Re: [carfree_cities] Re: NYT op-ed about Amtrak
- Yes! Turning highways into railways! I like that.
> Od: "Greg Steele" <thegisguru@...>
> Komu: email@example.com
> Datum: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 14:13:33 -0000
> Předmět: [carfree_cities] Re: NYT op-ed about Amtrak
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "emccaughrin"
> <emccaughrin@y...> wrote:
> > --- In email@example.com, "J.H. Crawford"
> > <mailbox@c...> wrote:
> > > I don't think you can reliably run a tight rail operation without
> > > this kind of one-point final responsibility for everything that
> > > happens. Otherwise its lousy service and plenty of work for
> > > lawyers.
> > Then what you are basically proposing is to take over ownership of
> > the rail line outright. Certainly not a bad idea, but politically
> > and legally very difficult.
> A national transit system would be wonderful. But, I don't see it
> happening right now. However, it is possible to implement small
> steps in that direction. Sooner or later an energy crisis will force
> a paradigm shift in transportation. Currently the public thinks of
> highways as infrastructure, something that benefits everyone. Rail
> is perceived as only used by "others." The truth is using "public
> transit" means traveling on private property. By separating the
> infrastructure (I am intentionally using this word repeatedly) from
> operations you frame the debate in such a way as to shape a new
> paradigm when oil prices begin to skyrocket. Unlike, the situation
> in Britain, where privatization was used to separate and divide for
> the sake of competition, I am suggesting that the infrastructure be
> consolidated. As a comprise to any that would bring up political
> ideology objections to the government owning property the
> infrastructure is open to entrepreneurial investment. It brings the
> rail network under the same ownership as the road network, making it
> much easier to turn roadways into railways, when the raising oil
> prices create the political will to do so.
> > The only other alternative is to build new ROW, perhaps paralleling
> > the existing lines. That could only be justified in place with very
> > high frequency (i.e. not the kinds of places Amtrak tends to
> > operate). Again, not a bad idea either, but it is incredibly
> > expensive.
> To Post a message, send it to: carfree_cities@...
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: carfree_cities-unsubscribe@...
> Group address: http://www.egroups.com/group/carfree_cities/
> Yahoo! Groups Links