 | | Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation —Kevin Salm
|
| | | Associated Press Top Story November 9, 2001 Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation (URL) November 9 6:12 PM ET Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation By LAURENCE ARNOLD, Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - A federal panel ordered Amtrak to come up with a (...) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.trains)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) As someone that doesn't think rail has gotten a fair shake at the feeding trough (rail owns its own right of way, which it pays tax on, trucks pay pretty small fuel taxes (5000 a year per truck does not buy you a lot of highway) and nothing (...) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: All important (was: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation) —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | (...) Sorry for bringing it up again, but this is exactly why I think it's unfair to lumber plane passengers with the entire cost of "global security". ROSCO (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: All important (was: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | (...) Can you be more specific? If passengers didn't want to travel by air there would be no problem, would there? There'd be no airlines! Why shouldn't airlines shoulder the whole cost? (note that in a free market there is no difference between (...) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: All important (was: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | (...) Sorry if this is a repost. I lost my cookies somewhere. Anywho... I don't think we got to closure on this (or much of anything else, lately) so don't be sorry. I am not sure I follow this argument. You are going to have to elaborate. I will (...) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: All important (was: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation) —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | | | (...) to (...) When I lose mine, I generally find them a couple of months later, all mashed up down the back of the couch 8?) (...) And buildings exist for the convenience of companies to house their workers. They're not necessary, but they're (...) (23 years ago, 12-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: All important (was: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) Maybe I'm still not following you here, but I would tend to say yes, the things that are a RESULT of the building's existance ought to be borne by the building users (...) This doesn't follow. Just because some fair thing is hard to do is not (...) (23 years ago, 12-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: All important (was: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation) —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Not sure here, but are you implying that the existance of the WTC buildings was less to blame for Sep 11 than the existance of the aeroplanes? (...) for (...) If you come to us & say "This polution can only affect you 8 people, and I want you (...) (23 years ago, 13-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: All important (was: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation) —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | | (...) I think that a security company would typically charge a fee for their services. And their services could include defense against missile attack. So it's just a matter of people feeling properly motivated. Some people are willing to work in (...) (23 years ago, 12-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: All important (was: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation) —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | | | (...) I'm *happy* for airlines (and building managers, whoever) to pay for extra security *if they choose to*. I'm *happy* to pay an extra fee to increase my safety when I fly. I should, however, be able to choose. (...) for (...) planning (...) OK. (...) (23 years ago, 13-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: All important (was: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation) —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Uh...sorry. It seems that we're in essentially complete agreement. I must have misunderstood your points...or they changed...or something. Chris (23 years ago, 13-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: All important (was: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation) —Frank Filz
|
| | | | | | (...) Why shouldn't we? Why should someone who rarely or never flies pay so that folks like Larry can fly once a week or more (not sure how often Larry flies, but he's a good example of a very frequent flyer here)? If aircraft are truly that (...) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | (...) Just as our government would not allow the demise of Ansett airlines - especially just before a federal election! Be interesting to see what our PM does now he's been re-elected... (URL) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
