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.
If all these people want high speed rail, and I would like it is as well, then let the private industry supply it and compete for the rail lines and rail lanes, and let the public bear the fares. There is no reason whatsoever taxpayers should subsidize high speed passenger railroads in the US.
Here in Texas, tax payers subsidize (in some cases, pay for all of it) road construction, and private companies charge tolls. Would it make for a good business model?
If all these people want high speed rail, and I would like it is as well, then let the private industry supply it and compete for the rail lines and rail lanes, and let the public bear the fares. There is no reason whatsoever taxpayers should subsidize high speed passenger railroads in the US.
One way or another, taxpayers fund all transportation infrastructure whether it be roads, air travel or rail. So, what you really want is the solution which makes the most sense economically.
Here in Texas, tax payers subsidize (in some cases, pay for all of it) road construction, and private companies charge tolls. Would it make for a good business model?
Most people use roads, and therefore, those that use them should pay for them. Furthermore, roads are required for national security and passenger rail service is not. Passeneger rail service, as like airline service, is a private company holding itself out for hire. The same should hold true for passeneger rail service.
Toll roads could be used quite effeciently in some parts of the US. There could be exclusive lanes on roads operated by private companies just for trucks grossing over 26,000 lbs. No cars, no busses, and no motorcycles. Let trucks pay the tolls and the company that operates the lanes would be responsible for the upkeep. The rest would be profit for them. This could eliminate backups that delay shipments from auto accidents and remove the danger of trucks and cars travelling the same lanes if the trucks choose to travel the toll road.
It would mke much more sense for the trucks to pay the premium for the toll road, and include it in the trucking rates, if they knew it was exclusive for them because they are the safest drivers on the road. All truckers want to do is keep rolling so they can earn money by turning around their equipment in a more timely fashion.
Most people use roads, and therefore, those that use them should pay for them. Furthermore, roads are required for national security and passenger rail service is not. Passeneger rail service, as like airline service, is a private company holding itself out for hire. The same should hold true for passeneger rail service.
Toll roads could be used quite effeciently in some parts of the US. There could be exclusive lanes on roads operated by private companies just for trucks grossing over 26,000 lbs. No cars, no busses, and no motorcycles. Let trucks pay the tolls and the company that operates the lanes would be responsible for the upkeep. The rest would be profit for them. This could eliminate backups that delay shipments from auto accidents and remove the danger of trucks and cars travelling the same lanes if the trucks choose to travel the toll road.
It would mke much more sense for the trucks to pay the premium for the toll road, and include it in the trucking rates, if they knew it was exclusive for them because they are the safest drivers on the road. All truckers want to do is keep rolling so they can earn money by turning around their equipment in a more timely fashion.
So you're for selective tax payers subsidies. Thanks for clearing that up.
Having said that, what about airports? what about oil companies? And what criteria did you use to identify what is in nation's best interests and for its defense?
One way or another, taxpayers fund all transportation infrastructure whether it be roads, air travel or rail. So, what you really want is the solution which makes the most sense economically.
I want passenger rail service to operate partly like airline services. Privatly operated on a for hire basis. There is no reason in the world for the government to pay for passenger rail services. Private companies can do it better, and the competition for the rail lines and the rail lanes, would eventually come to a level that is justified by the user for the expense of the ticket.
Once again, rail lines could use high speed tracks that are constructed exclusively for high speed rail. None of this stopping at every station along the lines as was done in 20th century. Let the low speed rail lines service that sector of transportation. Private companies can bid for the lease of the lines and the lanes for true high speed rail service between major cities just as airlines do for gates now. The rights of way can be leased from the government yet the private companies would be responsible for laying and maintaining the trackage.
The airlines would meet real competition in the short line service let's say between Boston and NYC. In the I-95 corrider, it is 211 road miles. The trackage pretty much runs along side of I-95, The run non stop @ high speed of 150 MPG would would take a bit over an hour an a quarter to one and a half hours. You board at 8am and get off at 9:30 am.
In contrast, by the time one arrives at the airport, waits for all of the security, boards, and flys and lands and gets thier rental car or are picked up, you have wasted the entire morning.
For a 8am flight, you have to arrive at the airport by 6 to 6:30am. Check in, go through security, and then sit and wait. The plane may or may not be on time due to weather all year long. Let's say you board at 8am but by the time you are in the air it is 8;30 am. It is an hour flight so you descend at 9:30 am. By the time you taxi to the jetway, deplane with 100 other people, get down to ground transportation. it is now 10-10:30 am. That is 4 to 4.5 hours from the time you arrive at the airport until you are on your way from the airport to your final destination..
This is merely on example. Flying has become a nightmare. High speed trains would solve the time problems for short trips. Of course for longer journeys the airlines win out, but some people may opt out of the airlines on a longer journey if they have the time. I personally have used the Acela over using air service between New London CT and DC and I find the train much more relaxing and convenient. You can get up walk around, visit the snack or bar car. The seats are spacious and not cramping and overhead baggage space is not a problem. You don't have to be shoehorned in next to a 300 lb smelly gorrilla and the tables will fold down between the seats for a family of four to eat, play a game, or merely enjoy each other's company. It is relaxation rather than anxiousness over delays in landing, takeoff connections, terrorist bombers, or an airline malfunction /disaster.
So you're for selective tax payers subsidies. Thanks for clearing that up.
Having said that, what about airports? what about oil companies? And what criteria did you use to identify what is in nation's best interests and for its defense?
Wrong again.
Where is there a selective taxpayer subsidy? The national defense is constitutionaly protected and this not a subsidy.
As for airports, the only airports that deserve taxpayer supports are military airports.
I want passenger rail service to operate partly like airline services. Privatly operated on a for hire basis. There is no reason in the world for the government to pay for passenger rail services. Private companies can do it better, and the competition for the rail lines and the rail lanes, would eventually come to a level that is justified by the user for the expense of the ticket.
Once again, rail lines could use high speed tracks that are constructed exclusively for high speed rail. None of this stopping at every station along the lines as was done in 20th century. Let the low speed rail lines service that sector of transportation. Private companies can bid for the lease of the lines and the lanes for true high speed rail service between major cities just as airlines do for gates now. The rights of way can be leased from the government yet the private companies would be responsible for laying and maintaining the trackage.
The airlines would meet real competition in the short line service let's say between Boston and NYC. In the I-95 corrider, it is 211 road miles. The trackage pretty much runs along side of I-95, The run non stop @ high speed of 150 MPG would would take a bit over an hour an a quarter to one and a half hours. You board at 8am and get off at 9:30 am.
In contrast, by the time one arrives at the airport, waits for all of the security, boards, and flys and lands and gets thier rental car or are picked up, you have wasted the entire morning.
For a 8am flight, you have to arrive at the airport by 6 to 6:30am. Check in, go through security, and then sit and wait. The plane may or may not be on time due to weather all year long. Let's say you board at 8am but by the time you are in the air it is 8;30 am. It is an hour flight so you descend at 9:30 am. By the time you taxi to the jetway, deplane with 100 other people, get down to ground transportation. it is now 10-10:30 am. That is 4 to 4.5 hours from the time you arrive at the airport until you are on your way from the airport to your final destination..
This is merely on example. Flying has become a nightmare. High speed trains would solve the time problems for short trips. Of course for longer journeys the airlines win out, but some people may opt out of the airlines on a longer journey if they have the time. I personally have used the Acela over using air service between New London CT and DC and I find the train much more relaxing and convenient. You can get up walk around, visit the snack or bar car. The seats are spacious and not cramping and overhead baggage space is not a problem. You don't have to be shoehorned in next to a 300 lb smelly gorrilla and the tables will fold down between the seats for a family of four to eat, play a game, or merely enjoy each other's company. It is relaxation rather than anxiousness over delays in landing, takeoff connections, terrorist bombers, or an airline malfunction /disaster.
The key to the entire plan is privatization.
I don't have any problem at all with the concept you lay out here although I think government does have a role to play in making sure the right of way exists and getting the track up and running. But if private companies can run it effectively, make a profit and the taxpayer gets a return in the form of fees for the right of way then that works for me.
Where is there a selective taxpayer subsidy? The national defense is constitutionaly protected and this not a subsidy.
As for airports, the only airports that deserve taxpayer supports are military airports.
The argument is not national defense but your limited vision of what defense entails, and how it can be achieved. Just because you can't see it, doesn't mean something can't exist.
And for your selectivity, the evidence is in your previous post. I would hate to reiterate your words on the subject.
Whether only military airports deserve taxpayer subsidies or not is a non-issue, considering that airports are receiving taxpayer assistance, and yet that has to be brought to light in discussions like these because people like you like to pick and choose until forced into the realities.
In that sense, I do agree. Right now the only places where HSR can make a big impactfrom DC to Baltimore (with spurs running to York, PA and Harrisburg, PA since thousands of people commute the Harrisburg-Baltimore-Washington corridor daily) to Philly to Boston. And I imagine the same can be said of the San Diego-San Francisco corridor
That wouldn't be HSR , those would be trunk lines with a Top speed of 120mph and Electric. That Corridor and 14 others in the Northeast would connect towns and cities along busy commuting corridors. There would be numerous feeder railways that would feed into them that would be used by Freight and commuter Rail services.... Theres over 18,000+ proposed / planned Restored Intercity , Regional Rail and Urban Rail for the Northeastern states. About 7,000 will be done by private companies in mostly rural areas of New England. Theres 5 proposed lines feeding into Harrisburg , Lehigh Express (Harrisburg - Lebanon - Reading - Allentown - Easton - Newark - NY / Hoboken) , Restoration of the old Atglen and Susquehanna branch ( New route for Amtrak's Keystone service) , Corridor 1 Regional Rail (Harrisburg - Lancaster) , Chambersburg line , Carlisle line , York / Baltimore line & Williamsport / Sunbury line
Proposed map of a Washington-Baltimore regional rail system (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rllayman/192900288/ - broken link) by rllayman (http://www.flickr.com/people/rllayman/ - broken link), on Flickr
In an "ideal" world that paid attention to the laws of physics and actual costs... and not partisan politics:
Vision 2021, ten years later
America has weaned herself from imported petroleum, thanks to a massive change in energy consumption.
The nation's major (and most minor) metropolitan and urban areas have extensive networks of streetcars, subways, interurban, commuter, and light rail interconnecting their neighborhoods. Most people are within 1 mile (20 minute walk) of rail transit. Intercity rail service is now more popular than flying for medium distance trips.
In parallel with the construction of the rail network, population consolidation via new development along the corridors was implemented.
With the 80% reduction in automobiles on the road (down to 41 million, nationwide and trending downward), the atmosphere in cities is no longer choked with smog and pollution. People no longer risk their respiratory systems when going outside. It's true that rails are more inconvenient that automobiles, but it's also inconvenient to not breathe. And it is a slower way to travel, but far faster than the highways and streets in gridlock. But with the increase in walking there has been a positive affect on health, with obesity dropping substantially. Few mourn the passing of the "Drive through".
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.
