Amtrak not easy

[dave1949]

Originally Posted by MicroPilot

When I looked into train travel recently it was just as expensive as air travel, but took way longer.

Why would anyone want to pay the same amount of money as a 2 hour flight for a 2 day train trip?

A plane will always beat a train on long trips - especially over water

Rail service done correctly can be just as fast, door-to-door, as air travel on short to medium trips. A train can travel into the center of a metropolitan area. Trains are much less delayed by weather. Train stations are smaller and quieter than airports and can be placed where an airport is impossible, even underground.

You can breathe cleaner air and watch the scenery too

We need a comprehensive public transportation system that works, trains should be part of that. Comparing Amtrak as it is now, to air travel, isn't an apples to apples comparison.
Dave.

[buckeyefarmer]

No, amtrak is not easy, nor that cheap. I do enjoy it though for trips up the East coast.

[tallyho8]

Amtrak seems to be proof that an entity can spend as much money as they can get the government to give them. Last week Amtrak announced that last year was it's second best year in history and yet they have received over $1,400,000,000 in subsidies so far this year and they keep increasing. Their expenses are unbelievable as they pay workers in the snack bar $24 an hour and the government demands that if they lay anyone off, they have to pay them severance pay for up to 6 years.

I would hate to see our passenger train system die, but just throwing more money at it each year won't improve it. Only 3 of it's 44 lines have ever turned a profit.

[dave1949]

Originally Posted by tallyho8

Amtrak seems to be proof that an entity can spend as much money as they can get the government to give them. Last week Amtrak announced that last year was it's second best year in history and yet they have received over $1,400,000,000 in subsidies so far this year and they keep increasing. Their expenses are unbelievable as they pay workers in the snack bar $24 an hour and the government demands that if they lay anyone off, they have to pay them severance pay for up to 6 years.

I would hate to see our passenger train system die, but just throwing more money at it each year won't improve it. Only 3 of it's 44 lines have ever turned a profit.

Good Morning Tallyho8,

I am not 100% certain on this, but I don't think there is a rail system anywhere in the world that doesn't get subsidized by government. Highways, ports and airports are also heavily subsidized by tax dollars. To pick out Amtrak because it is subsidized isn't making the correct comparison IMHO. I am sure there are excesses in Amtrak and a lack of good service - just as there are in highway projects, harbor pilots, etc. I'm still rooting for rail done right
Dave.

[turbo36]

Originally Posted by tallyho8

Amtrak seems to be proof that an entity can spend as much money as they can get the government to give them. Last week Amtrak announced that last year was it's second best year in history and yet they have received over $1,400,000,000 in subsidies so far this year and they keep increasing. Their expenses are unbelievable as they pay workers in the snack bar $24 an hour and the government demands that if they lay anyone off, they have to pay them severance pay for up to 6 years.

I would hate to see our passenger train system die, but just throwing more money at it each year won't improve it. Only 3 of it's 44 lines have ever turned a profit.

You been listening to FOX TV again? I'd like to see proof of this.

[tallyho8]

Originally Posted by turbo36

You been listening to FOX TV again? I'd like to see proof of this.

If you want proof, just google "amtrak subsidies". There is a multitude of info on this subject.

The only Amtraks to ever make a profit were 4 in the Northeast. The one losing the most is the one from New Orleans to Los Angeles.

I love trains and wish they could improve. I would love to take one through the Rockies on one of the most scenic routes.

[hitekcountry]

When it comes to the passenger train system the US is just about a third world country. If the price of gas goes up as much as some are predicting, we may soon see a massive shift to rail travel.

[dave1949]

Originally Posted by hitekcountry

When it comes to the passenger train system the US is just about a third world country.

When I lived in Germany, I could take a cab or local bus to the train station, change trains once and get off in the basement of the Frankfurt airport. Take the escalator up to the check-in counter. The trains ran on schedule to within a minute. I could take a train to Paris, get off at the North Station, cross the street and enter the Paris Metro. From there I could go literally anywhere in Paris. Just some examples.

One thing about mass transit in the US, we lack the population density in many areas to make it efficient. Another is, mass transit gets no respect in planning. If you travel through Boston on Amtrak, you have to take a shuttle bus from the north station to the south station, the train doesn't connect through the city. They did manage to spend umpteen billions to route I-93 underground - The Big Dig. This is an example of what I mean by very unequal subidies. We have highway-itis. LA, Cal. is living proof you can't pave your way out of a mass transit problem.
Dave.

[weldingisfun]

Any company that does not have to worry about being profitable will never be concerned about customer service, convenience or effiency. AMTRAK and the USPS are perfect examples.

[tallyho8]

Originally Posted by weldingisfun

Any company that does not have to worry about being profitable will never be concerned about customer service, convenience or effiency. AMTRAK and the USPS are perfect examples.

I have always had much better service from USPS than from UPS or Fed Ex and I have heard that it is one of the top mail delivery systems in the world. It could be that I am wrong.