 |
Re: So what constitures "within reason' when it comes to the subsidy you feel would benefit rural America? Compared to what??
Author: last word for KIA
Date: 05-10-2019 - 16:51
This is a loaded question that needs extensive analysis and future considerations. But I have a few initial thoughts.
What value does an urban dweller place on the value of an electrician working at a dam? If the urban area loses its power can a city dweller survive? If they lose their food can they manage? Do those in cities think it is wrong to subsidize doctors in luring them to work in rural areas to serve these electricians and farmers(which is the case for many rural doctors)? Do city people think it is fare that rural folk have some sort of long haul transportation or subsidized internet? What contribution to GDP and urban dwellers well being can be attributed to rural citizens? What is the minimum quality of life to be expected for living in a remote area and what quality of life for urbanites is generated from rural folk? Questions that are best left for politicians, maybe.
I think, as states keep adding intercity rail lines, long distance routes cost will continue to come down. Is it best to continue expansion which will continue benefiting the long haul or just gut the entire system?
Take the Coast Starlight that interlaces with Amtrak Cascades, San Joaquins and other state supported lines. The extra overhead is minimized because states must already subsidize these lines independent of the long haul route.
Another thing that needs looking into is the miles traveled as a cost issue which was brought up earlier. Is the value of a single passenger carried 1000 miles at $100.00 any lower than 100 passengers carried 10 miles at $10.00 each? Minimizing extra crew, track maintenance, fuel and other long haul expenses will help better manage these cost. But a complete analysis would be advised.
"How does that subsidy per passenger, or passenger mile, and offsetting benefits from such a subsidy compare, in things like travel times savings, to the taxpayer who's stuck right now in the 5 hour daily traffic jam getting from LA to San Diego on I-5?"
It's not as if these long haulers are doing 100+. Far from it in most cases.
Stuck in traffic 5 hours daily is no fault of rural folk. Blame that on decades of poor urban planning.
"tiny handful of rural communities"
Communities where having rail is not a long stretch to implement, ie, mostly exist already. This tiny handful of communities exit mostly between large swaths of dense metropolises.
How much traffic delay benefit does a Montana taxpayer get for using that subsidy to buy a trip off of I-90.
Seeing how driving across the state is a good chunk of the day I imagine he/she saves a days wages each way.
"since most rural states are "recipient" states".
Amtrak's long routes are not exclusive to recipient states, in fact, the majority of the rural based stations are in states such as California, Texas, Illinois and etc. Also, many times there are rural recipient states sandwiched between non-recipient states. This is where connecting city pair lines may need improvement and should not be diminished.
I'm sure there are others things to consider, but I'll leave it so you can have the last word...you come across as the type.
What value does an urban dweller place on the value of an electrician working at a dam? If the urban area loses its power can a city dweller survive? If they lose their food can they manage? Do those in cities think it is wrong to subsidize doctors in luring them to work in rural areas to serve these electricians and farmers(which is the case for many rural doctors)? Do city people think it is fare that rural folk have some sort of long haul transportation or subsidized internet? What contribution to GDP and urban dwellers well being can be attributed to rural citizens? What is the minimum quality of life to be expected for living in a remote area and what quality of life for urbanites is generated from rural folk? Questions that are best left for politicians, maybe.
I think, as states keep adding intercity rail lines, long distance routes cost will continue to come down. Is it best to continue expansion which will continue benefiting the long haul or just gut the entire system?
Take the Coast Starlight that interlaces with Amtrak Cascades, San Joaquins and other state supported lines. The extra overhead is minimized because states must already subsidize these lines independent of the long haul route.
Another thing that needs looking into is the miles traveled as a cost issue which was brought up earlier. Is the value of a single passenger carried 1000 miles at $100.00 any lower than 100 passengers carried 10 miles at $10.00 each? Minimizing extra crew, track maintenance, fuel and other long haul expenses will help better manage these cost. But a complete analysis would be advised.
"How does that subsidy per passenger, or passenger mile, and offsetting benefits from such a subsidy compare, in things like travel times savings, to the taxpayer who's stuck right now in the 5 hour daily traffic jam getting from LA to San Diego on I-5?"
It's not as if these long haulers are doing 100+. Far from it in most cases.
Stuck in traffic 5 hours daily is no fault of rural folk. Blame that on decades of poor urban planning.
"tiny handful of rural communities"
Communities where having rail is not a long stretch to implement, ie, mostly exist already. This tiny handful of communities exit mostly between large swaths of dense metropolises.
How much traffic delay benefit does a Montana taxpayer get for using that subsidy to buy a trip off of I-90.
Seeing how driving across the state is a good chunk of the day I imagine he/she saves a days wages each way.
"since most rural states are "recipient" states".
Amtrak's long routes are not exclusive to recipient states, in fact, the majority of the rural based stations are in states such as California, Texas, Illinois and etc. Also, many times there are rural recipient states sandwiched between non-recipient states. This is where connecting city pair lines may need improvement and should not be diminished.
I'm sure there are others things to consider, but I'll leave it so you can have the last word...you come across as the type.
