From: Mike Lorrey (mlorrey@datamann.com)
Date: Tue Jun 25 2002 - 08:37:27 MDT
> "Smigrodzki, Rafal" wrote:
>
> Terry W. Colvin [mailto:fortean1@mindspring.com] wrote:
>
> Naturally, what trains we do have are about to go bankrupt.
>
> ### And a good riddance, too. They are too expensive, and the
> customers are staying away in droves, with all the amenities you
> describe being unable to make up for the price. Of course, you could
> take some money from non-travelling persons (like me) and allow the
> travellers to have a marvellous travelling experience at my cost - but
> I do hope you do not advocate that.
If you are talking about the US semi-socialized system called Amtrak, be
advised that its 'reform' several years ago at the hands of legislation
was doomed to failure by the tacking on of requirements that Amtrak
service unprofitable routes. Whether this was done by leftie
congressmonsters wanting pork for their districts (as in the case of
Leahy, Sanders, and the unspeakable third Vermont legislator) or
righties wanting to hamstring Amtrak to force its bankruptcy early is
really immaterial. There are plenty of train routes in the US which are
quite competetive and profitable, specifically commuter routes in the
east coast corridors. Long distance routes in the western US are
distinctly unprofitable and should be canned. For example, the New
Orleans to LA route is subsidized at a rate of over $260 per passenger.
To attract more profitable ridership, Amtrak should have been spending
its money on buying new high speed trains, rather than subsidizing dog
routes. They should also have been pursuing upgrades to track along the
east coast so that the high speed trains they already have can actually
operate at their design speed, and not less than 50% of it.
>
> ----
>
> Being squashed is not because some people are larger than others, but
> because the seats are too close for comfort even for skinny people,
> and
> because there are too many seats in the first place.
>
> ### No, there are exactly as many seats as the customers want. The
> customers exercise their free choice between cost and convenience, and
> most of them decide they want to keep more of their money, even at the
> risk of leg cramps and DVT's. If I ever have to fly somewhere, I'll
> fly Southwest, because I'll have low price without the risk of being
> squashed by lard. I hope more airlines follow suit.
Good for you, until of course those who are glandularly challenged get
such rules tossed via lawsuit.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:15:00 MST