Amtrak Debate

[Bob Dylan]

Economists are like AGR Agents- Ask Ten and youll get Ten different Answers! When you pin one of those Fakers down they end up being like what's behind the curtain in the Wizard of Oz!! (And Yes, ALL Budgets in Washington have more Padding than the Amtrak LD Schedules <_< !!)

 

[George Harris]

Economists are like AGR Agents- Ask Ten and youll get Ten different Answers! When you pin one of those Fakers down they end up being like what's behind the curtain in the Wizard of Oz!! (And Yes, ALL Budgets in Washington have more Padding than the Amtrak LD Schedules <_< !!)

:hi: :hi: :hi: Yea, and verily!!! Absolutely true. :hi: :hi: :hi: :hi:

 

[alanh]

Heh. I can do that sort of stuff too and I also lead a boring life. The military budget is particularly hard to track though, there's a practice of scattering money for essentially military projects around (not just in the DoD), so I have tended to rely on others for totals.

A very good point. For example, nearly half of the Department of Energy's budget is devoted to running the military's nuclear program -- warheads, submarines, etc.
Of course the US should have a strong defense, but this doesn't mean we have to write blank checks to military contractors either.

 

[Alexandria Nick]

Heh. I can do that sort of stuff too and I also lead a boring life. The military budget is particularly hard to track though, there's a practice of scattering money for essentially military projects around (not just in the DoD), so I have tended to rely on others for totals.

A very good point. For example, nearly half of the Department of Energy's budget is devoted to running the military's nuclear program -- warheads, submarines, etc.
Of course the US should have a strong defense, but this doesn't mean we have to write blank checks to military contractors either.

The DoE was originally the Atomic Energy Commission. They're supposed to be doing the military nuclear stuff. The rest is all, really, mission creep.

 

[Agent]

Despite not being mentioned in the actual debate, Amtrak still got mentioned in Saturday Night Live's spoof of the debate. (Start around 3:38)

 

[George Harris]

Despite not being mentioned in the actual debate, Amtrak still got mentioned in Saturday Night Live's spoof of the debate. (Start around 3:38)

SNL is on my list of programs I will watch if tied to a chair with my eyes glued open. :angry2:

 

[Bob Dylan]

Despite not being mentioned in the actual debate, Amtrak still got mentioned in Saturday Night Live's spoof of the debate. (Start around 3:38)

SNL is on my list of programs I will watch if tied to a chair with my eyes glued open. :angry2:

What about Colbert and The Daily Show on Comedy Central George? Good Political Satire is always Great no matter where it's shown!!!!

 

[Old MM]

Here is what galls me about the whole "We need a businessman" line of reasoning. We need business people to run businesses, not government. I don't care if LD trains EVER show a profit and as Alan said, it's not even a drop in the ocean of government spending. So say you have a businessman, or woman, and they look at their budget line by line and think, "Hmmm.. this line is losing money. Have to cut it out." It's a valid statement as far as it goes but as applied to government it is so simplistic as to be irrelevent. For example, the business owner who generates waste, even toxic waste, will dispose of it as cheaply as possible without regard to the environment or human health, were it not for government dictating how the waste is to be disposed of. And if they do it illegally, we have funding to clean it up. Does that make money? No that costs money, a lot of it. But the advantages to the citizens outweighs all cost factors. Back to Amtrak. Little spending, little risk, big benefits. I don't need to outline the benefits of Amtrak to this forum!

 

[Devil's Advocate]

1349998049[/url]' post='398911']

1349992737[/url]' post='398904'][Moderator's Note]

Although it hasn't become one yet, let not have this become a Republican vs Democrat thread!

but, let's have free discussion. romney, i believe, wants to eliminate amtrak or the federal subsidy at any rate. obama, i believe, wants to increase funding, at least for high speed rail. although, as frequently pointed out, congress passes appropriations it may well matter who is in the white house as far as the direction for amtrak and passenger rail

I'll allow that comment, but consider that EVERY President and Presidential candidate (of both parties) has wanted to eliminate Amtrak, and some have even proposed a $-0- budget for Amtrak!

This has to be the most blatantly dishonest thing I've ever read on this entire forum. Ever. By anyone. Unless you can cite when and where Bill Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, and Barack Obama stated their desire and intention to eliminate Amtrak I think you need to owe it to the forum to admit you simply made it up.

 

[Bob Dylan]

Good to see Chris back, as usual he makes his point with Emphasis!(those Made up Comments seem to be happening more and more during this Political Season and as Dis- Functional Illiterates Surf the Web more and more!) With the exception of Jimmy Carter basically cutting the Amtrak LD Network, the only President that I am aware of that "Zeroed Out" Amtrak in his Budget was George the Lesser but Congress continued to fund it! Our own Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison R-Texas,who unfortunately is retiring,saved the Texas Eagle and helped increase funding for Amtrak several times! She'll be missed!

 

[JayPea]

If I remember right Ronald Reagan either zeroed out Amtrak's budget or threatened to. I'm not aware of any other Presidents who did so other than the examples Jim mentioned. And in the case of Reagan, Amtrak of course kept chugging along, pun entirely intended.

 

[jis]

If I remember right Ronald Reagan either zeroed out Amtrak's budget or threatened to. I'm not aware of any other Presidents who did so other than the examples Jim mentioned. And in the case of Reagan, Amtrak of course kept chugging along, pun entirely intended.

AFAIR it was David Stockman's mission in life to zero out Amtrak. But he did not last that long.

AFAIR Carter never said anything about killing Amtrak. He was in office when Amtrak went through one of its periodic crises of equipment and poor budget management, and had to back off from its previous over-reach. Like many other things Carter is a safe bet to blame everything on.

 

[George Harris]

Here is what galls me about the whole "We need a businessman" line of reasoning. We need business people to run businesses, not government. I don't care if LD trains EVER show a profit and as Alan said, it's not even a drop in the ocean of government spending. So say you have a businessman, or woman, and they look at their budget line by line and think, "Hmmm.. this line is losing money. Have to cut it out." It's a valid statement as far as it goes but as applied to government it is so simplistic as to be irrelevent. For example, the business owner who generates waste, even toxic waste, will dispose of it as cheaply as possible without regard to the environment or human health, were it not for government dictating how the waste is to be disposed of. And if they do it illegally, we have funding to clean it up. Does that make money? No that costs money, a lot of it. But the advantages to the citizens outweighs all cost factors. Back to Amtrak. Little spending, little risk, big benefits. I don't need to outline the benefits of Amtrak to this forum!

You are missing the point. The objective is to operate govenment agencies efficiently. It is not altogether a joke that those who cannot make it working in the private sector end up in government service. Likewise, in many cases a person's professional progress in a government agency is frequently dependent upon the seminars he attends and level of education he has achieved rather than his real on the job performance.

Amtrak is actually one of the more efficient of government or more aptly quasi-guvenmental agencies. If you compare them to many of the European railway agencies, Amtrak produces more passenger miles per manhour and amount of equipment than most of them, despite having a much denser service which should lead to considerable efficiencies.

 

[Bob Dylan]

:hi: Excellent Post George,thanks! What you say is True, and if one wants to look @ Private Sector Conmpanies that are much worse run than Amtrak you could start with the Airlines (exception would be SWA)and all of the "Too Big to Fail" Banks!

Most Civil Servants in Washington (and all levels of Governement) are Hard Working, Dedicated Public Servants that earn their Pay and Benefits, the Real Problem Basically are the Politicians!

 

[Devil's Advocate]

[Moderator's Note]

Although it hasn't become one yet, let not have this become a Republican vs Democrat thread!

but, let's have free discussion. romney, i believe, wants to eliminate amtrak or the federal subsidy at any rate. obama, i believe, wants to increase funding, at least for high speed rail. although, as frequently pointed out, congress passes appropriations it may well matter who is in the white house as far as the direction for amtrak and passenger rail

I'll allow that comment, but consider that EVERY President and Presidential candidate (of both parties) has wanted to eliminate Amtrak, and some have even proposed a $-0- budget for Amtrak!

This has to be the most blatantly dishonest thing I've ever read on this entire forum. Ever. By anyone. Unless you can cite when and where Bill Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, and Barack Obama stated their desire and intention to eliminate Amtrak I think you need to owe it to the forum to admit you simply made it up.

Still no examples to back up your completely erroneous claims, Dave?