[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: (erielack) Re: [NYC-Railroad] New Passenger Routes --- What is the answer?

In a message dated 6/25/00 2:48:51 PM US Eastern Standard Time, 
"JACK5008_@_webtv.net" writes:

<< Subj:     (erielack) Re: [NYC-Railroad] New Passenger Routes --- What is 
the answer?
 Date:  6/25/00 2:48:51 PM US Eastern Standard Time
 From:  "JACK5008_@_webtv.net"
 Sender:    "erielack-owner_@_internexus.net"
 To:    "NYC-Railroad_@_egroups.com"
 CC:    "NYC-Railroad_@_egroups.com", erielack@internexus.net
 
 Hi Phil,
 
 You make some very good points.
 
 It was not my intention to completely convert the entire system to
 privatization at this moment. My intention is to try to experiment in
 another way with lines that have not yet materialized.
 
 With all its slick tricks, why should NJTransit run a service from the
 Poconos to New York when its mandate is New Jersey? Why do we have
 subsidized passenger service for gamblers going to Atlantic City when
 the casinos should pay the bill? Why does the government subsidize all
 transportation facilities except railroads unless it operates it. If
 some railroads were able to get some of the deals that Amtrak did, some
 might be still running passenger trains.
 
  Why does nobody see the logic of an interstate railway system with
 private operators?
 
 The trouble is that the railroad passenger business is not a business
 with blInkers on its eyes being led by big brother.
 
 All this leads to is lets look to alternatives. We are not doing this.
 If we don't, their will be no Amtrak or no long distance passenger
 trains.
 
 
 As for your comment on some in Britain wanting renationalization of
 passenger trains, look at what party is in power.
 
 
 
 Jack Grasso
 
 
 --------------------
 Received: from mailsorter-101-1.iap.bryant.webtv.net (209.240.198.97) by
    storefull-623.iap.bryant.webtv.net with WTV-SMTP; Sun, 25 Jun 2000
    11:38:40 -0700 (PDT)
 Return-Path: 
<sentto-84005-2093-961958313-JACK5008="webtv.net_@_returns.onelist.com">
 Received: from ho.egroups.com (ho.egroups.com [208.50.144.85]) by
    mailsorter-101-1.iap.bryant.webtv.net (8.8.8-wtv-d/ms.dwm.v7+dul2)
    with SMTP id LAA12943 for <"JACK5008_@_webtv.net">; Sun, 25 Jun 2000
    11:38:39 -0700 (PDT)
 X-eGroups-Return: 
sentto-84005-2093-961958313-JACK5008="webtv.net_@_returns.onelist.com"
 Received: from [10.1.10.37] by ho.egroups.com with NNFMP; 25 Jun 2000
    18:38:35 -0000
 Received: (qmail 11397 invoked from network); 25 Jun 2000 18:38:33 -0000
 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m3.onelist.org with QMQP; 25 Jun
    2000 18:38:33 -0000
 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net) (207.172.4.60) by
    mta2 with SMTP; 25 Jun 2000 18:38:33 -0000
 Received: from 209-122-248-234.s488.tnt8.lnhva.md.dialup.rcn.com 
([209.122.248.234]
    helo=pjkuhl) by smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 2.12 #3) id
    136HId-0003Zg-00; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 14:38:32 -0400
 Message-ID: <004a01bfded4$908c2580$"eaf87ad1_@_pjkuhl">
 To: <"NYC-Railroad_@_egroups.com">, <erielack@internexus.net>
 X-Priority: 3
 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3155.0
 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0
 From: "Philip J. Kuhl" <"PJKuhl_@_erols.com">
 MIME-Version: 1.0
 Mailing-List: list "NYC-Railroad_@_egroups.com"; contact
    "NYC-Railroad-owner_@_egroups.com"
 Delivered-To: mailing list "NYC-Railroad_@_egroups.com"
 Precedence: bulk
 List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:"NYC-Railroad-unsubscribe_@_egroups.com">
 Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 14:38:29 -0400
 Reply-To: "NYC-Railroad_@_egroups.com"
 Subject: Re: [NYC-Railroad] New Passenger Routes --- What is the answer?
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
 
 Jack, I would not be hasty to point to Europe as an example of
 privatization.
 
 First off, with the exception of Germany, continental Europe's railways are
 still nationalized and operate passenger service at a deficit.  Most of
 those countries believe that the overall social benefits to having good
 passenger service outweigh the cost of the government subsidies that need to
 be added to ticket revenue to cover the costs of operations.
 
 Second, in Germany and the UK, privatization efforts have not yet been
 branded a success because the quality and reliability of service has gone
 down under privatization while ticket prices have risen.  In the UK there is
 a move afoot to consider renationalization of the passenger service.
 
 Even Amtrak's Northeast Corridor isn't a stellar example:  Ticket revenues
 certainly come close to covering operating costs (if they don't cover them),
 but do not even make a dent in capitalization costs, costs for new
 equipment, or costs for infrastructure maintenance and modernization
 (catenary maintenance, catenary expansion to Boston, station modernization,
 etc.).    If Amtrak's Northeast Corridor were a private business now, it
 would fail.  And this is despite the Northeast Corridor's having a traffic
 density that eclipses by far anything that the routes you proposed (New
 York-Poconos, Utica-Lake Placid, and Pittsburgh-Cleveland) could ever dream
 of operating, even in the glory days of passenger service before interstate
 highways!
 
 We had extensive private operation of passenger service in the US.  It
 ultimately proved unprofitable (admittedly in part because of antiquated
 labor laws and subsidized competition, but only in part).  That is what lead
 to our nationalized service with Amtrak in 1971.
 
 I'd challenge you to name a single country that has moved --successfully--
 from a nationalized or quasi-nationalized rail passenger system to a
 privatized one.  I can't think of a single example myself.
 
 Phil Kuhl
 Arlington, Virginia
 "PJKuhl_@_erols.com"
 
 
 
   >>

So far privatization at the hands of the party in power in NJ has been an 
abysmal failure. Over 300 milion was wasted on the Atlantic City Tunnel 
project (so called joint venture with a Casino that doesn't exist anymore) 
and the tunnel construction is now in cost overruns. The tunnel now goes 
nowhere to an empty waterfront. Cost overruns on the state DMV system are in 
the 100's of millions for this privatized mess. That's a subject for another 
day.

Every time you get behind the wheel of your car and cruise down the road 
you're on welfare, yes; we all are. The highway system costs are largely paid 
by general fund sources. Our user fees and gas taxes pay for only a small 
portion of the cost to build and fix roads. Virginia is now in negotiations 
with NS to pay NS the costs to double track their line that runs parallel to 
I-81. I-81 is truck gridlocked. It costs 10 million per mile to build two 
more lanes of I-81. It costs 1 million per mile to double track the NS line 
(that will carry road railers). VA will be building the double track becasue 
it's cheaper. It works (NS as an operations plan to make it work) and it 
costs 2/3 less to run the freight by rail than by truck (source - Wall Street 
Journal). Less government - no government is not the answer, nor is the 
continued welfare of building more roads.

We used to make fun of the Soviets who waited in line for hours to buy one 
loaf of bread. Now, we wait in line on our grid locked highways to the tune 
of 100 Billion (with a "B" dollars) in wasted fuel (1999 USDOT statistics) 
going nowhere. That's a lot of regular unleaded. 
And that's why government will be building railroads and not highways in the 
congested regions of the country...or like that pilot project in Virginia 
with NS, if it makes sense, then do it. 


Seth T

 ------------------------------------------------------------
Visit the erielack photopage at http://el-list.railfan.net

------------------------------