Re: (erielack) Rail Developments in France & Britain

[ELRRco_@_aol.com]

In a message dated 4/5/2003 10:52:32 AM Eastern Standard Time, ELRR co 
writes:


> 
> I wanted to reply to Mr. Smith's submission about rail in France & Britain.
> 
> Primarily, because privitization got such a bad rap in England, many people 
> are attempting to use that as a reason to avoid doing it here. We must 
> remember that prior to Amtrak, New Jersey Transit, Metro-North and the 
> rest, that private companies ran the passenger trains and ran them well. 
> Erie Lackawanna did a great job, but it along with all the others were 
> forced out by the very groups some of us hope will continue to run 
> passenger trains--Federal and State governments.
> 
> Those entities are quick to cut services, and personnel to save money. Why 
> is there no rail service on the Trenton Line? because NJ DOT gave it up. 
> Why is there no more Chicago-Miami streamliner? because Amtrak gave it up. 
> Did the EL or Missouri Pacific ever run passenger trains with one man in 
> the cab? No--but Amtrak does nearly all over the country. Just like private 
> enterprises, the governmental entities that we always look to only act when 
> it is in the best interests of those tho comprise that respective body. If 
> they really wanted to act in the of-mentioned "public interest," Conrail 
> would never have left Xenia, OH bereft of rails nor would it have removed 
> the New Jersey Cutoff.
> 
> If tommorrow, either A) the Federal Government decided to place railroads 
> on the same footing as truckers, motor coach operators, and airlines then 
> believe me people like Michael Ward and Matt Rose would clamor to run 
> passenger trains again. Why? because it adds revenue without adding much 
> cost, and this passes on to shareholders which means more bonuses for them. 
> And if CSXT or BNSF ran passenger services on the same lines as the B&O, C&
> O, SCL, CB&Q, GN and NP then passenger revenues would not be the chump 
> change that one train every three days provides to Amtrak. The other option 
> is for a new generation of rail advocates to step to the plate, demand that 
> the policies that have existed since 1916 be made more sensible, and take 
> the lead in ensuring that no matter who chooses to run passenger trains be 
> it private company A, NJT or whatever is able to compete in the marketplace 
> by keeping the heat on politicians and not letting them settle in their 
> gilded offices without promoting good policies for all the people. 
> 
> So, don't knock GM for wanting to pave over the continent. Just watch what 
> they do, and do that--then we don't have to sit here and mourn for the 
> trains we lost--we can fondly recall those days on the trains we will have.
> 
> Sorry for the rant and the questionable topic adhearance. 
> 
> Phil Bell

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