 |
Re: more trains s/b the focus
Author: Erik H.
Date: 12-23-2017 - 18:22
Arlen Sheldrake Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Drive I-5 between Seattle and Portland and argue against additional trains....I wish you
>luck in that argument as you have a losing hand.
Except that Amtrak still carries a small minority of the mode share of passenger travel on the corridor. You have no fewer than 75,000 vehicles a day on any point of I-5 between the Seattle and Portland (actually, Eugene) metropolitan areas. You have at least two airlines (Alaska/Horizon and Delta) flying planes overhead. You have multiple bus lines providing service. But even with the wide range of options, the vast majority of people CHOOSE to take Interstate 5. In 2016, just 2,238 riders each day chose Amtrak (based upon an annual ridership of 817,000 total riders, divided by 365 days...which is being generous because 2016 was a leap year.)
If it's such a "losing hand" why is it winning? Because the market has spoken, in that it refuses to pay a fare or provide a subsidy to ride Amtrak that matches Amtrak's operating expenses, disallowing it from being able to provide better and more service. Whereas, Washington has raised its gas tax significantly over the recent years, and people are choosing to drive more despite the higher cost of gasoline. Throw in the fact that Cascades train ridership was in a downward pattern since reaching a peak in 2011, and only in 2016 started to climb again but lower than the peak.
If the focus is "more trains", that only begs the question "why", and more importantly - why is a government agency using unfair subsidies to compete with private business that is paying taxes and for the use of public infrastructure, while Amtrak is not paying the same? Those POINT buses that run in Oregon are privately owned, privately operated, pay full taxes whether it's income taxes (do Washington based Amtrak crews pay Oregon income tax when they operate into Portland?), weight-mile taxes, tire taxes, registration fees, property taxes, sales taxes if they purchase anything in Washington, etc. Amtrak pays none of that. Every single one of Amtrak's competitors, whether it's Greyhound, MTR Western, Alaska or Delta, has to pay those taxes. So now we must ask, why does Amtrak specifically get a free ride? Why aren't we exempting Greyhound (Bolt Bus) and MTR Western from all the road use taxes? Why doesn't Alaska, Horizon and Delta get free rent, and landing fee exemptions at PDX and Sea-Tac?
-------------------------------------------------------
> Drive I-5 between Seattle and Portland and argue against additional trains....I wish you
>luck in that argument as you have a losing hand.
Except that Amtrak still carries a small minority of the mode share of passenger travel on the corridor. You have no fewer than 75,000 vehicles a day on any point of I-5 between the Seattle and Portland (actually, Eugene) metropolitan areas. You have at least two airlines (Alaska/Horizon and Delta) flying planes overhead. You have multiple bus lines providing service. But even with the wide range of options, the vast majority of people CHOOSE to take Interstate 5. In 2016, just 2,238 riders each day chose Amtrak (based upon an annual ridership of 817,000 total riders, divided by 365 days...which is being generous because 2016 was a leap year.)
If it's such a "losing hand" why is it winning? Because the market has spoken, in that it refuses to pay a fare or provide a subsidy to ride Amtrak that matches Amtrak's operating expenses, disallowing it from being able to provide better and more service. Whereas, Washington has raised its gas tax significantly over the recent years, and people are choosing to drive more despite the higher cost of gasoline. Throw in the fact that Cascades train ridership was in a downward pattern since reaching a peak in 2011, and only in 2016 started to climb again but lower than the peak.
If the focus is "more trains", that only begs the question "why", and more importantly - why is a government agency using unfair subsidies to compete with private business that is paying taxes and for the use of public infrastructure, while Amtrak is not paying the same? Those POINT buses that run in Oregon are privately owned, privately operated, pay full taxes whether it's income taxes (do Washington based Amtrak crews pay Oregon income tax when they operate into Portland?), weight-mile taxes, tire taxes, registration fees, property taxes, sales taxes if they purchase anything in Washington, etc. Amtrak pays none of that. Every single one of Amtrak's competitors, whether it's Greyhound, MTR Western, Alaska or Delta, has to pay those taxes. So now we must ask, why does Amtrak specifically get a free ride? Why aren't we exempting Greyhound (Bolt Bus) and MTR Western from all the road use taxes? Why doesn't Alaska, Horizon and Delta get free rent, and landing fee exemptions at PDX and Sea-Tac?
