SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: pgerassi who wrote (124241)9/19/2000 12:34:14 PM
From: hmaly  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1571405
 
Pete ...Re..<Freight trains are surviving and even thriving once intermodal was allowed by the RR regulators (the exact name escapes me at the moment). Long haul trucking costs too much when fuel costs go up. Two engineers (operators) can haul 200 to 400 semi trailers worth over thousands of miles far faster than any trucking company can do it for quite a bit less money (although somewhat more hassle). Passenger rail thrives when high traffic routes are maintained properly (Boston to Washington corridor or things like Chicago Metro). <<<<

All of these things are true, but just like the cars did in Britian, trucks are taking over a greater percentage of long haul freight, not to mention short haul. And that is the problem with railroads, the lineal footage of tracks keep shrinking and spurs are abandened because it costs to much to keep the tracks up, and the tracks with their maintenece is the main costs of railroads.

<<<). If the rail track was maintained by the government like the interstate is, railroads would be very profitable for hauling freight and still hauling passengers. There is less cost to building a double track mainline than a four lane interstate and the exits (train stations) are much cheaper as well. If intermodal for passengers was as cheap as for freight, there would be much more traffic for long range travel.<<<

The interstate and its repairs are taken care of by gas taxes. If railroads want to pay extra fuel taxes to have their tracks fixed by an inefficent gov. agency that is fine by me. Railrods are also subsidized in that they paid subsidised prices for the land tracks are on,( think this is the case), nor do they pay taxes on the land.

<If this was done, you would see much more passengers and freight going by train.<<<

This once again sounds good, the the reality is that cars and trucks are currently displacing the railroads; and you need volume to make the costs of track repairs pay off. The tracks here in the main north south corridor are so bad, trains can't travel over 45 mph. Major hwys have ten time the traffic of railroads, that is why hwys are maitained, railroads are not.