>>1486242>I've said that in the long run, the public would probably have been better served by directly subsidizing freight carriers to maintain skeleton passenger service for the reasons you listedHonestly, that's exactly what I was getting at. Make freight carriers maintain their passenger services and reimburse them for it or allow them to operate it in lieu of paying corporate taxes (since they're providing a national service). Thousands of cities and towns that lost their rail service thanks to Amtrak cuts would still have their passenger service today and America may have been able to avoid missing out on the rise of high speed rail since Amtrak was still a complete mess when it took off in the late 70s and early 80s. Private carriers would've been a lot more inclined to invest in developing high speed rail (or an equivalent using conventional equipment) in order to remain competitive in the market than one monolithic rail company whose existence was government-funded anyway.
Just imagine a Zephyr-type service linking every American city.
