I think you missed my point, Jordan. I said that if Amtrak received proper public funding 9which is a big IF), rail travel would be much more efficient. I did not argue that it would be more efficient using the current infrastructure.
To illustrate - the distance from NYC to Chicago is 787 miles, and driving time (according to Yahoo map service) is 12 hours and 6 minutes (which gives the average travel speed about 65 mph thanks to vastly subsidized interstate highway system). Trains can go much faster than that, Acela reaches about 140 mph. Thus assuming average speed 120 mph, the 787 mile distance between Chicago and NYC could be covered in about 7 hours. Now it takes about 16 hours because Amtrak uses old freight tracks with a lot of detours (via Phily, Altoona, Pittsburgh etc).
> Totally false. The San Luis Obispo->San Diego corridor is awash with
> rail transit, including connections to airports, regional rail,
subway,
> trollys, etc. The Pacific Surfliner was Amtrak's 2nd busiest corridor
> (behind NEC) last month. The Capitol Corridor (Sacramento->San Jose)
is
> similarly rich, not far behind that on ridership, and adding service
and
> riders all the time.
I am not saying there is no service, but that the service is painfully slow. Takes the whole day (11 hours) to get to from SJ to LA by train, and about 5-6 hours to drive. Been there done that. You need do better than that to attract passangers other than college kids and old geezers on vacation.
> Sacramento -> San Jose is about $23 and is about 30 miles less than
your
> Portugal example. The NEC is priced competitively! Amtrak isn't
losing
> passengers on that route because it's too expensive, they are losing
> them because they can't keep the trains running on schedule.
I do not think Amtrak has any worse on-time record than most airlines and certainly much better than Greyhound. And this whole "competitive pricing" on NEC is a bunch of bull. They charge more to cross-subsidize their money losing operations elsewhere.
>
> So you're all for fully funding Amtrak?
>
Yes. Emphatically. It is a public good with greater utility and efficiency than most other subsidized projects, from highways to cruise missiles. The taxpayer would get a much greater bang for their buck by subsidizing rail than by subsidizing freeways.
Wojtek