Nostalgia & History > What does Amtrak cost me?

I've seen this amount before, but I've forgot. What is the amount that the average taxpayer pays to fund Amtrak each year?

Ret. Navy Chief Bob Jensen
Manteno, IL

Not enough so's you'd remember.
SR

Be assured, you can afford it. That's been the case since May of 1971.

And without it even when the service isn't so good many could not travel as they can with it. Its no different than any other country which has passenger rail service.

This goes back about 25 years, but Ive heard for every dollar you pay for train tickets, it costs Amtrak $1.67 to take you there. Not sure if that applies today.

BAB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And without it even when the service isn't so good
> many could not travel as they can with it. Its no
> different than any other country which has
> passenger rail service.
And no one ever seems to worry about how much is spent on highways which the gas tax does not completely cover nor does anyone seem to be upset that our taxes go to take care of the nation's airports, yet the airlines make a profit, because of what our taxes pay. But too many people get upset about their taxes going for passenger trains.
John

In round numbers about $ 5.00 for every man,woman and child in America. It's either a bargain or a total waste of money depending on your viewpoint.

IMHO-Ross Rowland

The thing that always floored me was the cost analysis that money could be saved by just buying an
airline ticket for everyone on the Southwest or the CZ and give it to them. Cost benefit analysis and
an Amtrak ticket don't do well together.

Out

co614 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In round numbers about $ 5.00 for every man,woman
> and child in America. It's either a bargain or a
> total waste of money depending on your viewpoint.
>
> IMHO-Ross Rowland


I am willing to give more of my tax $$$ to Amtrak... Make it 20.00.....

callum_out Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The thing that always floored me was the cost
> analysis that money could be saved by just buying
> an
> airline ticket for everyone on the Southwest or
> the CZ and give it to them. Cost benefit analysis
> and
> an Amtrak ticket don't do well together.
>
> Out


Cost benefit analysis works against Amtrak ONLY when considering major city endpoints of a train. Using Expedia and Amtrak for pricing, I priced a lowest ROUND TRIP cost coach tickets between a couple of city pairs with a 2+ month 'lead time' of July 25th going and July 27th return:

New York City to Miami Fly: $201 Amtrak: $244
Syracuse NY to Jacksonville, FL Fly: $347 Amtrak: $326
Buffalo NY to Jackson MS Fly: $792 Amtrak: $392

Anyone who's flown a lot knows that major city to major city is always quite cheap. NY-MIA is among the cheapest of airline tickets because competition and numerous flights on multiple airlines. I was surprised to find two 'mid sized' city pairs (SYR-JAX) came in so close. But Amtrak came out better. I don't know if Syracuse is on the federal government 'smaller airport support' hand out, but if it is, SYR prices will skyrocket when it gets cut off in Trumps' budget.

As expected, using two 'lesser' cities, BUF-JAN, gave Amtrak an overwhelming advantage. I suspect NYP-JAN would also result in a significant cost savings on Amtrak.

As I see it, the 'problem' is two-fold. First, when anti-Amtrak forces calculate their 'numbers', they use NY-MIA ticket prices as an example, and completely ignore the countless small towns where the nearest commercial airport is 100+ miles away...I'll pick Niles MI as an example. Amtrak stops there multiple times per day. The second part of the problem is that less than (estimated) 10% of Amtrak passengers travel endpoint to endpoint, especially on overnight trains. There are significant percentages of their passengers that either embark or debark at a small town somewhere enroute. Amtraks' strengths are these many small towns...exactly the weaknesses that airlines don't address or serve.

The real problem lies in Congress. Most of the politicians in Washington all come from major cities. As a result, they never consider the small town residents dilemma...almost total lack of public transportation. Small town voters don't add up to any significant percentage of their constituentcy, so the politicians could care less and will therefore vote with a 'big city' bias.

From its creation in 1971 to today and into the future, Amtrak supporters will always have to 'do battle' in Congress. NARP is a good start. As individuals, we may not agree with everything NARP pushes for, but it's the best we got. Writing letters to our representatives in Washington is also critical to get continued Amtrak funding.

callum_out Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The thing that always floored me was the cost
> analysis that money could be saved by just buying
> an
> airline ticket for everyone on the Southwest or
> the CZ and give it to them. Cost benefit analysis
> and
> an Amtrak ticket don't do well together.
>
> Out

I've heard that, too. I'm not sure it holds up in some of the captive air markets (Garden City Kansas, Gallup NM) or places that don't have an airport within 100 miles. Flights aren't cheap. Garden City to Kansas City is a $300, four hours and a change in DFW. Amtrak is $61 and 8 hours

For example, flights from Roanoke to Washington DC start at $300 one way, and move up into the $500 pretty fast. Four to seven hour connecting flights. Same day, same destination, Lynchburg VA starts at $147 and moves into the mid $200s. Still seven and eight hour connections. Amtrak is the difference, I think. The Amtrak does the deed in under four hours for $90. and as low as $71 with a non-can ticket.

That "buy them an airline ticket" thing conveniently ignores the fact the that the airlines are subsidized too- slightly higher per seat mile than Amtrak.
So you're simply trading one subsidized fare for another.

Mmmmmm... Red herring anyone?
Tasty!
SR

The problem is, Amtrak only serves about 1 out of every 100 of those small towns, so we are all paying for something that serves a purpose for so few. Roads take you EVERYWHERE, airlines will get you fairly close and do it with great speed. Amtrak is just like throwing darts at a board to see if it start ANYWHERE near you, or stops ANYWHERE near where you want to go, and does it neither cheaply or quickly. Amtrak is Alco in 1967. The third horse in a two horse race.

Maybe give folks an Uber or Lyft allowance?

Taxpayer money is being spent on worse...

Posted from Android

bluesboyst Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> co614 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > In round numbers about $ 5.00 for every
> man,woman
> > and child in America. It's either a bargain or
> a
> > total waste of money depending on your
> viewpoint.
> >
> > IMHO-Ross Rowland
>
>
> I am willing to give more of my tax $$$ to
> Amtrak... Make it 20.00.....

i 2nd that.......

66

> I've heard that, too. I'm not sure it holds up in
> some of the captive air markets (Garden City
> Kansas, Gallup NM) or places that don't have an
> airport within 100 miles.

Hello all,

The missing part of the conversation so far is the bus option. As a RR guy, I have to admit I underestimated the extent of bus services these days. As I was putting together the Cost-Benefit Analysis for the TIGER Grant that funded BNSF's SW Chief route upgrade through Garden City, I was surprised to learn how much bus service was available in that area, to/from all directions. Also found through research that modern buses are much more fuel efficient than Amtrak's intercity passenger trains. The fundamental problem is that a passenger train is much heavier on a per-passenger basis than a bus, just too much weight being moved around...

Take care,

Mark

mamfahr Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > I've heard that, too. I'm not sure it holds up
> in
> > some of the captive air markets (Garden City
> > Kansas, Gallup NM) or places that don't have an
> > airport within 100 miles.
>
> Hello all,
>
> The missing part of the conversation so far is the
> bus option. As a RR guy, I have to admit I
> underestimated the extent of bus services these
> days. As I was putting together the Cost-Benefit
> Analysis for the TIGER Grant that funded BNSF's SW
> Chief route upgrade through Garden City, I was
> surprised to learn how much bus service was
> available in that area, to/from all directions.
> Also found through research that modern buses are
> much more fuel efficient than Amtrak's intercity
> passenger trains. The fundamental problem is that
> a passenger train is much heavier on a
> per-passenger basis than a bus, just too much
> weight being moved around...
>
> Take care,
>
> Mark

Greyhound US has been paring a lot of what used to be local services in the past decades. There was an article last year about ending the "into town" stops in Montana. The local agency / stop was abolished, as the company focused on through customers. It was amazing how small the losses were. In the several hundred thousand dollars per line range. For a private company that watches expenses, that was enough.


(I remember that the state of NJ turned down a request from Erie-Lackawanna for subsidy on some of their branch lines in 1966. Tiny number by today's standards, maybe $10 million.

Service to Newton on the Sussex Line, Washington on the Phillipsburg Line, Wanaque on the Greenwood Lake Line, Caldwell on that branch, Tenafly on the Northern (!) ended soon after. )

No one ever calculates the "spill over" benefits. Consider an Amtrak conductor buying a new car or truck. An Amtrak engineer buying a new home. They're stimulating the economy.

CA_Sou_MA_Agent Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No one ever calculates the "spill over" benefits.
> Consider an Amtrak conductor buying a new car or
> truck. An Amtrak engineer buying a new home.
> They're stimulating the economy.

Yes. But that's an expensive way to deliver stimulation.

So, governments would probably do it...

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes. But that's an expensive way to deliver stimulation.

How do you figure? The Government and the public is getting something in return (rail passenger service) and people are being employed and spending their money. It might be one of the wisest ways to spend Government dollars.

During the Space Race in the 1960s, some people thought that was a waste of money. A similar justification was provided, reminding naysayers that all those high paying aerospace jobs gave a huge boost to various state economies in the form of the buying power of those aerospace workers. It helped to give California one of the most robust economies on the planet.

Now, with the decline of aerospace and other factors, California has slipped a tremendous amount in that regard. We've gone from aerospace workers making $50. an hour to dish washers and leaf blower operators making less-than-minumum wage.

Anyone who lives in California can see the sharp contrast. The State is well on its way to mimicking a Third World country.