81–90 of 128 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, that's what de facto priority means. Since the railroads operate the lines and the freight trains, they (illegally) give their own freight trains priority over Amtrak passenger trains, which by law are supposed to have priority.
That is not what de facto means, but regardless what is the point in even mentioning it if it were?
The history of the US's Western freight lines is fascinating (and frustrating): we've allowed these massive companies (UP, BNSF) to extract rent for well over a century, in exchange for having laid down the original lines (which, mind you, were also paid for in land and bonds[1]). [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Railroad_Acts
I'm confused why you think that private rail owned, operated, and built by private companies is somehow "rent seeking". Amtrak is even only allowed to use their rails by forced act of Congress. If things followed normal commercial rules Amtrak would have no right to use them at all. More so, they operate below the cost of any freight rail of anywhere in the developed world. They're incredibly efficient in operation.…
No one expected Amtrak to last 50 years.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The railroads were sure funded by public money, but it most certainly has not been taxpayer money. Instead, it was money invested by private individuals. Government did help the railroads with vast grants of lands, but most of the value of the granted land stemmed from the railroads that were built nearby. It was in fact a great deal for taxpayers, a win-win situation. > One wonders what the US's rail infrastructure…
> US federal government certainly is not known for providing high quality service at low cost, quite the opposite in fact. The Post Office stands as a prime example of an extremely high quality service provided at a comparatively tiny price, and one that's successful and self-sustaining even while dealing with the immense costs of reliable delivery to extremely rural areas.
The qualifications for postmaster general had more to do with campaign contributions than talent or interest.
Thankfully, largely reformed with the merit based civil service changes, but passing those was a struggle! So I'd be hesitant to assume than anything lucrative and government-run won't face substantial corruption pressures.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm confused why you think that private rail owned, operated, and built by private companies is somehow "rent seeking". Amtrak is even only allowed to use their rails by forced act of Congress. If things followed normal commercial rules Amtrak would have no right to use them at all. More so, they operate below the cost of any freight rail of anywhere in the developed world. They're incredibly efficient in operation.…
It depends on how you look at it. Purely from a $/tonne/mile perspective, it is a massive success. There is no doubt about that. However, the technology is literally decades behind compared to the rest of the world. Electrification basically does not exist, and basic safety systems are in their infancy. Precision Scheduled Railroading has resulted in a system with very little flexibility which makes extremely poor us…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The railroads were sure funded by public money, but it most certainly has not been taxpayer money. Instead, it was money invested by private individuals. Government did help the railroads with vast grants of lands, but most of the value of the granted land stemmed from the railroads that were built nearby. It was in fact a great deal for taxpayers, a win-win situation. > One wonders what the US's rail infrastructure…
> US federal government certainly is not known for providing high quality service at low cost, quite the opposite in fact. The Post Office stands as a prime example of an extremely high quality service provided at a comparatively tiny price, and one that's successful and self-sustaining even while dealing with the immense costs of reliable delivery to extremely rural areas.
There was a Postal Service Reform Act of 2022[1], which apparently allows USPS to avoid funding pensions in advance, which had led to billions of dollars of debt. It also shifts new retiree health insurance to Medicare, which may be a zero sum game of sorts but good for the USPS budget.
Then there's that ongoing reliance on fees for delivering junk mail... I am somewhat disappointed that there isn't a junk mail non-delivery option. At least FedEx and UPS don't deliver junk mail. Yet.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_Service_Reform_Act_of_2...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, that's what de facto priority means. Since the railroads operate the lines and the freight trains, they (illegally) give their own freight trains priority over Amtrak passenger trains, which by law are supposed to have priority.
That is not what de facto means, but regardless what is the point in even mentioning it if it were?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The official policy, in that it is literally US law. The subject of the article is an attempt to enforce said provisions.
Sure, but there is no precedent for such regulation as long as the railroads are privately owned by the same corporations that control congress. This is yet another case of HN Utopianism.
The solution to fixing problems with Amtrak is to privatize it and shut down the unprofitable long distance lines or require states that want them to pay for them. Amtrak is already profitable in areas of high density if they weren't held back by all the unprofitable lines.
The history of the US's Western freight lines is fascinating (and frustrating): we've allowed these massive companies (UP, BNSF) to extract rent for well over a century, in exchange for having laid down the original lines (which, mind you, were also paid for in land and bonds[1]). [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Railroad_Acts
Its long and complicated. Amtrak exists in the first place because once upon a time these freight operators were also the passenger operators. While today they look like "extracting rent", once upon a time they were forced by regulation to carry the burden of passenger service. The situation with Amtrak was basically the government agreeing to take over that before it killed the companies, but Amtrak would retain cer…
Ladies and Gentleman! May I present to you TELEVISION CITY!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riverside_South,_Manhattan
(Now playing "Living in America" by James Brown https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5BL4RNFr58 )
Earlier quoted context omitted.
extremely high quality service Really? When's the last time you had to go do something at the post office? It is a nightmare. Dirty building with disinterested workers, and long slow lines. The bulk of the mail I receive is junk mail, and multiple times a week I get my neighbor's mail.
As somebody that moved from Europe to the USA, I can attest that the USPS is the best postal system I have ever encountered. The service level is far above anything I saw in Scandinavia by a long shot. In Iceland the Postal Service is declining really rapidly, so much so that there isn’t even a post office any more down town in the countries biggest city. Yet in the USA you can get a package delivered to your door in…