What prevents the government from installing more rail systems for commuters?

Answer 1

It would cost government multi-millions to install more rail systems for commuters. Then these same commuters would just want to pay a few dollars for the ride to and from work. That is why Amtrak is in such trouble. It costs a fortune to keep it rolling and the passengers would need to spend thousands of dollars on a trip if they were actually paying for the REAL cost of transportation. The government subsidizes Amtrak and probably any other rail system, too. So, the answer is MONEY in one word.

Answer 2

FIRST, it's not profitable for a PRIVATE company to do passenger rail-transport: competing against the airlines and automobiles. So in the USA, Amtrak does ALL passenger trains, and contracts most commuter lines.

Private companies (Union Pacific, BN&SF, etc) though do a BOOMING business in frieght traffic... and OWN all the railroad right-of-ways !!

SO...Gromit hit it on the rail-spike !!

THE BIGGEST problem is LAND (which equates to money):

As an example, here in Northern California on the Penisula, there is ONE rail right-of-way owned by CALTRAIN which used to be owned by Southern Pacific.

Now to put down any MORE lines in the area, the government would have to purchase the LAND to create a right-of-way... the problem IS that the land you want for a right-of-way is the prime real estate you build roads an homes on !!

SO, you have to BUY that land... California has very restrictive rules on "eminent domain". Sadly the taxpayers aren't happy to fund THAT when they want their freeways, highways, and roads kept up-to-date.

NOW, in California, we DID have an interesting thing happen a few years back: the folks in the San Joaquin Valley were commuting over to the Silicon Valley (50-70 miles) and traffic was horrible !! A group was formed and developed the ACE trains that run from Stockton to San Jose each morning and evening... by leasing track-time from Union Pacific. It is heavily used... but still subsidized

Answer 3

I think the words used in your question, "the government," pretty much sums it up.

You'd want to entrust the building, training and management necessary, including day to day operations to "the government?" These are the same folks who pay $330 for a 'brad impacting device', that which we call a hammer, and a good one can be bought for less than $60 at Home Depot? Then there are those $800 toilet seats.

And then there is that little thing called 'eminent domain'. Right of way acquirement would displace an untold number of people, as the west bound main is going to lay right where your living room couch now sits. These are the people who'll really be pony-ing up the bucks as their property is taken and remuneration made in dollars far below actual value.

My crystal ball says it ain't gonna happen............

Answer 4

Indeed, while land acquisition is a common problem today in obtaining right-of-ways to build new railroad (NIMBYs, which means "Not In My Back Yard" are major problem for obtaining new right-of-ways today), particularly private, I think the even larger problem is simple politics. Case-in-point is our nation's rail-passenger service, Amtrak, which, unfortunately, is constantly under siege in Washington regarding funding and barely receives enough money to even function, let alone operate efficiently. It is now a proven fact that due to the ever increasing use of transportation by us Americans that our nation's highways simply cannot keep up with current and future demand. So, ideally, we should be focusing on upgraded commuter rail as a means to handle this demand, which it easily can do if properly funded since it is also a proven fact that no other means of transportation is more efficient at moving people per-fuel-mile (which, in turn, is more environmentally friendly). But, because of politics it is unclear if our nation's commuter rail systems will ever be properly funded. A recent article clearly shows are lack of transportation infrastructure, particularly high speed and commuter rail: U.S. lags the world in infrastructure planning RailwayAge: A new report by the Urban Land Institute and Ernst & Young, “Infrastrujccture 2007: A Global Perspective,” is strongly critical of this country’s “relatively low investment in virtually all aspects of mobility-related infrastructure--airports, public transit, railway systems, roads, and bridges.” The report calls America “more a follower and no longer a world leader when it comes to infrastructure. Other countries marshal vanguard strategies and provide the contemporary lessons for developing best practices in public/private finance, intermodal transport, congestion pricing, and high speed rail. [In the U.S.] there is a tendency to invest in the infrastructure we have rather than on the infrastructure we will need.” The Urban Land Institute surveyed 30 state transportation planning directors with the following results: "87% said that the nation's transportation infrastructure is not capable of meeting the nation’s needs over the next 10 years. The respondents warned that 97% of roads, bridges, and tunnels, and 88% of transit rail systems will require at least moderate improvements in the years ahead. An estimated $185 billion in additional funding will be required for road systems over the next five years alone.” Solving the problem will require more than greater commitment to infrastructure, the report warns: "In addition to revamping funding mechanisms for construction and operations, long-term solutions must include rethinking land-planning models so they are far less auto-dependent and offer plenty of options for getting from one place to another. If driving continues to be the only practical transportation in many metropolitan areas, no amount of infrastructure will be adequate.”

Answer 5

Highways are massively subsidized by the government. In this environment, rail must compete on a stacked playing field.

A rail line benefits everybody traveling that way even if they don't use it because:
1) they enjoy the benefits of reduced congestion (do you want tens or hundreds of thousands of additional cars in front of you?)
2) rail lines are MUCH cheaper than the equivalent highway capacity, so they save all taxpayers money. (likewise, the subsidy cost is lower than the cost of road maintenance, not even considering pollution, global warming, and additional deaths from traffic accidents that would be caused by more driving).

Answer 6

Passenger rail in Europe has always been the way to travel. But, in North America people fell in love with the automobile. Its fine to take the train from point A if you live nearby and travel to point B if your destination is nearby. But the vast majority of North Americans would have to drive in excess of 1 hour just to get to the train station. Then when you get there, there is no place to park your car. It would be too costly to try and entice people to take the train. In Ontario there are hundreds of miles of abandoned RR lines that could be used for commuter travel but then again who in their right mind would take the train if they have a car and can leave home when they want and get to their destination when they want without worrying about timetables.

Answer 7

The US in the early 1900's had the best transportation system in the world, from trains to trolleys, you could go anywhere, anytime. Now Europe is 20 years ahead of the US and the US still does not realize this. Passenger service has to make a comeback, because gas is only going to get more expensive.

Answer 8

First, The cost.
Second, Governments are only elected for the short term, railroad expantionis along term project from conception to compleation.

Answer 9

Lack of land.

Where are you going to lay the tracks? You want a train through your neighborhood?

Money doesn't solve everything.

BTW: The $800 toilet seat was for one aircraft, and it wasn't massed produced, so it was a one time build. The original dies had been destroyed and recycled.

Answer 10

Basically the fact that they have never really made money if you're referring to trains and not just subways and trolleys. Amtrak is already subsidized out the yahoo.