Page 13 of 19 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 182

Thread: Report: Amtrak loss comes to $32 per passenger

  1. #121
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ventura California
    Last Seen
    11-15-11 @ 11:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,706

    Re: Report: Amtrak loss comes to $32 per passenger

    Quote Originally Posted by MyOwnDrum View Post
    I'm amazed that people don't see the benefit in encouraging train travel and building up a train system that will be a viable alternative to car travel.
    I am amazed that you think that people are against encouraging rail travel.

    If train travel was truly economical and of more benefit than other forms of travel, people would be demanding it and it would be profitable without the need for vast Government subsidies.

    No one is arguing against rail travel; the debate is that taxpayers should not be subsidizing you if rail travel is your preference.

    Quote Originally Posted by MyOwnDrum View Post
    I suppose you all are against the funding of public education too. It only benefits kids, not everyone. It loses money too.
    Educating our kids most definitely benefits society as a whole; I am stunned how anyone would think that it doesn't.

    Relating rail travel to education is absurd in the extreme and completely lacking in logic.

  2. #122
    Traditionalist
    phattonez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    12-05-17 @ 03:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,072

    Re: Report: Amtrak loss comes to $32 per passenger

    Quote Originally Posted by Glinda View Post
    On the contrary, I gave you a thoroughly documented study, complete with verified research done by a host of qualified experts working for a trusted state agency.
    Except it showed correlation, and as I showed you, there are a ton of reasons that could explain the disparity. You can't just pick one and disregard the others like you tried to do.

    In response, you offer the criticisms of an anti-rail mouthpiece, and a lot of "theories." I'm still not seeing any sort of research, documented studies or evidence that proves "Rail actually increases traffic." (As a side note, the entire paper is not presented and the footnote links do not work; perhaps Cox's own study on how "rail actually increases traffic" is in the missing Methodology portion...)

    To begin with, Mr. Cox's entire base premise is laughably incorrect:



    If his understanding of public transit is this biased and myopic, any assumptions he makes based on that flawed premise can be called into question.

    Oddly enough, your own view of public transit is terribly skewed (perhaps that's why you champion Cox's essay):



    From this narrow view, I can only assume you've never lived or worked in a large metropolitan city, nor regularly commuted via rail for any reason whatsoever.

    It appears that Mr. Cox's primary solution to ever-increasing traffic and congestion is... more/better roads. (Big shock, that.)



    While this "solution" sounds very nice, Cox gives no indication of what this design model would actually entail: what building these intelligent highways would cost, what it would cost to retrofit all vehicle manufacturing plants and replace all existing vehicles with self-accelerating, self-braking, self-steering cars, how the roads would be built/retrofitted so as not to further impede traffic and increase congestion, and how long this road-building / "smart car" replacement process would take. (Again, no documentation or realistic alternative solutions, just a lot of nutty "theories").

    Then, Cox tosses this gem of critical thinking out there:



    For this nutty idea to bear fruit, every car on the road would have to be a hybrid-electric vehicle. Oh, and nobody is trying to "force" people who can drive to use mass transit. Nice hyperbole.

    Finally, this bolded portion of Cox's anti-rail screed is a flat-out lie, and I know this because I live along I-5, 30 miles from Portland:
    Strangely enough, you didn't argue against the point he was making that it is more efficient to invest in roads if you want to decrease auto congestion.

    On this we can agree. However, your friend Mr. Cox has plenty of complaints about the second-most bike-friendly city in the world - Portland OR - and its efforts to address the needs of pedestrians and bike riders. Evidently, he believes people on bikes and on foot are just as much his enemy as public transportation is.
    My friend? Nice use of oratory. It's more like I'm just using him to prove that you can't expect rail to decrease auto traffic.

    In conclusion, Mr. Cox's premises are egregiously flawed, his "solutions" are either wildly impractical and/or utterly impossible to implement, his principle sources of funding remain troublesome, and he has not produced a valid study that clearly contradicts the work that TTI has been doing for decades.

    I'm afraid your "rail actually increases traffic" argument remains unproven.
    He has as much of a study as you showed. It takes a lot more than an observational study to prove that rail is the reason for the decreased traffic. There are a ton of other variables that were not accounted for.

    Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully. Psalm 24
    "True law is right reason in agreement with nature . . . Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature [and] will suffer the worst penalties . . ." - Cicero

  3. #123
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: Report: Amtrak loss comes to $32 per passenger

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post

    If train travel was truly economical and of more benefit than other forms of travel, people would be demanding it and it would be profitable without the need for vast Government subsidies.
    Isn't the interstate highway system subssidized with tax dollars?

  4. #124
    Traditionalist
    phattonez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    12-05-17 @ 03:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,072

    Re: Report: Amtrak loss comes to $32 per passenger

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    Isn't the interstate highway system subssidized with tax dollars?
    It shouldn't be.

    Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully. Psalm 24
    "True law is right reason in agreement with nature . . . Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature [and] will suffer the worst penalties . . ." - Cicero

  5. #125
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: Report: Amtrak loss comes to $32 per passenger

    Quote Originally Posted by phattonez View Post
    It shouldn't be.
    Why not? I think has been benefit to us all as well as rail and air subsidies.

  6. #126
    Traditionalist
    phattonez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    12-05-17 @ 03:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,072

    Re: Report: Amtrak loss comes to $32 per passenger

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    Why not? I think has been benefit to us all as well as rail and air subsidies.
    We could subsidize caviar and that would benefit us all too. However, the real question is if it is worth it. It's hard to judge, but a good indicator is whether or not a private company would have invested. If they wouldn't, then it probably wasn't wroth it. If they would, then it probably was. Since I don't see private companies building interstate highways, then it probably wasn't worth it.

    Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully. Psalm 24
    "True law is right reason in agreement with nature . . . Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature [and] will suffer the worst penalties . . ." - Cicero

  7. #127
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,343

    Re: Report: Amtrak loss comes to $32 per passenger

    Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't the opening post of this thread comparing the losses in Amtrak to how the government will run health care?


    j-mac
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  8. #128
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Report: Amtrak loss comes to $32 per passenger

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't the opening post of this thread comparing the losses in Amtrak to how the government will run health care?


    j-mac
    Yes, but the Left is trying to ignore that.

    However, the discussion is still relevant. Right now it's about if government should subsidize failing businesses.

    Naturally, the answer is no.

  9. #129
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: Report: Amtrak loss comes to $32 per passenger

    Quote Originally Posted by phattonez View Post
    We could subsidize caviar and that would benefit us all too. However, the real question is if it is worth it. It's hard to judge, but a good indicator is whether or not a private company would have invested. If they wouldn't, then it probably wasn't wroth it. If they would, then it probably was. Since I don't see private companies building interstate highways, then it probably wasn't worth it.
    With out the interstate highway system there would not be a lot of commerce happening. Here in Texas there is a Spanish co. Interested in buying 635 and turning into a toll road.

    Since I'm posting from my phone it is hard for me to link. I will provide more later.

  10. #130
    Traditionalist
    phattonez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    12-05-17 @ 03:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,072

    Re: Report: Amtrak loss comes to $32 per passenger

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    With out the interstate highway system there would not be a lot of commerce happening. Here in Texas there is a Spanish co. Interested in buying 635 and turning into a toll road.

    Since I'm posting from my phone it is hard for me to link. I will provide more later.
    We would probably have highways between close cities built by private companies and rail and plane travel used primarily for cities further apart.

    Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully. Psalm 24
    "True law is right reason in agreement with nature . . . Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature [and] will suffer the worst penalties . . ." - Cicero

Page 13 of 19 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •