Eastern Olympic Venues other than Whiteface

[x10003q]

There would be virtually no sustainable demand for Boston to Montreal, certainly not anything that could justify the considerable expense of ongoing operations.

As for the "success" of the "DC to Boston corridor" via rail? It's a complete myth. It's one of those things that gets repeated so often that people (and I mean probably nearly everyone) believe it's true. But if you actually look into the financials I think you'd be absolutely shocked (and possibly aghast).

It loses tons of $$$$ and only survives via government assistance, the taxpayer pumps $$$ into it to keep it alive. For whatever reason, this isnt publicized (at all), so people generally dont realize how much $$$$ AMTRAK etc loses.



It's funny cause' it's true! (I loffed).

Amtrak served around 30.2 million passengers last year and claimed that it recovered 79% of its operating cost from fares. The Amtrak subsidies are easy to find:$563million for operating and $922million for capital costs this year.
(The 32 F-35 fighters scheduled to be purchased this year are coming in around $208million for each F-35 or $304million each including R&D. The final purchase total is supposed to be 2443 F-35 fighters.)

The US Highway system and the air traffic system also receive huge amounts of govt $$$$$$$$$$. Last time I checked zero money was recovered from the US Interstate highway system from its users.

I cannot tell if the North East Corridor is profitable or not but around 750,000 people use it every day. It is an important part of the east coast transportation system.

As for high speed rail between Boston and Montreal - not happening. There will never be enough demand or money to build it.

http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ContentServer?c=Page&pagename=am/Layout&cid=1246041980246

 

[BenedictGomez]

I cannot tell if the North East Corridor is profitable or not but around 750,000 people use it every day. It is an important part of the east coast transportation system.

AMTRAK itself loses millions. The NEC, IINM does breakeven or make money, but even that's a bit skewed by the fact that it's the lighter traveled (mostly business) ACELA is profitable while the heavily traveled (every day people) Metroliner loses money.

The reason is that they charge a ton for those ACELA tickets, and they're not really worth it given you're paying twice as much and only saving about an I Love Lucy episode in time, but when you're not the one paying for it? Why not, is the business traveler logic. But as businesses get squeezed I imagine that mindset is diminishing. At any rate, there is no way to economically state that it has been a success. The company is what.... 40 something years old? To the best of my knowledge, it has never had even a single profitable year.

And FWIW, I loved taking ACELA myself from NY to DC or Boston on business. Does that mean I think it's an intelligent expenditure? No.