Fred Frailey Column- "It's Time"

[Gilbert B Norman]

Mr. Bas, over at another site comprised of "hard core advocates" (and that "asked me to leave"), they like to contend that Amtrak accounting is "fraudulent" and that the LD's might put more cash in the cookie jar than they take out.

Even if these "massive" losses arise from a disproportionate allocation of the overhead, which I'm not prepared to accept simply because a bunch of advocates believe such to be the case, wait until the losses pile on when the Superliners need be replaced. Further, think of the impact at such time that the Class I's get paid at rates representing the opportunity cost of that train they cannot operate owing to Amtrak interference. This interfetence will be magnified ss the roads move to "Precision Railroading" operations.

Let's be honest volks, the LD's have not had a meaningful role in meeting transportation requirements since the Interstates were largely complete and air trsnsport became available to "the masses".

The party's over, Mr. Bas; I ask you and your fellow advocates accept such.

[JoeBas]

But it is. Once entitlements, defense, interest on the national debt, etc. are taken care of, there isn't much of the federal pie left to be divided. And lots of worthy (and unworthy) programs clamoring for it.

Anyone who thinks that the current federal spending is a "Zero Sum Game" must be using new math.

Yes there is a reason. It no longer serves enough of a function to be worth keeping. And if you think we are the only country facing this, look at what has happened to LD in Australia, Canada, and New Zealand, as examples of other places with low population density.

In your opinion, it no longer serves enough of a function to be worth keeping. TBH, in its current state I don't find myself using it much either, at this point in my life. But I recognize there is a proportionally-sizable portion of the populace to whom it is usable, even in its current state, as witnessed by the frequently sold out trains. And I further posit that investment and modernization rather than euthanasia is the proper course of action. As always, YMMV, but I'll just point out that a lot of "corridor only" proponents don't seem to realize that when you stop scratching my back, I could care less about your cute little corridor when the knives come out for you.

[JoeBas]

This is indeed a zero sum game and we are losing big time right now. As I said earlier, economies are predicated on scarcity. We have a finite budget and we are not only outspending it, but our trade balance is absurdly out of balance.

You're talking macro-economics, on the scale of which Amtrak isn't a pimple on the federal budget's posterior. And you're also not talking about "saving money to save the budget defecit", but rather "I'd rather the money be spent on my pet area, and yours can go wanting".

You may argue "Yeah, but we have to start somewhere". To which I respond "Fine, start somewhere else".

The assertion that regional rail should be regionally funded has also met heavy resistance at regional levels, with the resounding reply that "anything that touches two states is a national problem" (see: Hudson tunnels).

The only reason that resounding reply is being called out is because those proponents want the feds to pay for their regional cake, so they don't have to pay for it themselves. Far as I'm concerned, if the federal bakery is closed where I am, it is where you are too. Buy your own damned cupcakes.

Finally, the assertion that no other country struggles with long distance trains is just patently false. Canada is down to two sleeper trains, run 2x/week. Most EU nations have dumped conventional and night trains in favor of HST (sub four hours) and DMU/EMU regional trains. Australia offers something like three sleeper trains, two of which are weekly Canadian-esque trains for tourists. Argentina is struggling to keep four weekly sleeper routes open, with rumors two are toast this year. Brazil has two long distance day trains required by the government of the mining companies that own the tracks.

Chile, Mexico, Brazil, and many other countries have simply dropped any sort of passenger network.

China, India, and Russia have a vibrant long distance and sleeper network.

I'll just say again - long distance rail works in China, India and Russia because they prioritize and value it. Which is Prima Facie evidence that it DOES work, it just takes the political will and priority to make it so. If it "just didn't work", it wouldn't work anywhere.

[JoeBas]

Mr. Bas, over at another site comprised of "hard core advocates" (and that "asked me to leave"), they like to contend that Amtrak accounting is "fraudulent" and that the LD's might put more cash in the cookie jar than they take out.

Even if these "massive" losses arise from a disproportionate allocation of the overhead, which I'm not prepared to accept simply because a bunch of advocates believe such to be the case, wait until the losses pile on when the Superliners need be replaced. Further, think of the impact at such time that the Class I's get paid at rates representing the opportunity cost of that train they cannot operate owing to Amtrak interference. This interfetence will be magnified ss the roads move to "Precision Railroading" operations.

This is what most of this long distance travel opposition is really about - political ideologues still upset that the "Federal Government" is "Stealing" from the "Poor Hapless Class I's". To which I have said and will continue to say, Pish Posh.

Let's be honest volks, the LD's have not had a meaningful role in meeting transportation requirements since the Interstates were largely complete and air trsnsport became available to "the masses".

Next time I'm traveling LD and on yet another sold-out train, I'll be sure to tell those people that their travel is "meaningless". I'm sure they'll appreciate it.

The party's over, Mr. Bas; I ask you and your fellow advocates accept such.

I'm disinclined to acquiesce to your request. Thanks though, but I'm good fam.

[Gilbert B Norman]

Mr. Bas, by now it should be evident that I am far more "pro industry" than I am "pro Amtrak LD" (my Long UNP is third best performer in my portfolio). With Auto-Train having "priced me out of the market", who knows if I will next have an occasion to ride one.

If Amtrak lost their ability to "appropriate" investor owned railroad property in consideration of some token payment for its use, and if replacement equipment for the existing Superliner fleet is to move forth, then the debt service on these cars, quite appropriate to charge in full against the trains to which the cars are assigned, then the cost to operate these LD's will quite simply "skyrocket".

[David Benton]

The avoidable cost of the long distance trains is not the $ 500 million that they "lose". A good portion of the costs are shared by the corridors , and their share of those costs will increase , simply because they can't be shared with the LD trains. Maybe you are looking at saving 1/2 the "loss".
As to the Class ones , if one passenger train a day is such a drag on their resources, they must be in pretty bad shape.

[Suburban Station]

The avoidable cost of the long distance trains is not the $ 500 million that they "lose". A good portion of the costs are shared by the corridors , and their share of those costs will increase , simply because they can't be shared with the LD trains. Maybe you are looking at saving 1/2 the "loss".
As to the Class ones , if one passenger train a day is such a drag on their resources, they must be in pretty bad shape.

You are correct, the actual savings would be somewhat less than 500 million...and I suspect the impact of late trains on the long distance is enormous requiring far more equipment, labor hours, and fewer riders than would otherwise be the case. It seems to me the problem is the unscheduled freight train just doesnt place nice with scheduled passenger trains on a railroad that has lost its passenger capacity. I keep seeing that psr will make it worse but I'm not sure I understand why

[charlesriverbranch]

Even if these "massive" losses arise from a disproportionate allocation of the overhead, which I'm not prepared to accept simply because a bunch of advocates believe such to be the case, wait until the losses pile on when the Superliners need be replaced.

You're confusing capital expenses with operational expenses. Investment in new rolling stock is not part of the annual operating budget; it's a one-time expense. Once you buy the new cars, you have them, and you only have to pay to maintain them going forward. Presumably, with new equipment your maintenance expenses will be lower.

The long distance routes are an essential part of the national network; ideally, they need to be strengthened, with additional infrastructure added to allow passenger and freight operations to operate as seamlessly as they once did when they were all run by the Class I's in their heyday.

I'll say it again: Amtrak's creation was a mistake. What should have been done was for the Class I's to get sufficient subsidies, whether via tax incentives or otherwise, to build and maintain the necessary infrastructures and run the trains. There would then be no conflict between passenger an freight operations; both would mean money in the bank for the railroads.

[Gilbert B Norman]

You're confusing capital expenses with operational expenses. Investment in new rolling stock is not part of the annual operating budget; it's a one-time expense. Once you buy the new cars, you have them, and you only have to pay to maintain them going forward. Presumably, with new equipment your maintenance expenses will be lower.

Mr. Charles River, I will concede that new equipment will result in lower Maintenance of Equipment Expense. But with that having been said, this retired CPA is quite aware of your other point. When a Capital Expenditure is made, there is a lag between the recording of such and when such becomes an Expense by means of Depreciation. But one way or the other, the Expenditure made, or Cost, of replacement equipment will reflect in the Net Loss of an LD route. I'll concede that those LD's are largely full, but if accepting the advocacy community's position of break even at present, they won't be with higher Depreciation Expense charged against them.

As to the Class ones , if one passenger train a day is such a drag on their resources, they must be in pretty bad shape.

Mr. Benton, since Yager's death, all the Class I's are implementing to one degree or the other, concepts of "Precision Railroading" (more so for handling Products of Mines and Agriculture than Manufacturing). I don't claim to be an expert on such, but one concept is that trains depart "at the convenience of the Operating Department", and has two trains departing simultaneously in opposite directions to a "point in between", say, five hours away. There the trains meet, exchange crews, and everybody's home under Hours of Service and with no costs for lodging or Held Away pay.

It should be evident, an Amtrak train, ostensibly on a schedule, operating in the opposite direction will interfere with a "Precision Railroading" model.

[Tadman]

The delusions here are mind boggling. Y'all are living in fantasy land.

But that's cool. We saw what happened at Via and SOFSE (Argentina). They have no friends on either side of the aisle and they are now a shadow of themselves, running a few 1-2x/week long distance trains and corridor trains of about the STL-CHI level. If that's what you want, go for it. Be very clear. The liberals or socialists in most big countries do not care about trains.

But lets be real. Let's pretend Trump loses in 2020 and a super cool socialist becomes president. They hate the midwest, the rockies, etc... and they will not want to fund long distance trains any more than Trump. You seriously think AOC wants to pay for the Chief? That Bernie loves the Builder?

Given historical tendencies, a democrat or socialist will cut trains to pay for something else far more important than trains. They did under Carter and Clinton. Obama let PRIIA ride when he had ample ability to wipe it and start funding more LD trains.

Don't pretend the other team loves you, they don't.

[jonnhrr]

I'll just say again - long distance rail works in China, India and Russia because they prioritize and value it. Which is Prima Facie evidence that it DOES work, it just takes the political will and priority to make it so. If it "just didn't work", it wouldn't work anywhere.

The situation in other countries is much different than the US. India and China are more densely populated countries and all 3 have generally a lower standard of living that makes domestic air travel out of reach for the average person, although that is starting to change in India and China as the standard of living rises. Also the networks are nationalized which means passenger and freight are on more of a level playing field.

As others have pointed out if you look at countries more comparable to the US such as Canada there LD networks are in the same if not worse shape as ours. Canada has lost the Canadian, the Atlantic, and the Chaleur and is down to essentially a skeleton single train to the West and one to Atlantic Canada.

[mtuandrew]

“Federal governments have cut funding for LD trains” isn’t the same as “LD trains are unpopular and worth less than other transportation services.” As for the politicians you mention, Bernie’s opinion matters in re: his assignments to the Budget and the Environment & Public Works Committees as well as his stated policy positions as a candidate for President, and AOC’s mainly in re: her role on the Oversight & Reform Committee.

Also, I notice you don’t mention Biden, Warren, or any other candidate (of which Rep Ocasio-Cortez is not one.) I wonder where those talking points originate.

I’m not concerned about January 2021 as of now because I’m more concerned about the civil rights and financial abuses happening now. Train service is a level of magnitude lower in importance, excepting Gateway which begins to approach that level of importance, and cutting LD service isn’t worth the political capital of excluding “flyover America” further — and I haven’t seen a Democratic candidate who doesn’t recognize that they need to resolve the factionalism of America by any means necessary including government service to rural and urban communities. Amtrak fits those priorities for everyone from Moulton to Inslee.

[JoeBas]

Don't pretend the other team loves you, they don't.

More political ideology lecturing that has little if anything to do with the topic at hand.

How's this for a shocker - I'm not playing team baseball. Far as I'm concerned, both "teams" have made such a cock-up of this country they should both be lined up against a brick wall somewhere and given their just deserts. None of that has the least bit of relevance to the topic at hand though, which is whether the country can and should prioritize corridors at the expense of the long distance network.

[Tadman]

I don't see Biden as any more of a friend to Amtrak than AOC. He was "Amtrak Joe", 2-term Vice President of the United States of America, and had a friendly congress for part of that. What did Amtrak get? They didn't repeal PRIIA. They didn't start any new long distance trains. They didn't buy new LD power or cars. Anybody with a rail background and a calculator could see the P42 fleet's last days were around 2018, but you didnt' see anybody in the Obama-Biden administration making moves to replace that power.

You had a few things under that administration:
1. They rebuilt some amfleets for corridor service
2. They spent money on some corridor trackage like NW Indiana and Saint Louis
3. They bought cars for corridor service in the biggest dumpster fire of Amtrak procurement

All of that was corridor stuff. None of it was long distance. The democrats are no friend to LD trains.

None of that has the least bit of relevance to the topic at hand though, which is whether the country can and should prioritize corridors at the expense of the long distance network.

You can keep saying this, and I can keep showing you empirical evidence that you're wrong. How long do you want to go? Your emotions versus my numbers, I'm ready to play.

[CNJGeep]

Mr. Bas, over at another site comprised of "hard core advocates" (and that "asked me to leave")

Did you? Is asking you all it takes?