Sleeping cars under attack

[saxman]

Just saw this on the NARP news site.

It may be true that sleeping car passengers make up a small percentage of Amtrak's long distance passengers, but they sure provide a huge amount of revenue, actually subsidizing the coach passengers in essence.

I also find it interesting that whenever I see a "per passenger loss" or per passenger subsidy" it's always a different number depending who you ask.

 

[Bob Dylan]

:hi: Interesting Chris, seems like the same old right wing propoganda! Meanwhile the mess that the last group in power created continues to compund the current woes that this country faces! What is spent on Amtrak would, maybe, fund one uneeded weapon platform (ie plane),what is stolen monthly in the Middle East or scammed by brother in law contracts! People vote with their pocket books and Amtrak is getting lots of votes even in the high bucket sleepers!

 

[pebbleworm]

Ack! Cut taxes for billionaires, cut services for the destitute, de-regulate industry! That's worked out great for the nation over the past 30 years... I can't track down a link, but I've seen some numbers that an Amtrak sleeper actually generates more revenue than a coach. Maybe I need to watch Fox "news" more.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

So what would be a reasoned response to this attack? How much would a sleeper ticket cost if it had to pay for every expense it incurred? How do we make the case that the subsidy is a benefit? Speaking of which, why is Cantor wasting his time on subsidies that pale in comparison to the really huge giveaways? If he was serious about cutting subsidies you'd think he'd be looking at completely upside down markets like corn syrup and nuclear power.

 

[volkris]

It seems the obvious response is to prove the attack wrong with some real numbers.

The blurb flat out says that "Amtrak loses more than twice as much per passenger (an average of $396) for first class service as compared to coach class service," yet the OP claims first class services subsidize coach. Both statements can't be right, so if you want to argue against their statement you should probably bring some data to support your side.

After all, if they have their facts right, they're making a pretty good argument.

 

[kentuckian1977]

Republican arguments against Amtrak always make me very tired. If anything, Amtrak should receive much more in the way of Federal funding, so that we can have a national passenger rail system that even starts to compare to those in other industrialized nations. Maybe then sleepers would not be priced out of reach of working class people, as they are most of the time now. More to the point, maybe then there would be more corridors that would be daylight only, city to city, not requiring sleepers at all. This particular argument is silly too in the sense that if they want Amtrak passengers to pay every dime it costs to provide the sleeper services, how about having every driver pay their proportional share for the destruction of farmland for more interstate lanes, and the paving, repaving, and endless upkeep of said highways, or ditto for every flyer and the government propped-up airlines and airport infrastructure...

 

[lyke99]

So what would be a reasoned response to this attack? How much would a sleeper ticket cost if it had to pay for every expense it incurred? How do we make the case that the subsidy is a benefit? Speaking of which, why is Cantor wasting his time on subsidies that pale in comparison to the really huge giveaways? If he was serious about cutting subsidies you'd think he'd be looking at completely upside down markets like corn syrup and nuclear power.

It is my personal opinion that Amtrak is the target because of it's political impact. If you live in a place with little or no service, most people haven't have ridden Amtrak, but everyone has heard of it. Cutting Amtrak seems like "doing something" - especially to people with little or no chance to use the service. Most people are not aware of corn syrup subsidies so cutting those would have less political impact (it would seem less like "doing something") and this is an election year for Congress.

 

[Guest]

Personally I think sleepers should be subsidy free. I mean when someone is paying a grand on the Zepher for a bedroom it is not a question of affordable transportation anymore.

Now of they want to start nit picking they need to cut way back on EAS as well. Why does Bar Harbor need subsidies on flights when Bangor is an hour away, ect? I have done a EAS flight before and while convenient it was completely ridiculous.

 

[Boswash]

Sleeping cars are like the airplanes that the car companies flew to testify in DC. They are only for rich people. The vast majority of the common folk have no use or need for any of it.

Just send us our unemployment checks so we can make the payments on our Silverado's and F150's. That's how to keep us happy and as long as we have our trucks we will vote for you in November.

 

[had8ley]

The red flag that jumps out at me Sax is that "only" 16% of Amtrak pax opt for sleeper class. Well, if it's only available on 16% of trains I think they twisted the math... h34r:

 

[sunchaser]

Just send a nice email expressing your opinion. The You Cut website is designed so that you can submit items to cut wasteful spending from the Federal Budget. You submit an idea, & if it gets enough votes from the public on the internet, he will submit it to the House. This does not mean that anything he submits will pass, however. Remember the Democrats have control of both the House & the Senate.

The Democrats have a similar website.

I personally do not agree with the opinion that since sleepers are "First Class", & they should not be subsidized.

If that is the case then Business Class should not be subsidized either.

There are plenty who take it because they can afford it, but others who use a sleeper for many reasons, such as age, health, etc.

 

[spacecadet]

I'm sure these Republicans fly coach whenever they travel anywhere, right?

Their tax dollars are going to subsidize first and business class on airlines too, because it's only government paying for things like airports, air traffic control and runway maintenance that keeps those fares from being even higher.

That's the obvious argument against these cuts. There should be no selective cutting of transport subsidies. Cut one, cut them all. That includes air travel and roads too. (What about all those "first class" buses now using government paid-for roads?)

 

[sunchaser]

I'm sure these Republicans fly coach whenever they travel anywhere, right?

Their tax dollars are going to subsidize first and business class on airlines too, because it's only government paying for things like airports, air traffic control and runway maintenance that keeps those fares from being even higher.

That's the obvious argument against these cuts. There should be no selective cutting of transport subsidies. Cut one, cut them all. That includes air travel and roads too. (What about all those "first class" buses now using government paid-for roads?)

Yeah, just like Speaker Pelosi flies coach. :lol:

I'm a Republican & I fly coach if I fly...Granted, we do not fly much. We have actually taken the train more than flying in the last few years. On the train we use sleepers. If we didn't, I don't think hubby would want to go. We usually go for an overnight trip, & would not do well trying to sleep in coach. He needs to lie flat.

 

[alanh]

Speaking of which, why is Cantor wasting his time on subsidies that pale in comparison to the really huge giveaways?

Because real cuts are hard. 75% of the budget is Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, the military, and interest on the debt. You can't make meaningful cuts without cutting any of those, and good luck with that. Military spending (adjusted for inflation) is the highest since WW II.

 

[Boswash]

True, some ride trains because they are too large to fit in a bus or airline seat. Some cannot drive. Should the taxpayer continue to subsidize large folks or those who don't drive? Should the taxpayer continue to subsidize business people by operating airports, covering the cost of airline operations (air traffic control, weather satellites,etc)? Do we really need the government trying to educate children, fight fires, providing police protection, or piping water into our homes?

It does one good once and a while to consider which services they really want and need, and let their elected officials know which ones they do want and which ones they don't.

 

[saxman]

It seems the obvious response is to prove the attack wrong with some real numbers.

The blurb flat out says that "Amtrak loses more than twice as much per passenger (an average of $396) for first class service as compared to coach class service," yet the OP claims first class services subsidize coach. Both statements can't be right, so if you want to argue against their statement you should probably bring some data to support your side.

After all, if they have their facts right, they're making a pretty good argument.

The problem is that $396 per passenger is a really meaningless number. It's sort of like asking me how much money per passenger it costs me to drive my car. Even if I sit and calculate all that out and come up with say $10 per passenger to drive my car. Great! But what does mean? It obviously depends on how many people ride in my car and the distance I go, pretty much messing up my $10 number.

People that ride buses, trains, and planes, always are going different distances. So maybe it's more accurate in measuring ridership and cost in cost per passenger mile. Ask an airline what their per passenger cost is and you'll get an answer in per mile.

So you wanted numbers, and this is just some average numbers. I don't have time to dig through the files on Amtrak's site, but here are some of NARP's site made simple:

Looking at Amtrak's long distance route only, Amtrak takes in an average of 23.8 cents per passenger mile for sleepers. They took in only 12.3 cents per passenger mile for coach. The average fare for sleeping car pax was $241 vs. only $67 for coach. And for 2008, Amtrak took over 635,000 sleeping car passengers vs. 3.5 million coach passengers. Keep in mind that the average sleeping pax travelled twice the distance of coach passengers too. (1014 vs. 546)

So even though, according to these numbers, sleeping car passenger made up only about 15% of all long distance passengers, they make up for almost 40% of the revenue.

So essentially, this senator is asking Amtrak to eliminate 40% of its revenue for the long distance trains. If you want to write to him that is all you have to say.

 

[sunchaser]

True, some ride trains because they are too large to fit in a bus or airline seat. Some cannot drive. Should the taxpayer continue to subsidize large folks or those who don't drive? Should the taxpayer continue to subsidize business people by operating airports, covering the cost of airline operations (air traffic control, weather satellites,etc)? Do we really need the government trying to educate children, fight fires, providing police protection, or piping water into our homes?

It does one good once and a while to consider which services they really want and need, and let their elected officials know which ones they do want and which ones they don't.

I don't think anyone mentioned size as a factor, although, in some cases, that may be a reason people would prefer train travel. It seems a good number choose train travel & sometimes sleepers is because of disabilities. Train travel seems to be a better option for some in that situation compared to flying or driving. The premise is that sleepers are 'First Class' & therefore should not be subsidized by the government.

The argument about subsidies for things we all use-education, firefighters, police etc., is IMHO, a different comparison. We are talking about travel. We subsidize airports, airlines, highways etc. Train travel, IMHO, is in that category. Not everyone flies or takes trains, but almost everyone uses roads, directly or indirectly.

 

[Tony]

I'm sure these Republicans fly coach whenever they travel anywhere, right?

Wow, how quickly people forget the all new luxury private jets the Republican controlled Congress had on order for their own personal use. Well, until the press uncovered the expenditure, hidden in the federal budget as a so-called military aircraft.

 

[MikefromCrete]

If you live in this guy's district, vote him out of office. Donate money to his opponent (providing his opponent isn't also anti-Amtrak).

 

[birdy]

So what would be a reasoned response to this attack? How much would a sleeper ticket cost if it had to pay for every expense it incurred? How do we make the case that the subsidy is a benefit? Speaking of which, why is Cantor wasting his time on subsidies that pale in comparison to the really huge giveaways? If he was serious about cutting subsidies you'd think he'd be looking at completely upside down markets like corn syrup and nuclear power.

It is my personal opinion that Amtrak is the target because of it's political impact. If you live in a place with little or no service, most people haven't have ridden Amtrak, but everyone has heard of it. Cutting Amtrak seems like "doing something" - especially to people with little or no chance to use the service. Most people are not aware of corn syrup subsidies so cutting those would have less political impact (it would seem less like "doing something") and this is an election year for Congress.

I agree. Amtrak is high profile, even if its low-dollar. The billion per year we spend on it is about equal to the cost of our wars until Monday morning. Probably most people think is something like the Post Office. Its easy enough for the anti-Amtrak types--Sen. McCain comes to mind--to talk about "billions" in subsidy by merely talking as if the last twenty years of subsidy happened last year.

 

[dlagrua]

We seem to have a very partisan crowd here on this forum. People are idiots to believe that one party is better than the other. Look at the past administration and then look at the current one that runs the whole show today. They both stink to holy hell. That opinion comes from a traditionalist/constitutionalist pro American independent. The partisan finger pointing game is to make you feel that you have a choice. You dont have a choice. The president takes his orders from the financial elite and the world banking establishment.

 

[Donctor]

We seem to have a very partisan crowd here on this forum. People are idiots to believe that one party is better than the other. Look at the past administration and then look at the current one that runs the whole show today. They both stink to holy hell. That opinion comes from a traditionalist/constitutionalist pro American independent. The partisan figer poin ting game is to make you feel that you have a choice. You dont have a choice. The president takes his orders from the financial elite and the world banking establishment.

Why does this conversation need to be about your personal views?

Anyway, uneducated individuals (referring to people complaining about sleepers) will always complain about things like this. If they want to believe that Amtrak's sleepers (or diners, or whatever) are the cause of all the railway's problems, they're going to believe it.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

These kinds of nonsense things like "u-cut" never work or mean much. Why? Because you can't get a lot of people to agree on cutting a particular item. Such a group focused on general cost cutting is too disorganized to do anything. Also, they have amazingly bogus numbers.

There are no additional subsidies for Amtrak sleeper passengers, period. Amtrak sleeper passengers pay the full cost of their first class service, and then some.

 

[wheatridger]

Sleepers are essential, I believe, to the success of long distance trains. It's a big country, and you can't make all that distance in the daytime. You wind up riding overnight. My recent (and last) experience on an overnight coach indicated to me that sleep may not be possible anymore. Too many other passengers, juiced on caffeine (or whatever) and amused by DVDs and laptop games (without using headphones), may not even attempt to sleep, especially if they must board or disembark on the wee hours. In a sleeper, you're insulated from the increasing hubub in coach and guaranteed a chance to sleep. While sleeping, you won't count the hours spent enroute. That's the unique advantage of a train- you can sleep through the miles in comfort that's unattainable in a car or a plane.

Planes do those speeds even before liftoff. Speed comes naturally to air travel, just as the nature of trains enables them to carry more weight and provide more space. why not build on rails' natural advantages?

So the current goal to rebuild our national passenger rail network to allow 100+mph speeds over thousands of miles of track seems rather misguided. Keep your HSR, and give me cheaper sleepers, and a lot of 'em.

 

[dlagrua]

Let us not discount competitiveness in this debate. First off, sleepers are an essential part of long distance travel via rail. Eliminate and or greatly increase the price of the sleepers and Amtrak will lose business. Revenue will go down as people like myself will no long consider LD trains an appealing form of travel. Sleeper passengers pay three times as much per mile of travel as coach passengers do. There comes a price point when rail travel no longer becomes affordable and Amtrak must consider that.

Let's not assume that only affluent people ride the sleepers. You will find mostly middle class people, senior citizens, families and the handicapped in them. Over dinners onbord I have met very few people that seem rich. On the AutoTrain you have mostly seniors during certain periods of the year and some months there are many students.

Point is that everything has a value. When you already charge three times as much for an average sleeper trip (and take in more revenue per mile than in coach) leave well enough alone. As a frequent Amtrak travelers, we are NOT going to buy a sleeper fare for $350 to $800 per night plus coach fare. Our limit is $200-$300 per nite (in addition to coach fare) and that's it. If Amtrak fares rise much more, then we drive.

As for "FIRST CLASS". Amtrak sleeper cars at this point are well worn and far from real First Class. While they are the best accomodations onboard, the bedrooms and roomettes can hardly be called luxurious. They are cramped, the trip can be rough and they are utilitarian at best.