

http://www.cnn.com/video/?hpt=hp_t2#/video/politics/2012/10/11/endo-amtrak-vp-debate.cnn

[DaTransitMan4608]

Well after reading all the posts on this thread, I'm gonna throw my 2 cents in.

I honestly believe that Amtrak would do so much better if the government paid them more attention instead of just brushing it off to deal with something else like the healthcare or defense budget. It always seems as if the government couldn't give two s**ts about the transportation industry, let alone Amtrak. I prefer to take Amtrak over some of these airlines like American. They must not be taking good care of their planes, because their planes are always making emergency landings. Last month there were emergency landings at Newark and JFK Airports almost every week. They said it had something to do with the seats coming loose or something.

 

United Airlines is a completely different story however.They don't give a flying f*** about their customers, they don't train their employees that well, and you'll be sitting at the gate for nearly 45 minutes. In the summer of 2011, I took a vacation to Florida, and when I got to the airport the lady who was printing out the tickets obviously had no idea what she was doing because it took her forever to print the tickets. It was because of her I missed my flight and had to wait nearly 3 hours for another one. Then there was that model whose dog died in the plane's compartment. You can read about that here: http://abcnews.go.com/Travel/united-airlines-killed-golden-retriever-model/story?id=17287486#.UHcoPFHhcfY

 

My point here is that traveling on an airplane is more stressful than riding Amtrak. If you're afraid of flying then taking Amtrak or Greyhound is your next best bet. I've always wondered why the gov't seems to care more about air travel than rail travel. I mean look at most of these airport terminals compared to train terminals. They're huge and more modern-looking than most train terminals I've seen. If the Amtrak hubs looked a little more modern and attractive, maybe that would attract more passengers to the rails. NY Penn Station kinda has a head start on that as their waiting room looks like one you'd see at an airport. Otherwise the other major stations like Baltimore Penn, Philly 30th St, or Newark Penn look like they need a future's touch if you know what I mean.

[Fan Railer]

Well, now with the election decided, by a wide margin, I might add, how does this affect Amtrak, if anything at all?

[DJ MC]

Well, now with the election decided, by a wide margin, I might add, how does this affect Amtrak, if anything at all?

 

 

Not much is going to change really. I mean Amtrak will indeed get more support from the president. Amtrak is also on track to get it's new passenger cars, new electric motors (yes they are motors not locomotives), and some new routes in the Midwest that are also going to start running in a few years.

[theaveragejoe]

Means Amtrak lives for another 4 years!

[nostalgia]

Amtrak is NOT part of the government. The employees are NOT federal employees. I'm tired of hearing the Republican mantra of "privatize it." Private railroads couldn't turn a profit so there's no reason to assume anothe entity can turn a profit. And just because a private entity doesn't want to operate a service doesn't mean it's not in the public interest to operate the service. New York city bus companies went bankrupt and were taken over by the city. Private bus lines on Long Island went bankrupt and were taken over the by the State.

 

Comparing end-to-end point train and plane fares and travel time isn't a fare comparison. Seats turn over about three times between Washington and Boston. I'm sure there is a turnover on the long distance trains as well.

 

Amtrak DOES have a business model and ridership is growing. They need new equipment as Amfleet equipment have reached their service life - - if not beyond.

 

REMEMBER: Private equity didn't rescue General Motors and Chrylser. If we had to rely on private equity, Ford would be the only American car manufacturer.