Author Topic: As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now a rail strike.  (Read 3923 times)

sumpnz

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,304
Re: As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now a rail strike.
« Reply #75 on: December 05, 2022, 07:10:12 PM »
If you haven’t noticed, there are a lot of differences between the USA and Japan.

cordex

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,570
Re: As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now a rail strike.
« Reply #76 on: December 05, 2022, 07:15:36 PM »

zahc

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,791
Re: As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now a rail strike.
« Reply #77 on: December 05, 2022, 07:29:53 PM »
If you haven’t noticed, there are a lot of differences between the USA and Japan.

You are very right. The thing about Japan is that it's full of Japanese people. That's what they have going for them, because they don't have much otherwise. In some ways it's a very poor country. They have very little resources. On the other hand, the US is truly overflowing with milk and honey in comparison. So one might ask the question why we can't lay down railroads. Actually the correct question is, why can't we lay down railroads ANYMORE, because of course we were powerful at one time, but somehow we have lost the ability to do 19th-century things. When Toyota was starting out, they copied Detroit. Toyota didn't surpass; Detroit fell. Why?. Is it corruption in DC? Pthalates in the water? The internet? Why can't we do simple things in America that we used to do?

And it's not US vs. Japan. It's US vs. every other country. I believe in American exceptionalism, but I don't like this kind. I'm not proud that China and Uzbekistan and Russia can build railroads but we can't.
Maybe a rare occurence, but then you only have to get murdered once to ruin your whole day.
--Tallpine

cordex

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,570
Re: As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now a rail strike.
« Reply #78 on: December 05, 2022, 07:35:43 PM »
Zahc, population density is a huge piece of what makes rail and other fixed-infrastructure mass transit work.

Japan by and large has extreme population density. The vast majority of the US lacks the density necessary to support that kind of mass transit.

zahc

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,791
Re: As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now a rail strike.
« Reply #79 on: December 05, 2022, 07:46:56 PM »
Zahc, population density is a huge piece of what makes rail and other fixed-infrastructure mass transit work.

Japan by and large has extreme population density. The vast majority of the US lacks the density necessary to support that kind of mass transit.

Completely false and has been shown false many times. You sell the US short by underestimating the sheer size of our internal travel and economy, AND population densities.

There are a multitude of locations in the US that have optimum population densities AND existing travel demand. Texas alone has opportunities for high speed rail better than many countries that have it. Other corridors in the US are even better.

By the way, Japan is not densely populated. Most of Japan is relatively uninhabitable because of mountains. Uniform population is not optimal for trains anyway. Trains are good for connecting people to places they want to go while going fast through places the people don't need to be. Those same mountains make building trains between places in Japan very hard. There are many routes in the US that have much better geography for trains than anything they have in Japan. And we hardly even have earthquakes in the US.

No, really, we have all the density, proximity, population, travel demand, and geography in spades. It's all just excuses and propaganda. It really is just that bad. You should be very very mad at American leadership for the glory of previous generations that they have stolen, destroyed, or sold overseas and continue to steal from America and her children.
Maybe a rare occurence, but then you only have to get murdered once to ruin your whole day.
--Tallpine

cordex

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,570
Re: As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now a rail strike.
« Reply #80 on: December 05, 2022, 08:27:11 PM »
Completely false and has been shown false many times. You sell the US short by underestimating the sheer size of our internal travel and economy, AND population densities.

There are a multitude of locations in the US that have optimum population densities AND existing travel demand. Texas alone has opportunities for high speed rail better than many countries that have it. Other corridors in the US are even better.

By the way, Japan is not densely populated. Most of Japan is relatively uninhabitable because of mountains. Uniform population is not optimal for trains anyway. Trains are good for connecting people to places they want to go while going fast through places the people don't need to be. Those same mountains make building trains between places in Japan very hard. There are many routes in the US that have much better geography for trains than anything they have in Japan. And we hardly even have earthquakes in the US.

No, really, we have all the density, proximity, population, travel demand, and geography in spades. It's all just excuses and propaganda. It really is just that bad. You should be very very mad at American leadership for the glory of previous generations that they have stolen, destroyed, or sold overseas and continue to steal from America and her children.
Japan’s rail works because they have very dense cities relatively close to each other.  The only place in the US that is remotely close to Japan in that regard is the northeastern cities.

Even with Japan’s very lightly populated areas included, their overall population density is ten times that of the US. So lots of people in a few cities relatively close together. Great scenario for rail transport. Unsurprisingly their farebox recovery ratio is some of the best in the world.

The US by and large is simply not well suited to the fixed infrastructure mass transit model.

I’m sure there are a handful of isolated places in the US that could support better rail systems but pretending that the only thing interfering with passenger rail in the US is bad policy or not enough government shows a spectacular lack of understanding of the basic concepts involved.

Hawkmoon

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 27,197
Re: As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now a rail strike.
« Reply #81 on: December 05, 2022, 08:34:49 PM »
The U.S. has been going the wrong way with regard to railroads for decades. One of the reasons (not the only one, but one) is the highway lobby -- the companies who make big bucks out of building and rebuilding roads.

I'm in my late 70s. Even when I was a kid, the northeast had a LOT of transportation of both goods and people by rail. There used to be a HUGE rail switching yard located in New Haven, Connecticut. You can find it on Google -- it was called the Cedar Hill Yard. It was a sorting yard -- trains would bring in strings of freight cars. The yard would uncouple them, push them up a hill, and as they rolled down the other side of the hill the yard operators would flip switches and sort the freight cars into different trains, depending on where they were going. When I was a Cub Scout my troop took a day trip to see the Cedar Hill Yard in operation.

The Cedar Hill yard no longer exists -- and it can't be brought back, because most of the land it occupied has now been built over with a couple of shopping centers. There is comparatively NO freight rail service in New England any more, and passenger rail service exists basically only around Boston, between New haven and New York, and a smattering of under-utilized Amtrak trains that pass through once in a while.

Years ago, Congress foresaw a need for rail service and they passed a railway right-of-way conservation law (I think it was called the National Rail Banking Act). Basically, it said (and I believe it's still on the books) that existing railroad rights-of-way can't be lost if the railroad stops running trains on them. The land can be used for other purposes, but must be preserved for future use as a railroad.

This was the birth of the Rails-to-Trails Conservancy. They would take over abandoned rail rights-of-way and convert them to hiking and bicycling trails. Fine. Good interim use of the land. For several years I contributed to the Rails-to-Trails Conservancy on an annual basis. Then I saw something in one of their newsletters that bothered me, so I called their headquarters. I asked if their program was based on the National Rail Banking Act. Yes, it was. So then I asked how they would react if someone came along and wanted to use one of those old railroad rights-of-way for something other than a hiking trail -- like, say, a railroad.

"Oh, we would be strongly opposed to that."

I no longer support the Rails-to-Trails Conservancy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railbanking
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
100% Politically Incorrect by Design

RoadKingLarry

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 21,841
Re: As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now a rail strike.
« Reply #82 on: December 05, 2022, 09:57:27 PM »
Completely false and has been shown false many times. You sell the US short by underestimating the sheer size of our internal travel and economy, AND population densities.

There are a multitude of locations in the US that have optimum population densities AND existing travel demand. Texas alone has opportunities for high speed rail better than many countries that have it. Other corridors in the US are even better.

By the way, Japan is not densely populated. Most of Japan is relatively uninhabitable because of mountains. Uniform population is not optimal for trains anyway. Trains are good for connecting people to places they want to go while going fast through places the people don't need to be. Those same mountains make building trains between places in Japan very hard. There are many routes in the US that have much better geography for trains than anything they have in Japan. And we hardly even have earthquakes in the US.

No, really, we have all the density, proximity, population, travel demand, and geography in spades. It's all just excuses and propaganda. It really is just that bad. You should be very very mad at American leadership for the glory of previous generations that they have stolen, destroyed, or sold overseas and continue to steal from America and her children.

Sure, rail could work in some parts of the US but I don't think it would work everywhere.
I live in a rural area 50-ish miles from a major metropolitan area. There is a BNSF line in town 2 miles away  so rail access.  If I were to catch a train to Tulsa I would have to rely on busses for getting around in town either for shopping or entertainment or employment making me reliant on someone else's schedule. And, if was there to buy something I'd have to carry it around with me. I also can't imagine being allowed to be armed on public transportation. My preference would be to drive.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.

Samuel Adams

Andiron

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,930
Re: As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now a rail strike.
« Reply #83 on: December 05, 2022, 11:16:40 PM »

" No, there really is no excuse except corruption."

"The railroad companies have utterly failed Americans in providing reasonable rail service, arguably for freight and indisputably for passenger rail."






I think it's more likely that they haven't provided a service that no one wants and isn't profitable.


« Last Edit: December 06, 2022, 12:10:59 AM by Andiron »
"Leftism destroys everything good." -  Ron

There is no fixing stupid. But, you can line it up in front of a wall and offer it a last smoke.

There is no such thing as a "transgender" person.  Only mental illness that should be discouraged.

Nick1911

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,486
Re: As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now a rail strike.
« Reply #84 on: December 05, 2022, 11:49:09 PM »
This has become an interesting conversation and has had be thinking about my own perspective on mass transit.

And... it turns out I'm extremely biased against mass transit in the US, with the exception of air travel.

I've been to other places in the world, where mass transit was fairly normal, and didn't find it objectionable.  The underground in the UK.  The french rail network.  No worries - by and large much like with US air travel is like.  Normal people moving about for whatever reason.  Reasonably clean, safe and economical.

In the US though?  Not long ago I flew into midway and took the "L" to Michigan avenue.  Cheapest way to go.  On the way I was panhandled three times, had two people try to sell me illegal drugs, witnessed one arrest at a station and felt uncomfortable about my personal security the whole time.  Experiences from much further in the past in New York and Baltimore weren't much different.  In the US, you are around and dealing with the segment of society that are on mass transit because they lack any other options.  Why would you want to put yourself in a confined space with a bunch of low SES folks?

Now, those aren't true rail systems - they are intercity connections and have the same problems that cities typically have.  Fair enough.  But when I've looked at Amtrak travel, I've found that it takes just as long as driving, costs a similar amount, and at the end I don't have a car for the last leg of my journey.  If you already own an reliable car, there's no advantage.  I'll pay more to get their faster via air, or pay less and get there in my own car on my own terms.

MechAg94

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 33,622
Re: As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now a rail strike.
« Reply #85 on: December 05, 2022, 11:53:04 PM »
Completely false and has been shown false many times. You sell the US short by underestimating the sheer size of our internal travel and economy, AND population densities.

There are a multitude of locations in the US that have optimum population densities AND existing travel demand. Texas alone has opportunities for high speed rail better than many countries that have it. Other corridors in the US are even better.

By the way, Japan is not densely populated. Most of Japan is relatively uninhabitable because of mountains. Uniform population is not optimal for trains anyway. Trains are good for connecting people to places they want to go while going fast through places the people don't need to be. Those same mountains make building trains between places in Japan very hard. There are many routes in the US that have much better geography for trains than anything they have in Japan. And we hardly even have earthquakes in the US.

No, really, we have all the density, proximity, population, travel demand, and geography in spades. It's all just excuses and propaganda. It really is just that bad. You should be very very mad at American leadership for the glory of previous generations that they have stolen, destroyed, or sold overseas and continue to steal from America and her children.
The last time I saw the high speed rail plans for Texas they were idiotic.  Huge tracts of eminent domain land bisecting huge distances of rural Texas with crossings spaced out at fairly large distances.  All to drop people off somewhere in the suburbs of a few major cities so they have to rent a car or ride a bus to where they need to go.  Nothing is within walking distance in Texas.  At the time, the high speed rails would have to cut a straighter distance than even the interstate highways which IMO is a potential problem depending on the route. 

The costs of high speed rail in Texas would be huge even compared to interstate highways and I don't think the ridership would come even close to justifying the cost and headaches. 

IMO, the highways are better allowing people the freedom to pick whatever destination they want.  Tons of people leave Houston on Fridays and Saturdays (and all return Sunday afternoon) heading out to lakes and parks elsewhere.  Guess where the rail won't go.  To all the spots people want to get to.  The highways will still be full of people driving. 

I know there were high level plans to expand the interstate highway routes including adding more freight rail.  I have no idea where that stands. 
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.”  ― Calvin Coolidge

K Frame

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 44,009
  • I Am Inimical
Re: As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now a rail strike.
« Reply #86 on: December 06, 2022, 10:00:54 AM »
"The railroad companies are doing well for themselves. That's all you proved. The railroad companies have utterly failed Americans in providing reasonable rail service, arguably for freight and indisputably for passenger rail."

OH MY GOD! EVIL CAPITALISM!

Sure, every time you purchase a consumer production, virtually ANY consumer product, the railroads have failed you. The simple fact that you can purchase anything at all is because of the freight railroads.

Your contention is most incredibly stupid statement I've ever heard, and is apparently based only on your feels and on love of government control.

As for passenger service, it is NOT the duty of the freight railroads to provide passenger service -- that is Amtrak's duty. The agreement as it exists exists because of the Government/industry agreement that was reached that created Amtrak.

The railroads, at the time of the agreement, were looking to exit passenger service because it was a DYING service. The government decided that it needed to be maintained and stepped in, set the conditions for the deal, and agreed to it.

Amtrak exists, and its conditions of its existence, aren't the fault of the freight railroads, it's due to the complete and blatant fuckuppery of the government's negotiating position when Amtrak was created. So sure, the government *expletive deleted*ed up Amtrak, let's fix everything by nationalizing everything and giving top priority to passenger service, which constitutes something like 4% of the total value of rail service in the United States!

Hey, those 50,000 tons of wheat that are needed to ensure that companies can actually continue supply bread products to the North East?

Let those aholes eat cake! 36 passengers need priority transport from DC to Boston!

Wonderful solution to a problem that exists only in your mind.
Carbon Monoxide, sucking the life out of idiots, 'tards, and fools since man tamed fire.

zahc

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,791
Re: As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now a rail strike.
« Reply #87 on: December 06, 2022, 11:25:04 AM »
I think our philosophies are similar. The difference is in our understanding of the situation and how bad it is. I have come to the realization of what has happened and how bad it is, and you haven't.

All the talk about capitalism and free markets is not wrong, just doesn't apply here. I think of it very much like Pacific Gas and Electric. PG&E are not a good company. They have many failures and corruption, (although not as bad as railroads because people in California still have electricity, usually). When I see your defense of the railroads, in plain view of their utter and consistent destruction of US rail network, for me it's like this. This is a fake scenario, but very similar and actually happening right now.

Imagine if nobody did anything about PG&E, and let them do whatever they wanted to maximize shareholder value. Let's make sure the only metric we care about is maximizing shareholder value, and nothing else, nothing so mundane as actually providing electricity to Californians.

Then, (spoiler alert: some of this has already happened) imagine they petitioned the government to remove or relax standards for electricity reliability. Because maintaining 99% grid uptime is "not profitable". So they allow the standard to be that rolling blackouts, peak pricing and shutdowns, etc. are all normal. Then, imagine they failed to build any new power plants (investing in additional capacity is not profitable compared to just raising rates to reduce demand). Imagine they stopped maintaining their line right of ways altogether, or just decided to turn the lines off to prevent fires instead (more profitable that way). Imagine this trend of reducing service went on for 50 years.

 One day, you take a trip from you home in Nevada to California, and realize they have no functional power grid. Everyone has standby generators, their air conditioning turns off during the day, if they can afford air conditioning at all, toaster ovens have been banned, and what's left of the power grid goes out daily, and electricity rates are $1/kWh. You realize, my God, they have no electricity in California, and it's like a 3rd world country. Wait, it's worse than that, because in the meantime, even third world countries figured out how to have electricity. And you remember last time you came to California 50 years ago, they had perfectly fine electricity.

Meanwhile, across the border in Nevada your electricity works reliably. You look into PG&E and find they have been making 50% profit margins off the remaining remnant of the power grid while investing nothing in maintenance or growth for the last 50 years.


 In this scenario, what is your assessment of what happened to the power grid in California? My assessment would be that PG&E, and the government that let them do it, sold the California power grid down the river in exchange for piles of dividend checks, enjoying lack of any effective competition, and this is a despicable thing that's borderline criminal. Your assessment, if your opinions on US rail are any indication, would be that PG&E is a shining beacon of capitalism, heros providing a needed good to customers who need it, at a fair price by definition, and the fact that they are making 50% profit margins, while failing in their mission, means they are "doing well" since the government thankfully let them out of all their obligations in that messy business to actually provide first-world electricity to California. The destruction of the functioning power grid that previously existed in California was just a natural fact of life that couldn't be helped, despite the fact that California used to have a great power grid, scaled it and maintained it for decades to meet demand, all similar states and countries have managed to have reliable electric at reasonable rates and consider it a basic necessity if life since the early 20th century. Meanwhile, people in California who don't know any better think that reliable electricity is overrated, they "know" they can't have a reliable grid because California is special because of (made up absurd reasons), and it has nothing to do with PG&E failing, in fact they are thankful to PG&E for the remaining grid they have left. People who take the latter stance are some combination of ignorant, naive, brainwashed, or just not very bright. Or, they lie themselves because they have no individual power to change it, and moving on is easier than admitting the electricity situation in their state is so bad and hopeless.

And that's most Americans and US rail network. They are like future generations of Californians who won't even know what it's like to live where there's reliable electricity, unless they travel to Nevada one day and realize what they could still have.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2022, 01:12:14 PM by zahc »
Maybe a rare occurence, but then you only have to get murdered once to ruin your whole day.
--Tallpine

Angel Eyes

  • Lying dog-faced pony soldier
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12,257
  • You're not diggin'
"I make love to men daily, but in the imagination."
                         - Barack Obama

Ben

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 45,745
  • I'm an Extremist!
Re: As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now a rail strike.
« Reply #89 on: December 06, 2022, 12:00:27 PM »
Some interesting arguments to be sure. I guess I'll throw my two cents in (for passenger rail only, not freight).

It IS affected by population / population density. It IS affected by geography. It IS affected by culture. It IS affected by economics.

It has worked in modern Europe because of population distributions and geography. It has also worked there because they didn't get on the car bandwagon like the US did, when the US did. Some of my relatives in Germany didn't even own a car until the 1960s. By then, despite people becoming wealthier, a train system and train culture were baked in to Western Europe. Plus owning cars (and buying fuel) was and still is much more expensive in Europe than here. Though talking with my relatives at various times, in Germany at least, other than the greenies, in the last couple of decades people there have also tended more to like driving and going where they want, when they want. I don't know how it is in other Western European countries.

I did the Eurail thing in the 80s. For the most part, it was great, with trains going everywhere everyday. Still, while travel was clean (as in newer, well kept train cars) and efficient in the Germanic countries and the nordic countries, that wasn't the case everywhere. Traveling one time from Germany to Spain, everything was peachy until France, where suddenly in Marseilles (what a dirty train station) I was out of luck with trains going anywhere West when I arrived in the late afternoon and couldn't catch another train until the next morning. Going into Spain, the trains got crappier, and so did the schedules.

You can argue that in Russia, much larger than the US, they have trains running so how can geography make a difference? Well, economy and culture will make a difference. It's another place, unlike the US (and I think we are unique with our car culture) where there was neither infrastructure nor money in households to support individual cars for many people, so rail became a viable option. It's probably still difficult to drive the ~4K miles (as the crow flies) from Moscow to Vladivostok between bad roads and refueling infrastructure. You can take the rail of course, and I just looked it up: $400US for a 2nd class berth and a 160 hour train ride. The price is pretty reasonable, though you're bunking in the same room with strangers (and of course, the 160 hours one way, so build two weeks travel time into your trip). I tried looking at flights but Russian flights seem to be blocked on every travel site. I can't imagine they cost more than $400 though, and they only take 8 hours. Russians seem to like to drive cars in the cities moreso than taking public transport.

https://www.russianrail.com/search/A3KP2CU5PE

If you look at the ragistan countries who also have large geographic areas with lots of empty spaces, sure they have passenger rail, also because there's not a lot of car ownership and a lot of poor people who can't afford a car or airfare.

The US is simply designed for auto and air travel. Sure there are exceptions like the DC Metro. When I had to go to DC a lot for work, I took a cab from Dulles to my DC hotel, then everything was done on the metro. There were stops within 10-15min walks of everywhere I had to go. Certainly Nick makes a good point about the demographics. Even back then, I would constantly be accosted by aggressive panhandlers, which residents seemed to take as "well, that's just how it is." I'm guessing that has only gotten worse.

Then of course we have the government high speed rail in California. A bajillion dollars over budget, and a rail that was supposed to connect LA with SanFran is currently being partially built to connect BFE with BFE.

I can't think of any circumstances for longer distances in the US where a train gets me somewhere faster and easier than driving or flying. If it's a shorter trip, the car almost always wins. If it's a longer trip, the plane wins and is probably cheaper most of the time.

Edit: Angel Eyes posted on the CA boondoggle while I was typing.
"I'm a foolish old man that has been drawn into a wild goose chase by a harpy in trousers and a nincompoop."

dogmush

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 13,671
Re: As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now a rail strike.
« Reply #90 on: December 06, 2022, 12:29:22 PM »
On freight rail, I don't see the whole "no working rail network" argument?  I certainly run across trains moving frequently.  A quick google shows me the DOT claims about 28% of freight movement in the US is by rail. https://railroads.dot.gov/rail-network-development/freight-rail-overview  (It also says railroads invest 19% of their revenues in maintaining and increasing the rail network, for what that's worth).  I don't claim to be an expert on the subject, but it seems like we have a functional freight rail network. [shrug]

True, the US doesn't have a decent passenger rail system (mostly because it's been nationalized, IMO) but it also doesn't seem to want one.  Amtrak doesn't run at capacity, and inter city light rails are perpetual boondoggles that loose millions because usage estimates always fall short of reality.  We're dealing with that in central FL right now, where the mass transit-philes are perennially trying to build high speed rail between cities, and their ideas are all stupid on the face.

I will say, that I'm not normally a union fan by any means, but from what I read this summer working for the RR's is some BS.  The whole "on call 24/7 unless on PTO" would be a deal breaker for me.  Those unions might want to step up a little more.

zahc

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,791
Re: As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now a rail strike.
« Reply #91 on: December 06, 2022, 02:31:57 PM »
Quote
I don't see the whole "no working rail network" argument? 

I depends how low you set your standards. Others have already posted upthread about the rail infrastructure that has been neglected or torn out. Places that used to have rail sidings have them removed ("not profitable "). Grain bins and other ag infrastructure that used to run on trains has been cut off, purely at the mercy of the rail companies who seem to have no obligation whatsoever. Imagine if a private road company just up and decided to shut down the WV turnpike when they decided it wasn't profitable enough for them. Do you think that would be Ok or better?

You don't have to tell me about what boondoggles train projects are in the US; we are both complaining about the same thing, that's how the US can't seem to do any productive industrial things that not only poorer countries can do, but we ourselves used to be able to do. I agree many rail projects in the US are boondoggles, note however that ALL transportation projects in the US are boondoggles, making it not strictly a train problem. Do you consider how many highway boondoggles there are? Or are they so commonplace, they don't even make the news anymore?

They have been working on I395 in Maine for 25 years and spent untold million dollars on it. Nobody has yet driven on it. Heck they haven't completed 1-69, and they've been working on it 75 years (should be done in 2024 though, for real this time).  Similar project boondoggle road projects are too numerous to count. Many states are hundreds of millions in the hole on road maintenance. The government budget just for expansion, not maintenance, in 2016 was 30 billion. Yet every time a train project goes over budget, everyone knows about it and pretends it proves something.

 But really, California HSR is a boondoggle for sure. I'm not going to defend those guys. Just show me a road project that isn't also a boondoggle on top of the existing billions of dollars deferred maintenance boondoggle.


Maybe a rare occurence, but then you only have to get murdered once to ruin your whole day.
--Tallpine

RoadKingLarry

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 21,841
Re: As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now a rail strike.
« Reply #92 on: December 06, 2022, 03:07:03 PM »
I'm curious as to what other industries you think would be better run if the federal government took them over?

Why should the RRs be required to maintain and service infrastructure and locations that are not profitable?
My little podunk rural town used to have 3 rail sidings to support coal mining, the local feed and grain elevator and the lumber yard.
The rail lines used to service every little piss-ant farming town along their route, times changed, people changed, how things got done changed
In the early '60s you cold catch a train with several stops along the way in to Tulsa and back the same day. It stopped because people found ways to travel that they like better.
They fell out of use in the late '70s and have since been torn out with just the main rail line passing though town.
There also used to be a Greyhound bus station in town. That's been gone for decades as well, now you have to go to downtown Tulsa to catch a bus. Should Greyhound be nationalized so they will be forced to service unprofitable locations and routes? 
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.

Samuel Adams

zahc

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,791
Re: As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now a rail strike.
« Reply #93 on: December 06, 2022, 04:12:57 PM »
I'm curious as to what other industries you think would be better run if the federal government took them over?

It's interesting that you used the term "industries". You probably consider railroads to be "industry", but you probably don't consider roads to be "industry" but rather "infrastructure". I reject the double standard. Both road and railroad is critical infrastructure, which supports many industries. Most of the world agrees.

Quote
Why should the RRs be required to maintain and service infrastructure and locations that are not profitable?

I see your point but if you follow that line of thinking you can't do literally anything. You certainly can't have a civilization. You have to have a way of getting things done. It's like saying, why should gas companies be "forced" to run gas lines to every house. They aren't "forced" to do it, they do it as part of their very mandate for existing. Because we as a society recognize that's their entire purpose. You can't just one day let the gas companies start cutting off houses to boost their profits, with the idea that's it's evil to "force them to do unprofitable things". Or maybe in your world, you think that would be ok? I mean it would undeniably boost their profits if they could just start failing to provide services at their discretion, right? Repeat for any other essential service or public infrastructure. Would you be happy if some company bought out public waterworks and started cutting unprofitable services and extorting the remainder with high rates, while not maintaining the capital? They could boost profits to railroad levels and be business heros.

Why should any infrastructure exist? Why should we have any civilization at all?


Quote
times changed, people changed, how things got done changed

Yes; all of those things happened as a result of specific government policy decisions.

And they didn't change the same way in other developed countries, due to different specific government policy decisions. This is the entire discussion. We aren't talking about forces of nature here. We got here by specific government policy action. Don't pretend the government had nothing to do with it.

Also, there is no arrow of progress leading to rail becoming obsolete. Rail was efficient then, and it's efficient now.

Quote
In the early '60s you cold catch a train with several stops along the way in to Tulsa and back the same day. It stopped because people found ways to travel that they like better.

It stopped because the trains disappeared. You talk like people had a choice. When the railroads disappear, is that really a case of people choosing other options?

If the roads all disappeared and people took trains because that was their only remaining option, would you say that it must have been that people all decided they liked trains better? Or would you grasp the actual situation?

Quote
Should Greyhound be nationalized so they will be forced to service unprofitable locations and routes?


I don't think they reallly need to be taken over. Maybe there could be a government supported option to bus people long distances, that coexist alongside private options, but would have some guarantee that people could travel the great nation, even to "flyover country", in some capacity. Sort of like how the USPS delivers to everyone, while coexisting (even sometimes collaborating) with private options like FedEx and UPS.
Maybe a rare occurence, but then you only have to get murdered once to ruin your whole day.
--Tallpine

HankB

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 16,564
Re: As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now a rail strike.
« Reply #94 on: December 06, 2022, 04:54:37 PM »
. . . Sort of like how the USPS delivers to everyone, while coexisting (even sometimes collaborating) with private options like FedEx and UPS.
USPS doesn't deliver to all addresses - I have some (distant) cousins that live in a very rural area of Virginia, and they have no local mail service; a couple of times a week they have to drive into town to the post office to pick up their mail. And most new housing developments have their mailboxes grouped at the entrance to the development. So yes, virtually  everyone has service of some sort, but it's good to keep in mind it's not always local service.
Trump won in 2016. Democrats haven't been so offended since Republicans came along and freed their slaves.
Sometimes I wonder if the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on, or by imbeciles who really mean it. - Mark Twain
Government is a broker in pillage, and every election is a sort of advance auction in stolen goods. - H.L. Mencken
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it. - Mark Twain

zahc

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,791
Re: As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now a rail strike.
« Reply #95 on: December 06, 2022, 05:04:23 PM »
USPS doesn't deliver to all addresses - I have some (distant) cousins that live in a very rural area of Virginia, and they have no local mail service; a couple of times a week they have to drive into town to the post office to pick up their mail. And most new housing developments have their mailboxes grouped at the entrance to the development. So yes, virtually  everyone has service of some sort, but it's good to keep in mind it's not always local service.

This makes sense and I would support USPS scaling back in smart ways. Especially with the way the market has changed due to the internet. It just makes sense. Honestly I would be fine only delivering on alternate days, or whatever, considering I mostly get junk mail anyway. I think it makes a lot of sense to have the community mailboxes too, not only because it is easier for the mailman, but also declutters the area from having a million mailboxes on the sidewalks.
Maybe a rare occurence, but then you only have to get murdered once to ruin your whole day.
--Tallpine

RoadKingLarry

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 21,841
Re: As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now a rail strike.
« Reply #96 on: December 06, 2022, 05:06:08 PM »
There's a lot of "which came first" argument here.
Your claim is that the passenger service went away because the passenger rail service went away. My contention, based on admittedly 2nd hand information from the people that actually used the service, is that the passenger service went away because the passengers stopped using it.

Another argument you offer is that gas companies are forced to run service to every house. Out here in rural America they do not in fact run service to every house I know many people that are either total electric or have a big ass propane tank in their yard. Nor do all the people I know have public water service, I now many people that are on private wells. I also know many people that are generally unable to get reliable high speed broadband service to their house.

You position seems to be solidly rooted in a metropolitan/high population density mind set. It doesn't work in rural America.

Mass transit is all well and good in high population density locations. it would not work in my area or for my life style. I don't have a use for it, I don't want to be required to pay for it by way of taxation so other people can benefit from something I have no desire to use.

If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.

Samuel Adams

MechAg94

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 33,622
Re: As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now a rail strike.
« Reply #97 on: December 06, 2022, 05:21:11 PM »
It's interesting that you used the term "industries". You probably consider railroads to be "industry", but you probably don't consider roads to be "industry" but rather "infrastructure". I reject the double standard. Both road and railroad is critical infrastructure, which supports many industries. Most of the world agrees.

I see your point but if you follow that line of thinking you can't do literally anything. You certainly can't have a civilization. You have to have a way of getting things done. It's like saying, why should gas companies be "forced" to run gas lines to every house. They aren't "forced" to do it, they do it as part of their very mandate for existing. Because we as a society recognize that's their entire purpose. You can't just one day let the gas companies start cutting off houses to boost their profits, with the idea that's it's evil to "force them to do unprofitable things". Or maybe in your world, you think that would be ok? I mean it would undeniably boost their profits if they could just start failing to provide services at their discretion, right? Repeat for any other essential service or public infrastructure. Would you be happy if some company bought out public waterworks and started cutting unprofitable services and extorting the remainder with high rates, while not maintaining the capital? They could boost profits to railroad levels and be business heros.

Why should any infrastructure exist? Why should we have any civilization at all?


Yes; all of those things happened as a result of specific government policy decisions.

And they didn't change the same way in other developed countries, due to different specific government policy decisions. This is the entire discussion. We aren't talking about forces of nature here. We got here by specific government policy action. Don't pretend the government had nothing to do with it.

Also, there is no arrow of progress leading to rail becoming obsolete. Rail was efficient then, and it's efficient now.

It stopped because the trains disappeared. You talk like people had a choice. When the railroads disappear, is that really a case of people choosing other options?

If the roads all disappeared and people took trains because that was their only remaining option, would you say that it must have been that people all decided they liked trains better? Or would you grasp the actual situation?
 

I don't think they reallly need to be taken over. Maybe there could be a government supported option to bus people long distances, that coexist alongside private options, but would have some guarantee that people could travel the great nation, even to "flyover country", in some capacity. Sort of like how the USPS delivers to everyone, while coexisting (even sometimes collaborating) with private options like FedEx and UPS.
Much of the passenger trains stopped because the interstate highway system made it easier and faster to drive longer distances.  Many of the state highways have improved as well.  I think demand had a lot to do with it.  Not to mention that driving comfort has improved in cars. 

On the freight side, trucks can haul a lot of the smaller volume freight in a much more flexible manner than trains.  I don't think the heavy 18 wheeler trucks were around until the '50's or '60's.

You mentioned interstate highways in Maine, those are built and maintained by the state govt with federal funding.  If they can't manage that, then building rail infrastructure won't be any better.   
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.”  ― Calvin Coolidge

MechAg94

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 33,622
Re: As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now a rail strike.
« Reply #98 on: December 06, 2022, 05:25:48 PM »
There's a lot of "which came first" argument here.
Your claim is that the passenger service went away because the passenger rail service went away. My contention, based on admittedly 2nd hand information from the people that actually used the service, is that the passenger service went away because the passengers stopped using it.

Another argument you offer is that gas companies are forced to run service to every house. Out here in rural America they do not in fact run service to every house I know many people that are either total electric or have a big ass propane tank in their yard. Nor do all the people I know have public water service, I now many people that are on private wells. I also know many people that are generally unable to get reliable high speed broadband service to their house.

You position seems to be solidly rooted in a metropolitan/high population density mind set. It doesn't work in rural America.

Mass transit is all well and good in high population density locations. it would not work in my area or for my life style. I don't have a use for it, I don't want to be required to pay for it by way of taxation so other people can benefit from something I have no desire to use.
And rural people certainly don't want BigGov seizing land with eminent domain to run high speed rail trains through the area that will never stop anywhere nearby and restrict travel due to limited crossings. 
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.”  ― Calvin Coolidge

MechAg94

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 33,622
Re: As if we didn't have enough to worry about. Now a rail strike.
« Reply #99 on: December 06, 2022, 05:38:52 PM »
Some interesting arguments to be sure. I guess I'll throw my two cents in (for passenger rail only, not freight).

It IS affected by population / population density. It IS affected by geography. It IS affected by culture. It IS affected by economics.

It has worked in modern Europe because of population distributions and geography. It has also worked there because they didn't get on the car bandwagon like the US did, when the US did. Some of my relatives in Germany didn't even own a car until the 1960s. By then, despite people becoming wealthier, a train system and train culture were baked in to Western Europe. Plus owning cars (and buying fuel) was and still is much more expensive in Europe than here. Though talking with my relatives at various times, in Germany at least, other than the greenies, in the last couple of decades people there have also tended more to like driving and going where they want, when they want. I don't know how it is in other Western European countries.

I did the Eurail thing in the 80s. For the most part, it was great, with trains going everywhere everyday. Still, while travel was clean (as in newer, well kept train cars) and efficient in the Germanic countries and the nordic countries, that wasn't the case everywhere. Traveling one time from Germany to Spain, everything was peachy until France, where suddenly in Marseilles (what a dirty train station) I was out of luck with trains going anywhere West when I arrived in the late afternoon and couldn't catch another train until the next morning. Going into Spain, the trains got crappier, and so did the schedules.

You can argue that in Russia, much larger than the US, they have trains running so how can geography make a difference? Well, economy and culture will make a difference. It's another place, unlike the US (and I think we are unique with our car culture) where there was neither infrastructure nor money in households to support individual cars for many people, so rail became a viable option. It's probably still difficult to drive the ~4K miles (as the crow flies) from Moscow to Vladivostok between bad roads and refueling infrastructure. You can take the rail of course, and I just looked it up: $400US for a 2nd class berth and a 160 hour train ride. The price is pretty reasonable, though you're bunking in the same room with strangers (and of course, the 160 hours one way, so build two weeks travel time into your trip). I tried looking at flights but Russian flights seem to be blocked on every travel site. I can't imagine they cost more than $400 though, and they only take 8 hours. Russians seem to like to drive cars in the cities moreso than taking public transport.

https://www.russianrail.com/search/A3KP2CU5PE

If you look at the ragistan countries who also have large geographic areas with lots of empty spaces, sure they have passenger rail, also because there's not a lot of car ownership and a lot of poor people who can't afford a car or airfare.

The US is simply designed for auto and air travel. Sure there are exceptions like the DC Metro. When I had to go to DC a lot for work, I took a cab from Dulles to my DC hotel, then everything was done on the metro. There were stops within 10-15min walks of everywhere I had to go. Certainly Nick makes a good point about the demographics. Even back then, I would constantly be accosted by aggressive panhandlers, which residents seemed to take as "well, that's just how it is." I'm guessing that has only gotten worse.

Then of course we have the government high speed rail in California. A bajillion dollars over budget, and a rail that was supposed to connect LA with SanFran is currently being partially built to connect BFE with BFE.

I can't think of any circumstances for longer distances in the US where a train gets me somewhere faster and easier than driving or flying. If it's a shorter trip, the car almost always wins. If it's a longer trip, the plane wins and is probably cheaper most of the time.

Edit: Angel Eyes posted on the CA boondoggle while I was typing.
A few points on that:
1.  I don't think Russia has any sort of interstate highway system like the US.  I don't know if they have ever encouraged freedom of travel like we do. 

2.  From what I have heard about Europe, part of the reason for the population density is zoning.  People are not allowed to buy up rural property and build a house.  There are waiting lists for housing outside the major cities.  Where they have relaxed zoning and allowed it, people there move out of the city and drive with the resulting traffic congestion.  IMO, no one wants to be packed into a dense area if they have a choice. 

3.  In the US, there was a lot of movement from the farms to the cities to work in industry just like a lot of countries.  Our road infrastructure has allowed smaller scale industry to move out of the cities and use the roads to ship materials and equipment. 

IMO, our road networks allow a great deal of individual freedom to move around without depending on anything but fuel.  I would hate to change that. 

Question for the Group:  If the existing rail lines set up some nice passenger cars on the rail around the country, would anyone actually ride them?  The speeds would be relatively slow and have limited destinations.  Not to mention rail yards are not always in the best areas of cities.  Buses make a lot more sense these days than rail.  Only way I could see it work is if a city had an existing mass transit rail system, a connection could be made to the interstate rail to allow people to switch over.  I doubt it would make economic sense to build all that if it didn't exist.
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.”  ― Calvin Coolidge