Question:
Whenever there is an economic activity that can only be carried out by the use of eminent domain then that activity should be naturally owned by the people (government). If the government owned the RR tracks like they do most of the highways and airports we would have a robust amazing rail system that would rival or surpass our freeway system. Many different train owners would supply many different services and the political process could allocate resources so that all would benefit. I would like to put my car on a 100 to 200 mph train, travel across the country and then use it when I get to my destination. One person driving a train can replace about 200 semi truck drivers. Due to the steel wheels on trains the fuel used per ton moved is much less than trucks. The possibility of huge savings in transportation costs requires us to consider this drastic change.
Answers:
Shipping papers used during rail transportation of a hazardous material are?
Our brain trust in Washington, DC, couldn't dispatch two fleas across a dog's butt, and you want to put THEM in charge of the railroad?Not a good idea.
Those recent MRT deaths --an aberration or did they decide to copy the first guy?
that idea is nothing new. the government subsidizes the RR now. the companies that own the trains ARE private. the companies that build the tracks ARE private. and when everything is working right, it is very economical to ship by rail. a percentage of your income taxes go to the RRs. all this applies if you're in the US...i keep forgetting we have "foreigners" on here too.i want to know the train availability & timing from kolkata to siliguri?
They have this model in New Zealand now. The NZ government owns the tracks and Toll Holdings (an Australian company) owns the trains and runs them. Trying to get the politicians to fund the track upgrades and maintenance hasn't been any better than trying to get a private company to spend the money. The legislators don't see it as something that's going to "earn them political capital." They'll go for projects that have high visibility with voters and are politically popular--that's the way they get re-elected. Short-term thinking is not unique to publicly traded companies, in fact it's probably worse with government--House members are always in re-election mode with their terms lasting only 2 years. I commute by train every day and enjoy doing longer distance rail travel too, so I'm not an anti-rail. I just don't think government ownership is going to improve the situation.Indian railway reservation site?
Amtrak is run by the government.NEVER allow the federal government to control ANYTHING on a large scale. Hogshead has the point made quite succinctly.
Besides, the private rail companies ALREADY move freight in the 200-1 ratio you mentioned. but moving freight aint the same as moving people and there is much higher overhead involved due to providing for passenger comfort.
The only change would be allowing the government to annex all the rails, but they would provide for upkeep the same way they do the highways. Not at all. Besides, didnt people like Hitler, Mussolini, Hugo Chavez all nationalize THEIR rail systems too? And if you do a little reading, you will find that the rails improved in each case for about three months then went to a shambles. Esp in Germany in the 30s, look what they used THEIR rails to do...... because they COULD.
How can I clean battery acid that leaked on an old electric train?
Keep the rails PRIVATE.
How could I catch a freight train from California to Portland Oregon?
In the UK when the railways were first taken into public ownership in the 1940s the Government owned everything - tracks, trains, signaling, whatever.. Then they were privatised in the 1990s and rather than vertical integration (as has always been the railways way), the Government of the day set up a separate private company for each function - the tracks were owned by a private company, signaling done by someone else, rolling stock owned by others which leased them to the train operating companies. The infrastructure owning company, Railtrack, was run by bean counters who knew nothing about running a railway. Maintenance was carried out by sub-contractors and no one kept tabs on them so corners were cut etc. Result? A number of high-profile accidents. Railtrack was in severe financial trouble and it was wound up. The Government set up another organisation, Network Rail, a 'not-for-profit' company which now owns the infrastructure and does a great deal of work in-house. In the US (outside the big cities with commuter lines) I believe your system is that the private railroad companies still own everything, other than the passenger trains which are owned by Amtrak which presumably pays a fee for using the tracks. Seems a good system. Don't alter it.More Questions & Answers ...
This article contents is post by this website user, CarQnA.com doesn't promise its accuracy.