"d’hello — i am an economics moron."
Amtrak, our national passenger rail carrier, transports more than 25 million people a year. Moreover, under contracts with local agencies, Amtrak hauls more than 800,000 commuters a day, many moving between Northeastern suburbs and their city jobs.But Amtrak cannot earn a dime. In fact, passenger railroads – unlike freight carriers – are inherently unprofitable. A few trains might turn a profit, but most do not.
All this is not due to inept management or overstuffed payrolls. The heavy equipment; the fast trains’ wearing out the rails and roadbeds; heating and maintaining the stations; and the employees needed to serve customers _ all drain cash from a passenger railroad. …
it gets better.
…Rather than ending Amtrak’s funding, Congress should be increasing it. Last fall, the Intermodal Transportation Institute (of the University of Denver) warned that America faces a transportation crisis – that its highways are congested and its airports overcrowded. The institute added darkly that things will worsen.Anyone who has ridden on a major road in the East knows the problem all too well. For example, a driver from Providence to Washington must often negotiate at least six traffic jams – in Connecticut, New York’s Westchester County, northern New Jersey, Wilmington, Baltimore and Washington.
Moreover, as reserves are depleted, there is little hope that fuel prices will decline. They might ebb and flow, but generally they will probably move upward. …
there’s far too much in almost every paragraph of the article to begin to debunk in a short post. however, one overriding link is notable in that most economics fools won’t address it (assuming they’re even aware of it): the premise that prices are not useful. this one gap damns to hell all of the ranting, yet it’s far too subtle and beautiful a point for most people to understand.
prices matter. prices are the communication system of commerce. any attempt to remove or disguise prices must lead to failure. though the failure may be removed from its source, it will be there nonetheless.
of course, there is no possibility of failure for socialists, because they will merely outlaw it. problem solved!
“it shall be illegal for this scheme to fail. i hereby decree the perfect society. there shall be no heavy lifting.” blah blah blah.
infernal, infantile dumbshits.
April 16th, 2005 at 07:50
There use to be fast, modern electric trains leaving every half hour between Baltimore, Annapolis, and Washington DC. After cars became affordable, train use declined, but with the sorry state of our local roads, (why let developers build houses before the infrastructure to support them is in place? Because they have better lobbyist than we do.) I think that modern train service might just have a chance, if run more effectively.
The government regulates the air, manages and improves our waterways, and builds and maintains the roads, yet tracks are owned by railroad companies. I am not calling for the nationalization of railroad right-of-ways, but otherwise I don’t have an easy answer, surely amtrak has got to go. Perhaps the rails need to be managed by one set of companies, and the trains another. Then the rail owners auction off time slots to use their competing right-of-ways.
For long haul trips, most people think this way, if I can get an airline ticket for less than the cost of a train ticket, I’ll take the air ticket. It’s usually faster, better and cheaper.
April 17th, 2005 at 07:22
no need to fret. the answer is liberty. get government out of transportation, and mutually beneficial arrangements will be made by those who understand the source of wealth. solutions unfettered by coercion will always be better than anything government inflicts (“offers”). perhaps liberty would mean the end of rail travel. doesn’t matter. what a beautiful thing when we stop to think about it. i hope it happens one day.