posted
excellent article in today's Washington edition of the N.Y. Times. (www.nytimes.com/2006/12/23/washington/23amtrak.html?) It's about the growth of Amtrak and the new president among other things. It came to me via a google alert.
TwinStarRocket Member # 2142
posted
Thank you for that link. I am very encouraged by Mr. Kummant's comments on long distance. Here are excerpts in case the link expires:
"He also said he did not intend to slash the long-distance network because it was a national asset that, once lost, would probably never be recovered."
"The cost of cross-country trains comes to about a dollar and a half per American per year, he said, and they are irreplaceable. He compared trains like the Empire Builder and the City of New Orleans to assets like national parks."
Gilbert B Norman Member # 1541
posted
Nice to see that Don Phillips contributed to the article. Now that he is 'back Stateside', I hope to see his byline a bit more in my "morning read' of the past 55 years.
Dan Machalaba at the Journal is a fine transportation reporter, but with Phillips and Matt Wald, along with Michelline Maynard's reporting of air transport industry affairs, The Times has 'the powerhouse".
train lady Member # 3920
posted
I have signed up on Google alerts for info on the Senate and House "doings" on Amtrak. Interesting things come up almost every day
sojourner Member # 3134
posted
I am very excited about this. I have phoned Amtrak and many Congresspeople in the past few years and suggested the long-distance trains are like traveling national parks, so I feel like my advice has been heeded!
However, that Government Accounting Office report worries me. To me it's like saying Yellowstone Park does not help with the problem of urban sprawl and urban crime; let's stop funding it.
TwinStarRocket Member # 2142
posted
Now there is a good way reign in government spending. Let's put Yellowstone Park on a glidepath to profitability. Open it 3 days a week only to reduce staff. Raise the prices for restaurant food, which will be pre-made and mailed in from Jaurez. Overlooks should be closed since they are not revenue space. By reducing wasteful luxury attractions, we could get by with just a few rangers to open all the gates and clean the toilets.
Soon, for the price of subsidizing each visitor, the government could probably buy each of them a ticket to Disney World instead, where they can view nature as man meant it to be. The trees there are easier to maintain, and there is always the more efficient and reliable pavement.
National Parks are only supported by a small nostalgic group of nature fanatics who are not living in the present. Why support a destination used only by a tiny percentage of vacationers when we could put taxpayer money to better use expanding Las Vegas or Branson.
sojourner Member # 3134
posted
hahaha very good, Twin Star. I think you should send it to the newspaper. You can call it "A Modest Proposal."
Don't forget to change the name of Old Faithful to Old Wasteful. . . .
notelvis Member # 3071
posted
Do they have ponies and bagpipes at Yellowstone?
Liberty Limited Member # 4300
posted
Very thought provoking post, Twin Star, thanks! All the while I was reading it, I kept on thinking what a nice retort it would make at another well known Amtrak forum to which I belong, which has a Moderator who is less than receptive regarding the LD network, and extremely obsessive about fiscal comparisons between LD trains and other modes.
train lady Member # 3920
posted
good grief, Twin Star, don't let your thoughts get to Washington. Some idiot,of whom there are many, will take you seriously and we will be fighting to keep our National parks.
RRRICH Member # 1418
posted
Twin Star -- right on, Man!!!!!!!!!!!! GREAT analogy there!!!!! But, as Sojourner said, don't let any "Congress critters" hear that, or they may take you seriously!!!!
posted