Republicans think handing corporations money creates jobs.

[Mikeoxenormous]

Keep the Amtrak in the NE where it is profitable, dump the rest of the country. We do we need to use public funding when private carriers will do the same? Also Amtrak will run buses, there are private carriers that duplicate the work and it doesn't cost taxpayer dollars.

Private carriers will not do the same. It's precisely the reason why the USPS delivers for UPS and FedEx. You know that scene in the movie Cast Away, when Tom Hanks delivers the package to that woman in the middle of nowhere? Yeah, he wouldn't be driving a FedEx truck, he'd be driving a USPS truck because the USPS delivers to areas of the country that private shippers can't deliver to because of the costs. Same is the case for transportation.

Most every stop that Amtrak makes has a private carrier bus service available and if it is not available, it's because Amtrak sucks off the passengers so private carrier can't make it. Also you will find private bus carriers serve way more communities than Amtrak ever has. Also Amtrak includes in it's ridership those that travel by their buses, which Amtrak has many bus routes.

And of course if it happened in a Tom Hanks movie!!! LOL!! More laughs! Thanks!

No matter what you tell the Derp, his mind has been so polluted by Liberal kool aid, that he cant see through all the shit on his face. It is humorous watching you debate, but not see his ridiculous response. I may put more on ignore if they keep up the liberal lunacy. All that information I posted he just ignored, typical of the liberal playbook.

 

[Papageorgio]

Most every stop that Amtrak makes has a private carrier bus service available and if it is not available, it's because Amtrak sucks off the passengers so private carrier can't make it. Also you will find private bus carriers serve way more communities than Amtrak ever has. Also Amtrak includes in it's ridership those that travel by their buses, which Amtrak has many bus routes.

So bus routes already exist then...so what is your point?

We don't need to use public money for Amtrak when the private sector can take care of the issue better than the government. The bus travel is cheaper and faster than Amtrak, why waste the taxpayer money.

 

[The Derp]

We don't need to use public money for Amtrak when the private sector can take care of the issue better than the government. The bus travel is cheaper and faster than Amtrak, why waste the taxpayer money.

But you just said Amtrak also operates bus lines. So why do away with Amtrak?

 

[The Derp]

And of course if it happened in a Tom Hanks movie!!! LOL!! More laughs! Thanks!

So you didn't read my post fully. You rushed through it in order to vomit up that sloppy reply. What I said was that the Tom Hanks movie depicted something that would not happen in real life. The USPS routinely delivers on behalf of FedEx and UPS because FedEx and UPS lose money if they have to ship things to remote locations. The USPS has to deliver everywhere. FedEx and UPS lean on the USPS when delivery costs are too high to bear.

That's reality.

 

[The Derp]

We don't need to use public money for Amtrak when the private sector can take care of the issue better than the government.

If they haven't done so already, that would seem to indicate they cannot. And who says private is better than public? Take health insurance, for example. Medicare and BCBS serve the exact same function, yet one has 20% overhead and one has 3% overhead. Try to guess which is which.

 

[Papageorgio]

We don't need to use public money for Amtrak when the private sector can take care of the issue better than the government. The bus travel is cheaper and faster than Amtrak, why waste the taxpayer money.

But you just said Amtrak also operates bus lines. So why do away with Amtrak?

Because Amtrak is using public money, take away the federal funding and I am good with Amtrak.

 

[The Derp]

Because Amtrak is using public money, take away the federal funding and I am good with Amtrak.

So...here's the problem with your argument. You say that Amtrak should go away so the private bus lines (?) can pick up the slack of rail (?). You say they are undercutting private bus services. So that means that Amtrak does it better and cheaper than the private sector, and thus, we should expand Amtrak, not contract it.

 

[danielpalos]

dear, the poor and Mr. Trump only pay the taxes we are legally obligated to pay. Don't complain, be Patriotic.

Right, because they gamed the system to make it that way by buying the politicians who will vote for such taxation policies. Not sure why you think it's a good thing for you that these people pay less in taxes. All it means is that the less they pay, the more you pay for basic services like education and health care. So you can thank the Conservatives for the rise in costs for both. It's entirely their fault.

All it means is that the less they pay, the more you pay for basic services like education and health care.

The less who pays? The poor? They don't pay shit. But they get all the goods because of what everyone else has to pay. Want to talk about REAL poverty, go look at the poor in Africa, or South America. that is poor, but shits like you only want the vote so your side can stay in power, to eventually destroy the US and make it poor like everyone else. That is called FAIRNESS.

don't, "hate on the poor"; work hard, don't complain, and be Patriotic.

 

[Papageorgio]

Because Amtrak is using public money, take away the federal funding and I am good with Amtrak.

So...here's the problem with your argument. You say that Amtrak should go away so the private bus lines (?) can pick up the slack of rail (?). You say they are undercutting private bus services. So that means that Amtrak does it better and cheaper than the private sector, and thus, we should expand Amtrak, not contract it.

They don't do it cheaper, they are using taxpayer money to subsidize the routes. The actual cost to run Amtrak is more than the price of a ticket.

Reason & Rail: Amtrak costs per train-mile per route

A minimum average of $46 a mile to run Amtrak, a bus uses $0 tax dollars to do the same trip. So a trip from Chicago to Seattle cost taxpayers $120,000 plus the person that actually rides the train pays $181.

A Greyhound from Seattle to Chicago $149 38 hours 5 minutes and not costing taxpayers.
Amtrak by train from Seattle to Chicago $181 45 hours 15 minutes, plus costing taxpayers $120,000.

Which is more efficient and less costly for America?

 

[danielpalos]

Per passenger mile, Amtrak is 30–40 percent more energy-efficient than commercial airlines and automobiles overall,[66] though the exact figures for particular routes depend on load factor along with other variables. The electrified trains in the NEC are considerably more efficient than Amtrak's diesels and can feed energy captured from regenerative braking back to the electrical grid. Passenger rail is also very competitive with other modes in terms of safety per mile.--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amtrak#Efficiency