Posted on 08/05/2010 11:00:03 AM PDT by george76
The Obama administration's enthusiasm for high-speed rail is a dispiriting example of government's inability to learn from past mistakes. Since 1971, the federal government has poured almost $35 billion in subsidies into Amtrak with few public benefits. At most, we've gotten negligible reductions -- invisible and statistically insignificant -- in congestion, oil use or greenhouse gases. What's mainly being provided is subsidized transportation for a small sliver of the population. In a country where 140 million people go to work every day, Amtrak has 78,000 daily passengers. A typical trip is subsidized by about $50.
Given this, you'd think even the dullest politician wouldn't expand rail subsidies, especially considering the almost $11 trillion in projected federal budget deficits between now and 2019. But no...
The vision is a mirage. The costs of high-speed rail would be huge, and the public benefits meager.
Obama's network may never be built. It's doubtful private investors will advance the money, and once government officials acknowledge the full costs, they'll retreat...
That would be only the beginning. Ticket prices would surely be subsidized; otherwise, no one would ride the trains.
the triumph of fantasy over fact. The same false arguments used to justify Amtrak... A White House so frivolous in embracing dubious spending cannot be believed when it professes concern about future taxes and budget deficits.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
They are only to be run by Shirley Sherrod-types, who are allowed to pay themselves and their posses mid six-figure salaries.
Choo-Choo Willie don't care, no matter how many times these numbers are presented to him. He wants his goverment-fund cheese Choo-Choos!
Nonsense. The O-bot knows full well trains don't make money. The goal isn't profit; it is control, for which trains are perfectly suited.
The great Robert J. Samuelson
Says it best, again !!!
Watch how thy put down ribbon rail.
Werktrein in Overpelt
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFE8nmKpmXY
Samuelson may make some points, but he confuses city to city rail travel with commuter rail, a different thing.
Also missing: How much in tax subsidies do highways and air travel receive?
Do you seriously think the average car trip or airfare comes anywhere near the $50/passenger trip subsidy that we see with Amtrak?
Good catch - the assumption of the author is that DC is the least bit interested in learning from past mistakes. To the contrary, this adminstration is interested in magnifying them.
Even the Washington Compost doesn’t like Obama’s high speed rail pork.
We have a $20 Billion dollar road that moves 65,000 vehicles a day.
The subsidy is a negative one for roads. A large portion of the gas tax is diverted from road building and maintenance to bus and rail systems. In California according to an actual Department of Transportation report around 50% of the gas tax was diverted into rail subsidies. No wonder the California roads are deteriorating so badly.
The most effective, flexible and efficient form of transportation ever developed is the personal automobile and all effort should be put into enhancing it further.
One can get in their car at any time of day or night, and get door-to-door service to literally anywhere else. I’ve ridden the subways and rail systems of Europe many times and they’re wonderful as long as you have a lot of time to waste, you’re not transporting sick kids or aged parents to the doctor, doing shopping or moving a lot of business materials around. For the transportation needs of our personal and business lives, public transit doesn’t work at all. That’s why we avoid them and why the Europeans are abandoning these systems and driving more. Unlike politicians, we make rational assessments.
Counting the ones that are crushed and their passengers killed?
The Obama administration’s enthusiasm for high-speed rail is a dispiriting example of government’s inability to learn from past mistakes
No....it’s their REFUSAL to learn from past mistakes
How much tax revenue does the Federal gubmint rake in from highways (fuel taxes) and air travel (ticket taxes, fuel taxes, parts compliance costs, etc)? Add to that, given the massive amounts of money that is taken in from those two sources, how much of that money is spent back in those areas versus what gets pissed away somewhere building tennis courts or studying ketchup viscosity or the mating habits of the salt marsh harvest mouse? Funny how we were able to build an entire interstate system with 1960's level tax rates on fuel and such, but now we can't even fill potholes or maintain bridges and we're being taxed to death......
Now amortize that over the 20+ year life-cycle of the road...
Looks like those concrete ties don’t last forever.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.