You're viewing a single thread.
The feds still technically own large portions of the rail system, why would they throw themselves under the bus.
That’s absolutely false. The feds only own small, short rail for passenger services. Other than that they own the northeast corridor from Washington DC to Boston. All other rail is directly owned by the rail companies. The feds really should nationalize the rail and have these cartels pay to use the rail. That way the fed can actually make sure the rail is in good condition and stop these big chemical spills.
Yeah privatization of rail was an absolute disaster
Yeah, turns out letting companies run critical infrastructure incentivizes them to pay as little as possible to keep it running.
"What if we raised the prices of necessities?" - genius MBA thinking of our time.
They own several sections of track and you forgot to mention that it's the most popular publicly owned transit in the US. It's not insignificant. And similarly they still maintain interest in the transcontinental railroad they just do not gain a profit or have complete control. You also fail to note that the federal government owns Amtrak so how exactly was what I said "completely false".
Wrong again, the most popular US public transportation would go to the New York City Subway. At 2 billion rides a year compared to Amtrack’s about 23 million rides a year. It is insignificant compared to the hundred and sixty thousand miles of rail in the US. Amtrak only owns 750 miles of track. So you tell me is .4% of all the rail in the US significant? The only interest the feds maintain in US rail, aside from owning amtrack, is in regulating railroads and transportation. Those agencies would be the federal railroad administration and the surface transportation board, along with state regulators in some states. What you said is completely false, as you said “the feds still technically own large portions of the rail system” and I’m telling you that .4% is not large portions of the rail system.
You forgot to add x100 to your calculations - it's <0.48%
No. 750/160000 = 0.0047
Yes, and now make that into percentage, not just a fraction.
Ahhh, yes I see. I’m too used to doing that part in my head and just slapped a percent on the end when I didn’t actually do that here. When I saw your last comment I instinctively went that’s like 50% how did they mess that up?
Yeah, and the same way I saw 0.004% and thought how ridiculous that is. No biggies, just making sure math checks out, and it does ;)
exactly... 0.0047 is 0.47% of 1. you forgot to shift the decimal
Spitting out the statistics, what a legend. Appreciate the write up!
City light rail shouldn't come up in talk about railways. Compare Amtrak to other intercity rail operators if you want to compare
Rail shouldn’t come up in talks about rail. Okay, that makes total sense. Maybe pay attention to the fact that they are both passenger rail. One is inner city, the other is between cities. And the entire reason I brought it up was because I’m replying to a comment where they said amtrack is the most popular public transportation. You and them both need better reading comprehension.
We don’t have any other intercity public rail. It’s all Amtrak
What other intercity passenger rail operators are there to speak of? And what does that have to do with who owns the actual rails?
Brightline. That's the new one that keeps clobbering idiot Floridian drivers that insist they can beat the train.
But that doesn't hold a candle to Amtrak's coverage.
The New York subway system isn't federal, it's state.
No, it's not. A thousand miles of track is more then exists in all of some countries.
I think your idea of large is just skewed, short lines are a thing and are often shorter then 750 though that is changing with rapid consolidation.
“They own several sections of track and you forgot to mention that it's the most popular publicly owned transit in the US.” I don’t know how you came to the conclusion that I said the New York subway is federal. I said that it is actually the most popular public transportation in the US. Okay cool some countries have less than 1000 miles of rail, I’m sure I could have figured that out on my own. But the US has 160,000 miles and 750 of that is, guess what, .4%. So yes it’s fucking small compared to the total rail in the US. My idea of large is not skewed in the slightest, 160,000 is much bigger than 750, simple maths. Yeah short lines are a thing, and guess what, they are not long. It honestly makes no sense that you are comparing amtrack to countries that don’t have much rail, when the entire conversation is about US rail. Like I can say that the US has more miles of road than Cuba, but that has no impact on how many of the roads are paved vs dirt in the US. That’s pretty much what you are saying. Let me put it this way, there was approximately 245 billion miles traveled in 2021 for European passenger rail. While for the same year amtrack had 12.1 million miles traveled. Which if you do the math is .005%.
How exactly is state regulated state funded subway relevant to federally regulated partially federally funded railroads? It's not in my opinion but if you're going somewhere with it I'm intrigued.
Correct, it's not gigantic but for a federal rail system even the "small" Amtrak section it in itself isn't small.
Nope, I think it's skewed. If you think that small section isn't enough for governmental interest in lack of regulation I think you're absolutely mistaken.
Much like how the NYC subway is in no way related to federal rail or federally regulated rail. I don't even think mta handles hazmat in any way at all whatsoever so how does it matter in relation to chemical spills?
Again, I think you're simply not willing to connect the dots.
Btw that's 137000 miles of publicly funded highly regulated passenger rail which by your account we have 750 miles. And you claim I'm bringing up irrelevant stuff.
They are both passenger rail. It’s relevant because I responded to your claim that amtrack is the most popular public transportation. It’s not, NYC subway is. How is that not relevant? That’s still small, you can’t compare a small country with fewer people and little rail infrastructure and draw relevant conclusions. So when you properly compare to countries that have populations and rail infrastructure that is comparable you can draw relevant conclusions. Which is why in my last response I chose to compare it to the EU. I never talked about lack of regulations and the Feds interest in it. That would be you projecting. And also the lack of regulation is because of the 4 main rail companies that lobby to keep it the way it is. Not because of the government’s interest in the lack of regulation. I never claimed that the NYC subway moves hazmat. They are passenger rail not freight. Idk what “dots” you want me to connect, but you definitely need some better reading comprehension. I honestly do not understand how you think that US rail is publicly funded. It is not. The railroad companies own the railroads and maintain them. There is 750 miles of rail that amtrack directly owns. They have cost-sharing agreements with states that they operate in, on lines less than 750 miles. Anything over 750 miles receives federal financial support. So the 750 miles that amtrack directly owns is publicly funded. And the rest that they use from the railroad companies gets some public funding. But that is still less than 22,000 miles compared to the 160,000 miles of US rail.
It's not relevant because they do not do hazmat at all, Amtrak rails are shared with commercial rail often including hazmat.
Yes you can, I can compare an apple and the planet Venus. You're confusing inability with inanity and you're still wrong, it's a reasonable comparison.
Agreed, it was my point and you can't seem to absorb it and on fact are arguing that the conflict doesn't exist because "Amtrak small". The 4 main companies that lobby a regulatory agency soft on actual regulation because of perverse federal incentive.
I didn't say you did, I said NYC subway is a shit comparison because it doesn't take part in the subject of the conversation. Tomatoes are delicious too but it's entirely irrelevant because it's not related to the subject in any way.
The feds own track that they find federally, are you actually too dense to accept your own position? Then you subsequently explain how exactly rail is publicly funded. Amazing.
I just can’t even. Like I explain how something like 23,000 miles of rail gets some public funding and you say that’s the entire 160,000 miles of rail. The only federal rail is the rail owned by amtrack, which is 750 miles.
I’m done. You’re too fucking dense, with the reading comprehension of a fucking brick. I literally answered all of that in my last comment.
Which of the recent chemical spills have been on federally owned rail?
I hate it when Amtrak dumps hazardous waste everywhere!
None as far as I'm aware. The point is they make a profit so they have the same reason to avoid being regulated well enough.
None as far as I'm aware
Wow, I guess that kind of makes that a totally irrelevant derailing of this post about chemical spills on railways.
The chemical spills are because of lack of regulation. Agreed?
That lack of regulation is because of for profit companies going as cheap as possible to make more money. Agreed?
The federal government owns a for profit passenger line that is comparatively large to other private passenger lines in the us. Agreed?
The federal government has a hand in regulating the same rails it has a stake in. Agreed?
So how exactly are these things not relevant in relation to chemical spills due to lack of regulation.... Like what?
Sorry, “the government runs some passenger lines so it’s the government’s fault that private companies on privately owned rail regularly create environmental disasters” doesn’t check out.
With regulation being a federal issue yes. How is that a leap?
They’re federally mandated to run a profit. It’s actually a problem just not the one you think
No that's exactly the problem I think it is. If they're mandated to turn a profit the federal government then has a perverse incentive to have weak regulation that allows greater profit margins.
No the problem as it manifests isn’t reduced regulation but basically zero service outside the northeastern corridor
it’s the most popular publicly owned transit in the US
compared next to what? Fucking nasa?
Other federally controlled rail systems. You're still ignoring the actual point.
dude im pretty sure disney world could arguably be classified as a private transportation company with how much transportation they have in their campus.
Of course amtrak is the most highly rated public transit system, it's the only fucking one that exists.
They are, its literally called Disney Transport and on top of that they have the cruise line contracts and partial ownership.
The fact it exists at all is my point.
yeah so why are we talking about amtrak being the higest rated public transit? The late soviet government was still a government.
Because it's income is not insignificant. How is this not obvious, of profit is the motive to reduce regulation then profit is relevant.
You fail to note that those rails are irrelevant to the conversation.
Stop being an idiot choosing to completely miss and obfuscate the point. It's just... pathetic.
They're not, they have interest in not being regulated well enough for the same reason any other for profit business does.