The U.S. ought to Privatize Amtrak

Rebuttals: “Only two high-speed rail routes in the world are profitable [1], with these routes being Tokyo-Osaka and Parisk-Lyon. The vast array of "advanced" railroad networks in France, Germany, Japan, China, etc., are not only hemorrhaging taxpayer's funds, but only account for approximately 8% of all transportation usage [2].” I was not talking about profitability when I was saying they were a success. They are successful in the sense of technology, efficiency, usage, and their extensive networks. That 8% you claim is the total (I question that number since I found nothing to support it) still apparently adds up to 397.8 billion passenger-kilometers out of population of 505.7 (European Union) million people. Most of the railway infrastructure is in Western Europe with the majority of its usage in Germany and France. Sources: - http://en.wikipedia.org... - http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu... “Amtrak's subsidies, as I said earlier, far exceed the subsidies for highways and air travel [3]:” First, I would like to point out that your source is from the Cato Institute which is a libertarian and conservative bias think tank. It is obvious that the Cato Institute would oppose Amtrak subsidies and try to exaggerate every apparent flaw. Additionally, your graph shows their subsidy in relation to per passenger mile. However, I have also pointed out earlier that Amtrak boasts the highest revenue by passenger mile over doubling the next highest which is domestic airlines. Therefore, Amtrak actually makes the most money out of all of them. I believe you may have misinterpreted the data in the graph. I have already proven in my former argument that Amtrak’s subsidy is nearly half of that of the FAA and almost one tenth of the Highway Trust Fund. Your graph technically does not refute that but does display its information in a misleading way by comparing the numbers to per passenger mile. “The average American's rail usage hasn't budged in recent years [3]:” Again, I question both your source and misleading statistics. The graph you used is, as you said, for the average American. It is obvious that Amtrak is not used as much as domestic airlines or passenger cars because passenger railways are not accessible to everyone. The average American probably doesn’t use rail transport every day throughout the U.S. There are entire western states such as Idaho, Wyoming, and South Dakota that does not even have a rail going through them yet. While Amtrak is becoming increasingly popular in the last decade, especially in the Northeastern United States, they are not yet an average American’s form of transportation in most of America. “Furthermore, after adjusting for the fact that vehicles (in intercity travel) typically have 2.4 passengers [3], vehicles on average used fewer BTUs per passenger mile — ipso facto, vehicles overall had greater energy efficiency.” Your source states, “At 2.4 people per car, the average car used 2,226 BTUs per passenger mile in intercity travel in 2010.” 2,226 BTUs is still less than my data that says Amtrak uses 1,735 BTUs per passenger-kilometer. Additionally, your source is in “passenger-miles” which is greater than a “passenger-kilometer” which makes the passenger car even less efficient in comparison. Again, I greatly question Cato Institute “research” due to their clear bias and unaccredited status for valid research. Your source claims that 2,226 BTUs is less than what Amtrak’s energy consumption while my source is based off of objectively collected data that says Amtrak uses significantly less. My source for energy usage is from the United States Bureau of Transportation I collected through a Wikipedia article. “Moreover, both vehicles and air travel are gaining energy efficiency much more rapidly than Amtrak, and will both exceed Amtrak within the next several years [3]:” Your graph does not exactly seem to support your claim. The graph is based on data from former statements such as their passenger car efficiency claim that I refute. Also, the trend on the graph shows all modes of transportation lowering. While airlines may become more efficient by 2023 as you claim I see little to prove it. Airliners went down significantly until 1980 and then slow similarly to its competing modes. In reference to privatization: Your World Bank source does not support your argument. There is nothing in the source that says anything against subsidizing. I believe the article is suggesting making government-owned entities private meanwhile Amtrak is a publically-held corporation with common and preferred stock on the stock market. They are officially part of the private sector. Many corporations in the United States get subsidies as government investment. Therefore, this article does not apply to this situation and your argument goes unsupported. Your source also states, “Revenue maximization should not be the primary goal of privatization.” This goes against your theory that privatization would make them more efficient at making profits. There is no evidence to suggest that Amtrak would financially benefit from being released from subsidies. Concluding Rebuttals: “Amtrak — if left in government hands — will continue to falter” “Amtrak would benefit operating as a private enterprise” Amtrak is not governed by the government and operates like any other corporation in the private sector. There is nothing to support these claims. I thank Contra for this very interesting debate. I greatly enjoyed it.