Amtrak Losing $32 Per Passenger

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

U.S. taxpayers spent about $32 subsidizing the cost of the typical Amtrak passenger in 2008, about four times the rail operator's estimate, according to a private study.

Posted by member2586 at 05:33 PM | 67 COMMENTS | permalink | Comment on This Entry

Front Page
News Weblog
Comments
Flagged Comments
User Blogs
Write a Blog Entry
Edit Account
Stats Page
RSS Feed
Back Page

Subscriptions

RSS Feed

Author Info

member2586

Private E-mail
No Home Page

Joined 2006/03/13
Visited 2009/11/16

Status: user

MORE STORIES

US Army Suicides Approach New High (19 comments) ...

Dems at risk of losing Obama's old Senate seat (7 comments) ...

Why pro-choice Liberals should oppose Obamacre (33 comments) ...

Detroit Getting New Daily Newspaper (20 comments) ...

Napolitano: Immigration Overhaul Expected in 2010 (25 comments) ...

Supremes Asked to Boot Hillary (33 comments) ...

CO2 not causing global warming (11 comments) ...

The secret is out (5 comments) ...

African slavery apology 'needed' (1 comments) ...

A civil war brewing among Democrats (14 comments) ...

Obama Won't Attend Berlin Wall Celebration (138 comments) ...

The Girl With Two Vaginas! (24 comments) ...

Election results rattle some Democrats (5 comments) ...

A pandemic of indoctrination in our schools (88 comments) ...

Disney Gets OK for Theme Park in China (17 comments) ...

Special Features

Daily Nooner

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

ALL RIGHT

lets put the health and welfare of everyone in the hands of this great entity called the federal govt

HERE Is where you libs tell us all about how medicare and medicaid is a govt entity
and THEN we will tell you all about medicare RIGHT NOW being 38 billion in the hole.

#1 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2009-10-27 11:13 AM | Reply | Flag:

Go cash your Social Security check.

#2 | Posted by LetUsPrey at 2009-10-27 11:22 AM | Reply | Flag:

I dont know if you are talking to me or not because if you are, you dont know what you are talking about.

I DO think you probably know all about this.

I bet you had one too didnt you>

www.ratemymullet.com

#3 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2009-10-27 11:34 AM | Reply | Flag:

Amtrak is known as the "public option". It's unconscionable that people should be required to travel on trains and pay the full rate to those greedy railroad executives.

#4 | Posted by rightisright at 2009-10-27 11:35 AM | Reply | Flag:

Nobody should go without expensive, polluting, money-losing cross-country rail service.

#5 | Posted by JOE at 2009-10-27 11:38 AM | Reply | Flag:

Amtrak may be a poorly executed version of passenger rail, but you're foolish to think the current model of everybody driving everywhere for everything isn't hurting America. Fuel costs continue to rise, peak oil availability has passed, America's cities have been devastated by car-based suburbanization, and of course the taxpayer cost of all those roads and bridges is mighty high. Where I live, two major new bridges across the Ohio River are planned, with costs into the many billions of dollars.

Not to mention the cost of buying at least two cars per household, keeping them filled with gas, maintained and insured. Transportation is costly no matter how you slice it.

When I worked 50 miles from home, I would have gladly taken a train every day to and from the office. I didn't have that choice. There are tracks in place already, but they're only used by freight trains.

#6 | Posted by cbob at 2009-10-27 12:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

Many of the "problems" you cite with regard to automobiles are also present when considering a train.

Amtrak passenger trains run on fuel. Massive amounts of it.

They also require rail (which requires a lot of energy to produce), and bridges (just like cars). Trains don't magically fly over the river leaving all the cars in the dust.

#7 | Posted by JOE at 2009-10-27 01:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

HERE Is where you libs tell us all about how medicare and medicaid is a govt entity
and THEN we will tell you all about medicare RIGHT NOW being 38 billion in the hole.

#1 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2009-10-27 11:13 AM | Reply |

And then I point out to you, they are taking care of all the people the private industry WILL NOT TOUCH.

They can't lean on they're roster of millions of young healthy people to foot the bills. They get saddled with all the expense and none of the income.

If you disagree with the poor and the old getting healthcare, thats fine. But make that point. Make the point you'd rather they just die and not cost anything.

But don't be completely fucking retarded and pretend that there was some way of making money off these people just the government was too fucking stupid to bother. While at the same time bitching and hollering about the government trying to fix it.

#8 | Posted by KnightHawk at 2009-10-27 01:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

"If you disagree with the poor and the old getting healthcare, thats fine. But make that point. "

Are you kidding? He's on Medicare.

#9 | Posted by Danforth at 2009-10-27 01:20 PM | Reply | Flag:

Report: Amtrak loss comes to $32 per passenger

So? Why must everything turn a profit? If you're living off medicare or your retirement savings you're not making any money either. Should you be eliminated too?

#10 | Posted by DARTHCHENEY at 2009-10-27 02:18 PM | Reply | Flag:

They also require rail (which requires a lot of energy to produce), and bridges (just like cars). Trains don't magically fly over the river leaving all the cars in the dust.

#7 | Posted by JOE at 2009-10-27 01:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

You have got to be kidding me. They don't magically fly? Damn. Clearly I was misinformed.

#11 | Posted by cbob at 2009-10-27 02:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

Everyone knows you have to replace the rails daily.

#12 | Posted by LetUsPrey at 2009-10-27 06:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

Biden used to ride the train.

#13 | Posted by mysterytoy at 2009-10-27 09:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

Since its creation in 1970, Amtrak has sucked up $30 billion in taxpayer money, and the money is still flowing. The original aid package from Congress in 1970 was $340 million with an expectation the railroad would make a profit in five years.

Fun facts to know and tell, brought to you by the very same folks who wish to take control of your personal healthcare.

#14 | Posted by 2008ATL at 2009-10-28 06:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

Fun Fact number 30920-09. The Illegal War in Iraq will cost America 3 TRILLION and some economist declare it could cost upto 6 TRILLION Dollars when all is said and done. Yet people are bitching about Amtrak losing 32 Bucks per person per ride?????? What kind of fucked up mentality do we have in this great nation??

Larry

#15 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2009-10-28 06:12 PM | Reply | Flag:

The Northeast corridor has the highest passenger volume of any Amtrak route, greatly enhancing efficiency. The corridor's high-speed Acela Express made a profit of about $41 per passenger. The more heavily utilized Northeast Regional lost almost $5 per passenger.

Aren't these the only routes with any reliability? And gosh, they're the ones that are doing relatively well.

The problem with Amtrak isn't government -- it's LACK of government. The private sector (freight) owns most of the rails that Amtrak runs on, and as a result, most routes are completely unreliable because Amtrak has to pull over whenever a freight train needs the tracks. On the West Coast routes I knew, Amtrak was routinely 1-2 hours late *on 2-hour trips.* One Easter Sunday, we sat parked on the track *4 hours* because one of the freight companies had left a train in the way, and no one felt like moving it.

No surprise that Amtrak can't attract enough passengers to make money on these routes. But if anyone is serious about reducing oil imports by beefing up mass transit, passenger trains need priority on the rails.

#16 | Posted by Phoenix at 2009-10-28 06:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

In related news, public bus systems across the USA operate on subsidies as well.

#17 | Posted by Danforth at 2009-10-28 06:18 PM | Reply | Flag:

"War in Iraq will cost America 3 TRILLION"

#15 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2009-10-28 06:12 PM
-------------------

LOL!!!

Try again sport:

To date, $915.1 billion dollars have been allocated to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The national, state, and local numbers we provide are based on the total approved amounts through the end of Fiscal Year 2009.

#18 | Posted by 2008ATL at 2009-10-28 06:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

"The problem with Amtrak isn't government -- it's LACK of government." With this kind of thinking we are really in some deep shit. Something doesn't work,then the government needs to spend more money. Holy crap, and we wonder why the deficit is up to a trillion and a half.

#19 | Posted by SpokaneJim at 2009-10-28 06:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

End airline subsidies, then talk about the trains.

Not before.

#20 | Posted by Shawn at 2009-10-28 06:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

"The problem with Amtrak isn't government -- it's LACK of government."

#16 | Posted by Phoenix at 2009-10-28 06:13 PM
------------

Good Gawd.....you're actually serious aren't you...

How Sad
.

#21 | Posted by 2008ATL at 2009-10-28 06:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

To date, $915.1 billion dollars have been allocated to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

----------

Most likely more than this.

Far more.

#22 | Posted by Shawn at 2009-10-28 06:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

the story is about trains, not health care. while you are at it, figure out who owns the airports and the air traffic control system it isnt the airline

#23 | Posted by Georgeisadrunk at 2009-10-28 06:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

Most likely more than this.

Far more.

#22 | Posted by Shawn at 2009-10-28 06:22 PM
-------------------

Only if PrezBo and the Democrat Congress approve the funds......
.

#24 | Posted by 2008ATL at 2009-10-28 06:25 PM | Reply | Flag:

Try again sport:

#18 | Posted by 2008ATL at 2009-10-28 06:19 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

www.washingtonpost.com

THE RECKONING
The Iraq War Will Cost Us $3 Trillion, and Much More

By Linda J. Bilmes and Joseph E. Stiglitz
Sunday, March 9, 2008

There is no such thing as a free lunch, and there is no such thing as a free war. The Iraq adventure has seriously weakened the U.S. economy, whose woes now go far beyond loose mortgage lending. You can't spend $3 trillion -- yes, $3 trillion -- on a failed war abroad and not feel the pain at home.

SUCKERS

#25 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2009-10-28 06:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

This story IS about health care. Amtrak has been loosing more for decades. This is an example of what will be happening with Health Care if the Feds get involved. Medicare already looses money, and now they want to add another 30 million people, and a dozen or so more million with eventual amnesty. Why are people so deluded about all this?!? Can anyone name a single government run/sponsored organization that actually pays for itself? Anything? Look around, practically every government jurisdiction in the country is cutting back. If a government-run organization like Amtrak that actually charges for its services can't break even, how can a tax-sponsored program such as a "public option" health care option expect to be anything more than a pat on the head and a band-aid and aspirin program?

#26 | Posted by SpokaneJim at 2009-10-28 06:34 PM | Reply | Flag:

#25 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2009-10-28 06:32 PM
---------------------

YAWNS........

The Authors are just trying to sell their book champ........

Linda J. Bilmes, a former chief financial officer at the Commerce Department, teaches at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government. Joseph E. Stiglitz, a professor at Columbia University, served as chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under President Bill Clinton. They are co-authors of "The Three Trillion Dollar War: The True Cost of the Iraq Conflict."

It certainly explains the lack of hard numbers and 'projections' they use.
.

#27 | Posted by 2008ATL at 2009-10-28 06:41 PM | Reply | Flag:

#25...
Do you even bother to read your own link Larry? Or do just figure nobody else will bother???

"By the time you add in the costs hidden in the defense budget, the money we'll have to spend to help future veterans, and money to refurbish a military whose equipment and materiel have been greatly depleted, the total tab to the federal government will almost surely exceed $1.5 trillion."
www.washingtonpost.com

#28 | Posted by crispee_oc at 2009-10-28 06:43 PM | Reply | Flag:

"To date, $915.1 billion dollars have been allocated to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The national, state, and local numbers we provide are based on the total approved amounts through the end of Fiscal Year 2009."

Thank God there are no additional costs for replacement of machinery, replacement of personnel, additional costs for continuing medical care, additional costs for withdrawal, additional costs for larger pensions due to longer service, or interest on any of the above.

#29 | Posted by Danforth at 2009-10-28 07:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

BTW, "Fiscal Year 2009" ended almost a month ago.

#30 | Posted by Danforth at 2009-10-28 07:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

Can anyone name a single government run/sponsored organization that actually pays for itself?

Who ever said health care will pay for itself?

The idea is to have it consume less of our GDP.

Right now it consumes 1/6th our GDP.

In other modern countries the burden is about half that.

Get it?

#31 | Posted by snoofy at 2009-10-28 07:39 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Can anyone name a single government run/sponsored organization that actually pays for itself?"

Sure...Social Security is a cash cow.

#32 | Posted by Danforth at 2009-10-28 07:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

"The idea is to have it consume less of our GDP."

Finally, someone gets it.

Kudos, Snoofy.

#33 | Posted by Danforth at 2009-10-28 07:41 PM | Reply | Flag:

But Biden likes Amtrak. Isn't that enough? Where is your HEART, people?

#34 | Posted by Dinsey at 2009-10-28 09:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

I think trains are so exciting. I took Amtrak's Coast Starlight from Los Angeles to Oregon. Beautiful scenery. (Nice slide show in the link too.) Also took the train from Los Angeles to Newark, NJ (with a 3 hour stop in Chicago).

#35 | Posted by CalifChris at 2009-10-28 09:33 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Can anyone name a single government run/sponsored organization that actually pays for itself?"

The Post Office pays for itself.

#36 | Posted by Youarebothcrazy at 2009-10-28 09:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

Social Security--broke. Either have to cut benefits or raise taxes.

The Post Office?? LOL It's on life support and in the red as well.

#37 | Posted by MURPHY at 2009-10-28 10:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

Oh yeah, here in California some rocket scientists voted for a huge white elephant called "high speed rail". If it troubles you that Amtrack is only surviving on welfare from Big Brother, you ain't seen nothing yet. The Californiatards who voted for this just put another nail in this states coffin. I am going to laugh when Ahhh-neee rolls out next years budget and the state is 100 million short.

#38 | Posted by tickyul at 2009-10-28 10:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Social Security--broke."

Murphy--liar.

SS is a cash cow, bringing in billions more than it pays out.

Once again, Murphy shamelessly tells a bald-faced lie.

#39 | Posted by Danforth at 2009-10-28 10:18 PM | Reply | Flag:

The Post Office is adapting to changing times, but they still aren't using taxpayer money.
They will come to your house, pick up your letter and deliver it across the country for less than 50 cents.
Not bad...

#40 | Posted by Youarebothcrazy at 2009-10-28 11:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

We have the lowest postage rates in the industrialized world.

#41 | Posted by Timex at 2009-10-28 11:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

"We have the lowest postage rates in the industrialized world."

Posted by Timex at 2009-10-28 11:26 PM

I just shipped a beautiful 1950's vintage Collins S Line ham radio station, in the original boxes, to Japan USPS, insured, for ~$300. Made it just fine. UPS wanted ~$1,000.

#42 | Posted by Zatoichi at 2009-10-28 11:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

Zatoichi

I'll never use UPS again in my life. Nearly everything shipped to me via them has arrived damaged. Just try to collect insurance when they do. Exercise in futility. FedEx Ground or USPS is the only way I roll.

#43 | Posted by Timex at 2009-10-28 11:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

I've exchanged a passel of electronics with a vendor in CA (I'm in Texas.) lately using USPS and Fedex with no problem. The stuff UPS has delivered (I live in the sticks.) has been OK, but their shipping rates are outrageous. Alpha (They build ham radio RF amplifiers.) has gone to strapping their boxes onto pallets to thwart UPS.

A few months back at work I bought an ENGINE STAND and UPS managed to destroy it.

#44 | Posted by Zatoichi at 2009-10-28 11:51 PM | Reply | Flag:

That's right, an engine stand, big pieces of welded steel.

#45 | Posted by Zatoichi at 2009-10-28 11:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

Welded metal, Zatoichi? Wow. That took some doing! There ya go.

If it were just a couple of times with UPS I could shrug it off to doofuses working there, but it seems to be systemic. Time after time stuff arrived broken or did on the other end.

I've started using FedEx Ground to ship out. Great prices, super fast delivery. I just dropped off three big boxes today going to the same address. Will arrive 400 miles away tomorrow. USPS won't ship the size one of the boxes was. 46" tall.

#46 | Posted by Timex at 2009-10-29 12:01 AM | Reply | Flag:

Businesses depend on Amtrak as transportation for their employees. This is one subsidy which benefits everyone

#47 | Posted by furio at 2009-10-29 03:16 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Businesses depend on Amtrak as transportation for their employees."

Bingo. We have a winner.

#48 | Posted by Danforth at 2009-10-29 03:20 AM | Reply | Flag:

IIRC I always thought that Amtrak was part of our National Defense plan.

Larry

#49 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2009-10-29 03:26 AM | Reply | Flag:

That's got to be wrong. Amtrak is much cited here on by the all knowing left as THE EXAMPLE of gov efficency. Them, and the post office.

The two best run parts of gov service????

#50 | Posted by DavetheWave at 2009-10-29 06:57 AM | Reply | Flag:

I think trains are so exciting. I took Amtrak's Coast Starlight from Los Angeles to Oregon. Beautiful scenery. -- #35 | Posted by CalifChris

I love 'em too, and that route is spectacular. It's also notoriously unreliable -- they cut stops rather than pretend they have any clue when it's likely to arrive.

Makes the West Coast trains ok for pleasure travel, but useless for commuting to work. Again, no surprise that they can't get the ridership they do on the Northeast corridor.

#51 | Posted by Phoenix at 2009-10-29 07:11 AM | Reply | Flag:

You've never heard of investment? Firms make them because they pay for themselves. In this case, continuing to run train routes that are too unreliable to attract riders doesn't make sense. Investment that makes them usable -- as they are on the East Coast -- does.

#52 | Posted by Phoenix at 2009-10-29 07:15 AM | Reply | Flag:

Might be worth remembering that air fares were extremely low in 2008 but are now rising. That would give Amtrak some room to raise their ticket prices too.

#53 | Posted by danni at 2009-10-29 09:01 AM | Reply | Flag:

And we are turning healthcare over to these morons?

#54 | Posted by tennisnut at 2009-10-29 11:34 AM | Reply | Flag:

This is as idiotic as most everything posted here. So just because there is something worse than this, we should ignore this is happening? It is no different than when an article says "Bush was the worst president ever" and the other side responds with "Well at least he didn't get a blowjob like Clinton". I guess that makes Bush OK. No, it fucking doesn't. Just because the war is expensive doesn't mean we should be wasting money on shitty trains that can't sell enough tickets at our own expense. We shouldn't be in the Middle East either, but it has nothing to do with fucking trains.

#55 | Posted by jsprague at 2009-10-29 12:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

Businesses depend on Amtrak as transportation for their employees. This is one subsidy which benefits everyone
#47 | Posted by furio

"Businesses depend on Amtrak as transportation for their employees."
Bingo. We have a winner.
#48 | Posted by Danforth

Classic socialism. Everybody subsidizing everybody else until the money runs out.
No nation that embraces systematic theft can remain solvent, as the socialists will be finding out.

#56 | Posted by Ray at 2009-10-29 12:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

Its actually more like Corporatism. IF the trains mostly benefit corporations as was stated, then it is another shining example of government choosing corporations over the populace.

#57 | Posted by jsprague at 2009-10-29 12:53 PM | Reply | Flag:

Re: Ray in #56

"The problem with socialism is that you eventually
run out of other people's money."
-Margaret Thatcher, British Prime Minister

#58 | Posted by AKat at 2009-10-29 01:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

Fun Fact number 30920-09. The Illegal War in Iraq will cost America 3 TRILLION...

This is as idiotic as most everything posted here. So just because there is something worse than this, we should ignore this is happening? -- #55 | Posted by jsprague

I'm not the one whose post you cited, but there's a good point to be made -- if we didn't need to import so much oil, we wouldn't keep fighting wars in the Middle East. So yeah, you can think of $3 trillion as a price we're paying for under-investing in mass transit.

#59 | Posted by Phoenix at 2009-10-29 02:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

This is by definition what a government "service" is. Something there is not enough demand for to be self sustaining, but a couple of people in an ivory tower deem that it's "good for you", so they take your money, then provide the "service".

If there was enough demand for such a thing, it would already be a successful business.

This is a *classic* example of the American welfare state. Not just social welfare, but corporate and international welfare as well. The poster boy for the act of taking from one person, and giving to another for the "greater good".

It's absolute BULLSHIT and needs to stop.

#60 | Posted by Pontius at 2009-10-29 04:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

Another fine government run program. How do you like paying that?

#61 | Posted by Sniper at 2009-10-29 06:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

Did You folks realize that Amtrak is a Government owned corporation and that it was first dreampt up for use as a National Defense transportation infrastructure IIRC. It also allows people a cheap way to travel America as people on business and tourism. By doing so it adds monies to tourist locations and subsequently adds to each communities bottom line as well as bringing much needed revenue to said communities. You would think these tourism dollars would amply cover the net loss in Amtrak ticket revenues. Of course I could be all wet too.

Larry

#62 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2009-10-29 06:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

Wait until the numbers from Goverment Motors come in and we find out how much it cost per passenger to put them in one of those fine vehicles.

#63 | Posted by wisgod at 2009-10-29 07:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

So yeah, you can think of $3 trillion as a price we're paying for under-investing in mass transit.

#59 | Posted by Phoenix

Wanna see what $3T would do if nuclear was on the table?

#64 | Posted by wisgod at 2009-10-29 07:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

The Obama administration just paid 5 trillion to illegals to renovate the White House lawn... WTF?

#65 | Posted by Unclesam at 2009-10-29 07:53 PM | Reply | Flag:

Do you love government so much that you want to marry it?

Unless you live under a rock, you should realize that Amtrak was taken over by the govt because they could not make a profit (bailout). By no surprise, our gvt can't make one either.

#66 | Posted by jsprague at 2009-10-30 11:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

Marry the whole Government?? Ummmmmmmmmm nope. But I wouldn't mind marrying Barbara Boxer though. Will THAT work for You??

Larry

#67 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2009-10-30 11:10 PM | Reply | Flag: