David Gunn (Amtrak) Fired today
D. Kirkpatrick
http://www.nationalcorridors.org/df/df11092005.shtml
Fired Weds morning.
R.Glueck
I'm sure he prayed on this decision and God told him what to do---again.
"D. Kirkpatrick" <sun...@sunclad.com> wrote in message
news:sunclad-1899F1...@news.verizon.net...
Jerry
"R.Glueck" <glu...@maine.edu> wrote in message
news:dl7jav$dfm$1...@tturner.unet.maine.edu...
> The abysmal, failed, Bush administration does it again!
> I'm sure he prayed on this decision and God told him what to do---again.
The socialists (gimme sumpin' fer nutting crowd) fail to consider the fact
that the public does NOT ride the train anymore except for the Northeast
Corridor where the passenger traffic density will support it. Amtrak likely
WILL fade into a more or less local operation.
So let's continue to pour money from the public coffers into a socialistic
failure. Conrail managed to wean itself off the public dole because the
TRAFFIC was there to support it and because it got a good old Southern
Railway manager to show 'em how to run a railroad! ;) Amtrak cannot do that
because the public is emanored with airplanes and they do NOT ride. Simple
economics which fly right over the heads of the tax and spend crowd. So we
have a "few" people that want the government to continue to support a failed
operation and another few that want us to run this giant trainset around the
country so the choo choo foamers can drool at the sight of a passenger
train. If there was money in passenger trains, the freight roads wouldn't
have abandoned them.
Amtrak has mostly lost money from the beginning. I doubt Mr Bush was in a
position to do anything about it in the interim 35 years.
Jerry
retired 23 years Sou and NS
Brian Paul Ehni
"Jerry" <jox...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> The socialists (gimme sumpin' fer nutting crowd) fail to consider the fact
> that the public does NOT ride the train anymore except for the Northeast
> Corridor where the passenger traffic density will support it. Amtrak likely
> WILL fade into a more or less local operation.
> So let's continue to pour money from the public coffers into a socialistic
> failure. Conrail managed to wean itself off the public dole because the
> TRAFFIC was there to support it and because it got a good old Southern
> Railway manager to show 'em how to run a railroad! ;) Amtrak cannot do that
> because the public is emanored with airplanes and they do NOT ride. Simple
> economics which fly right over the heads of the tax and spend crowd. So we
> have a "few" people that want the government to continue to support a failed
> operation and another few that want us to run this giant trainset around the
> country so the choo choo foamers can drool at the sight of a passenger
> train. If there was money in passenger trains, the freight roads wouldn't
> have abandoned them.
>
> Amtrak has mostly lost money from the beginning. I doubt Mr Bush was in a
> position to do anything about it in the interim 35 years.
>
> Jerry
> retired 23 years Sou and NS
Save your breath; this kind of guy will believe Bush is responsible for
causing sunspots!
In reality, Amtrak has been a grossly mismanaged mess from day one,
regardless of administration, and NO administration, Republican or
Democratic, has ever given it the budget it needs to sustain itself.
--
Brian Ehni
Everett M. Greene
> "R.Glueck" <glu...@maine.edu> wrote
> > "D. Kirkpatrick" <sun...@sunclad.com> wrote
> > The abysmal, failed, Bush administration does it again!
> > I'm sure he prayed on this decision and God told him what to do---again.
>
> The socialists (gimme sumpin' fer nutting crowd) fail to consider the fact
> that the public does NOT ride the train anymore except for the Northeast
> Corridor where the passenger traffic density will support it. Amtrak likely
> WILL fade into a more or less local operation.
> So let's continue to pour money from the public coffers into a socialistic
> failure. Conrail managed to wean itself off the public dole because the
> TRAFFIC was there to support it and because it got a good old Southern
> Railway manager to show 'em how to run a railroad! ;) Amtrak cannot do that
> because the public is emanored with airplanes and they do NOT ride. Simple
> economics which fly right over the heads of the tax and spend crowd. So we
> have a "few" people that want the government to continue to support a failed
> operation and another few that want us to run this giant trainset around the
> country so the choo choo foamers can drool at the sight of a passenger
> train. If there was money in passenger trains, the freight roads wouldn't
> have abandoned them.
What do we do about the subsidies that the airlines get?
Automobiles are subsidized to a high degree although
fuel and other taxes are supposed to make them pay-as-you-go.
I read somewhere that the aviation industry is a net loss
to investors in its nearly 100 year history.
> Amtrak has mostly lost money from the beginning. I doubt
> Mr Bush was in a position to do anything about it in the
> interim 35 years.
And there is such a thing as providing things as a public
service, profitable or not.
User
says...
lacked the political finesse to manage a railroad when under the thumb
of a supervisory body. When running Washington Metro he fought most
undiplomatically with the city council and metro board, refusing to talk
to some members and occasionally walking out of meetings when budget
matters arose. His attitude was that if you wanted it built he would
build it, if you wanted it fixed he'd fix it, if you wanted to know
where every nickel and dime was or went he'd rather you find some pencil
pushing geek who would make a feeble attempt at explaining it while
kissing ass and boots.
Bob
--
The goal when driving is to miss the maximum number of objects.
Ashton Crusher
Autos are NOT subsidized to any "high degree". Auto users pay about
90 to 95% of the cost of the road system thru their taxes. Autos are
about the least subsidized form of transit there is. The federal tax
that's collected from ROAD USERS gives about 20% of it's "income" to
various mass transit projects that pay LITTLE or NO TAXES into the
fund.
Everett M. Greene
I seriously doubt that anywhere near 20% of fuel and highway
use taxes are diverted to mass transportation. That would
be one huge diversion and would have mass transit proponents
salivating!
Has the cost of developers being required to deed the
land for streets in new developments to the government
been included in the figures quoted for auotmobile
subsidies?
whitroth
>
> http://www.nationalcorridors.org/df/df11092005.shtml
>
> Fired Weds morning.
Wonderful. "Broken up and sold..." to who, NS, and maybe they'll change
their name to PRR?
mark
--
To a fanatical libertarian, our [law] code is just. If a poor man can
afford a four hundred dollar an hour lawyer, he can get the same
protection as a rich man. - schwepes
Peter W.
> D. Kirkpatrick wrote:
>
> >http://www.nationalcorridors.org/df/df11092005.shtml
>
> > Fired Weds morning.
>
> Wonderful. "Broken up and sold..." to who, NS, and maybe they'll change
> their name to PRR?
>
> mark
>
H U H ?!?!
This thread is from 2005!! Did you just wake up from a coma? It is
now year 2008. AFAIK, Amtrak is still operating (more or less).
Peteski
Paul Newhouse
whitroth <whit...@rcn.com> writes:
> D. Kirkpatrick wrote:
>>
>> http://www.nationalcorridors.org/df/df11092005.shtml
>>
>> Fired Weds morning.
>
> Wonderful. "Broken up and sold..." to who, NS, and maybe they'll change
> their name to PRR?
>
> mark
So what has happened since 2005 on this?
Paul
--
Excuse me, I'll be right back. I have to log onto a server in Romania
and verify all of my EBay, PayPal, bank and Social Security information
before they suspend my accounts.
Working the rockie road of the G&PX
Wolf Kirchmeir
> D. Kirkpatrick wrote:
>> http://www.nationalcorridors.org/df/df11092005.shtml
>>
>> Fired Weds morning.
>
> Wonderful. "Broken up and sold..." to who, NS, and maybe they'll change
> their name to PRR?
>
> mark
>
<sarcasm>
Well, of course private interests want to get their grubby paws on the
NE Corridor. It's the only profitable part of the system. After all,
it's only fair that if there's a profit to be made, it should be
_private_ profit. _Public_ profits are a evil! Might give the more
progressive elements in Congress some "socialist" ideas, such as
spending the profit to subsidies non-profitable routes.
Oh wait, they're doing that already.
I guess we have to kill Amtrak. No profit in it.
</sarcasm>
--
Wolf Kirchmeir
Val
"whitroth" <whit...@rcn.com> wrote in message
news:gauvb...@news7.newsguy.com...
umar
>Well, of course private interests want to get their grubby paws on the
>NE Corridor. It's the only profitable part of the system.
I suspect it's not profitable, although a company that just
ran trains on rails maintained at someone else's expense might make
some money.
umar
--
The destination of this brain is... Traintree!
saucer...@webtv.com
(in article <20051121.7...@mojaveg.iwvisp.com>):
"The astronomical growth in the practice of using highway funds to pay for
politically motivated projects is one of the most disconcerting examples of
improper use of highway funds. Some experts estimate that total diversions of
gasoline tax dollars away from legitimate general road use equal nearly 40
percent of the Highway Trust Fund¹s annual budget." (Ronald Utt, Ph.D.,
³Reauthorization of TEA-21: A Primer on Reforming the Federal Highway and
Transit Programs,² Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 1643 (April 7, 2003).
el...@no.spam
Sir F. A. Rien <jaS...@gbr.online.com> wrote:
>Wonder IF we could divert some more of that and get/keep some STEAM locos
>running?
Do you have any idea how much labor is involved with steam?