>>1024163The answer to this is actually extremely simple: the only reason Amtrak loses money is the Long Distance Routes. Don't believe me? I did out the numbers using Amtrak's annual performance reports.
In 2015 if all the Long Distance routes were eliminated (even including the money-making auto train), Amtrak would be making $41,101,136 a year off of ticket revenue ALONE, nevermind advertising space and food services which aren't calculated by route. In 2016, they would be making $10,375004. This drop is almost entirely due to the fact that they have millions in lost revenue and increased costs due to track repair on the Wolverine and Empire corridors. Were their costs and services at normal levels, Amtrak would be making close to 60-100 million a year.
There are two solutions to this, the Australian solution and the European solution.
-In Australia, long-distance trains make a ton of money and are run by private companies. How do they do this? Every train is an auto train. Think about it: you need a car to get around LA and many other cities, no exceptions. Unless you live in the hyper-dense downtown cores or nearby to a public transit stop on a good transit line, intercity train travel is 100% out of your reach. Flying is cheaper...but then you have to rent a car to get around. If it were cheaper to just auto-train your car across the country and drive around, you could easily boost ridership to money-making levels.
-In Europe, trains aren't city-to-city, they are corridor trains. Right now, cities like Denver are served by one train a day that goes from Chicago to LA. That is pathetic and absolutely must stop. If we want to see the long-distance routes actually work without turning them into auto-trains, you need to increase frequency of service to make them viable options for people living along the corridor. There are lots of 2am stops in Arizona and New Mexico and Nebraska or Kansas. What the fuck does that do for anybody?
