Private Corporations should run passenger trains in America

[Pensyfan19]

Such examples would be Brightline (Virgin Trains USA), Texas Central Railway, and Microsoft's proposed high speed rail between Portland and Vancouver. For further discussion of this, please post comments about this here.

[RRspatch]

They did at one time. I'm guessing you're fairly young and don't know the history of rail passenger operations in the US. Prior to 5/1/71 all medium and long distance passenger trains were run by private railroads. Commuter trains were also still run by the private railroads but some cities had already started subsidizing them. The private railroads were loosing so much money and were in such bad shape that the Cities and states (commuter rail) and the national government (medium to long distance) took the trains over. Amtrak and commuter rail lines in the northeast are a direct result of the collapse of the Penn Central.

Generally you can't make money hauling passengers. While there are a few exceptions around the world generally they are due to local conditions. Several lines in Japan make money due to the density of population as well as real estate holdings (rent from buildings built over lines and yards). The MTR system in Hong Kong is also profitable largely due to density and real estate. Several high speed lines make money from the wheels up but will never repay the money spent to build the high speed line. The French TGV and the Eurostar come to mind. In this country the ACELA makes money but it isn't enough to pay for a new set of tunnels under the Hudson or a new B&P tunnel.

As for Brightline/Virgin I see that as more of a real estate play with the railroad designed to funnel people to developments along the line. Yes, some tourists will use it between the House of Mouse and Miami but that's mostly an add on. It remains to be seen whether or not they make a profit. I suspect once all the real estate is built out and the railroad isn't making a profit or a BIG enough profit the keys to the train set will be tossed to the state of Florida or Amtrak. The biggest problem I see with Brightline/Virgin is a lot of that real estate in Florida could end up underwater both literally and financially ... oops.

[Pensyfan19]

I am well aware of the history of passenger railroads in the U.S. During that time, the Interstate Highway Act of 1954 signed my Eisenhower further influenced more AMericans to use cars thus driving more people away (pun intended) from using the railroads, thus leading to their downfall and the government eventually taking over a few lines under Amtrak. My point is if private corporations, not necessarily brightline, were to form new routes or even take over existing lines from Amtrak, then Amtrak would redirect funding which would have gone to that line and spend it on other projects while the private corporations would only focus on those lines that they have and have enough funding from the private sector to provide new equipment, increased train frequency, comfortable passenger cars, and better maintained stations.

[CarterB]

Passenger train agreement/s are only between private railroads and Amtrak or Regional commuter lines. So, except for where Amtrak or Regionals actually own the ROW, it is a moot point.

[charlesriverbranch]

My point is if private corporations, not necessarily brightline, were to form new routes or even take over existing lines from Amtrak, then Amtrak would redirect funding which would have gone to that line and spend it on other projects while the private corporations would only focus on those lines that they have and have enough funding from the private sector to provide new equipment, increased train frequency, comfortable passenger cars, and better maintained stations.

Amtrak shouldn't really exist as such. Until 1967, Post Office mail contracts made it worthwhile for private railroads to run some passenger trains -- fewer than in the heyday of passenger rail, but more than Amtrak runs today -- and it was the abandonment of rail by the Post Office that year which led to the crisis that resulted in Amtrak's creation, I think.

In Binghamton, NY, where I was living at the time, Erie-Lackawanna ran two daily trains "primarily for mail", but which carried coach passengers: one Hoboken - Buffalo, the other Hoboken - Chicago, plus the Lake Cities, E-L's last train that carried sleepers and a diner. The end of the mail contract left only the Lake Cities, which made its last run 50 years ago this past Monday. No Amtrak train comes within 90 miles of Binghamton today.

Every mode of transportation receives subsidies of some or another sort. Buses use public roads, airliners use public airports and rely on public air traffic control. Had subsidies for passenger rail continued, whether via mail contracts or some other mechanism, there would have been no Amtrak.

The fact that railroads own and maintain their own infrastructure rather than running on public roads has been a handicap;they have to pay property taxes, for instance, that no bus line or airline ever has to pay. If the right tax incentives existed, there'd be a lot more private passenger rail today.

[SouthernRailway]

My point is if private corporations, not necessarily brightline, were to form new routes or even take over existing lines from Amtrak, then Amtrak would redirect funding which would have gone to that line and spend it on other projects

Private railroads are allowed to bid to operate Amtrak long-distance routes. I believe that the Amtrak subsidy would be directed to those private railroads instead. (Thus Amtrak wouldn't redirect funding.)

None have done so.

I'd love to see private companies run all passenger trains in the US--I generally do not care for government--but in this case, I'm grateful for Brightline and the few private operators that exist. Brightline is wonderful; I've taken it and it is way nicer and snazzier than Amtrak. I don't see how it'll last, though; passenger rail simply does not make money, with rare exceptions.

[Rockingham Racer]

Private operators, AKA the railroads, were relieved of the "burden" to run passenger trains with the inception of Amtrak. They want no part of running passenger trains again, it seems. And third party operators have little chance of operating on the railroads, because Amtrak [NRPC] has first dibs, and will not give that option up. That's my understanding. Corrections welcome!

[ConstanceR46]

every word you just said was wrong, OP

Brightline only looks good because Amtrak is routinely defunded, cut up, and defunded - compare it to passenger services where the government respects trains (such as china, or russia) and you'll be seeing an obvious difference - and your hypothesis is proposing a solution to a symptom, not the root of the problem - which is a mixture of wall st profit-ghouls and the Big Boys in washington defunding amtrak while funding alternatives.

In addition, Brightline does exist as a real estate subsidy, and mainly serves as a commuter service in relatively dense areas.

[SouthernRailway]

Brightline only looks good because Amtrak is routinely defunded, cut up, and defunded - compare it to passenger services where the government respects trains (china, or russia) and you'll be seeing an obvious difference

Respectfully:

1. Brightline looks great compared to anything and everything, not just Amtrak.

Brightline is way better than any other passenger service I’ve taken anywhere. It may not be as fast as the TGV but it is sleek, luxurious and cheery (employees smile and wave at the train when it leaves a station), and it probably operates a lot more efficiently (in terms of output per dollar invested) than the TGV or Chinese HSR does.

2. Amtrak could have already created a Brightline-type system. It hasn’t. This is evidence of a lack of innovation at Amtrak, typical for the public sector.

[ConstanceR46]

Nahhh. Brightline's not better than many other developed rail networks - You'll find the EXACT SAME coaches, with extremely similar luxuries, operating on Austria's state-owned network.

Amtrak's "Lack of innovation" can be pinned to continuous efforts to gut and defund it. You're comparing a system that was able to get investors, and FEC's cash reserves, to a system which again is almost constantly under attack by neoliberal privatization fans, and ignoring the fact that public systems in countries that fund them are objectively better.

The thing is you think that privatization will be like the 1950s where everything was luxurious- if you want to see privatization in action, take a pacer lol

[SouthernRailway]

Nahhh. Brightline's not better than many other developed rail networks - You'll find the EXACT SAME coaches, with extremely similar luxuries, operating on Austria's state-owned network.

Amtrak's "Lack of innovation" can be pinned to continuous efforts to gut and defund it. You're comparing a system that was able to get investors, and FEC's cash reserves, to a system which again is almost constantly under attack by neoliberal privatization fans, and ignoring the fact that public systems in countries that fund them are objectively better.

The thing is you think that privatization will be like the 1950s where everything was luxurious- if you want to see privatization in action, take a pacer lol

Paragraph 1: Not true.

Brightline's stations are way nicer than other railroads' stations. Every one has a luxurious lounge in it, with open bar drinks and unlimited food. No other railroad has that.

Brightline's employees are way more helpful than other railroads'. When I arrived in Miami, even though my train was about to leave, the nice Brightline employee said that I just had to see the lounge, so she took me to it and told me to eat and drink whatever I could. No other railroad does that consistently.

Paragraph 2: Not true. Any business that does not have to scramble to earn and increase profits will fail to innovate. Look at most any state-owned company or any monopoly. They don't innovate as much as for-profit non-monopolies.

Paragraph 3: Not so. I would expect privatization to simply result in more innovation and lower costs. Maybe more luxury, maybe not. I don't think that Brightline's luxury is sustainable, but I like it.

[ConstanceR46]

look how innovative british rail's privatization has left it... nah you'll blame it on muh gubmit or something. you just really like marketing buzzaords

[SouthernRailway]

look how innovative british rail's privatization has left it... nah you'll blame it on muh gubmit or something. you just really like marketing buzzaords

I don’t think that British Rail’s privatization was ideal: for example, why are there so many train companies in such a small country; isn’t that inefficient?

But sure, let’s look at how innovative the UK’s private operators are. Ridership has soared under privatization and there has been a significant increase in service frequency and speed. There is a massive amount of government spending on passenger rail in the UK, but if you look at the quality and variety of private services, they seem very good.

[ConstanceR46]

Deleted by moderator

[electricron]

edited for content by moderator

—————

How does the USA rate with a few other countries with subsidizing public transit?
USA (2017) $71.2 billion funding from all agencies, $15.8 billion fares collected, subsidy around $55 billion.
England (2015) (grants) 3 billion pounds for rail, 2.3 billion pounds (subsidies) for buses, totaling 5.3 billion pounds.
It is far easier to find world listings for rail subsidies than it is for public transit subsidies
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_subs ... by_country
The largest European country on that list was Germany with 17 billion euros, and France with 83.9 billion passenger kilometers.
The USA passenger rail networks rack up 37.8 billion passenger miles, or 60.8 billion passenger kilometers.
Not bad considering the railroads are moving 2,326 billion ton kilometers of freight in the USA, and only 32 billion ton kilometers of freight in France.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c ... rail_usage
That last link is much better for comparison purposes than the first link.