Comments on: McCain Impressed by US Trains, So Long as They Don’t Stay in US http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/ Covering the New York City Streets Renaissance Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:01:47 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8 hourly 1 By: Alex http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/comment-page-1/#comment-55386 Alex Wed, 20 Aug 2008 21:39:05 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/#comment-55386 GE locomotives are very popular in North America, and not just for export. Just look at the wiki page of GE's latest model to see its NA sales: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GE_ES44DC You guys realize that these are locomotives for Freight trains right? And that Freight companies in NA are doing very well. Do not lump the crappy passenger rail in NA with the booming freight rail. GE locomotives are very popular in North America, and not just for export. Just look at the wiki page of GE's latest model to see its NA sales:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GE_ES44DC

You guys realize that these are locomotives for Freight trains right? And that Freight companies in NA are doing very well. Do not lump the crappy passenger rail in NA with the booming freight rail.

]]> By: uSkyscraper http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/comment-page-1/#comment-55156 uSkyscraper Fri, 15 Aug 2008 20:40:35 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/#comment-55156 Having trouble navigating the tortured arguments here, so I'll stick to the basics. The true cost of car use is not currently borne by users. This distorted the market, the entire economy reformed itself to adapt, and the rails were left to the only purpose that could make sense of them, which was long-distance freight. Plants like the one in Erie make locomotives that pull mostly freight trains, which sell well around the world due to the strong domestic market that funds the development of said locomotives. McCain held a political event at a plant with lots of workers for a political photo-op. A blogger decided to link this visit to an unrelated previous comment on privatizing Amtrak by McCain. Why are we talking about this again? Having trouble navigating the tortured arguments here, so I'll stick to the basics. The true cost of car use is not currently borne by users. This distorted the market, the entire economy reformed itself to adapt, and the rails were left to the only purpose that could make sense of them, which was long-distance freight. Plants like the one in Erie make locomotives that pull mostly freight trains, which sell well around the world due to the strong domestic market that funds the development of said locomotives. McCain held a political event at a plant with lots of workers for a political photo-op. A blogger decided to link this visit to an unrelated previous comment on privatizing Amtrak by McCain. Why are we talking about this again?

]]> By: George Fleming http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/comment-page-1/#comment-55092 George Fleming Fri, 15 Aug 2008 04:09:14 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/#comment-55092 For starters, the major land grants of the 19th century gave the railroads half of the land around the railroad right-of-way in a swath about 20 miles wide, IIRC. Land which the government couldn't sell at $1 an acre (no transportation!) then was sold for $2 an acre, so there was no net cost to the Federal government -- except for the Army and their treatment of the native Americans, of course. In addition, until the Depression, the railroads had to, in return, carry government freight (and passenger, I think) at half rates. At least in these regards, the land grants were a good deal for the Federals. Remember, too, that freight and passenger rates were controlled by the (Federal) Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) until the railroads were deregulated about a third of a century ago. For starters, the major land grants of the 19th century gave the railroads half of the land around the railroad right-of-way in a swath about 20 miles wide, IIRC. Land which the government couldn't sell at $1 an acre (no transportation!) then was sold for $2 an acre, so there was no net cost to the Federal government -- except for the Army and their treatment of the native Americans, of course. In addition, until the Depression, the railroads had to, in return, carry government freight (and passenger, I think) at half rates. At least in these regards, the land grants were a good deal for the Federals.

Remember, too, that freight and passenger rates were controlled by the (Federal) Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) until the railroads were deregulated about a third of a century ago.

]]> By: Niccolo Machiavelli http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/comment-page-1/#comment-55089 Niccolo Machiavelli Fri, 15 Aug 2008 02:30:50 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/#comment-55089 So underfunding is a sort of relative term and the history of transportation began in the 1950s. I have always called the interstate highway system "Socialism for trucks". So you say that the competition created by the highways and the move of industrial customers to the suburbs served by those highways only effected passenger service. I understand now, thanks for the clarification. So giving the railroads land grants on either side of the right of way to create the service from the get-go was not a government subsidy? Maybe I'm still confused. I may be under a misunderstanding that the government played a huge role in the creation of the railroads all along. I also misunderstand how government always has seemed to play a big role in the creation, funding and maintenance of all transportation systems. So what you are saying is that had the government continued to fatten the accounts of the railroad barons that then passenger rail would have taken off as a private enterprise? So underfunding is a sort of relative term and the history of transportation began in the 1950s. I have always called the interstate highway system "Socialism for trucks". So you say that the competition created by the highways and the move of industrial customers to the suburbs served by those highways only effected passenger service. I understand now, thanks for the clarification. So giving the railroads land grants on either side of the right of way to create the service from the get-go was not a government subsidy? Maybe I'm still confused. I may be under a misunderstanding that the government played a huge role in the creation of the railroads all along. I also misunderstand how government always has seemed to play a big role in the creation, funding and maintenance of all transportation systems. So what you are saying is that had the government continued to fatten the accounts of the railroad barons that then passenger rail would have taken off as a private enterprise?

]]> By: uSkyscraper http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/comment-page-1/#comment-55078 uSkyscraper Thu, 14 Aug 2008 19:22:21 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/#comment-55078 The passenger rail system was underfunded, in a relative sense, when the government chose to create that little landscape project known as the Interstate Highway System. Perhaps you've heard of it? The passenger rail system was underfunded, in a relative sense, when the government chose to create that little landscape project known as the Interstate Highway System. Perhaps you've heard of it?

]]> By: Niccolo Machiavelli http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/comment-page-1/#comment-55055 Niccolo Machiavelli Thu, 14 Aug 2008 17:36:50 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/#comment-55055 So, Skysraper, how specifically was passenger rail underfunded historically? Was it that when the private carriers owned the railroads and streetcars their fares were held down by political pressure on the State and Local level while their freight components were regulated Federally but allowed to profit? Did that make them prefer to provide freight service at a profit rather than passenger service at a loss? Is there not a present component of that conflict of interest? Did not deregulation of trucking, busing, airline and railroad rates over the last twenty years allow the operators to charge what they wanted, consolidate and monopolize while the public operations (MTA, AMTRAK) etc. are expected to provide a service and never increase the price of that service regardless of inflationary pressure? Also, when the passenger rail services bankrupted the private operators 40 years ago what happened to the industrial users of the freight services? Conrail was handed a monopoly on New York, New Jersey and the entire East. Did that have anything to do with the de-industrialization of the East? Did the suburban preference for passenger service (at a price limited by government) not have anything to do with the elimination of freight service to the city industrial employers? How about Jamaica Queens? It used to be a great industrial neighborhood, until it became a platform for passenger service and suburban sprawl. So, Skysraper, how specifically was passenger rail underfunded historically? Was it that when the private carriers owned the railroads and streetcars their fares were held down by political pressure on the State and Local level while their freight components were regulated Federally but allowed to profit? Did that make them prefer to provide freight service at a profit rather than passenger service at a loss?

Is there not a present component of that conflict of interest? Did not deregulation of trucking, busing, airline and railroad rates over the last twenty years allow the operators to charge what they wanted, consolidate and monopolize while the public operations (MTA, AMTRAK) etc. are expected to provide a service and never increase the price of that service regardless of inflationary pressure?

Also, when the passenger rail services bankrupted the private operators 40 years ago what happened to the industrial users of the freight services? Conrail was handed a monopoly on New York, New Jersey and the entire East. Did that have anything to do with the de-industrialization of the East? Did the suburban preference for passenger service (at a price limited by government) not have anything to do with the elimination of freight service to the city industrial employers?

How about Jamaica Queens? It used to be a great industrial neighborhood, until it became a platform for passenger service and suburban sprawl.

]]> By: uSkyscraper http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/comment-page-1/#comment-55039 uSkyscraper Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:22:08 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/#comment-55039 Seriously - barking up the wrong tree here. If anything, the underfunding of passenger rail spurred the freight business, and those GE locomotives are pulling containers, not commuters. It's actually surprising that they do export so much, since Europe has a very small rail freight market (due to their excellent passenger network). Really should retract this story and wait for a proper opportunity to cut up politicians when they actually do something that is anti-transit, like cut the gas tax. Seriously - barking up the wrong tree here. If anything, the underfunding of passenger rail spurred the freight business, and those GE locomotives are pulling containers, not commuters. It's actually surprising that they do export so much, since Europe has a very small rail freight market (due to their excellent passenger network).

Really should retract this story and wait for a proper opportunity to cut up politicians when they actually do something that is anti-transit, like cut the gas tax.

]]> By: George Fleming http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/comment-page-1/#comment-55032 George Fleming Thu, 14 Aug 2008 07:08:35 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/#comment-55032 Chill! GE makes excellent freight locomotives, which sell quite well domestically, if you please. They also made the P42 Amtrak locos (and variants). But their bread and butter is the freight business -- which is going gangbusters. Don't confuse freight with passenger business. And passenger is made up of different elements: Long Distance (i.e., overnight), intercity, regional, commuter, and local transit. It's a mix. The US has the best-performing rail freight system in the world. Passenger -- not so good on most levels. Chill! GE makes excellent freight locomotives, which sell quite well domestically, if you please. They also made the P42 Amtrak locos (and variants). But their bread and butter is the freight business -- which is going gangbusters. Don't confuse freight with passenger business. And passenger is made up of different elements: Long Distance (i.e., overnight), intercity, regional, commuter, and local transit. It's a mix. The US has the best-performing rail freight system in the world. Passenger -- not so good on most levels.

]]> By: gecko http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/comment-page-1/#comment-55021 gecko Wed, 13 Aug 2008 20:52:13 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/#comment-55021 #5 Charles Siegel, Exactly! Except the 30% environmental impact and 70% operation analysis are percentages of typically way too low base values considering lots of costs and externalities not considered; on the macro scale alone, perhaps, where Joseph Stiglitz has estimated the Iraq war cost on the order of $3 trillion for the US; Charles Komanoff quantifies US auto costs something like $300 billion (one-third trillion) annually. Total global environmental services provided by earth to humanity has been estimated at $30 trillion; an absurdly low figure and a completely nonsensical idea. Comprehending the ongoing and accumulating devastation of our extremely primitive, dangerous, and wasteful transportation habits is difficult to imagine. #5 Charles Siegel, Exactly! Except the 30% environmental impact and 70% operation analysis are percentages of typically way too low base values considering lots of costs and externalities not considered; on the macro scale alone, perhaps, where Joseph Stiglitz has estimated the Iraq war cost on the order of $3 trillion for the US; Charles Komanoff quantifies US auto costs something like $300 billion (one-third trillion) annually.

Total global environmental services provided by earth to humanity has been estimated at $30 trillion; an absurdly low figure and a completely nonsensical idea.

Comprehending the ongoing and accumulating devastation of our extremely primitive, dangerous, and wasteful transportation habits is difficult to imagine.

]]> By: Charles Siegel http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/comment-page-1/#comment-55016 Charles Siegel Wed, 13 Aug 2008 20:14:15 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/#comment-55016 "If someone, somewhere, comes up with a source of power that is safe, inexpensive, and for all intents and purposes inexhaustible, then we, the Chinese, the Indians, and everyone else on the planet can keep on truckin’" Plus a source of the raw materials needed to build all those cars. Remember that about 30% of the environmental impact of a car is a result of its manufacturing and disposal, and 70% is a result of its operation. Even if we got rid of the entire environmental impact of operation, the remaining impact would be huge if Chinese, Indians, and everyone else on the planet owned as many cars as Americans do. "If someone, somewhere, comes up with a source of power that is safe, inexpensive, and for all intents and purposes inexhaustible, then we, the Chinese, the Indians, and everyone else on the planet can keep on truckin’"

Plus a source of the raw materials needed to build all those cars. Remember that about 30% of the environmental impact of a car is a result of its manufacturing and disposal, and 70% is a result of its operation. Even if we got rid of the entire environmental impact of operation, the remaining impact would be huge if Chinese, Indians, and everyone else on the planet owned as many cars as Americans do.

]]> By: gecko http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/comment-page-1/#comment-55014 gecko Wed, 13 Aug 2008 19:49:52 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/#comment-55014 correction: . . . hybrid human-electric vehicles . . . correction: . . . hybrid human-electric vehicles . . .

]]> By: gecko http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/comment-page-1/#comment-55013 gecko Wed, 13 Aug 2008 19:47:58 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/#comment-55013 Regarding the last link "Car of the Future" it seems that Elizabeth Kolbert neglects to consider small light, streamlined, less than 100 pounds, ruggedized human-power vehicles (The Secret Weapon apparently!) when she writes at the very end: "If someone, somewhere, comes up with a source of power that is safe, inexpensive, and for all intents and purposes inexhaustible, then we, the Chinese, the Indians, and everyone else on the planet can keep on truckin’. Barring that, the car of the future may turn out to be no car at all." Regarding the last link "Car of the Future" it seems that Elizabeth Kolbert neglects to consider small light, streamlined, less than 100 pounds, ruggedized human-power vehicles (The Secret Weapon apparently!) when she writes at the very end:

"If someone, somewhere, comes up with a source of power that is safe, inexpensive, and for all intents and purposes inexhaustible, then we, the Chinese, the Indians, and everyone else on the planet can keep on truckin’. Barring that, the car of the future may turn out to be no car at all."

]]> By: Max Rockatansky http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/comment-page-1/#comment-55001 Max Rockatansky Wed, 13 Aug 2008 18:42:18 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/#comment-55001 McCain should have taken some credit - thanks to his crippling of Amtrak we've increased the relative percentage of locomotive exports. They outnumber domestic orders greatly, further showing the superiority of American craftsmanship! McCain should have taken some credit - thanks to his crippling of Amtrak we've increased the relative percentage of locomotive exports. They outnumber domestic orders greatly, further showing the superiority of American craftsmanship!

]]> By: Mark Walker http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/comment-page-1/#comment-54997 Mark Walker Wed, 13 Aug 2008 18:25:24 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/08/13/mccain-impressed-by-us-trains-so-long-as-they-dont-stay-in-us/#comment-54997 What's not high-tech about locomotives, McCain? They can run on diesel, hybrid, or all-electric engines -- and the latter have been viable for a lot longer than electric cars. France's bullet trains are setting speed records. Vienna's trams are made by Porsche. And GE boasts "8000 fuel savings solutions" on its <a href="http://www.getransportation.com/na/en/fuelsavings.html" rel="nofollow">website</a>. What's not high-tech about locomotives, McCain? They can run on diesel, hybrid, or all-electric engines -- and the latter have been viable for a lot longer than electric cars. France's bullet trains are setting speed records. Vienna's trams are made by Porsche. And GE boasts "8000 fuel savings solutions" on its website.

]]>