Liberals Scream"Spend More on Infrastructure..."

[Rozman]

Libs scream spend more as the answer for what's wrong with anything and everything in this country....

 

[Rozman]

Oh the drama!!!!

Care to take the challenge? Or are you too afraid to admit the infrastructure has nothing to do with the crash?

Actually it did because lack of funding was one of the reasons the automated train control system was not in place.

I heard many reports that the system was funded but they had issues making the connection to cell towers......

So anyway I guess the reasons the train crashed were one or all of the following.

George Bush
The Republican party.
Halliburton....
Whitey....
Ronald Reagan....

I'm going with the blame it all on whitey....
That seems to be the latest fad but a main issue with democrats and the first Lady in particular.

 

[bripat9643]

Oh the drama!!!!

Care to take the challenge? Or are you too afraid to admit the infrastructure has nothing to do with the crash?

Actually it did because lack of funding was one of the reasons the automated train control system was not in place.

No it wasn't, dickhead.

 

[Rozman]

The price of tolls went up again in the NY tri state area.....
Now it's $8.00 a pop.

I handed over a $20 the other day to cross into Staten Island....and didn't get all that much back in change.
Some of this money is needed by the MTA to keep mass transit up and running....

Amtrak,MTA,they are always broke.They always need more,more,more...

 

[jasonnfree]

In the wake of the Amtrak tragedy Democrats have been holding it up as an example of broken infrastructure and say we need to raise more taxes to invest into infrastructure like China does. Well perhaps if China did not have all of our manufacturing jobs we would have a local tax base that could pay for infrastructure and education. Only 14 Dem's bolted on Pacific trade bill that will lose more American jobs. Brilliant...just fucking brilliant.

China does not have all our manufacturing jobs. We are making more stuff than ever before.

Technology obsoleted our manufacturing jobs, not China.

Besides, manufacturing is the trough of the smiley curve of production value addition. Design and distribution are where its at.

That's why the US is being tough about protecting intellectual property rights in the negotiations.

There simply is no money in making T-shirts and lava lamps.

If the TPP is so great then why is it being kept a secret?

 

[OKTexas]

If you think I'm a big fan of GWB and his massive expansion of government, you're wrong.

Well, gee, who was the last Republican President to trim the size of government?

Reagan would have, congress kept blocking him. If he had is way we wouldn't have wasted another trillion on the DOE.

But he didn't. The same guy you say would have shrunk government what...quadrupled military spending. In his book "My American Journey", Colin Powell talks about how him and Cap Weinberger moved from their budget to their "wish" list to their "dream" list at the behest of the White House.

It worked...don't get me wrong.

I've often commented that Reagan doesn't deserve a place on Mt. Rushmore...he deserves his own mountain (I predict in the next 100 years or so, he'll have a memorial in DC on the mall somewhere--if MLK deserves one, Reagan most assuredly does for ending communism as we knew it).

But please don't sit there and tell us he was some sort of small government fundamentalist.

Carter decimated our military, Reagan knew defense is the primary function of the federal government. When Reagan was elected morale was in the tank, military equipment was falling apart, hell were still driving 1940's jeeps. Like you said, most every dime spent on the military was worth it. Unfortunately the dems didn't learn the lesson of Reagan, every one since has undermined the military. Just a note, I served under Reagan, Bush 41 and Clinton. Reagan did a lot of good with Tip O'Neill but reducing the size of government wasn't one of them, even though he tried.

So basically he gets 100% of the credit and the Dems in Congress got 100% of the blame. Amazing.

Yep, it is amazing, not all presidents think they can bypass congress with their pens and phones and just do what ever the hell they want. Utterly amazing.

 

[Andylusion]

In the wake of the Amtrak tragedy Democrats have been holding it up as an example of broken infrastructure and say we need to raise more taxes to invest into infrastructure like China does. Well perhaps if China did not have all of our manufacturing jobs we would have a local tax base that could pay for infrastructure and education. Only 14 Dem's bolted on Pacific trade bill that will lose more American jobs. Brilliant...just fucking brilliant.

China does not have all our manufacturing jobs. We are making more stuff than ever before.

Technology obsoleted our manufacturing jobs, not China.

Besides, manufacturing is the trough of the smiley curve of production value addition. Design and distribution are where its at.

That's why the US is being tough about protecting intellectual property rights in the negotiations.

There simply is no money in making T-shirts and lava lamps.

If the TPP is so great then why is it being kept a secret?

Whether or not the TPP is specifically good or bad, I don't know. But it being kept secret is not shocking to me.

The average voter doesn't know what is good or bad for the country. Just look at the $15/hr minimum wage movement. Anyone who understands economics, knows that would cause havoc in the economy. But the average voter doesn't care, or have the time, to find that out.

This is one of the primary reasons we were never supposed to be a democracy. We were never supposed to be governed by the ignorant.

The way a representative republic is supposed to work, is we vote for who we believe will make wise choices, and then we let him govern. So Obama is in office, and he thinks the TPP would be a benefit, but knows the ignorant public will not. Thus he keeps it secret.

Now I would argue that it is entirely Obama's right to keep the trade negotiations secret. But once the deal is done, it still has to be confirmed by the Senate. This is entirely constitutional.

If there is something totally bad in the trade agreement, then the Senate should vote it down. If you trust the people you put into Congress, then everything should be fine. If you don't.... the public generally get's what it deserves.

Trade in inherently good, so unless there is something really crazy in the TPP, I'm not worried about it.

 

[candycorn]

Well, gee, who was the last Republican President to trim the size of government?

Reagan would have, congress kept blocking him. If he had is way we wouldn't have wasted another trillion on the DOE.

But he didn't. The same guy you say would have shrunk government what...quadrupled military spending. In his book "My American Journey", Colin Powell talks about how him and Cap Weinberger moved from their budget to their "wish" list to their "dream" list at the behest of the White House.

It worked...don't get me wrong.

I've often commented that Reagan doesn't deserve a place on Mt. Rushmore...he deserves his own mountain (I predict in the next 100 years or so, he'll have a memorial in DC on the mall somewhere--if MLK deserves one, Reagan most assuredly does for ending communism as we knew it).

But please don't sit there and tell us he was some sort of small government fundamentalist.

Carter decimated our military, Reagan knew defense is the primary function of the federal government. When Reagan was elected morale was in the tank, military equipment was falling apart, hell were still driving 1940's jeeps. Like you said, most every dime spent on the military was worth it. Unfortunately the dems didn't learn the lesson of Reagan, every one since has undermined the military. Just a note, I served under Reagan, Bush 41 and Clinton. Reagan did a lot of good with Tip O'Neill but reducing the size of government wasn't one of them, even though he tried.

So basically he gets 100% of the credit and the Dems in Congress got 100% of the blame. Amazing.

Yep, it is amazing, not all presidents think they can bypass congress with their pens and phones and just do what ever the hell they want. Utterly amazing.

Yeah, I forgot, we declared war on Lebanon, Grenada, et.al. when Reagan was there. Oh wait, he bypassed congress.

Seriously dude, Reagan was not a small government guy...you sound like an idiot claiming he was.

 

[OKTexas]

Reagan would have, congress kept blocking him. If he had is way we wouldn't have wasted another trillion on the DOE.

But he didn't. The same guy you say would have shrunk government what...quadrupled military spending. In his book "My American Journey", Colin Powell talks about how him and Cap Weinberger moved from their budget to their "wish" list to their "dream" list at the behest of the White House.

It worked...don't get me wrong.

I've often commented that Reagan doesn't deserve a place on Mt. Rushmore...he deserves his own mountain (I predict in the next 100 years or so, he'll have a memorial in DC on the mall somewhere--if MLK deserves one, Reagan most assuredly does for ending communism as we knew it).

But please don't sit there and tell us he was some sort of small government fundamentalist.

Carter decimated our military, Reagan knew defense is the primary function of the federal government. When Reagan was elected morale was in the tank, military equipment was falling apart, hell were still driving 1940's jeeps. Like you said, most every dime spent on the military was worth it. Unfortunately the dems didn't learn the lesson of Reagan, every one since has undermined the military. Just a note, I served under Reagan, Bush 41 and Clinton. Reagan did a lot of good with Tip O'Neill but reducing the size of government wasn't one of them, even though he tried.

So basically he gets 100% of the credit and the Dems in Congress got 100% of the blame. Amazing.

Yep, it is amazing, not all presidents think they can bypass congress with their pens and phones and just do what ever the hell they want. Utterly amazing.

Yeah, I forgot, we declared war on Lebanon, Grenada, et.al. when Reagan was there. Oh wait, he bypassed congress.

Seriously dude, Reagan was not a small government guy...you sound like an idiot claiming he was.

Seriously, have you ever been to Grenada, maybe you should go there and ask them if the US went to war with them. Trust me they are very grateful for what they call the intervention. Revisionist history seems to be a favorite tactic of the left.

 

[TooTall]

Does anyone know of a nation on the planet earth that has a rail system and a government that does not subsidize it? Perhaps if we could find that nation we could use their system for a model. Also, has their ever been a time in the history of America since railroads appeared that the government has not subsidized them?

Is there a dog on this planet that doesn't have fleas?

The "everybody does it argument" doesn't even fool small children.

What a stupid response.

Rail transport is an important piece of infrastructure which Americans turned over to private enterprise, trusting they would keep it up in a more efficient, cost effective manner than government. Clearly, that hasn't happened.

The American belief that private enterprise does everything better and cheaper than government is a conservative myth that deserves to die. Cheaper, yes, because they don't have to tender every project and giving contracts to the lowest bidder isn't always the most cost efficient way to go. But operating infrastructure on a bottom line basis means that running locomotives with one engineer is cheaper but not safer. Not providing infrastructure improvements is cheaper but not safer. Failure to maintain tracks and equipment is cheaper but not safer.

Sometimes the cheapest way of doing things, is not the safest or the best.

" Amtrak is a federally-chartered corporation, with the Federal government as majority stockholder. The Board is appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the U.S. Senate, and Amtrak is operated as a for-profit company, rather than a public authority."

None of the things you mentioned have a damned thing to do with the recent train crash. Hitting a curve with a speed limit of 50 mph at 106 mph was the cause of the accident, period! The only thing that possibly could have prevented this accident was having two Engineers in the cab to keep a check on each other.

 

[Camp]

Does anyone know of a nation on the planet earth that has a rail system and a government that does not subsidize it? Perhaps if we could find that nation we could use their system for a model. Also, has their ever been a time in the history of America since railroads appeared that the government has not subsidized them?

Is there a dog on this planet that doesn't have fleas?

The "everybody does it argument" doesn't even fool small children.

What a stupid response.

Rail transport is an important piece of infrastructure which Americans turned over to private enterprise, trusting they would keep it up in a more efficient, cost effective manner than government. Clearly, that hasn't happened.

The American belief that private enterprise does everything better and cheaper than government is a conservative myth that deserves to die. Cheaper, yes, because they don't have to tender every project and giving contracts to the lowest bidder isn't always the most cost efficient way to go. But operating infrastructure on a bottom line basis means that running locomotives with one engineer is cheaper but not safer. Not providing infrastructure improvements is cheaper but not safer. Failure to maintain tracks and equipment is cheaper but not safer.

Sometimes the cheapest way of doing things, is not the safest or the best.

" Amtrak is a federally-chartered corporation, with the Federal government as majority stockholder. The Board is appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the U.S. Senate, and Amtrak is operated as a for-profit company, rather than a public authority."

None of the things you mentioned have a damned thing to do with the recent train crash. Hitting a curve with a speed limit of 50 mph at 106 mph was the cause of the accident, period! The only thing that possibly could have prevented this accident was having two Engineers in the cab to keep a check on each other.

Nope, it was a stupid response and you are wrong about the only prevention having been to have two engineers. What could have and would have prevented the accident is called positive train control technology. It has been installed on many sections of track, but lack of funding prevented it from being installed on the entire system, including the northbound section of track involved with this accident. 825 million dollars were cut from latest budget that were designated to finish installing the system by the end of the year. The Republican budget prolonged it's implementation until 2020.

 

[Andylusion]

Reagan would have, congress kept blocking him. If he had is way we wouldn't have wasted another trillion on the DOE.

But he didn't. The same guy you say would have shrunk government what...quadrupled military spending. In his book "My American Journey", Colin Powell talks about how him and Cap Weinberger moved from their budget to their "wish" list to their "dream" list at the behest of the White House.

It worked...don't get me wrong.

I've often commented that Reagan doesn't deserve a place on Mt. Rushmore...he deserves his own mountain (I predict in the next 100 years or so, he'll have a memorial in DC on the mall somewhere--if MLK deserves one, Reagan most assuredly does for ending communism as we knew it).

But please don't sit there and tell us he was some sort of small government fundamentalist.

Carter decimated our military, Reagan knew defense is the primary function of the federal government. When Reagan was elected morale was in the tank, military equipment was falling apart, hell were still driving 1940's jeeps. Like you said, most every dime spent on the military was worth it. Unfortunately the dems didn't learn the lesson of Reagan, every one since has undermined the military. Just a note, I served under Reagan, Bush 41 and Clinton. Reagan did a lot of good with Tip O'Neill but reducing the size of government wasn't one of them, even though he tried.

So basically he gets 100% of the credit and the Dems in Congress got 100% of the blame. Amazing.

Yep, it is amazing, not all presidents think they can bypass congress with their pens and phones and just do what ever the hell they want. Utterly amazing.

Yeah, I forgot, we declared war on Lebanon, Grenada, et.al. when Reagan was there. Oh wait, he bypassed congress.

Seriously dude, Reagan was not a small government guy...you sound like an idiot claiming he was.

Every president since FDR has bypassed congress on military actions. And there were times before FDR we bypassed congress on military actions.

I don't think that is justification on bypassing congress on everything else. The president is, after all, commander and chief. That doesn't mean he's dictator over everything else too.

One doesn't justify the other.

 

[Andylusion]

Does anyone know of a nation on the planet earth that has a rail system and a government that does not subsidize it? Perhaps if we could find that nation we could use their system for a model. Also, has their ever been a time in the history of America since railroads appeared that the government has not subsidized them?

Is there a dog on this planet that doesn't have fleas?

The "everybody does it argument" doesn't even fool small children.

What a stupid response.

Rail transport is an important piece of infrastructure which Americans turned over to private enterprise, trusting they would keep it up in a more efficient, cost effective manner than government. Clearly, that hasn't happened.

The American belief that private enterprise does everything better and cheaper than government is a conservative myth that deserves to die. Cheaper, yes, because they don't have to tender every project and giving contracts to the lowest bidder isn't always the most cost efficient way to go. But operating infrastructure on a bottom line basis means that running locomotives with one engineer is cheaper but not safer. Not providing infrastructure improvements is cheaper but not safer. Failure to maintain tracks and equipment is cheaper but not safer.

Sometimes the cheapest way of doing things, is not the safest or the best.

" Amtrak is a federally-chartered corporation, with the Federal government as majority stockholder. The Board is appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the U.S. Senate, and Amtrak is operated as a for-profit company, rather than a public authority."

None of the things you mentioned have a damned thing to do with the recent train crash. Hitting a curve with a speed limit of 50 mph at 106 mph was the cause of the accident, period! The only thing that possibly could have prevented this accident was having two Engineers in the cab to keep a check on each other.

Nope, it was a stupid response and you are wrong about the only prevention having been to have two engineers. What could have and would have prevented the accident is called positive train control technology. It has been installed on many sections of track, but lack of funding prevented it from being installed on the entire system, including the northbound section of track involved with this accident. 825 million dollars were cut from latest budget that were designated to finish installing the system by the end of the year. The Republican budget prolonged it's implementation until 2020.

But see, you are blaming republicans, for what is natural to a socialized system.

Did you miss the fact our government is $18 Trillion in debt? Did you miss the fact we don't have loads of money to buy everything everyone wants?

Yes, we don't have money to make Amtrak, a money losing corporation, all the technology and updates we want. It should be completely privatized into a private corporation, and if there is a market for Amtrak, it should make a profit on it's own. If there is no market, then it should be closed.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Reagan would have, congress kept blocking him. If he had is way we wouldn't have wasted another trillion on the DOE.

But he didn't. The same guy you say would have shrunk government what...quadrupled military spending. In his book "My American Journey", Colin Powell talks about how him and Cap Weinberger moved from their budget to their "wish" list to their "dream" list at the behest of the White House.

It worked...don't get me wrong.

I've often commented that Reagan doesn't deserve a place on Mt. Rushmore...he deserves his own mountain (I predict in the next 100 years or so, he'll have a memorial in DC on the mall somewhere--if MLK deserves one, Reagan most assuredly does for ending communism as we knew it).

But please don't sit there and tell us he was some sort of small government fundamentalist.

Carter decimated our military, Reagan knew defense is the primary function of the federal government. When Reagan was elected morale was in the tank, military equipment was falling apart, hell were still driving 1940's jeeps. Like you said, most every dime spent on the military was worth it. Unfortunately the dems didn't learn the lesson of Reagan, every one since has undermined the military. Just a note, I served under Reagan, Bush 41 and Clinton. Reagan did a lot of good with Tip O'Neill but reducing the size of government wasn't one of them, even though he tried.

So basically he gets 100% of the credit and the Dems in Congress got 100% of the blame. Amazing.

Yep, it is amazing, not all presidents think they can bypass congress with their pens and phones and just do what ever the hell they want. Utterly amazing.

Yeah, I forgot, we declared war on Lebanon, Grenada, et.al. when Reagan was there. Oh wait, he bypassed congress.

Seriously dude, Reagan was not a small government guy...you sound like an idiot claiming he was.

ROFLMNAO!

Because the issue is the Command Powers of the Executive and NOT the consequences of such.

Seriously Dudette... which of those actions taken by Reagan resulted in the benefit of the enemy of the United States?

Now... once ya get that figured out, find us an Command Action of obama, that has NOT served the interests of the enemy of the United States?

(Reader, the would-be 'contributor' to which I am responding there, will have no means to offer a cogent response, as cogency cannot serve her own subjective needs. Understand that the reason I asked, is to demonstrate that its subjective needs are not even remotely aligned with those common to America.

 

[Camp]

Does anyone know of a nation on the planet earth that has a rail system and a government that does not subsidize it? Perhaps if we could find that nation we could use their system for a model. Also, has their ever been a time in the history of America since railroads appeared that the government has not subsidized them?

Is there a dog on this planet that doesn't have fleas?

The "everybody does it argument" doesn't even fool small children.

What a stupid response.

Rail transport is an important piece of infrastructure which Americans turned over to private enterprise, trusting they would keep it up in a more efficient, cost effective manner than government. Clearly, that hasn't happened.

The American belief that private enterprise does everything better and cheaper than government is a conservative myth that deserves to die. Cheaper, yes, because they don't have to tender every project and giving contracts to the lowest bidder isn't always the most cost efficient way to go. But operating infrastructure on a bottom line basis means that running locomotives with one engineer is cheaper but not safer. Not providing infrastructure improvements is cheaper but not safer. Failure to maintain tracks and equipment is cheaper but not safer.

Sometimes the cheapest way of doing things, is not the safest or the best.

" Amtrak is a federally-chartered corporation, with the Federal government as majority stockholder. The Board is appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the U.S. Senate, and Amtrak is operated as a for-profit company, rather than a public authority."

None of the things you mentioned have a damned thing to do with the recent train crash. Hitting a curve with a speed limit of 50 mph at 106 mph was the cause of the accident, period! The only thing that possibly could have prevented this accident was having two Engineers in the cab to keep a check on each other.

Nope, it was a stupid response and you are wrong about the only prevention having been to have two engineers. What could have and would have prevented the accident is called positive train control technology. It has been installed on many sections of track, but lack of funding prevented it from being installed on the entire system, including the northbound section of track involved with this accident. 825 million dollars were cut from latest budget that were designated to finish installing the system by the end of the year. The Republican budget prolonged it's implementation until 2020.

But see, you are blaming republicans, for what is natural to a socialized system.

Did you miss the fact our government is $18 Trillion in debt? Did you miss the fact we don't have loads of money to buy everything everyone wants?

Yes, we don't have money to make Amtrak, a money losing corporation, all the technology and updates we want. It should be completely privatized into a private corporation, and if there is a market for Amtrak, it should make a profit on it's own. If there is no market, then it should be closed.

I was blaming Republicans for the latest vote, that is why I quoted the 825 million and specific delay to the system that would have prevented the latest accident. If someone can show how Democrats undermined funding let them show it.
Not sure how you could privatize the system at this late. Seems the taxpayers have invested huge amounts into the system and turning it over to private interest could be a quandary.
I originally asked the question about any nations having a rail system that was not subsidized. I knew the answer was going to be none. Someone tried to answer the question with a deflection, but as yet, no one has named a country. That is because people, no matter their politics, understand that rail service is a necessity even in third world nations. Privatization may work to some degree or level, depending on the circumstances, but in the end, government subsidizing becomes a requirement.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Is there a dog on this planet that doesn't have fleas?

The "everybody does it argument" doesn't even fool small children.

What a stupid response.

Rail transport is an important piece of infrastructure which Americans turned over to private enterprise, trusting they would keep it up in a more efficient, cost effective manner than government. Clearly, that hasn't happened.

The American belief that private enterprise does everything better and cheaper than government is a conservative myth that deserves to die. Cheaper, yes, because they don't have to tender every project and giving contracts to the lowest bidder isn't always the most cost efficient way to go. But operating infrastructure on a bottom line basis means that running locomotives with one engineer is cheaper but not safer. Not providing infrastructure improvements is cheaper but not safer. Failure to maintain tracks and equipment is cheaper but not safer.

Sometimes the cheapest way of doing things, is not the safest or the best.

" Amtrak is a federally-chartered corporation, with the Federal government as majority stockholder. The Board is appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the U.S. Senate, and Amtrak is operated as a for-profit company, rather than a public authority."

None of the things you mentioned have a damned thing to do with the recent train crash. Hitting a curve with a speed limit of 50 mph at 106 mph was the cause of the accident, period! The only thing that possibly could have prevented this accident was having two Engineers in the cab to keep a check on each other.

Nope, it was a stupid response and you are wrong about the only prevention having been to have two engineers. What could have and would have prevented the accident is called positive train control technology. It has been installed on many sections of track, but lack of funding prevented it from being installed on the entire system, including the northbound section of track involved with this accident. 825 million dollars were cut from latest budget that were designated to finish installing the system by the end of the year. The Republican budget prolonged it's implementation until 2020.

But see, you are blaming republicans, for what is natural to a socialized system.

Did you miss the fact our government is $18 Trillion in debt? Did you miss the fact we don't have loads of money to buy everything everyone wants?

Yes, we don't have money to make Amtrak, a money losing corporation, all the technology and updates we want. It should be completely privatized into a private corporation, and if there is a market for Amtrak, it should make a profit on it's own. If there is no market, then it should be closed.

I was blaming Republicans for the latest vote, that is why I quoted the 825 million and specific delay to the system that would have prevented the latest accident. If someone can show how Democrats undermined funding let them show it.
Not sure how you could privatize the system at this late. Seems the taxpayers have invested huge amounts into the system and turning it over to private interest could be a quandary.
I originally asked the question about any nations having a rail system that was not subsidized. I knew the answer was going to be none. Someone tried to answer the question with a deflection, but as yet, no one has named a country. That is because people, no matter their politics, understand that rail service is a necessity even in third world nations. Privatization may work to some degree or level, depending on the circumstances, but in the end, government subsidizing becomes a requirement.

The only thing that could have prevented the catastrophic failure of the socialist policy that set aside sound, actuarial lending principle for a perverted sense of "Fairness"... was for the Lending Industry to have told Bawney Fwank and Jimmy Cater to shove their coercion up their collective.

Sadly, at every turn, they succumbed to the coercion and in so doing etched their fate, in the stone of history.

Now HAD the US just let those interests fail... within 18 months the assets of those failed institutions would have been bought and sold at fire-sale prices, resetting the markets and in so doing, resetting the US economy.

Sadly they didn't do that. What they did, was to double down on socialist policy, preventing the economy from resetting and setting up a catastrophe of epic scope, which is yet to come.

 

[Kosh]

Does anyone know of a nation on the planet earth that has a rail system and a government that does not subsidize it? Perhaps if we could find that nation we could use their system for a model. Also, has their ever been a time in the history of America since railroads appeared that the government has not subsidized them?

Is there a dog on this planet that doesn't have fleas?

The "everybody does it argument" doesn't even fool small children.

What a stupid response.

Rail transport is an important piece of infrastructure which Americans turned over to private enterprise, trusting they would keep it up in a more efficient, cost effective manner than government. Clearly, that hasn't happened.

The American belief that private enterprise does everything better and cheaper than government is a conservative myth that deserves to die. Cheaper, yes, because they don't have to tender every project and giving contracts to the lowest bidder isn't always the most cost efficient way to go. But operating infrastructure on a bottom line basis means that running locomotives with one engineer is cheaper but not safer. Not providing infrastructure improvements is cheaper but not safer. Failure to maintain tracks and equipment is cheaper but not safer.

Sometimes the cheapest way of doing things, is not the safest or the best.

" Amtrak is a federally-chartered corporation, with the Federal government as majority stockholder. The Board is appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the U.S. Senate, and Amtrak is operated as a for-profit company, rather than a public authority."

None of the things you mentioned have a damned thing to do with the recent train crash. Hitting a curve with a speed limit of 50 mph at 106 mph was the cause of the accident, period! The only thing that possibly could have prevented this accident was having two Engineers in the cab to keep a check on each other.

Nope, it was a stupid response and you are wrong about the only prevention having been to have two engineers. What could have and would have prevented the accident is called positive train control technology. It has been installed on many sections of track, but lack of funding prevented it from being installed on the entire system, including the northbound section of track involved with this accident. 825 million dollars were cut from latest budget that were designated to finish installing the system by the end of the year. The Republican budget prolonged it's implementation until 2020.

Wow the far left is still running with the lack funding propaganda even though that has been debunked..

This why you can not have a debate/discussion with a far left drone..

They can not admit when they are wrong!

 

[TooTall]

Does anyone know of a nation on the planet earth that has a rail system and a government that does not subsidize it? Perhaps if we could find that nation we could use their system for a model. Also, has their ever been a time in the history of America since railroads appeared that the government has not subsidized them?

Is there a dog on this planet that doesn't have fleas?

The "everybody does it argument" doesn't even fool small children.

What a stupid response.

Rail transport is an important piece of infrastructure which Americans turned over to private enterprise, trusting they would keep it up in a more efficient, cost effective manner than government. Clearly, that hasn't happened.

The American belief that private enterprise does everything better and cheaper than government is a conservative myth that deserves to die. Cheaper, yes, because they don't have to tender every project and giving contracts to the lowest bidder isn't always the most cost efficient way to go. But operating infrastructure on a bottom line basis means that running locomotives with one engineer is cheaper but not safer. Not providing infrastructure improvements is cheaper but not safer. Failure to maintain tracks and equipment is cheaper but not safer.

Sometimes the cheapest way of doing things, is not the safest or the best.

" Amtrak is a federally-chartered corporation, with the Federal government as majority stockholder. The Board is appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the U.S. Senate, and Amtrak is operated as a for-profit company, rather than a public authority."

None of the things you mentioned have a damned thing to do with the recent train crash. Hitting a curve with a speed limit of 50 mph at 106 mph was the cause of the accident, period! The only thing that possibly could have prevented this accident was having two Engineers in the cab to keep a check on each other.

Nope, it was a stupid response and you are wrong about the only prevention having been to have two engineers. What could have and would have prevented the accident is called positive train control technology. It has been installed on many sections of track, but lack of funding prevented it from being installed on the entire system, including the northbound section of track involved with this accident. 825 million dollars were cut from latest budget that were designated to finish installing the system by the end of the year. The Republican budget prolonged it's implementation until 2020.

Read this:

Writing in a letter published Dec. 8, 2013., about a derailment that year in New York, Rail Passenger Assn. of California and Nevada President Paul Dyson said there are simpler safety fixes than PTC:

While Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) calls for installation of new technology known as "positive train control," the fact is that railroad signaling equipment that most likely would have prevented the New York derailment has existed for many years.

Approach control at junctions uses electronic circuits in the track to prevent a signal turning green until a train's speed has been reduced to the line limit. If a train passes the red signal, automatic train stop (ATS) applies the brakes.

These systems date back to the late 1800s and, in modern form, provide protection to train passengers around the world.

Approach control adds a few minutes to the running time of a train, which may explain why it was not in use in New York. ATS was not installed during the 2008 Metrolink train crash in Chatsworth because it was not required, as the speed limit was lower than 90 mph.

ATS is considered obsolete, but it works. Instead, we have opted for a high-tech solution that may or may not do the job when it is switched on.

 

[Kosh]

Is there a dog on this planet that doesn't have fleas?

The "everybody does it argument" doesn't even fool small children.

What a stupid response.

Rail transport is an important piece of infrastructure which Americans turned over to private enterprise, trusting they would keep it up in a more efficient, cost effective manner than government. Clearly, that hasn't happened.

The American belief that private enterprise does everything better and cheaper than government is a conservative myth that deserves to die. Cheaper, yes, because they don't have to tender every project and giving contracts to the lowest bidder isn't always the most cost efficient way to go. But operating infrastructure on a bottom line basis means that running locomotives with one engineer is cheaper but not safer. Not providing infrastructure improvements is cheaper but not safer. Failure to maintain tracks and equipment is cheaper but not safer.

Sometimes the cheapest way of doing things, is not the safest or the best.

" Amtrak is a federally-chartered corporation, with the Federal government as majority stockholder. The Board is appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the U.S. Senate, and Amtrak is operated as a for-profit company, rather than a public authority."

None of the things you mentioned have a damned thing to do with the recent train crash. Hitting a curve with a speed limit of 50 mph at 106 mph was the cause of the accident, period! The only thing that possibly could have prevented this accident was having two Engineers in the cab to keep a check on each other.

Nope, it was a stupid response and you are wrong about the only prevention having been to have two engineers. What could have and would have prevented the accident is called positive train control technology. It has been installed on many sections of track, but lack of funding prevented it from being installed on the entire system, including the northbound section of track involved with this accident. 825 million dollars were cut from latest budget that were designated to finish installing the system by the end of the year. The Republican budget prolonged it's implementation until 2020.

But see, you are blaming republicans, for what is natural to a socialized system.

Did you miss the fact our government is $18 Trillion in debt? Did you miss the fact we don't have loads of money to buy everything everyone wants?

Yes, we don't have money to make Amtrak, a money losing corporation, all the technology and updates we want. It should be completely privatized into a private corporation, and if there is a market for Amtrak, it should make a profit on it's own. If there is no market, then it should be closed.

I was blaming Republicans for the latest vote, that is why I quoted the 825 million and specific delay to the system that would have prevented the latest accident. If someone can show how Democrats undermined funding let them show it.
Not sure how you could privatize the system at this late. Seems the taxpayers have invested huge amounts into the system and turning it over to private interest could be a quandary.
I originally asked the question about any nations having a rail system that was not subsidized. I knew the answer was going to be none. Someone tried to answer the question with a deflection, but as yet, no one has named a country. That is because people, no matter their politics, understand that rail service is a necessity even in third world nations. Privatization may work to some degree or level, depending on the circumstances, but in the end, government subsidizing becomes a requirement.

Yes you are far left partisan hack, that much is already known..

Using debunked far left religious propaganda as your "facts" that do not fit in reality..

 

[Camp]

What a stupid response.

Rail transport is an important piece of infrastructure which Americans turned over to private enterprise, trusting they would keep it up in a more efficient, cost effective manner than government. Clearly, that hasn't happened.

The American belief that private enterprise does everything better and cheaper than government is a conservative myth that deserves to die. Cheaper, yes, because they don't have to tender every project and giving contracts to the lowest bidder isn't always the most cost efficient way to go. But operating infrastructure on a bottom line basis means that running locomotives with one engineer is cheaper but not safer. Not providing infrastructure improvements is cheaper but not safer. Failure to maintain tracks and equipment is cheaper but not safer.

Sometimes the cheapest way of doing things, is not the safest or the best.

" Amtrak is a federally-chartered corporation, with the Federal government as majority stockholder. The Board is appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the U.S. Senate, and Amtrak is operated as a for-profit company, rather than a public authority."

None of the things you mentioned have a damned thing to do with the recent train crash. Hitting a curve with a speed limit of 50 mph at 106 mph was the cause of the accident, period! The only thing that possibly could have prevented this accident was having two Engineers in the cab to keep a check on each other.

Nope, it was a stupid response and you are wrong about the only prevention having been to have two engineers. What could have and would have prevented the accident is called positive train control technology. It has been installed on many sections of track, but lack of funding prevented it from being installed on the entire system, including the northbound section of track involved with this accident. 825 million dollars were cut from latest budget that were designated to finish installing the system by the end of the year. The Republican budget prolonged it's implementation until 2020.

But see, you are blaming republicans, for what is natural to a socialized system.

Did you miss the fact our government is $18 Trillion in debt? Did you miss the fact we don't have loads of money to buy everything everyone wants?

Yes, we don't have money to make Amtrak, a money losing corporation, all the technology and updates we want. It should be completely privatized into a private corporation, and if there is a market for Amtrak, it should make a profit on it's own. If there is no market, then it should be closed.

I was blaming Republicans for the latest vote, that is why I quoted the 825 million and specific delay to the system that would have prevented the latest accident. If someone can show how Democrats undermined funding let them show it.
Not sure how you could privatize the system at this late. Seems the taxpayers have invested huge amounts into the system and turning it over to private interest could be a quandary.
I originally asked the question about any nations having a rail system that was not subsidized. I knew the answer was going to be none. Someone tried to answer the question with a deflection, but as yet, no one has named a country. That is because people, no matter their politics, understand that rail service is a necessity even in third world nations. Privatization may work to some degree or level, depending on the circumstances, but in the end, government subsidizing becomes a requirement.

Yes you are far left partisan hack, that much is already known..

Using debunked far left religious propaganda as your "facts" that do not fit in reality..

It hasn't been debunked you moron. It is being denied as relevant by the fools who cut it's funding. That is not the same thing. The system is already being used and operational on many tracks, including the southbound track where the accident occurred.

foxnews.com/tech/2015/05/14/positive-train-control-technology-could-have-prevented-amtrak-crash-experts-say/

nydailynews.com/news/national-signal-system-prevented-amtrak-train-crash-article-1.2221460