David Smith Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's funny how no one on either side can think
> beyond various funding levels for government-run
> passenger trains.
>
> How about tax-incentivized re-privatization?
> Anyone?

1) Other than Guilford (now "Pan-Am" Railways), I know of no railroad which has proposed tax incentives to run passenger trains. And as someone who lived in Guildford's territory in the 1980s, I wouldn't trust it to run passenger trains any more than I would trust Paris Hilton to lecture on the virtues of personal modesty.

2) A tax incentive expends resources from the public treasury just like a direct grant, except the latter is more efficient. If you really believe the private sector can provide basic intercity passenger transportation than the public sector, then post examples of how good Greyhound and Trailways are at providing transportation.

3) Lavish amounts of federal, state and local public money are expended on automobile transportation to pay for highways, roads, streets & bridges (new construction, maintenance and renovation), parking garages, police, snow removal, and medical costs due to accidents. There are other major uncompensated costs like lost tax revenues where highways tear through urban neighborhoods. Yet there is no general widespread call for privatization of these costs.