TRANS-ALASKA-CANADA-USA 'Trans-Alas-Can-Intracontinnental Railway' announcement coming soon...!

And you really think American taxpayers will subsidize this wonderful passenger service?  Of course you didn't think of that.  You cannot even pronounce "economics."  It's really quite simple: Set fares high enough to cover all costs and they will be so high that no one will pay them.  Set them low enough to attract customers and even full trains will set records with their losses.  Catch 22.

Consider the source.  By which I mean that there is no official source for such information, much less one that might be cited as would be necessary in a responsible newspaper or even a trade magazine.  

This is the nature of blogs.  They do not even have the credibility in reporting that the old radio reporters had of repeating "Rumors on the Street" when talking of Wall Street or Entertainment "News".   They work best for expressing the opinions of those posting.  An opinion of "wouldn't it be wonderful if..." loses nothing by not fitting into the realities of economics or science or anything else.  Suspend disbelief in one area and you might as well do it in all areas.

It boils down to, true or not, this is not really believable.  (Does anyone remember working where the motto at the water cooler was, "If you haven't heard a rumor you liked recently, start one.  Nobody knows what might come true!"?)

This is just LOSERIST blogging from the dream-o-sphere again.  Another slow day in the limo I guess.

Well maybe not. Take the train to the PNW and then a cruise ship up to Alaska. Maybe not high speed but for sure the ship we'll offer nice accomidations such as the old Pullman cars did in there days!!!

DHEIS:  And your cruise liner pays its way, charging you and other customers sufficient fares to cover all expenses including depreciation of the vessel itself.  The right-of-way, of course, is free.  It's called "ocean."

If RAILWAYIST ever provides evidence that he's ever heard the word economics please wake me up.  Until then, he's a known quantity, and from the comments to this blog, it's obvious people have him figured out.

The railwayist has won again. He sits back and thinks up crazy ideas  and just waits for you guys to argue over his goofy blogs..

I don't think he sits and waits...he probably has a small alotment of time on the computer at the State Hospital he resides in, so he never really gets to see the results of his screeds.

He's off his meds again.

Where's Ross Rowland when we need him? Here's something for his steamer to haul................

Apparently between 2000-2200 hrs is free time at the farm.

FSA>"Where's Ross Rowland when we need him? Here's something for his steamer to haul................"

It's my understanding that if you dry it enough, it's even something Ross's steamers could burn.

DON'T DISCOUNT THIS PIPE DREAM GIVEN THAT DOT HIRED 1200 AT $170K/YR. I JUST NOTED A 'MARINE H IGHWAY' FOR THE EAST COAST PROJECT. MADNESS BUT ECONOMICS DO NOT COMPUTE WITH THIS ADMINISTRATION. HSR FOR 85 MILES FOR $8BIL. SOMEWHERE VILLAGES ARE MISSING THEIR IDIOTS. KEN PATRICK

Is posting in all-capitals supposed to enhance the importance of the comment?  In some parts of cyberworld, that's considered the equivalent of screaming at the top of your voice.  In any event, it's simply more difficult to read than comments that include upper and lower case typing.  Thank you.

Substantively, the "marine highway" proposal is for more than just the East Coast.  The idea behind it is to alleviate highway congestion where there is parallel waterway capability.  As long as vessels and crews would be required to follow Jones Act requirements, the costs would be higher than the market would tolerate.  Freight will move in the most efficient and economic manner that shippers and their agents can find.  If a "marine highway" does it for low enough rate and fast enough service, so be it.  This country once had a vibrant coastwise maritime industry - in fact, the original intermodal shipment in the 1950s by what became Sea-Land was a Newark - Houston movement.  Where highway congestion would force shippers to seek an alternative, I would expect the friendly neighborhood railroad to beat the maritime folks on cost and service.  You can count me among the skeptics about this idea.

LK>"Substantively, the "marine highway" proposal is for more than just the East Coast.  The idea behind it is to alleviate highway congestion where there is parallel waterway capability.  As long as vessels and crews would be required to follow Jones Act requirements, the costs would be higher than the market would tolerate."

Better not tell that to Totem.  Bad roads can even up the costs pretty quickly.

"If a "marine highway" does it for low enough rate and fast enough service, so be it.  This country once had a vibrant coastwise maritime industry - in fact, the original intermodal shipment in the 1950s by what became Sea-Land was a Newark - Houston movement."

I think Stone's beat that; they were moving stuff outa...Lowell?  I forget - on barge for coast-wise movement, and one of the interurbans in the Chicago area did successful piggyback (including smaller containers as well) for very short hauls in the Chicago area just after WW I, if (second-hand) memory serves.

What was the name of the small containers the Pennsy was using?  I forget.