Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not necessarily on the scale of intrastate, or interstate rail. Transit and passenger rail will still have their place moving lots of people long distances that can compete with airlines.
Not sure how much of an effect autonomous vehicles will have on long distance travel. I thought self-driving cars was the stuff of science fiction only. I feel humbled by how far they've come.
Quote:
Financial as in we have the aggregate resources to make it happen. Georgia's GDP is higher than a LOT of countries, some of which have a much, much better rail network than we do. We could certainly collect the taxes, issue the bonds, designate the funding districts, and assign the budget if we could get the political will to.
So if the government owned and maintained the rail lines, that'd make passenger rail profitable?
Quote:
The main reason use of passenger rail on private railroads declined was the onset of the automobile and all the federal subsidy it got. Government roads, highways, interstates all competed with the for profit rails. With the shift of mail contracts off the trains, it was finally not economic from a profit standpoint to run the trains.
If the roads were not subsidized to near entirety, then maybe the railroads could have continued to be competitive. Until such time that roads are not subsidized, it is ingenious to think that railroads could operate any other way on passengers alone.
I think the airlines did in rail. It's much faster and very safe. Besides, rail companies are moving containers, that's where the money is, despite trucking companies enjoying those subsidized roads.
Not sure how much of an effect autonomous vehicles will have on long distance travel. I thought self-driving cars was the stuff of science fiction only. I feel humbled by how far they've come.
Don't hold your breath for anything soon. They're still highly experimental, with too many problems and potential for problems.
Quote:
So if the government owned and maintained the rail lines, that'd make passenger rail profitable?
What do you mean by profitable? Do you mean the one department of the state that would be tasked with running the trains? Or do you mean increasing the profitability of the state itself? One big issue I see from a lot of right wingers, and some of the folks on here, is they want to treat individual government departments as entities designed to be profitable. It's a highly narrow, and incorrect view on macroeconomics. Quite simply, a state, is a business itself, any departments or agencies, are just that. Any big corporation these days has HR, Legal, Security, Transportation, in addition to the departments specific to that corporation's operations. Those four I mentioned rarely if ever bring any profit directly to the company. However, without them, the company would not be able to be profitable. A state is the same way. Not every department has to make a profit. If they can defray some of the costs, that's better, but hardly a requirement.
It's also one reason why I think Donald Trump may be good for the country economically. He's experienced in business, knows how to build a business, and hasn't made any of the classic highly conservative statements about increasing spending in select areas while also cutting revenue.
Quote:
I think the airlines did in rail. It's much faster and very safe. Besides, rail companies are moving containers, that's where the money is, despite trucking companies enjoying those subsidized roads.
Air isn't always faster, especially for short distances, and isn't all that safer than rail in-terms of passengers. If anything, the fact that rail is succeeding with containers only further exemplifies the key advantage of rail: cargo density. One rail "vehicle" can haul as much cargo as 200+ trucks, with the same number of people as two trucks, and in the same space as 15 or so trucks (8000 foot train, divided by length of truck plus safe following distance divided by typical number of highway lanes). One passenger train can hold over 1000 people. The largest airliner in the world, the A380 can only hold about 800, in its maxed-out configuration. A typical high speed train holds about 400, or about a good 747's worth.
Don't hold your breath for anything soon. They're still highly experimental, with too many problems and potential for problems.
Uber is already pressing to put them into service. The Feds are pushing for guidelines so even they see the handwriting on the wall.
Quote:
What do you mean by profitable? Do you mean the one department of the state that would be tasked with running the trains? Or do you mean increasing the profitability of the state itself? One big issue I see from a lot of right wingers, and some of the folks on here, is they want to treat individual government departments as entities designed to be profitable. It's a highly narrow, and incorrect view on macroeconomics. Quite simply, a state, is a business itself, any departments or agencies, are just that. Any big corporation these days has HR, Legal, Security, Transportation, in addition to the departments specific to that corporation's operations. Those four I mentioned rarely if ever bring any profit directly to the company. However, without them, the company would not be able to be profitable. A state is the same way. Not every department has to make a profit. If they can defray some of the costs, that's better, but hardly a requirement.
It's also one reason why I think Donald Trump may be good for the country economically. He's experienced in business, knows how to build a business, and hasn't made any of the classic highly conservative statements about increasing spending in select areas while also cutting revenue.
A business makes more money than it has to spend to run the train.
Quote:
Air isn't always faster, especially for short distances, and isn't all that safer than rail in-terms of passengers. If anything, the fact that rail is succeeding with containers only further exemplifies the key advantage of rail: cargo density. One rail "vehicle" can haul as much cargo as 200+ trucks, with the same number of people as two trucks, and in the same space as 15 or so trucks (8000 foot train, divided by length of truck plus safe following distance divided by typical number of highway lanes). One passenger train can hold over 1000 people. The largest airliner in the world, the A380 can only hold about 800, in its maxed-out configuration. A typical high speed train holds about 400, or about a good 747's worth.
Planes can go 400 miles an hour. High speed trains can do around 200 mph and that's only for specially designated stretches of track. Planes can do it wherever and yes plane travel is relatively safe. Trains hauling containers have to travel long distances to make financial sense. Likewise, they are not so good for short distances. I don't think rail container success carries over to passenger rail.
Uber is already pressing to put them into service. The Feds are pushing for guidelines so even they see the handwriting on the wall.
There's a lot of hype, but as someone actually inside the industry, it's a long way off if ever.
Quote:
A business makes more money than it has to spend to run the train.
As does the state.
Quote:
Planes can go 400 miles an hour. High speed trains can do around 200 mph and that's only for specially designated stretches of track. Planes can do it wherever and yes plane travel is relatively safe. Trains hauling containers have to travel long distances to make financial sense. Likewise, they are not so good for short distances. I don't think rail container success carries over to passenger rail.
It's not scheduled speed, and really it's not even the absolute speed of the vehicle. It's the overhead. I just did analysis on another forum for Atlanta to Chicago. Total trip time on a plane was somewhere around 4.5 hours for a "2 hour flight." Total trip time on a 220mph high speed train was somewhere around 6 hours. Atlanta to Chicago is definitely the extreme end of competitiveness for rail. The market Atlanta-Chicago is really an Atlanta-Nashville, Nashville-St. Louis, St. Louis-Chicago, Chicago-Nashville, St. Louis-Atlanta, etc. market. An Atlanta-St. Louis flight has a total trip time of about 4 hours. An Atlanta-St. Louis HSR trip would have a total trip time of about 4 hours. An Atlanta-Nashville flight has a total trip time of about 2.5 hours. Atlanta-Nashville via HSR would be about 2 hours. So you see, this nicely illustrates the competitiveness of rail on medium distances over airlines.
There's a lot of hype, but as someone actually inside the industry, it's a long way off if ever.
It's no hype. I think your "industry" is sort of out of touch. Uber is pushing forward the idea in Pittsburgh. And there are a lot of other players like Google.
Quote:
As does the state.
If that were the case Amtrak would have gone belly up as would the Post Office. Government is fine with money losing ventures.
Quote:
It's not scheduled speed, and really it's not even the absolute speed of the vehicle. It's the overhead. I just did analysis on another forum for Atlanta to Chicago. Total trip time on a plane was somewhere around 4.5 hours for a "2 hour flight." Total trip time on a 220mph high speed train was somewhere around 6 hours. Atlanta to Chicago is definitely the extreme end of competitiveness for rail. The market Atlanta-Chicago is really an Atlanta-Nashville, Nashville-St. Louis, St. Louis-Chicago, Chicago-Nashville, St. Louis-Atlanta, etc. market. An Atlanta-St. Louis flight has a total trip time of about 4 hours. An Atlanta-St. Louis HSR trip would have a total trip time of about 4 hours. An Atlanta-Nashville flight has a total trip time of about 2.5 hours. Atlanta-Nashville via HSR would be about 2 hours. So you see, this nicely illustrates the competitiveness of rail on medium distances over airlines.
Well, I recently made a short hop flight covering 165 miles rather than do a 3 hour drive. The flight took less than 1/2 an hour. Even figuring in having to arrive early at the airport, that flight was worth the money. For your train trips, are you figuring in where they can and can't achieve high speed? I took the TGV from Paris to Grenoble and only the stretch outside of Paris to Lyon could the train go at its high speed. From Lyon to Grenoble, its speed dropped dramatically. A train ripping from Atlanta to say Chattanooga has serious problems with the hills. An airplane can actually do a "straight shot", a train, not so much. Texas with its low density and flat plains might work for HSR, but Atlanta doesn't enjoy flat plains to everywhere.
If that were the case Amtrak would have gone belly up as would the Post Office. Government is fine with money losing ventures.
Individual departments loose money, but the overall government makes money. Passenger rail and mail are two parts of the MASSIVE organization that is the U.S. government. They may not earn more than they are subsidized by general funds, but they support the country's economy as a whole, allowing other departments to make money.
The analogy of a business is a good one, but only if applied at the appropriate scale. Trying to treat each government department as a single business that aught to hold on its own would mean that most of the government would be gone, and those departments that do turn direct profit, wouldn't continue to do so for much longer.
You see, it's much more accurate to treat the state as if it were a large corporation. The bottom line for the entire company is profit, though not necessarily in the same way as a business. (We'll get there in a second).
Each department within the company takes on either the supporting role, or the revenue generation role. When you think of large companies, you can see many non-direct revenue services at play within said company. You have Information Technologies, Grounds, Maintenance, Security, Human Resources, Health and Safety, Research and Development, Marketing, and Logistics (to name a few broad departments).
These departments rarely, if ever, have any direct profit contribution to the company overall, but in each case they support the Sales department in one way or another so that that department CAN make money. IT keeps communications, records, and information available so that sales can take new orders, fulfill orders, and appropriately target new customers. Grounds makes sure the facility looks nice so as to give potential investors or customers who visit the impression that you are a company worth working with. Maintenance makes sure your facility continues to function, so that your factory lines don't stop, and so you can continue to make product to sell. Security keeps people from wondering in and damaging your facility, stealing things, or even attempting corporate espionage. Human Resources attempts to keep your labor force satisfied so that they continue to work. Health and Safety attempts to keep your labor force from being killed or hurting themselves, which drives down productivity. Research and Development designs new products, or improves old ones so that you can continue to be competitive in the market. Marketing attempts to secure new customers by promoting your product.
Logistics makes sure that not only can your product move between internal facilities, external facilities, or even market, but they also make sure that your human capitol can move about as they attend investor meetings, conferences, trade shows, other facilities, etc.
To carry the analogy over to the state, the sales department is the tax collector, and the revenue is taxes and growth in the economy. Information Technologies is the utilities and telecom infrastructure. Grounds is grounds. Maintenance is maintenance. Security is the police force, courts, and even the national guard. Human Resources is your social programs and labor regulatory boards. Health and Safety is your food and safety regulatory boards. Research and Development is your educational infrastructure from pre-k all the way up into your universities and centers of innovation. Marketing is marketing.
Logistics is your streets, roads, avenues, boulevards, highways, interstates, sidewalks, bike lanes, community circulators, local buses, Arterial Rapid Transit, Bus Rapid Transit, commuter buses, streetcars, light rail, heavy rail, commuter rail, intrastate rail, interstate rail, high-speed rail, freight rail, airports, seaports, inland ports, and canals.
It's disingenuous to try to make transit, or passenger rail try to turn a profit on its own in our country, or even our state, at least on its own. Even those companies who manage it, generally do so with massive real-estate holdings along the route. The rail doesn't pay for itself, but it supports the real-estate developments which make up the majority of the bottom line, and which wouldn't be as valuable from the added mobility otherwise.
The state works just the same way, mobility within the state, and outside of the state, adds value to the state which can be leveraged into a grown GDP and more taxes collected. Now, you might say "let's just do it with roads!" to which I reply that we're running out of room for roads. Cars, even self-driving ones, are not a great use of road-space compared to a bus or train. We, here in Atlanta and in the Piedmont-Atlantic Megaregion in general, will run out of room to rely on roads as hills, mountains, creeks, rivers, etc. get in the way. That is why the city is investing in light rail and streetcars. That's why people call for commuter rail and more heavy rail. That's why we need to improve our bus lines. And it's why we should invest in High-Speed Rail.
So, basically, even if rail doesn't turn a direct profit, it supports the growth of the state as a whole, which does lead to growth in the economy and added taxes from the additional mobility which it supports. In addition to that, we need to build rail over road simply because of efficiency of movement in a given, limited space. That is, many more people can be moved with a train, than can be moved by a car, in the same space.
Individual departments loose money, but the overall government makes money. Passenger rail and mail are two parts of the MASSIVE organization that is the U.S. government. They may not earn more than they are subsidized by general funds, but they support the country's economy as a whole, allowing other departments to make money.
The analogy of a business is a good one, but only if applied at the appropriate scale. Trying to treat each government department as a single business that aught to hold on its own would mean that most of the government would be gone, and those departments that do turn direct profit, wouldn't continue to do so for much longer.
You see, it's much more accurate to treat the state as if it were a large corporation. The bottom line for the entire company is profit, though not necessarily in the same way as a business. (We'll get there in a second).
Each department within the company takes on either the supporting role, or the revenue generation role. When you think of large companies, you can see many non-direct revenue services at play within said company. You have Information Technologies, Grounds, Maintenance, Security, Human Resources, Health and Safety, Research and Development, Marketing, and Logistics (to name a few broad departments).
These departments rarely, if ever, have any direct profit contribution to the company overall, but in each case they support the Sales department in one way or another so that that department CAN make money. IT keeps communications, records, and information available so that sales can take new orders, fulfill orders, and appropriately target new customers. Grounds makes sure the facility looks nice so as to give potential investors or customers who visit the impression that you are a company worth working with. Maintenance makes sure your facility continues to function, so that your factory lines don't stop, and so you can continue to make product to sell. Security keeps people from wondering in and damaging your facility, stealing things, or even attempting corporate espionage. Human Resources attempts to keep your labor force satisfied so that they continue to work. Health and Safety attempts to keep your labor force from being killed or hurting themselves, which drives down productivity. Research and Development designs new products, or improves old ones so that you can continue to be competitive in the market. Marketing attempts to secure new customers by promoting your product.
Logistics makes sure that not only can your product move between internal facilities, external facilities, or even market, but they also make sure that your human capitol can move about as they attend investor meetings, conferences, trade shows, other facilities, etc.
To carry the analogy over to the state, the sales department is the tax collector, and the revenue is taxes and growth in the economy. Information Technologies is the utilities and telecom infrastructure. Grounds is grounds. Maintenance is maintenance. Security is the police force, courts, and even the national guard. Human Resources is your social programs and labor regulatory boards. Health and Safety is your food and safety regulatory boards. Research and Development is your educational infrastructure from pre-k all the way up into your universities and centers of innovation. Marketing is marketing.
Logistics is your streets, roads, avenues, boulevards, highways, interstates, sidewalks, bike lanes, community circulators, local buses, Arterial Rapid Transit, Bus Rapid Transit, commuter buses, streetcars, light rail, heavy rail, commuter rail, intrastate rail, interstate rail, high-speed rail, freight rail, airports, seaports, inland ports, and canals.
It's disingenuous to try to make transit, or passenger rail try to turn a profit on its own in our country, or even our state, at least on its own. Even those companies who manage it, generally do so with massive real-estate holdings along the route. The rail doesn't pay for itself, but it supports the real-estate developments which make up the majority of the bottom line, and which wouldn't be as valuable from the added mobility otherwise.
The state works just the same way, mobility within the state, and outside of the state, adds value to the state which can be leveraged into a grown GDP and more taxes collected. Now, you might say "let's just do it with roads!" to which I reply that we're running out of room for roads. Cars, even self-driving ones, are not a great use of road-space compared to a bus or train. We, here in Atlanta and in the Piedmont-Atlantic Megaregion in general, will run out of room to rely on roads as hills, mountains, creeks, rivers, etc. get in the way. That is why the city is investing in light rail and streetcars. That's why people call for commuter rail and more heavy rail. That's why we need to improve our bus lines. And it's why we should invest in High-Speed Rail.
So, basically, even if rail doesn't turn a direct profit, it supports the growth of the state as a whole, which does lead to growth in the economy and added taxes from the additional mobility which it supports. In addition to that, we need to build rail over road simply because of efficiency of movement in a given, limited space. That is, many more people can be moved with a train, than can be moved by a car, in the same space.
You reason like a lawyer. Companies often examine all their departments, looking for unnecessary or redundant positions. I worked in a government job that took some of our departments and outsourced everything. Not sure if trains contribute something to the economy that was otherwise missing.
You reason like a lawyer. Companies often examine all their departments, looking for unnecessary or redundant positions. I worked in a government job that took some of our departments and outsourced everything. Not sure if trains contribute something to the economy that was otherwise missing.
Trains contribute to the economy a mode of transport and level and scale of mobility that automobiles and planes cannot always fill.
Just take for example Atlanta's MARTA Heavy Rail Transit service.
Even though MARTA has not always been managed and operated in the most robust way possible that it should have been, MARTA Heavy Rail Transit service is one of the major reasons that Atlanta has grown into one of the top convention and event cities in the Western Hemisphere.
MARTA HRT has provided a crucial connection between major convention and event-staging venues like the Georgia Dome/Georgia World Congress Center complex and the Downtown, Midtown and Buckhead hotel districts....Not to mention that MARTA has provided a key logistical link between those areas and the world's busiest airport at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport.
Without MARTA Heavy Rail Transit service, Atlanta very likely does not:
> Host the 1988 Democratic National Convention...
> Become the seemingly semi-permanent host of the Southeastern Conference Football Championship Game...
> Become the semi-permanent host of the Southeastern Conference men's basketball postseason tournament (along with being the occasional host of the Atlantic Coast Conference men's basketball postseason tournament)...
> Get awarded the hosting duties for three Super Bowl games...
> And (most importantly), get named the host of the 1996 Summer Olympic games, the event that single-handedly propelled Atlanta to international city status.
Even though it has often been neglected and mismanaged during much of its history, MARTA has meant so much to the economy of the Atlanta metropolitan region and the state of Georgia. MARTA has (combined with the Interstate system and the airport to) basically make Atlanta and Georgia a powerhouse of the Southeastern U.S.
Even with the flawed setup, neglect, mismanagement, stunted growth and widespread public and political derision of the system (particularly outside of I-285), MARTA is an example of how trains have contributed something to the Metro Atlanta and Georgia economies that likely might otherwise be missing.
You reason like a lawyer. Companies often examine all their departments, looking for unnecessary or redundant positions. I worked in a government job that took some of our departments and outsourced everything. Not sure if trains contribute something to the economy that was otherwise missing.
New movie starting matthew mcconaughey, The MARTA Lawyer.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
