What Should be the Future of Amtrak

[iguanaman]

What should be the future of Amtrak? Although Amtrak had revenue of $3.3 Billion in 2017, it still lost $194 Million. Is it reasonable to expect Amtrak to turn a profit? Roads are built using Federal, State and Local tax revenue. Often states extract Sales Tax revenue (General Fund) for road projects. The Federal Government is about to pass another huge "Infrastructure" bill.

Why Amtrak train tickets are so expensive - Business Insider

In an attempt to rescue the service, then President Nixon signed a law in 1970 that ensured government funding. This act created the National Railroad Passenger Corp., which eventually became Amtrak. Of the 26 railroads offering passenger service, six declined to join Amtrak.
...
To this day, trains still have a low profit margin and rely heavily on subsidies to operate. According to the company's 2017 fiscal year report, Amtrak had a total revenue of $3.3 billion. Unfortunately, this wasn't enough to make Amtrak profitable. It still had a total operating loss of $194 million.
...
According to Amtrak's company profile, it operated some 300 trains a day in 2017. In comparison, SNCF, the French National Railway Co., operated 14,000 trains daily. That's about 47 times as many trains, serving a nation that has a quarter of the population of the United States. France is also even smaller than the size of Texas.

Long distance passenger service has always been a losing proposition that is why it needs to be subsidized in every Western nation and most of Asia too. It actually saves money to have fast, efficient and economical mass transit by the reduction in highway infrastructure costs alone. We so are far behind in passenger rail service that if we don't start soon we will never catch up.

Here's Japans latest generation of bullet trains. China has one even faster and they both are faster than commercial jet travel already.

 

[concernedpuma]

Long distance passenger service has always been a losing proposition that is why it needs to be subsidized in every Western nation and most of Asia too. It actually saves money to have fast, efficient and economical mass transit by the reduction in highway infrastructure costs alone. We so are far behind in passenger rail service that if we don't start soon we will never catch up.

Here's Japans latest generation of bullet trains.

That is sort of a contradiction isn't it. You write that it saves money, but is worthy of subsidy. Considering saving money(suggesting self paying) and subsidy are mutually exclusive, which is it? I may be misunderstanding, but I don't believe both states of economy can exist at the same time.
Regards,
CP

 

[iguanaman]

That is sort of a contradiction isn't it. You write that it saves money, but is worthy of subsidy. Considering saving money(suggesting self paying) and subsidy are mutually exclusive, which is it? I may be misunderstanding, but I don't believe both states of economy can exist at the same time.
Regards,
CP

LOL Try reading next time. I said the subsidies save more than they cost because reducing automobile use mean less money spent on upgrading highways. That is if you invest enough to make it fast, efficient and economical to use. Europeans have been doing it for many years with great success.

 

[Lord of Planar]

LOL Try reading next time. I said the subsidies save more than they cost because reducing automobile use mean less money spent on upgrading highways. That is if you invest enough to make it fast, efficient and economical to use. Europeans have been doing it for many years with great success.

It's also less revenue from gasoline taxes.

Do you want European type taxation? If so, why don't you just move there. Stay out of the pockets of those of us who think we already pay too much in taxes.

I would like to take away all subsidies and let things stand on their merit. I will settle for a slow reduction of subsidies, in an attempt to get to none. We can watch the changing dynamics, and see when the appropriate time to stop is.

 

[iguanaman]

It's also less revenue from gasoline taxes.

Do you want European type taxation? If so, why don't you just move there. Stay out of the pockets of those of us who think we already pay too much in taxes.

I would like to take away all subsidies and let things stand on their merit. I will settle for a slow reduction of subsidies, in an attempt to get to none. We can watch the changing dynamics, and see when the appropriate time to stop is.

We are weaning ourselves off gasoline powered cars anyway. They are a main cause of warming. Mass transit is the future of interstate travel and your kicking and screaming won't change that.

 

[Lord of Planar]

We are weaning ourselves off gasoline powered cars anyway. They are a main cause of warming. Mass transit is the future of interstate travel and your kicking and screaming won't change that.

Hogwash.

I can see how forced economic hardships by the left will reduce people's freedoms and make more take mass transit, but that is very few people's first choice.

Is your slogan "Make America Poor?"

 

[iguanaman]

Hogwash.

I can see how forced economic hardships by the left will reduce people's freedoms and make more take mass transit, but that is very few people's first choice.

Is your slogan "Make America Poor?"

Yes this is what "poor" looks like. :lol: Sitting back and relaxing while you get to your destination faster than any car could.

This is so much better....

 

[Lord of Planar]

Yes this is what "poor" looks like. :lol: Sitting back and relaxing while you get to your destination faster than any car could.

And then having to rent a car, or use taxis to get around.

How well does that work for weekly grocery shopping for a family of four?

 

[iguanaman]

And then having to rent a car, or use taxis to get around.

How well does that work for weekly grocery shopping for a family of four?

LOL Trains are not for "grocery shopping" they are for longer journeys. They do not replace cars only the long tedious trips in cars.

 

[Lord of Planar]

LOL Trains are not for "grocery shopping" they are for longer journeys. They do not replace cars only the long tedious trips in cars.

So, how do you get around at your destination?

 

[iguanaman]

So, how do you get around at your destination?

Trains leave you off inside city limits unlike airports. There are plenty of transportation options if even needed. Isn't just like a right winger to argue about a proven success all over the world. We used to lead now we can't even follow.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Trains leave you off inside city limits unlike airports. There are plenty of transportation options if even needed.

Nothing I like doing better than waste my time waiting for connections, taking all day to do something I can do in a car in two hours.

 

[Media_Truth]

Nothing I like doing better than waste my time waiting for connections, taking all day to do something I can do in a car in two hours.

Funny how Americans in New York, Chicago and many other cities can get around, buy groceries, raise families without cars. On top of that, your argument is no different than asking the question of how people get around once they fly to a destination.

 

[Media_Truth]

Long distance passenger service has always been a losing proposition that is why it needs to be subsidized in every Western nation and most of Asia too. It actually saves money to have fast, efficient and economical mass transit by the reduction in highway infrastructure costs alone. We so are far behind in passenger rail service that if we don't start soon we will never catch up.

Here's Japans latest generation of bullet trains. China has one even faster and they both are faster than commercial jet travel already.

That is a beautiful train! I agree that America should upgrade it's rail. I enjoy Amtrak as it is, with it's spacious seating, dining car, observation car, full-service FREE luggage, and other amenities. But it is true that most of their trains are a little slow, averaging only about 50 MPH. I would like to see gradual investment, once high speed line at a time.

 

[digsbe]

My biggest complaint with Amtrak is they use the Northeast Corridor to subsidize other lines that do not make a profit. The NEC to my knowledge is profitable and yet also expensive given the distance traveled. If it is to be subsidized, it should be applied fairly with costs reduced to ride on the NEC. Would also love to see upgrades to rail lines and have genuine high speed rail.

 

[Lord of Planar]

That is a beautiful train! I agree that America should upgrade it's rail. I enjoy Amtrak as it is, with it's spacious seating, dining car, observation car, full-service FREE luggage, and other amenities. But it is true that most of their trains are a little slow, averaging only about 50 MPH. I would like to see gradual investment, once high speed line at a time.

They don't have the same safety concerns as we do. Never happen here with current technology and costs to do so.

 

[iguanaman]

They don't have the same safety concerns as we do. Never happen here with current technology and costs to do so.

LOL Not true at all. Japans trains have excellent safety records. Thanks for agreeing that we used to lead the world and now we cannot even follow. Our passenger trains used to be the best in the world.

 

[Media_Truth]

LOL Not true at all. Japans trains have excellent safety records. Thanks for agreeing that we used to lead the world and now we cannot even follow. Our passenger trains used to be the best in the world.

But what about his link? Oh that's right - there wasn't one...

 

[Lord of Planar]

LOL Not true at all. Japans trains have excellent safety records. Thanks for agreeing that we used to lead the world and now we cannot even follow. Our passenger trains used to be the best in the world.

And...

What is the population density of Japan vs. the USA?

Why can't you guys do any rational thinking? Do you realize Japan has about ten time the population density as the USA?

Don't you think such facts are relevant?

 

[Media_Truth]

And...

What is the population density of Japan vs. the USA?

Why can't you guys do any rational thinking? Do you realize Japan has about ten time the population density as the USA?

Don't you think such facts are relevant?

The problem with your "gut feel" is that it falls very short on actual analysis. Consider the following statistics (sourced below, with mostly 2016 and 2017 numbers):

GDP: Japan - $5.443 Trillion
China - $23.2 Trillion
USA - $19.5 Trillion

Refined Petroleum product consumption: Japan: 3.9 Million BBLs/day
China: 12.47 Million BBLs/day
US: 19.96 Million BBLs/day

Dividing these out - Japan 3.9 Million BBLS / $5.443 = .71
China 12.47 / 23.2 = .54
US 19.96/ 19.5 = 1.02

So the US burns almost twice as much fuel as China to produce the goods, and about 50% more than Japan. Electricity usage is similar.

You can use a more expansive land base (which China also has) as an excuse, or you can look at it as an opportunity. What's more efficient? - Thousands of people driving independently in cars, across a country or thousands of people riding a train?

Country Comparison :: GDP (purchasing power parity) — The World Factbook - Central Intelligence Agency

 

[Lord of Planar]

The problem with your "gut feel" is that it falls very short on actual analysis. Consider the following statistics (sourced below, with mostly 2016 and 2017 numbers):

GDP: Japan - $5.443 Trillion
China - $23.2 Trillion
USA - $19.5 Trillion

Refined Petroleum product consumption: Japan: 3.9 Million BBLs/day
China: 12.47 Million BBLs/day
US: 19.96 Million BBLs/day

Dividing these out - Japan 3.9 Million BBLS / $5.443 = .71
China 12.47 / 23.2 = .54
US 19.96/ 19.5 = 1.02

So the US burns almost twice as much fuel as China to produce the goods, and about 50% more than Japan. Electricity usage is similar.

You can use a more expansive land base (which China also has) as an excuse, or you can look at it as an opportunity. What's more efficient? - Thousands of people driving independently in cars, across a country or thousands of people riding a train?

Country Comparison :: GDP (purchasing power parity) — The World Factbook - Central Intelligence Agency

That wan't the argument.

 

[Media_Truth]

That wan't the argument.

Exactly. It wasn't your argument. But it is THE argument. The US has lost it's position as the number one economy of the world, despite being the top resourse-advantaged country in the world. Tariffs are NOT the answer. The US needs to get more efficient. Better use of our energy resources is one piece of the pie. Using twice the fuel of another country to make the same goods is not sustainable.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Exactly. It wasn't your argument. But it is THE argument. The US has lost it's position as the number one economy of the world, despite being the top resourse-advantaged country in the world. Tariffs are NOT the answer. The US needs to get more efficient. Better use of our energy resources is one piece of the pie. Using twice the fuel of another country to make the same goods is not sustainable.

Efficiency is not the problem. Regulations and population density is, regarding things like transportation.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

Efficiency is not the problem. Regulations and population density is, regarding things like transportation.

The US has two maybe 4 areas in which HSR could make sense, the east coast from Boston down to Atlanta, perhaps Texas between Houston and Dallas, and the west coast, in California, perhaps up to Seattle (Oregon) would be an issue. Also a line from say Chicago down to Atlanta could be useful. The western states do not have the population to support it at all

 

[Lord of Planar]

The US has two maybe 4 areas in which HSR could make sense, the east coast from Boston down to Atlanta, perhaps Texas between Houston and Dallas, and the west coast, in California, perhaps up to Seattle (Oregon) would be an issue. Also a line from say Chicago down to Atlanta could be useful. The western states do not have the population to support it at all

Yes, only in high density areas.