mmi16 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 21, 2019 8:16 pm
electricron wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2019 11:45 pm
andrewjw wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2019 9:10 pm
It serves the purpose of getting people from one place to another place, just like any other transportation infrastructure. I'm not interested in discussing this toxic argument against funding for rail transport further.
You can get people from one place to another with a passenger train, why move their cars as well? Why should the taxpayers pay a subsidy to move other people's cars? It's not a toxic argument to expect Amtrak to earn a profit moving cars around. Whether or not the Auto Train earns a profit overall, subsidizing passengers is less offensive, but Amtrak better be earning a profit moving those cars.
How much does a additional lane of Interstate cost. How many more miles of Interstate lanes are you going to ad with the 'savings' your get from eliminating Auto-Train. Remember you eliminate Auto-Train and you put those people and vehicles on I-95 and I-4 between Auto-Train's end points.
I think you missed the point I was trying to make. There are other Amtrak long distance trains moving passengers to Florida that do not also carry cars. Nowhere else in the USA does Amtrak moved cars. Every long distance trains moving passengers requires a subsidy, including the Auto Train. The point I was trying to make is that Amtrak should not be subsidizing moving cars - even on the Auto Train. Do airlines move the cars of their passengers to Florida? Do cruise lines move the cars of their passengers to Florida? Do bus lines move the cars of their passengers to Florida? Are you getting my point now?
I'm not against Amtrak moving cars of the Auto Train passengers - as long as they move the cars without needing a subsidy. Whatever Amtrak charges to move those cars better pay 100% of the cost doing so. In fact, they should be charging more than their costs to move the cars so Amtrak can have more cash to subsidize more passenger fares.
The idea that Joe Blow taxpayer from Hicksville, USA has to subsidize the movement of cars is strange. Nowhere else in the USA does the USA actively subsidize the movement of cars.