Amtrak Posts Thanksgiving Ridership Mark

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette ^ | December 3, 2003

[Willie Green]

For education and discussion only. Not for commercial use.

BOSTON (AP) -- Amtrak said about 600,000 passengers boarded its trains over Thanksgiving weekend, the highest holiday ridership in the company's 32-year history.

The week that began Nov. 25 and ended Monday also brought the highest ticket sales for Thanksgiving travel, totaling $30.9 million, Amtrak spokesman Dan Stessel said.

Stessel stressed that the figures were preliminary and that official numbers would be released next week.

In 2002, Amtrak recorded 545,000 passengers for the Thanksgiving travel week.

In 2001 - a big year for Amtrak due to air-travel anxieties following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks - ridership was 567,000 for the week.

[Willie Green]

Good morning America how are you?
Don't you know me? I'm your native son.
I'm the train they call "The City of New Orleans",
I'll be gone five hundred miles when the day is done.

[GungaLaGunga]

"Amtrak will post record a record loss for it's fiscal year."

[newgeezer]

Meanwhile, buggy whip manufacturers continue to think, "If only...".

[big gray tabby]

I love AMTRAK.

This is a real problem with my political consistency, I know.

[Willie Green]

ping

[grania]

I love AMTRAK. This is a real problem with my political consistency, I know.

Maybe we should form a Freeper support group for those of us who love travelling by rail....you're not alone.

[discostu]

Wow .2% of America rode on an Amtrak train Thanksgiving "weekend" that's amazing, or it would be if they hadn't had to make the "weekend" an entire week (Tuesday the 25th through Monday the 1st = 7 days, hardly a weekend) to get these fluffed number.

End the train boondoggle, put Amtrak out of America's misery.

[newgeezer]

Maybe we should form a Freeper support group for those of us who love travelling by rail....you're not alone.

I'd guess it's not unlike being a FReeper who loves wind power.

Of course, one difference is that wind power is becoming more viable all the time...

[theDentist]

And don't forget who's running it...

... the same man who brought you the "Massachusetts Miracle".

[Cicero]

I know it's politically wrong of me, but I'm a regular user of Amtrak. It's the best way for my particular commute between Vermont and NYC.

Thanksgiving is always a very busy time. Business class seats on the Wednesday train are usually sold out months ahead of time, and all the regular seats are gone by the time the train leaves. Unfortunately they seem to be incapable of adding extra cars, at least on my train.

The problem with the railroads is that they are still trying to make up for a hundred years of resentment and increasing socialist persecution, in reaction to the robber barons of the late 19th century. It's hard to see how that can be dealt with, since the only model left now is unionized government bureaucracy, running trains over tracks which they often don't own and can't control. But we need the trains. I can think of a lot of boondoggles that are much bigger and much less useful.

[Howlin]

I have only been a rider once -- but I loved it; and I will use it again.

Look at it this way, that's 600,000 who WEREN'T on the road!

[Dixiekraut]

I was one of their riders this past holiday weekend....and I will be again come Christmas.(If you could see I-95 south of D.C.on any given evening you'd know why.)

[Mr. Lucky]

I love long distance passenger trains; I hate Amtrak.

[Howlin]

I loved it! Willie Green, in fact, is the one who pushed me into finally riding it for a return trip to Raleigh after I drove my mother back home; totally cool. Everybody was really nice and it didn't take much longer than I could drive it! I wish it was everywhere!

[billbears]

Willie on this one I'm going to have to strongly disagree with you. This is a waste of money and nothing but. If the market supports it or you can sell it to someone then great, let it be run off the private dollar. However it is just as true today as it was 130+ years ago, the government of these United States should not be involved in the railroad business

[Willie Green]

However it is just as true today as it was 130+ years ago, the government of these United States should not be involved in the railroad business

If the federal government had abided by that 130 years ago, we'd all be still crowded east of the Mississippi and buffalo would rule the prairies and plains.

[biblewonk]

Windmills Rock!

A friend just flew round trip to California, 4400 miles, for 378 bucks. Driving my F150 would have used more than that in gas alone plus all the fast food I'd have eaten, wear and tear, oil change, sleeping, etc. Trains won't be able to compete with that.

[discostu]

no the problem with trains is that outside certain rather small sections of the country nobody rides the things and so we gain no benefit from them yet we have to pay for them. In the Eastern corridor where population is dense (and where train ridership is greatest, and the system is probably even selfsustaining) I'm sure it's great. Out here it's just a tax hole that funds empty cars uselessly adding wear and tear to the tracks. The right answer is to kill the national train system and do it regionally, allow the market to decide where the people actually want trains and subsidize those if necessary.

[billbears]

If the federal government had abided by that 130 years ago, we'd all be still crowded east of the Mississippi and buffalo would rule the prairies and plains.

Not necessarily. The railroad could have been built much cheaper than through the kickbacks, payoffs, and double billing criminals and politicians that passed funding through in the first place. Internal improvements are not the place of the national government.

[discostu]

The railroads were built AFTER westward expansion, wagons got us from the east coast to the west.