posted
Anyone who follow the material I submit can surmise that I strongly disagree with the "nationalize 'em all" and "legal obligation" positions taken by the author:
Railroads lost money by carrying people, but they could not simply cease to run passenger trains. Both their charters and laws required them to do so. Amtrak, which was started in 1971, was a blessing to them. They could keep the lucrative freight and ditch the costly passengers.
The government created Amtrak to salvage a failing passenger rail system, but in detaching passenger traffic from freight traffic it created a monster that had to seek its lifeblood elsewhere. Freight traffic sustains railroads. Amtrak became a kind of corporate vampire. It has to feed on subsidies because it lacks the most lucrative part of rail transportation. When they divided the ledgers Amtrak got the red ink; the private rail lines got the black ink.
As American rail lines became freight lines, they had no need to build or maintain the tracks necessary for higher-speed passenger traffic. Amtrak has by and large lacked the funds to build new tracks or improve their safety. Given Amtrak’s hybrid infrastructure, the result is that American passenger trains run more like other advanced countries’ freight trains. When they go faster, disaster can ensue.
disclaimer: author holds long positions CSX UNP (no longer hold KSU; made my $$$; time to move on)
Posts: 9976 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
