HI Bob,

On Mon 2037-Jul-27 05:00, Bob Ackley (1:300/3) wrote to Richard Webb:

 RW>> The railroads would benefit the most, as we'd be utilizing
 RW>> them more for both passenger and freight.  I maintain
 RW>> passenger carriage is where the future is for the railroads
 RW>> if they really want to look at it.

 BA>> Especially short haul (<500 miles) passenger traffic.  But the big
 BA>> railroads won't be allowed to get back into that business.

 RW> OF course they won't, there's this thing called amtrack.
 RW> Unfair competition from government.

BA> Actually it's Amtrak that doesn't want the competition.

YEp, what I meant if that wasn't clear.

BA> Years ago I noted that if the big cities were smart they'd
BA> consolidate their bus and train terminals at the local airport,
BA> making said airport a transportation
BA> hub.  And the question arises, why do cities build airport terminals
BA> with public funds but require railroads and bus companies to build
BA> their own terminals with their own money (and, of course, pay taxes
BA> on those terminals to the city)? 

Always wondered this myself.  To me it would make more sense to have bus
train and air terminal in the same place.  A
person who travels the short haul by bus or train could
already be at the right place for the transcontinental
flight.  But that makes too much sense.

Regards,
           Richard
--- timEd 1.10.y2k+