Very well said Freericks.

But I don't think most railroads in the early fifties quite understood the depth of the problem, some not a all. They went right on investing. And not being fully aware, they certainly did fail to present a rational case for the needed major adjustments, that would have saved passenger service.

Indeed, those few that really were aware of the red ink, just summarily threw in the towel in a very hostile manner, trashing their passenger services to drive customers away; then once the trains were empty, whined and begged to be released from those common carrier obligations. Of course, some railroads are now doing the same to their freight customers - I wonder where that will lead?

Not that such corporate hostility wasn't understandable in the fifties, given that the primary culprit was a very heavy and very unlevel federal subsidization of all other competing modes; while at the same time leaving the whole rail industry on its own. All this orchestrated by a President, who himself had exhibited a very marked hostility of his own towards the rail industry, while serving as a General during WW2. It often makes me wonder; did Pres. Eisenhower actually do it on purpose. If he did, he certainly did his public no favors. But who did it favor?

I also can't figure out why today's repubicans profess so much antipathy towards subsidized rail passenger services; while quite happy to subsidize other corporate entities in their competing services. Especially since they themselves were the first to federally subsidize any corporate entity to build the railroads in the first place. Pres. Lincoln championed the concept from the beginning - some say he invented the whole idea - for the greater public good, as it were.

It could be argued I suppose, that passenger services were already weak financially. but just because an important public service was financially vulnerable, does not excuse deliberately toppling it - Thus leaving so much of the nation without any form of public ground transportation at all. In so much of the country - you drive your own car there, or you do not go at all.

And that leads us to the answer - Oh My!

Just imagine how well that very circumstance has done, to vastly enlarge the markets of automobile manufacturers, oil companies, tire companies, construction companies, etc, etc, etc. So of course, if that was Pres. Eisenhower's intent in the first place, why on earth would he not subsidize rail's competitors while starving out the rail industry. In the USA, the rail industry, and especially the passenger train was the goat!


And you say we Americans do not have an EXTREME centrally planned economy. Ha! We only pretend at a free market. In reality, it does not exist. Since the 30s, our political choices have been only between two flavors of central planning - the leftist/socialist democrat flavor, and the republican fake conservative flavor. Both are myopic.

Of course crap by any other name, is still crap, regardless of its flavor. Both have led to massive gargantuan inefficiencies worldwide; and economic and ecological disaster after disaster. But as long as we keep choosing between only these two flavors, us peons will of course, remain consigned merely to fighting over who sits in which deck chair. Note that even if it survives at all, the American passenger train will remain the goat.