> Harmon Seaver[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote > > On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 07:32:10AM -0800, Marshall Clow wrote: > > >[snip] > > > Exactly. Trains are great. I currently live 80 miles from both > Milwaukee and > > >Madison. > > > > I recently had to travel from San Diego to San Francisco. > > I investigated three options (all times are door to door) > > 1) Flying - about 4 hours - $95 round trip. > > 2) Driving - about 8 hours - $60 round trip > > 3) Train - about 17 hours - $130 round trip. > > > > Help me out here - why would I take the train? > > Comfort, for one. Vastly greater comfort, no hassles with airport thugs, > etc. > Also, you didn't factor in the subsidies. Those prices would change > greatly if > you took away the billions given to airlines recently, and the 100 years > of > subsidies to trucks. Travel times for the trains would be much, much > better by > now as well. Look at Japan and Europe -- trains work extremely well. > > Harmon Seaver > Factor in the subsidies? OK, lets start with the $20 odd billion in subsidies Amtrak has burned through since its inception. Back in '97 the average subsidy for a Chicago to Denver passenger was $650.
Counting in subsidies, that $130 round trip is probably over to $300, most of it from taxpayers. It would be cheaper to close down the whole system, and give passengers free (to them) bus or air tickets. Cites: http://www.cato.org/dailys/5-22-97.html http://www.publicpurpose.com/ic-amtroute.htm Peter Trei
