by SouthernRailway
As we all know, after an initial burst of investment after WWII, railroads cut back their intercity services significantly starting in the '50s, and moreso after the Post Office reduced mail delivery by rail in the 1960s.
Question: why weren't commuter trains around large cities cut back to the same extent, if not more, starting in the 1950s? Why did private railroads even invest a cent in them post WWII?
I'd guess that commuter trains in general lost much more money than mainline intercity passenger trains, considering (1) how much worse NY-area commuter railroads do compared to Amtrak and (2) how many intercity passenger trains were marginally profitable or marginally money-losing until the Post Office cut back its rail shipments, causing those trains to become very unprofitable.
I assume that government regulation and political pressure forced private railroads to continue to offer commuter trains, but why would those railroads do anything more than offer the bare minimum train service required?
Question: why weren't commuter trains around large cities cut back to the same extent, if not more, starting in the 1950s? Why did private railroads even invest a cent in them post WWII?
I'd guess that commuter trains in general lost much more money than mainline intercity passenger trains, considering (1) how much worse NY-area commuter railroads do compared to Amtrak and (2) how many intercity passenger trains were marginally profitable or marginally money-losing until the Post Office cut back its rail shipments, causing those trains to become very unprofitable.
I assume that government regulation and political pressure forced private railroads to continue to offer commuter trains, but why would those railroads do anything more than offer the bare minimum train service required?