Paul Ryan Went On Fox News To Defend Amtrak Safety Funding. It Didn’t Go Well.

[Trip]

Because long range passenger service has been bleeding money for years. The reason Amtrak was formed was because all the major rails were pulling out of passenger service. Ever developed country needs alternate routes of transport. Greyhounds are the cheapest, most unsecure modes of transportation. Have you ever ridden a greyhound? It's a dope fiend haven half the time and they wreck too. Rail transport is still necessary, it just needs to be operated more efficiently.

I've ridden Greyhound about as many times as AMTRAK once or ..I think once or twice each. How many Greyhound fatalities have there been over the last 5 years vs AMTRAK or commuter trains?

And I agree it needs to be operated more efficiently. Those blaming lack of funds on train crashes are pushing false talking points...the engineer is at fault with most of these accidents.

 

[radio rahiem]

@Trip

 

[Trip]

@Trip

I like riding trains

still will call it fair though

 

[radio rahiem]

MTA NYCT conductors and other railroad conductors are 2 different positions.
I got nothing
I expect a meeting about this soon though.

 

[Higher Tech]

I've ridden Greyhound about as many times as AMTRAK once or ..I think once or twice each. How many Greyhound fatalities have there been over the last 5 years vs AMTRAK or commuter trains?

And I agree it needs to be operated more efficiently. Those blaming lack of funds on train crashes are pushing false talking points...the engineer is at fault with most of these accidents.

That's still a stretch. The engineer is at fault for the last two major accidents, but funding is still needed. A lot of accidents never hit the public because there are no deaths or injuries. But outdated equipment is still an issue. I've run on some federally funded tracks, and the tracks are usually top notch, but I'd be hard pressed to believe everything is being taken care of as it should. the FRA is extremely underfunded. So you can bet regular federal inspections are not taking place. It's just a recipe for disaster. IMO, it's not ok to just wait until something happens to start funding things. If they properly funded the safety mechanisms that passenger trains should have had years ago, then this would not have happened. So, yes, engineers make mistakes, but underfunding is an issue. Especially when people are dying indirectly from it. With that being said, I don't work for AMTRAK, so I can only assume the particulars of where the funds should be allocated. But it's well known, and often spoken about at union meetings that AMTRAK is in need.

 

[Trip]

That's still a stretch. The engineer is at fault for the last two major accidents, but funding is still needed. A lot of accidents never hit the public because there are no deaths or injuries. But outdated equipment is still an issue. I've run on some federally funded tracks, and the tracks are usually top notch, but I'd be hard pressed to believe everything is being taken care of as it should. the FRA is extremely underfunded. So you can bet regular federal inspections are not taking place. It's just a recipe for disaster. IMO, it's not ok to just wait until something happens to start funding things. If they properly funded the safety mechanisms that passenger trains should have had years ago, then this would not have happened. So, yes, engineers make mistakes, but underfunding is an issue. Especially when people are dying indirectly from it. With that being said, I don't work for AMTRAK, so I can only assume the particulars of where the funds should be allocated. But it's well known, and often spoken about at union meetings that AMTRAK is in need.

Why should the American citizen be forced to buck up more cash for a train system that a small population of the country actually utilizes? AMTRAK gets a ton of funds as it is...their biggest costs go to health care benefits, retirement and salary...at the end of the day, you can't keep going back to the well to prop up what most view as a luxury.

 

[Higher Tech]

Why should the American citizen be forced to buck up more cash for a train system that a small population of the country actually utilizes? AMTRAK gets a ton of funds as it is...their biggest costs go to health care benefits, retirement and salary...at the end of the day, you can't keep going back to the well to prop up what most view as a luxury.

Simple answer, It's America. Healthcare, retirement, salary. That's just the cost of doing business. Any business. In the 70's the saw the need for AMTRAK and they still do today. It's not just foamers that ride the trains, it's just a fan base that they have. Look how many politicians were on the wrecked train, and I'm sure several more ride daily. It's not profitable, but it's necessary (to an extent). There are better places to make cuts because the truth of it is there is more than enough money to go around. We just spend it in all the wrong places and cut in all the wrong places. The government isn't doing away with AMTRAK, so they might as well make sure it's properly funded. Just like (imo) they should be funding libraries, after school programs, inner city social programs, etc., even though they will undoubtedly operate at a loss. The defense budget is eating up ungodly amounts of money and there's little to no oversight where the money is actually allocated. AMTRAK asked for 2 billion for infrastructure upgrades etc. 1 in 9 bridges in the US are in need of replacement. A lot of those are railroad bridges that AMTRAK runs over. Like I say, I can't get into the particulars of the budget, because I'm not familiar with it, but that money can be be put to use.

EDIT: and it's not just AMTRAK that could benefit in reallocation of defense spending. The whole country needs infrastructure reform. however, that's a whole nother thread.

 

[88m3]

Why should the American citizen be forced to buck up more cash for a train system that a small population of the country actually utilizes? AMTRAK gets a ton of funds as it is...their biggest costs go to health care benefits, retirement and salary...at the end of the day, you can't keep going back to the well to prop up what most view as a luxury.

You're speaking with emotions.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

the only folks that use AMTRAK are rich ppl...let them pay for it they want it.

I wish I could slap you for saying something so utterly stupid

 

[tru_m.a.c]

the only folks that use AMTRAK are rich ppl...let them pay for it they want it.

what? this is simply not true.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Why should the American citizen be forced to buck up more cash for a train system that a small population of the country actually utilizes? AMTRAK gets a ton of funds as it is...their biggest costs go to health care benefits, retirement and salary...at the end of the day, you can't keep going back to the well to prop up what most view as a luxury.

That corridor pertains to the greatest density of Americans in the country.

 

[Calmye]

what the hell is the conductors job again?

exactly! I understand if it was hijacked or something but this seems like dude was sleep or drunk.

 

[tru_m.a.c]

point is the volume of Amtrak riders are from DC to NY...it's an east coast operation...the volume of ppl who ride AMTRAK make a lot of money

Amtrak’s typical riders are not low-income Americans. The poor are less likely to travel by Amtrak than by most other travel options. Only 13 percent of Amtrak passengers have incomes below $20,000. The average Amtrak rider has a higher household income than the average taxpayer. In fact, the clientele for Amtrak Metroliner service between Washington and New York consists largely of Wall Street traders, K Street lobbyists and other affluent business travelers. These folks aren’t poor.

What? This is a terrible blurb. First - we need a link to that paragraph. This is the internet.

Secondly, why is the blurb quoting an income of 20,000? The federal poverty line for a 4 person family is 24,000 (this is the often quoted measure). This blurb is arguing that anyone above the poverty line is rich. That makes absolutely no sense what so ever.

Edit: Also the "average taxpayer" is a bullshyt phrase without numbers associated with it. If they mean the average Amtrak rider has a higher household income than the US median, then: 1 show us the income of Amtrak riders…2 the US median income is $53,046.

 

[GPBear]

ARN ANDERSON IS A TROTSKYIST, BROTHER!

Thanks for clearing that up, Hollywood Hogan

 

[KingMalik]

Amtrak Seattle to Portland is LESS than gas money fukkin $35...detroit to chicago is less than flying...and amtrak doesn't compete with cars it competes with flying. And is always less than flight.

Your talking point is total bullshyt.

Nah. He's spot on.

Nobody's taking Amtrak from NYC to DC, or from Philly to DC/NYC except people with disposable income.

It's like $40-$80 each way. Most times its closer to $80. So over $100 for round trip. I can just drive for all that. And nobody except rich people are gonna fly from one east coast city to another east coast city. So the "competing with flying" argument is wrong. We're all 1-4 hours away from each other. Why even bother with going through Airport security and all that.