 |
Re: Crowded?- Not Here- No One Rides Trains in America!
Author: Will
Date: 08-05-2011 - 13:42
OldPoleBurner Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nobody rides trains in America ?
>
> Yea, tell that to the nearly half million who
> crowd aboard BART trains every single weekday or
> the quarter million on weekends. Indeed, ever
> take a small boy to the Giants via Muni - and then
> back again? Don't do it - he will be literally
> crushed to death on-board if you let him stand
> beside you. Then, you will be pick-pocketed by
> your crushed up against you neighbor. And you
> better hope that person is not a woman, who will
> claim you "touched her" (as if you could have had
> any choice about it) And then there's the BART
> ride, with easily a thousand riders per train,
> every two minutes. Not as bad as Muni, but you
> will stand for the first twenty five miles.. . . .
> . Naw - nobody rides the train in America !
>
> Then of course, there are the several millions in
> in New York or Chicaco or Philly, or Washington or
> or or . . . . . Naw - nobody rides the train in
> America !
You are, of course, citing commuter rail. And yes, using years of experience riding the CTA, Metra and etc. during the am/pm rush hours seating can be iffy, but not impossible. During the non rush period, occupied seat counts go way down. On the CTA for instance, during non rush you may have the entire car to yourself. Non rush Metra, cars may be occupied, but you can still have a bench seat to yourself
In any event, here you are kinda doing an apple/orange thing, comparing long established local commuter rail service with long distance passenger service. These are really two different entities.
>
> In 1970, not too long before Amtrak, I had the
> occasion to ride ATSF, LA to San Diego several
> times. Each time the train was way crowded, with
> standees in every car. The last such trip was a
> Sunday night - 19 coaches and still there were
> standees. . . . . . Naw - nobody rides the train
> in America !
In 1977 I rode one of the Rock Island "Rockets" from Morris, IL to Chicago. At this point in time, I believe there was one baggage car and one coach. If I remember correctly, I was one of three passengers on the train. And, as an employee, I was riding deadhead.
>
>
> Every time I have ridden Amtrak since (at least a
> hundred times), The train was crowded. I've ridden
> the San Joaquins many times with standees aboard.
> I've ridden the Zephers a dozen times - always
> sold out. At sixteen trains each way each day,
> Even the Capitals are often crowded. In 1978, we
> took a trip to Seattle - what a god-awful mess
> that conductor had on his hands - a near riot - 15
> cars and too many people and still too few seats.
> It was 11 PM and at least 100 riders, all with
> reserved seats had no where to even sit, let alone
> sleep! . . . . . Naw - nobody rides the train in
> America !
Had a similar experience on the Lake Shore Limited from Boston, MA to Albany, NY. From Springfield, MA to Albany, my wife, son and I had to straddle our luggage in the aisle of the lounge. Because of the crowds??? No, because Amtrak couldn't handle a routine New England snow storm, it could not cough up enough coaches. Then we hit Albany, where we, the Boston section of the LSL, sat for 9 hours waiting for the delayed New York section of the LSL. Snow, you know. We did eventually arrive in Chicago. This was the last time we took Amtrak. Air travel from then on!!!
>
> Almost every year since the 1978 oil crisis,
> Amtrak ridership has increased over the previous
> year. The last few years, ridership levels have
> been exploding, despite the crappy unreliable
> service that Amtrak is noted for. Apparently,
> crappy unreliable train service is still better
> than driving, and Americans have obviously
> re-discovered that (assuming that they ever really
> did forget - which I doubt)
Can't argue with passenger counts, but, I would state that, for most Americans, the freedom and flexibility of driving far outweighs the regimented scheduling and routing demands made by rail (and air, for that matter) service.
>
> But Naw - nobody rides the train in America!
> Just ask any of the powers that be, how we just love
> the automobile;
Well, yes we do, all of us. Unless you live in a high density place like Chicago (and, even there, if you have a car, you use it, even a Ford F-100 (nothing like driving in Chicago in a pick-up, cops ticket you for driving on a boulevard)), where car storage, ie off-street parking, is really hard to come by, which has an extensive rail transit infrastructure and which has a compact retail store infrastructure, you will use automobiles for personal transportation. Going to Best Buy for a TV? Going to the A&P for groceries? More than likely you won't be going by public transit.
and how that somehow justifies
> the trillions that have been spent on highways.
This is an apples/oranges comparison, too. Of all the things that Uncle Sugar has done, the highly developed local road/arterial/highway system is the most egalitarian. Anybody can use the public highway system, rich, poor, commuter, tourist, day traveler, hobo. And, except for the interstate system, you can travel highways on bicycles, motorcycles, horses, skateboards and so on. Buses, trains and planes tend to be more elitist in the restrictive prices a traveler has to pay to use the system. Plus, unlike the highway system, neither Amtrak or United Airlines accommodate horses.
However, we could follow the Chicago, IL model and privatize the highway system. This would eliminate federal/state/local funding requirements, however, you, as a driver, pedestrian, etc. would have to pay a toll for every foot of roadway you used beyond the end of your driveway. Evening walk with your wife? Coupla bucks in tolls.
> Never mind that Americans obviously also love
> trains (that's why they always fail to kill
> Amtrak),
"they" don't kill it because of pandering and politics. Utility/feasibility of Amtrak has nothing to do with it.
but somehow spending anything on trains
> is somehow not justified.
Again, Amtrak is a somewhat elitist system, neither readily available to nor affordable by the average citizen.
>It makes reason stare,
> until you realize that it is not so much a case of
> dumb and dumber, but rather of pure favoritism (to
> the auto and oil industries), bordering on
> corruption.
No idea what this means.
> If you have any doubt that total corruption is
> rampant through and through - at every level of
> gov't and at almost every agency; I have worked
> for forty years in the rail industry (much of it
> with passenger rail) and have seen it all - every
> last sickening bit of it.
But, no backup proof documentation and etc. to make your argument meaningful.
And after that forty
> years is complete - I'm done! No more of it for
> me!
Congratulations!!! You get to retire!!! I was forced into early retirement because of the tanked economy and the fact that the citizens of the US do not think that investment in the rail/highway/water/sewer infrastructure is a notable goal.
>
> Just try to explain why congress set up the rules
> that govern publicly owned transportation the way
> they did - rules that force public agencies
> including Amtrak to pay up to ten to twenty times
> the private going rate for every mile of track and
> every loco they buy;
If you are going to issue libelous canards, the least you can do is provide documentation.
not to mention passenger cars
> that cost more than private locomotives do.
You wouldn't expect to buy a customized Cadillac for Chevy Malibu prices, why do you expect the railcar market to be different?
> Your choice is not between dumb and dumber. It is
> between Corrupt, and corrupter! Between those
> that sold out to the auto and oil industries (or
> any corporation for that matter); and those that
> give lip service to public ground transportation
> ,but all the while subvert it into costing ten to
> twenty times too much - thus severely handicapping
> it.
>
Tea Party thinking!!! Let's get real here. You want lower prices? Buy in volume, like everyone else.
> Still though, the real problem lies with the
> dumbed down voters
(you know - the product of our
> useless education system),
no!!!! Teaching the christian world viewpoint will not suffice. What we need, more than anything are posters who can think!!!
who cannot even tell
> the difference between lies and dammed lies; or
> dumb and dumber; or not even corrupt and
> corrupter. So NO!
America does not particularly
> "deserve" a better train system.
Correct. It doesn't "deserve" a thing. Nobody "deserves" anything (except us disabled veterans).
What it does
> deserve is the natural consequences of it own
> actions and choices. We will never even "deserve"
> the bread on our table, let alone better train
> service, unless we stop the madness at the polling
> booth.
And what "polling booth madness" are you talking about?
> And good luck with seeing that anytime
> soon!
Nothing new. Been going on from before 1776.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nobody rides trains in America ?
>
> Yea, tell that to the nearly half million who
> crowd aboard BART trains every single weekday or
> the quarter million on weekends. Indeed, ever
> take a small boy to the Giants via Muni - and then
> back again? Don't do it - he will be literally
> crushed to death on-board if you let him stand
> beside you. Then, you will be pick-pocketed by
> your crushed up against you neighbor. And you
> better hope that person is not a woman, who will
> claim you "touched her" (as if you could have had
> any choice about it) And then there's the BART
> ride, with easily a thousand riders per train,
> every two minutes. Not as bad as Muni, but you
> will stand for the first twenty five miles.. . . .
> . Naw - nobody rides the train in America !
>
> Then of course, there are the several millions in
> in New York or Chicaco or Philly, or Washington or
> or or . . . . . Naw - nobody rides the train in
> America !
You are, of course, citing commuter rail. And yes, using years of experience riding the CTA, Metra and etc. during the am/pm rush hours seating can be iffy, but not impossible. During the non rush period, occupied seat counts go way down. On the CTA for instance, during non rush you may have the entire car to yourself. Non rush Metra, cars may be occupied, but you can still have a bench seat to yourself
In any event, here you are kinda doing an apple/orange thing, comparing long established local commuter rail service with long distance passenger service. These are really two different entities.
>
> In 1970, not too long before Amtrak, I had the
> occasion to ride ATSF, LA to San Diego several
> times. Each time the train was way crowded, with
> standees in every car. The last such trip was a
> Sunday night - 19 coaches and still there were
> standees. . . . . . Naw - nobody rides the train
> in America !
In 1977 I rode one of the Rock Island "Rockets" from Morris, IL to Chicago. At this point in time, I believe there was one baggage car and one coach. If I remember correctly, I was one of three passengers on the train. And, as an employee, I was riding deadhead.
>
>
> Every time I have ridden Amtrak since (at least a
> hundred times), The train was crowded. I've ridden
> the San Joaquins many times with standees aboard.
> I've ridden the Zephers a dozen times - always
> sold out. At sixteen trains each way each day,
> Even the Capitals are often crowded. In 1978, we
> took a trip to Seattle - what a god-awful mess
> that conductor had on his hands - a near riot - 15
> cars and too many people and still too few seats.
> It was 11 PM and at least 100 riders, all with
> reserved seats had no where to even sit, let alone
> sleep! . . . . . Naw - nobody rides the train in
> America !
Had a similar experience on the Lake Shore Limited from Boston, MA to Albany, NY. From Springfield, MA to Albany, my wife, son and I had to straddle our luggage in the aisle of the lounge. Because of the crowds??? No, because Amtrak couldn't handle a routine New England snow storm, it could not cough up enough coaches. Then we hit Albany, where we, the Boston section of the LSL, sat for 9 hours waiting for the delayed New York section of the LSL. Snow, you know. We did eventually arrive in Chicago. This was the last time we took Amtrak. Air travel from then on!!!
>
> Almost every year since the 1978 oil crisis,
> Amtrak ridership has increased over the previous
> year. The last few years, ridership levels have
> been exploding, despite the crappy unreliable
> service that Amtrak is noted for. Apparently,
> crappy unreliable train service is still better
> than driving, and Americans have obviously
> re-discovered that (assuming that they ever really
> did forget - which I doubt)
Can't argue with passenger counts, but, I would state that, for most Americans, the freedom and flexibility of driving far outweighs the regimented scheduling and routing demands made by rail (and air, for that matter) service.
>
> But Naw - nobody rides the train in America!
> Just ask any of the powers that be, how we just love
> the automobile;
Well, yes we do, all of us. Unless you live in a high density place like Chicago (and, even there, if you have a car, you use it, even a Ford F-100 (nothing like driving in Chicago in a pick-up, cops ticket you for driving on a boulevard)), where car storage, ie off-street parking, is really hard to come by, which has an extensive rail transit infrastructure and which has a compact retail store infrastructure, you will use automobiles for personal transportation. Going to Best Buy for a TV? Going to the A&P for groceries? More than likely you won't be going by public transit.
and how that somehow justifies
> the trillions that have been spent on highways.
This is an apples/oranges comparison, too. Of all the things that Uncle Sugar has done, the highly developed local road/arterial/highway system is the most egalitarian. Anybody can use the public highway system, rich, poor, commuter, tourist, day traveler, hobo. And, except for the interstate system, you can travel highways on bicycles, motorcycles, horses, skateboards and so on. Buses, trains and planes tend to be more elitist in the restrictive prices a traveler has to pay to use the system. Plus, unlike the highway system, neither Amtrak or United Airlines accommodate horses.
However, we could follow the Chicago, IL model and privatize the highway system. This would eliminate federal/state/local funding requirements, however, you, as a driver, pedestrian, etc. would have to pay a toll for every foot of roadway you used beyond the end of your driveway. Evening walk with your wife? Coupla bucks in tolls.
> Never mind that Americans obviously also love
> trains (that's why they always fail to kill
> Amtrak),
"they" don't kill it because of pandering and politics. Utility/feasibility of Amtrak has nothing to do with it.
but somehow spending anything on trains
> is somehow not justified.
Again, Amtrak is a somewhat elitist system, neither readily available to nor affordable by the average citizen.
>It makes reason stare,
> until you realize that it is not so much a case of
> dumb and dumber, but rather of pure favoritism (to
> the auto and oil industries), bordering on
> corruption.
No idea what this means.
> If you have any doubt that total corruption is
> rampant through and through - at every level of
> gov't and at almost every agency; I have worked
> for forty years in the rail industry (much of it
> with passenger rail) and have seen it all - every
> last sickening bit of it.
But, no backup proof documentation and etc. to make your argument meaningful.
And after that forty
> years is complete - I'm done! No more of it for
> me!
Congratulations!!! You get to retire!!! I was forced into early retirement because of the tanked economy and the fact that the citizens of the US do not think that investment in the rail/highway/water/sewer infrastructure is a notable goal.
>
> Just try to explain why congress set up the rules
> that govern publicly owned transportation the way
> they did - rules that force public agencies
> including Amtrak to pay up to ten to twenty times
> the private going rate for every mile of track and
> every loco they buy;
If you are going to issue libelous canards, the least you can do is provide documentation.
not to mention passenger cars
> that cost more than private locomotives do.
You wouldn't expect to buy a customized Cadillac for Chevy Malibu prices, why do you expect the railcar market to be different?
> Your choice is not between dumb and dumber. It is
> between Corrupt, and corrupter! Between those
> that sold out to the auto and oil industries (or
> any corporation for that matter); and those that
> give lip service to public ground transportation
> ,but all the while subvert it into costing ten to
> twenty times too much - thus severely handicapping
> it.
>
Tea Party thinking!!! Let's get real here. You want lower prices? Buy in volume, like everyone else.
> Still though, the real problem lies with the
> dumbed down voters
(you know - the product of our
> useless education system),
no!!!! Teaching the christian world viewpoint will not suffice. What we need, more than anything are posters who can think!!!
who cannot even tell
> the difference between lies and dammed lies; or
> dumb and dumber; or not even corrupt and
> corrupter. So NO!
America does not particularly
> "deserve" a better train system.
Correct. It doesn't "deserve" a thing. Nobody "deserves" anything (except us disabled veterans).
What it does
> deserve is the natural consequences of it own
> actions and choices. We will never even "deserve"
> the bread on our table, let alone better train
> service, unless we stop the madness at the polling
> booth.
And what "polling booth madness" are you talking about?
> And good luck with seeing that anytime
> soon!
Nothing new. Been going on from before 1776.
| Subject | Written By | Date/Time (PST) |
|---|---|---|
 Crowded Train
|
Jack | 08-05-2011 - 04:16 |
|
Re: Crowded Train
|
1stcajon | 08-05-2011 - 08:55 |
|
Re: Crowded Train
|
!stcajon | 08-05-2011 - 08:58 |
|
Re: Crowded?- Not Here- No One Rides Trains in America!
|
BOB2 | 08-05-2011 - 09:40 |
|
Re: Crowded?- Not Here- No One Rides Trains in America!
|
OldPoleBurner | 08-05-2011 - 11:40 |
|
Re: Crowded?- Not Here- No One Rides Trains in America! |
Will | 08-05-2011 - 13:42 |
|
Re: Crowded?- Not Here- No One Rides Trains in America!
|
OldPoleBurner | 08-05-2011 - 15:26 |
|
Re: Crowded?- Not Here- No One Rides Trains in America!
|
Rail Fan | 08-05-2011 - 16:55 |
|
Re: Crowded?- Not Here- No One Rides Trains in America!
|
OldPoleBurner | 08-05-2011 - 19:09 |
|
Re: Crowded?- Not Here- No One Rides Trains in America!
|
Rail Fan | 08-06-2011 - 17:41 |
|
Re: Crowded Train
|
Shannon | 08-05-2011 - 13:47 |
|
Re: Crowded Train
|
Reader | 08-05-2011 - 14:08 |
|
Re: Rail Fan???? Or Congressman???
|
BOB2 | 08-08-2011 - 00:22 |
|
Re: Rail Fan???? Or Congressman???
|
I'll take congressman | 08-08-2011 - 07:30 |