From the article you posted Amtrak disputed those numbers claiming they lose on average $8 per passenger.
I’ll take this number and your increase in the fed gas tax and see who wins out.
How about we swap the funding amounts for Amtrak and the federal highway system for a few years and see which mode would win that one? Care to take that bet?
An independent study by CATO came to close to $100 per passenger in terms of subsidies... A claim of $8 doesn’t come close to penciling out.
So how about it, bump tickets by $32 each and we’ll increase the gas tax by $0.076 per gallon. You’ll find a lot more drivers, and a lot fewer train riders.
Oh, and these gas taxes go towards maintenance of the highways right now. Not new construction (which is funded with tolls), but maintenance. Amtrak isn’t even covering its maintenance costs, let alone any costs of expansion. You want to use more sleeper cars? Great - raise tickets even further to pay for the new capital costs.
Trains just don’t pencil out. They are more expensive and less convenient than the alternatives we have here in the US. About the only place they come close to working is the DC-to-Boston corridor where you have insanely high density and relatively close distances. The rest of the US? Not a chance.
Why should I pay $1200 for round trip tickets on a sleeper train and food along the way, and spend 3 days traveling from Seattle to LA and back, when I can fly there and back in 5 hours for a cost of $160? Doesn’t make sense.
Heck, I can take a Greyhound BUS from Seattle to LA in less time (29 hours versus 36 hours) and for 30% LESS cost! Yes, the BUS is faster AND cheaper than the train. You tell me how that makes sense.
So the train for $160 (coach seat, like the bus or plane; a roomlette is $573) and 36 hours, the bus for $114 and 29 hours, or a plane for $79 and 2.5 hours.
Hmmm... Not a tough choice there, eh?