Equipped To Survive Equipped To Survive® Presents
The Survival Forum
Where do you want to go on ETS?

Page 4 of 4 < 1 2 3 4
Topic Options
#120604 - 01/17/08 11:05 PM Re: Holy Buckets! [Re: MoBOB]
Art_in_FL Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 2432
Originally Posted By: MoBOB
Originally Posted By: Art_in_FL
Actually all other forms of transportation besides trains get large subsidies.


I think you forgot about a relativley large albatross...

Can you say "AMTRAK"? Tons and tons of Gov't money poured into it every year.


That "Tons and tons of Gov't money" actual wasn't that much compared the amount used to subsidize other forms of transportation. Also, before making believe that the trains are inherently less profitable than airlines, remember that railroads have to buy or lease and maintain their routes out of their accounts and on their very public books.

Airlines are provided radar and air traffic control by the federal government. States and municipalities buy the land for and build the airports. None of these cost show on airline books.

Truckers get it good also. Interstates are financed by tax money. Truckers pay a fuel tax but it is not even a drop in the bucket of actual costs. The highways are provided essentially gratis by taxpayers. But it doesn't show up on the news so everyone makes believe airlines and truckers are 'standing on their own two feet' while railroads are 'deadbeats on welfare'.

If all the transportation modalities had to cover their own costs trains would win easily because in terms of building, maintenance, energy and management costs they are by far the most efficient.

On the other end, if railroads were subsidized by the government, if the government just build and maintained the rails like they do highways and airways, the railroads would be much more profitable than either trucking or airlines.

Bottom line is that railroads only look like "a relatively large albatross" because they compete with transportation modalities that are much more highly subsidized than they are.

If railroads were subsidized at similar levels to trucking, airlines and shipping cargo and passengers would shift to railroads and, over time, the total amount of subsidies could be decrease. The cost of travel and shipping and need for foreign oil would also be reduced.

Top
#120606 - 01/17/08 11:06 PM Re: Holy Buckets! [Re: RayW]
Art_in_FL Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 2432
Originally Posted By: MoBOB
Originally Posted By: Art_in_FL
Actually all other forms of transportation besides trains get large subsidies.


I think you forgot about a relativley large albatross...

Can you say "AMTRAK"? Tons and tons of Gov't money poured into it every year.


That "Tons and tons of Gov't money" actual wasn't that much compared the amount used to subsidize other forms of transportation. Also, before making believe that the trains are inherently less profitable than airlines, remember that railroads have to buy or lease and maintain their routes out of their accounts and on their very public books.

Airlines are provided radar and air traffic control by the federal government. States and municipalities buy the land for and build the airports. None of these cost show on airline books.

Truckers get it good also. Interstates are financed by tax money. Truckers pay a fuel tax but it is not even a drop in the bucket of actual costs. The highways are provided essentially gratis by taxpayers. But it doesn't show up on the news so everyone makes believe airlines and truckers are 'standing on their own two feet' while railroads are 'deadbeats on welfare'.

If all the transportation modalities had to cover their own costs trains would win easily because in terms of building, maintenance, energy and management costs they are by far the most efficient.

On the other end, if railroads were subsidized by the government, if the government just build and maintained the rails like they do highways and airways, the railroads would be much more profitable than either trucking or airlines.

Bottom line is that railroads only look like "a relatively large albatross" because they compete with transportation modalities that are much more highly subsidized than they are.

If railroads were subsidized at similar levels to trucking, airlines and shipping cargo and passengers would shift to railroads and, over time, the total amount of subsidies could be decrease. The cost of travel and shipping and need for foreign oil would also be reduced.

Top
Page 4 of 4 < 1 2 3 4



Moderator:  MartinFocazio, Tyber 
September
Su M Tu W Th F Sa
1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30
Who's Online
2 registered (UncleGoo, hikermor), 323 Guests and 4 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
brenaline, keril, MarcusPetz, CBlackRaven, TnSweetie
5322 Registered Users
Newest Posts
An example of failed prep
by roberttheiii
45 minutes 54 seconds ago
More power sources!
by dougwalkabout
Today at 01:56 PM
Knife sharpening
by NAro
Today at 12:48 PM
Two Strand Stopper Knot
by TonyE
Yesterday at 06:25 PM
Mistakes I have seem...
by Phaedrus
09/27/20 03:24 AM
Radiooddity DB25 shortwave transceiver
by Tyber
09/25/20 03:56 PM
'Into the Wild' bus removed from Alaska trail
by dougwalkabout
09/25/20 03:18 PM
I'd like to improve my night vision capabilities
by Michael2
09/24/20 04:54 PM
Newest Images
Tiny knife / wrench
Handmade knives
2"x2" Glass Signal Mirror, Retroreflective Mesh
Trade School Tool Kit
My Pocket Kit
Glossary
Test

WARNING & DISCLAIMER: SELECT AND USE OUTDOORS AND SURVIVAL EQUIPMENT, SUPPLIES AND TECHNIQUES AT YOUR OWN RISK. Information posted on this forum is not reviewed for accuracy and may not be reliable, use at your own risk. Please review the full WARNING & DISCLAIMER about information on this site.