Amtrak subsidy

[iron_mountain]

First, I will say that I am impressed by the apparent level of expertise demonstrated by many of the contributors to this website. The knowledge of accounting, economics, history, and railroading is great.

So I would consider myself a layman in the sense that I don’t have the knowledge background of many of the contributors. But I nave noticed in some instances that the layman posseses a perception that the experts do not always have.

I have spent a number of years reading how to break down subsidy costs that Amtrak and other modes of transportation are figured and the subsequent debates about the cost. I think that this cost analysis depends on who is doing the figuring. I am not saying it is inaccurate just that it depends how you look at it. Whose ox is getting gored.

I have read about subsidies to other industries looking for analgous examples in relation to Amtrak, such as airlines, highways, autos, pro sports stadiums, utilites, and so on. It seems to me that generally people are willing to pay for what they want to have. One example is pro sports stadiums. I have never read an article that could justify the expense of building one. The owners are billionaires who have enough inluence in the government to get taxpayers to ante up for something that simply does not pay (except to the owners) and is not needed. I think that is especially true for pro football. But people seem to be willing to pay for that. And it is not even a majority of the population that desires such. There are other examples of entities that are subsidized, some more needed that others, such as water treatment, public schools, transportation, rural electrification, and so on. There are TIFS for industry expansion and development shopping malls. My point is that everything has some degree of private/government cooperation and dollar return to isn’t always the main part. And everyone contributing to what our government determi

[blue_streak_1]

Iron Mountain –

Although I tend to steer away from the discussions of subsidies and concentrate on operational items I have to think that you have blended this into a compact version.

[Overmod]

I don’t know if my figures are accurate but I figured that the Amtrak line item in the federal budget (which our government has illegaly avoided making) is a small fraction of 1% of the total budget. So I have to ask what is the big controversy about? There are costs that could be trimmed and have a greater impact on spending reduction.

Correct. The problem is that the Amtrak budget is low-hanging fruit for politicians who don’t want cuts to entitlements or other set-asides they find more expedient. Easy to get a rep for hardheaded protection of the American taxpayer, for slashing the evil Federal deficit… etc.

On the flip side: That IS a lot of money in absolute terms, and “could” be used for better unfunded social purposes. But then, so could the waste and misappropriations in, say, the military budget, or punitive strict-scrutiny enforcement on people the Government doesn’t like…

[John_WR]

So I would consider myself a layman in the sense that I don’t have the knowledge background of many of the contributors. But I nave noticed in some instances that the layman posseses a perception that the experts do not always have.

Not only that but in a democratic society such as ours all decisions must ultimately meet with the approval of layman or we will change those decisions. For example, the Viet Nam War ended when laymen refused to approve of it.

All of the thinks you mention go on because laymen ultimately approve of them. And when the experts disagree with the laymen it is the laymen who prevail.