Why riding a train is so expensive....

RailRide posted

But others will state (as did the first respondent to your message above), essentially that everyone depends on roads, and "almost nobody" depends on passenger rail, so it's "worth it" (i.e. 'not a subsidy' )

---PCJ

I must disagree that no one depends on passenger rail. All the major cities have busy commuter rail lines coming in where millions travel daily.  As for long distance; if you take the train going West from Chicago, and travel  through the plains of Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas, Missouri, the Dakotas, then Wyoming, Montana, Idaho passing small towns and rural areas where their are few airports. The one's that do exist are small,  have few flights and can be hours away by car so the only form of public transportation is long distance rail. A good portion of our population depends on passenger rail. We don't depend on it but contrary to air travel its comfortable, relaxing and fun.

I think Amtrak is a bargain compared to using VIA...... I've never found the prices that unreasonable any of the times I've used Amtrak. It's certainly a lot less than travelling a similar distance with VIA.

RailRide posted:

C W Burfle posted:

Just had time to watch the video.  I now understand the ticketing costs.  However, as always, the cost of labor gets an up front seat when it comes to pointing out why things are expensive.  I resent the implication. 

 What is there to resent?
Is it unusual for labor to be the major cost of a product or service?
I don't think so.

I think it has more to the common implication that if it weren't for those pesky unions, such services would be cheap for the end user.

---PCJ

Yep, exactly what I was thinking, that of course it isn't the economics of trains, but rather the 'greed' of the workers and such *sigh*. 

Greed of the workers ?

How are the workers greedy,they are not the Administrators.

Mikey

Whoa !!!!!  Don't get me started on who is the guilty party when it comes to greed.  Corporate greed has run amuck with such fervor that it's obscene.  Capitalism is by it's very nature the greed system.  And those at the top are greedier than ever in our history.  

Dennis LaGrua posted:

RailRide posted

But others will state (as did the first respondent to your message above), essentially that everyone depends on roads, and "almost nobody" depends on passenger rail, so it's "worth it" (i.e. 'not a subsidy' )

---PCJ

I must disagree that no one depends on passenger rail. All the major cities have busy commuter rail lines coming in where millions travel daily.  As for long distance; if you take the train going West from Chicago, and travel  through the plains of Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas, Missouri, the Dakotas, then Wyoming, Montana, Idaho passing small towns and rural areas where their are few airports. The one's that do exist are small,  have few flights and can be hours away by car so the only form of public transportation is long distance rail. A good portion of our population depends on passenger rail. We don't depend on it but contrary to air travel its comfortable, relaxing and fun.

Well, that's why I put "almost nobody" in quotation marks, silly

---PCJ

SouthernMike posted:

That sounds like government thinking. Bring in someone who has no railroad experience to run the show. 

Actually that isn't the government, that is one of the big shibboleths of modern management, that a well trained manager can manage anything, and in general imo it is a crock of manure. Didn't stop gm from hiring someone from p&g, didn't stop home depot nearly killing themselves w a moron from ge. Finance and other lowlife forms of beancounters believe that, believe me.

clem k posted:

Greed of the workers ?

I think you took my post literally I was being sardonic, that has been the mantra of a lot of politicians and sadly a lot of working class people, blaming for example the decline of the us auto industry on the uaw (funny how when the carmakers got bailed out by the government anti labor politicians ranted about uaw salaries while not talking about the CEO making 15 million a year who oversaw going from a 40% market share to 25...or their not so bright blue collar voters nodding their heads at that). 

Amtrak is expensive not because labor is too expensive it is they are handicapped by the way they operate. They run on freight railroads and are at their mercy, they are forced to maintain low volume routes to maintain service to rural towns (local congressmen make sure they do, then complain that Amtrak gets subsidies and should be run like a business...if Amtrak was run like a business podunk,Ohio would not have Amtrak service), and operated behind the 8 ball from the get go taking over private rail service that was in shambles and never having the money to do things right (latest one? Out of spite, likely the gateway tunnel project is gonna be dead in the water for a key link in Amtrak service that makes money,the ne corridor)

One of the challenges Amtrak has, besides the valid points raised above, is pension and other benefits appear out of line with other railroads, although granted there are no other passenger railroads in the US other than commuter lines, which have a different revenue model. 

As of the end of the 2017 fiscal year, Amtrak owed approximately $1.25 billion in pension benefits and other benefits.  The vast majority of this amount is unfunded.  Total Amtrak revenue as of end of '17 was about $3.3 billion.  To take one comparison point, Norfolk Southern reports about $16million in pension benefits on about $9.9 billion of railroad revenue.  

The disparity in these numbers, each reflecting opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of generosity to employees, point out the need to have a larger social conversation about how we responsibly make sure that people and companies are providing for retirement in an era of longer lifespans and higher living standards, and what the right mix is between government-provided safety nets like social security and employee funded retirements such as 401Ks.  There is also a discussion to be had about the need to address rent seeking behaviors within certain parts of the government (federal, state, and local) and quasi-government operations such as Amtrak.  (To take one interesting fact, people are almost universally surprised when you tell them that FDR was opposed strongly to any unionization of employees of the federal government, because he thought it unnecessary and contrary to the public good.)  All of those things are beyond the scope of this forum, but are nonetheless quite interesting. 

My personal belief is that financial numbers such as the ones I outline above "poison" the legitimate discussion regarding the need for and role of rail transportation in the US.  I think we need rail transportation, and I think there is a strong argument for increased support.  For example, on northeast corridor there is no question that rail is a valid and necessary mode of intercity transportation, both for recreation and business.  And in the midwest and west, there is a need for  rail linkage when an airport may not be within several hundred miles.  But there is a perception that a certain amount of that support is being wasted and that leads to opposition to Amtrak funding in general when it appears that any money used to support Amtrak will wind up being used to support a pension/benefits scheme that appears well out of line with anything available in the private sector.  Until that situation is squarely addressed, Amtrak will regularly be a political "whipping boy" whenever the discussion surrounds increased support for it. 

I've ridden the Auto Train, Palmetto and Silver Meteor, as well as commuting on the Long Island Railroad for a summer. I enjoy riding the train, but it is slow and the cleanliness of the cars on the LIRR could be much better.

Human labor is expensive, but a key issue is that the rail infrastructure we use is, in many cases, over a hundred years old or at best several decades old. There has never been a national effort to upgrade our rail network and social changes have made rebuilding/expanding it much more costly and difficult. Adding a second track or third track requires environmental impact statements, studies, fighting through NIMBY lawsuits and lengthy and expensive land condemnation proceedings, etc. Add the high cost of labor and the cost of building a 21st century rail system with multiple high speed tracks between major cities soars beyond what taxpayers are willing to fund or private rail corporations would find profitable.

The days when you could pay thousands of immigrants minimal wages to lay rail (or build roads for that matter) are over. Today we see much smaller crews using very expensive machinery to do the jobs.  The work proceeds much more slowly and at a huge financial cost.

We are stuck with an aged infrastructure while our economic competitors have much newer and more cost effective and faster infrastructure. Much of Europe was rebuilt after WWII (with help from Marshall Plan $) and much of Asian infrastructure is very new. We are at a competitive disadvantage.

We can argue the merits of not updating our infrastructure in favor of spending tax dollars on social spending programs, but the current situation is what it is. The cost of the needed upgrades is well beyond what the class I RR's can afford and unless there is a tremendous national effort to provide regulatory relief and trillions in funding, change will be incremental and passenger rail transportation will not achieve anywhere near its potential. And, that's unfortunate.

I'd much rather take a fast train from SC to NYC than drive I-95, but that just isn't a realistic option in most cases.

As of the end of the 2017 fiscal year, Amtrak owed approximately $1.25 billion in pension benefits and other benefits.  The vast majority of this amount is unfunded.  Total Amtrak revenue as of end of '17 was about $3.3 billion.  To take one comparison point, Norfolk Southern reports about $16million in pension benefits on about $9.9 billion of railroad revenue. 

How do Amtrak and Norfolk Southern pension benefits relate to the Railroad Retirement Program pension that is administered by the US Government?

If Amtrak didn't put enough money aside to pay for it's pension obligations they are not alone, but it is still on them, not the employees.

Tinplate Art posted:

Dennis: Well stated! I also gave up flying in 2000!

Ditto here.  

And, every time I'm about to reconsider my intransigence re flying, the airlines, the TSA, the mayhem in the world, the media, the prices/fees-for-everything, the weather delay/cancellations, a neighbor/friend's latest horrors-of-flying story, etc., etc., etc. remind me of why I'm more at peace with my original decision.  

KD

mikey posted:

I have ridden trains all over Europe and they are clean,comfortable and ON TIME and go everywhere that you want to go.I have ridden Amtrak from Sacramento to Reno round trip and the train was not clean and from Baltimore to New York round trip and that train was pretty clean.The government needs to pump money into Amtrak to improve the product which might create more ridership.

Mikey

Or you could always just move to Europe and leave those of us who don't give a rat's ___ about Amtrash out of it.

Dan Padova posted:

Capitalism is by it's very nature the greed system.  

I find it hilarious when I read stuff like this. The very people who live off capitalism's benefits are often the ones who whine the most about its existence. Where I live, they have May Day protests, where the third-generations of hippies decry the system they live under. One had a sign that said, "All ownership is theft" and I couldn't resist asking who he'd stole his fancy tablet, expensive clothes or even the sign off of. he just stared and me and said he meant everyone else.

Naturally.

"Dude," I told him, "You need to demand your money back for your education. 'ALL ownership' means what you own too, or did you not think about that before now? So I ask again, who'd you step on to get the stuff you have?"

He didn't get it.

We are stuck with an aged infrastructure while our economic competitors have much newer and more cost effective and faster infrastructure. Much of Europe was rebuilt after WWII (with help from Marshall Plan $) and much of Asian infrastructure is very new. We are at a competitive disadvantage.

Yeah, what a shame we didn't get our nation bombed into rubble... (not saying Germany and Japan didn't have it coming, but it was either rebuild them into allies after the war or have them at permanent enemies) I think Marshall chose wisely in that regard.

p51 posted:  Yeah, what a shame we didn't get our nation bombed into rubble... (not saying Germany and Japan didn't have it coming, but it was either rebuild them into allies after the war or have them at permanent enemies) I think Marshall chose wisely in that regard.

 

Me too.   NH 

America by Rail is located in East Lansing, Michigan about 50 miles from my train room and the Home of The Michigan State Spartans.

I use their catalog and web page to plan trips with them and some times as a reference books for trips that I plan.

Yes: Rail trips can be expensive. Just plan what you can afford and have fun.

Below is their catalog that I received in the mail, last month. “March 2018 to February 2019” Hope this helps.          https://www.americabyrail.com/

Gary

Nick Chillianis posted:

mikey posted:

I have ridden trains all over Europe and they are clean,comfortable and ON TIME and go everywhere that you want to go.I have ridden Amtrak from Sacramento to Reno round trip and the train was not clean and from Baltimore to New York round trip and that train was pretty clean.The government needs to pump money into Amtrak to improve the product which might create more ridership.

Mikey

Or you could always just move to Europe and leave those of us who don't give a rat's ___ about Amtrash out of it.

This is why these discussions don't get far, if you don't like a discussion or don't like a point someone makes, then either don't read it, or add a different viewpoint. Why should the user move to Europe because they pointed out that they have better train service than the US does and they would like our service to be of that quality, lot of people over the  years have pointed out that Germany has a highway system with high speed limits and an accident rate a fraction of the US and want to bring that kind of improvement to the US, should they move to Germany because others think/want to believe the US highway system is the only good one in the world? Instead of making a remark like that, that adds very little to the conversation, how about adding a view of your own, rather than deriding someone else for having a view? If you think Amtrak is a waste of time, say why you think it is a waste of time and money, rather than simply posting something that does nothing except try to demean what someone else wrote, doesn't further the conversation and only ends up causing the discussion to get shut down.

p51 posted:

Dan Padova posted:

Capitalism is by it's very nature the greed system.  

I find it hilarious when I read stuff like this. The very people who live off capitalism's benefits are often the ones who whine the most about its existence. Where I live, they have May Day protests, where the third-generations of hippies decry the system they live under. One had a sign that said, "All ownership is theft" and I couldn't resist asking who he'd stole his fancy tablet, expensive clothes or even the sign off of. he just stared and me and said he meant everyone else.

Naturally.

"Dude," I told him, "You need to demand your money back for your education. 'ALL ownership' means what you own too, or did you not think about that before now? So I ask again, who'd you step on to get the stuff you have?"

He didn't get it.

We are stuck with an aged infrastructure while our economic competitors have much newer and more cost effective and faster infrastructure. Much of Europe was rebuilt after WWII (with help from Marshall Plan $) and much of Asian infrastructure is very new. We are at a competitive disadvantage.

Yeah, what a shame we didn't get our nation bombed into rubble... (not saying Germany and Japan didn't have it coming, but it was either rebuild them into allies after the war or have them at permanent enemies) I think Marshall chose wisely in that regard.

The Marshall plan was brilliant, in that it realized that if they didn't improve the lives of people whose countries had been torn apart by WWII and left bankrupt and destroyed, that they would look for something else, and back then that either was the re-emergence of fascism that WWII spent destroying, or the very real threat of Communism. On the other hand, the US has often been pretty good at seeing issues with other countries and solving them, while being very blind to the issues we have in the US. Almost everyone realizes for example that we have a problem with infrastructure in the US that is becoming more and more second rate and falling apart (our power grid is almost third world in many ways), and on the other hand we have people struggling economically, and a Marshall style plan could be the solution to those issues, which also would help defray some of the anger and despair that is out there with the jobs that could create. The US rebuilt foreign countries that were in dire straits but often can't see the problems at home *shrug*.

As far as capitalism being based on greed, that isn't always true, greed is more to me a symptom of capitalism going on the wrong track then the base of it, greed is the poison that ends up ruining things in capitalism. It is greed for example that leads to oligarchies and monopolies, where enough is never enough where capitalism thrives on competition, it is also greed that leads those running companies to make short sighted decisions to increase their and their crony's share of the pie in the short term, that often ends up destroying the very thing they are in charge of, not to mention it is greed that in the name of increasing profits or stock price overlooks the value of the people who work producing those profits and so forth, forgets that the working people are where the demand for their products comes from, and that ends up destroying demand for what they produce, or skirting the rules and ending up fomenting anger against their industry and regulations that cost them a lot more then they ever made through chicanery.  Greed also is when you create a system that benefits the few mightily and the rest not much at all

p51 posted:

Dan Padova posted:

Capitalism is by it's very nature the greed system.  

I find it hilarious when I read stuff like this. The very people who live off capitalism's benefits are often the ones who whine the most about its existence. Where I live, they have May Day protests, where the third-generations of hippies decry the system they live under. One had a sign that said, "All ownership is theft" and I couldn't resist asking who he'd stole his fancy tablet, expensive clothes or even the sign off of. he just stared and me and said he meant everyone else.

Naturally.

"Dude," I told him, "You need to demand your money back for your education. 'ALL ownership' means what you own too, or did you not think about that before now? So I ask again, who'd you step on to get the stuff you have?"

He didn't get it.

We are stuck with an aged infrastructure while our economic competitors have much newer and more cost effective and faster infrastructure. Much of Europe was rebuilt after WWII (with help from Marshall Plan $) and much of Asian infrastructure is very new. We are at a competitive disadvantage.

Yeah, what a shame we didn't get our nation bombed into rubble... (not saying Germany and Japan didn't have it coming, but it was either rebuild them into allies after the war or have them at permanent enemies) I think Marshall chose wisely in that regard.

I am not protesting Capitalism.  After all, at one time it was the driving force that made our country what it is.  But the days of that form of Capitalism are over.  We learned in history class about the "Robber Barons" of the late 19th and early 20th century.  Those guys were patriots compared to the corporate leaders we have today, who will sell out their own mother.  

Someone once explained Capitalism to me.  He said it follows humans, which by their very nature are greedy.  That's not to say that it's a bad type of greed.  It's just that we don't want to be caught without.  

I agree with you about our infrastructure.  Not only the politicians, but we as citizens must be willing to pay the piper.  We all want services provided at the local, state and federal level.  But we don't want to pay for them in the form of taxes.  Instead, as has just happened, the wealthiest portion of our population gets their taxes lowered.  So where is the trillions of dollars coming from if politicians are afraid of those at the top and corporate lobbyists ?

The last part of the video was very interesting - why train service to rural American - the vast parts not served by public transportation - is so vital. I was reminded of the successful campaign by small East Texas communities a number of years ago to fight the threatened discontinuance of the Amtrak Texas Eagle. As these communities argued, for many residents, there was no other way to travel outside their communities.

The point was precisely as described in the video. Many people forget that there are lots of people who do not have access to automobiles. Also, almost all of these communities are not served by air transportation. Even in communities that are served, the fares are too expensive for most of the residents, just as pointed out in the video. In addition, the disabled, the elderly, and many others who can't drive depend on the train to get to other areas, even to Dallas to access an airport. They have no other alternatives.

Amtrak Capitol Corridor trains between Oakland, CA and Sacramento are nearly always full.  I used to ride the Amtrak SurfLiners between LA and San Diego.  These trains were often standing room only.   Another poster said that the Amtrak Cascades between Portland and Seattle were often sold out.  Clearly, Amtrak on does provide a needed service on these corridor trains.  

I do think that the USA needs to get on with rebuilding and upgrading our infrastructure.  Where the money comes from is another debate.  Here in CA, we have consistently voted for sales and other taxes to support transit systems in all forms.  This is the reason that our sales tax of about 10% in many communities is among the highest in the nation.  

The debate of whether Amtrak is useful or not will probably never be resolved.  Those who never ride it will say it isn't needed and those who do will say it is essential.  There are a lot of roads throughout the USA that I have never driven on and many airports that I have never been to.  I accept that those roads and airports are essential to someone and I support them being built and maintained.  I also think Amtrak falls into this category.  Perhaps someday the USA will build a true a high speed passenger rail system and Amtrak will become obsolete just as the horse and buggy did.  Until then, I think that Amtrak is needed and should be supported just as passenger rail is supported in other countries.

When you really think about it, many early railroads were supported with land grants and other perks.  Some of them still benefit from those early land grants through mining, drilling and timber rights.  It is puzzling how organizations and individuals who get public benefits complain about others getting similar benefits in another form.  

Basically, all public and private transportation is supported in someway by the government.  Even Uber uses the public roads and the internet that was initially developed by the government.   Should Amtrak be any different?

NH Joe

Several variables, ALL of which require significant expenditure, even with volunteers:

1. INSURANCE - LIABILITY & EQUIPMENT

2. Maintenance (engine)

3. Maintenance (train set)

4. Host railroad crew labor

5. Incidental expenses (advertising, printing flyers & tickets, etc.)

 6. Fuel and water

OK guys....quite a few alerts regarding the numerous political comments in this thread.  We really don't have time to edit and delete these kinds of things....this is why we have rules as are stated in our TOS (upper right of every forum page!).  So....rather than delete the thread, it is closed now as I believe it has run its course.