Posted on 03/11/2011 2:43:30 PM PST by La Lydia
George Will has noticed that liberals love trains so much, they will spend our last penny on them, regardless of whether anyone rides them.
Remarkably widespread derision has greeted the Obama administration's damn-the-arithmetic-full-speed-ahead proposal to spend $53 billion more (after the $8 billion in stimulus money and $2.4 billion in enticements to 23 states) in the next six years pursuant to the president's loopy goal of giving "80 percent of Americans access to high-speed rail."
Responsible governors like Rick Scott (R-FL), John Kasich (R-OH), and Scott Walker (R-WI) have turned down massive federal incentives to construct preposterous "high-speed" rail boondoggles. In Governor Moonbeam's California, however, Although prostrate from its own profligacy, it will sink tens of billions of its own taxpayers' money in the 616-mile San FranciscotoSan Diego line. Supposedly 39 million people will eagerly pay much more than an airfare in order to travel slower. Between 2008 and 2009, the projected cost increased from $33 billion to $42.6 billion.
Are moonbats pushing these monstrously wasteful rail projects during a deficit crisis as an act of economic sabotage, in hopes of bringing about a Cloward-Piven collapse all the sooner? At this point it would be naive to doubt it. But why rail in particular?
Because progressivism's aim is the modification of (other people's) behavior. Forever seeking Archimedean levers for prying the world in directions they prefer, progressives say they embrace high-speed rail for many reasons to improve the climate, increase competitiveness, enhance national security, reduce congestion, and rationalize land use. The length of the list of reasons, and the flimsiness of each, points to this conclusion: the real reason for progressives' passion for trains is their goal of diminishing Americans' individualism in order to make them more amenable to collectivism.
To progressives, the best thing about railroads is that people riding them are not in automobiles, which are subversive of the deference on which progressivism depends. Automobiles go hither and yon, wherever and whenever the driver desires, without timetables. Automobiles encourage people to think they unsupervised, untutored, and unscripted are masters of their fates. The automobile encourages people in delusions of adequacy, which make them resistant to government by experts who know what choices people should make.
Will has found the key that unlocks the bewildering ideology our liberal rulers have been imposing. Liberalism = statism = the worship of coercion as the ultimate end in itself. Liberals like trains because the tracks force you to go wherever they have decided you will go.
An independent analysis found that the average operational loss per passenger on all 44 of Amtrak's routes was $32 in 2008 (this study was done by the pro-Amtrak Pew Charitable Trust) The only profitable line was the higher-speed Acela Express in the Northeast Corridor. However, the Northeast Corridor's Northeast Regional line, which has more than twice the number of riders as the Acela, lost money per passenger. The Sunset Limited, which runs from New Orleans to Los Angeles, lost an astounding $462 per passenger.
I remember years ago traveling from Fullerton, Ca, to Las Vegas. It was a six hour drive, but I wanted to take Amtrak. Commercial trains have the right of way, so we had to wait in Bakersfield for two hours. All in all it took nine hours. But what a ball.
Another passenger had a year’s pass and used it to visit his children.
Just another government turf battle. Don't be surprised if the TSA ends up winning it. Frankly, I'm surprised they haven't been able to make NASA Astronauts submit to a grope before going into orbit.
Good one, Joe!
I’m past the stage where I consider efficiency. I am disgusted with the gov’s attempt to control the passengers on public transportation and I refuse to partake.
A long time ago trains were king. Then came automobiles and planes and trains faded. Operators sold their passenger lines to the government and resorted to just freight. Now as trains are becoming more popular I think things will change. Slowly at first but I think it will improve to where private investors might take a second look.
I am a fan of good rail service. I just don’t think other people should be forced to pay for it!
Our family loves taking the train for long distance trips, it a great opportunity to spend time together. Last summer our family rode the Sunset Limited to NOLA for vacation, and to shoot a family video.
I've always preferred trains over flying when I have the time. We've met some really great conservatives on trains, we're still in touch with two party's we met while traveling for a few days. Of course there are the occasional filthy hippy but our time on the train has always been time well spent.
I'll only get a cabin if I must, like if I have to do work on a business trip. We got the big family cabin and a double berth for a family trip once, we decided we liked the coach seating better.
I don't mind driving the 250 miles to 'GranMa's' but I would never drive my own car to San Francisco. It's just too much hassle to drive a non-resident vehicle up there.
I haven't flown since 9/11 and I'd rather not now.
*****vanity*****
Here's a screen-shot from the video we shot while in NOLA. It's not quite finished, I broke both of my arms and a camera before we could film the open/close. (we'll film that this spring)
The video is based on the Mojave Memorial Cross. I think FReepers will enjoy it.
This is the SEIU local in New Orleans founded by uber-radical Wade Rathke, who started ACORN.
Did George Will write those last two italicized paragraphs? If so, then kudos to George Will, because he nailed it.
What a family destination! ACORN headquarters. Now THAT is funny. So you are getting your money’s worth out of tax-subsidized travel opportunities. Good for you.
Yes, the italicized parts are George Will.
Why yes, yes it is. -- At one point the balcony had 4-5 people watching us tying to figure out what-the-heck we were doing.
We already had our eye on filming at that building; then ...with oil spill we decided NOLA was the place to go. We couldn't get close to oil areas to film unfortunately.
Can we be accurate and specify ‘passenger’ trains?.
Freight railroads are quite efficient and are ‘for profit’ companies.
Good Luck.
Yes, of course you are right. The article I posted, above, at the beginning of this thread, deals with high speed passenger rail. I don’t remember mentioning anything about freight trains.
Oh we did plenty of other things too, acorn was just gravy. We saw the WWII Museum, swamps, and we have friends there.
I may be wrong but aren’t airports partially funded with public funds? I can’t imagine they are fully funded on user frees alone.
Airlines and air freight companies have paid user fees for the construction and maintenance of the the major passenger airports since the early 70s. Those costs are, of course, passed on to passengers and freight customers. Large airports are pretty much self-financing. However, there is a program that provides federal subsidies to airlines for providing service to some small airports, depending on how effective their legislators are in getting them the funding, which is delivered in the form of grants. All that said, there is a difference between an airport, and an an entire system of passenger train service. A better comparison would be between airports and train stations.
Which explains why it is profitable on its own and requires no subsidies.
Maybe they plan on making it up in volume
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.