The problem is that to get that 6% large subsidies are needed. If you count capital costs even the north east corridor apparently loses money, and even ignoring them it rail loses and likely will continue to lose money elsewhere.
For truly high speed rail, you would have to obtain more right of way and build more line (and depending on how high of speed you want you might also have to invest in new rolling stock). If the passengers don't have to pay for that, if its all from extra subsidies, then yes you would see a larger market share. But it would still be low and it would cost a whole lot more than it does now.
I used to live in the New York area, now I live near DC. If your traveling city center to city center then maybe the train is a lot better. If not driving is. Its a reasonable length/time drive, and then you have a car at the end. rather than having to transfer to different lines and then get a taxi at the end. I went up to Suffolk county to get a car (I saved over $2k on the price compared to buying it locally). The drive back was much better, and much less expensive then the rail and taxi to get the car. The train trip took longer, you have to count the time to get to the station, then Amtrak was delayed, then I had to transfer to the LIRR, then take a taxi. Because of the delay I didn't make the dealer on time to get the car the first day, so instead of taking the car to the hotel and driving from there the next day, I had to take a taxi to the hotel, and then back to the dealer, I wound up spending $100 on taxis, plus the Amtrak and LIRR costs.
Also most of those subsidies go to people who are at least borderline rich. I have nothing against the rich, no desire to pull them down, but they are hardly the people that we need to shell out subsidies for. |
