on the line with us from the Heritage Foundation heritage .org is Michael
Sargent
research assistant and Thomas at the year Thomas a row institute for Economic
policy and policy studies at the Heritage Foundation and
the author of a new PC can find over heritage dot
s exiting a daily signal dot com a publication heritage foundation
titled ignore politicians sane amtrak crash is proof more funding is needed we
first need to know
more Michael welcome to the program thanks for having me Tom
thanks for joining us arm isn't isn't that argument the year making sorta like
my making the argument
that is no big deal that your brother-in-law
died when he was impaled by the steering wheel love his 1955 Chevy
up because it was working just fine track I mean look Tom
we still had absolutely no idea what caused the crash
at that point what any details surrounding it was a need for a
60-year-old technology
pics here well as a at that point we still did not know
what happened and we only have members of congress come out and say this is a
direct result
funding never mind that the train it is
the speed limit it is you've got you we have we
I this is this is a national embarrassment Michael in this is what I
don't understand about
about how it conservatives and Republicans in particular don't
understand the difference between spending
and investing we lose a hundred million dollars a day when the northeast corner
shutdown Amtrak doesn't lose it
we all lose it because because I've the diminished economic activity
in China right now they've got high speed trains are going 328 miles an hour
Japan you get high-speed trains are averaging 230 miles an hour
the high-speed trains in Europe for average and a .917 240 miles an hour
and you're sitting here telling me that a train that has to go 55 miles an hour
around a curve in an average is 79 miles an hour is just fine for america
custer how America we don't care if this country's competitive
well Tom but I think you can't compare America to Japan to europe
we've completely different I density yeah
thirty-five years a reaganomics has destroyed our country while they've
taken our job site but also to what would you say what would you tell me
s
you know if this happened I came out and said government mismanagement
caused this crash when you say we have to stick
see what happened I think that that is that you you really have to look at the
details I don't think you have to be a rocket science aside as Michael I mean
you point out in your article that the the I 35 bridge in Minneapolis that
that fell down armed and a bridge on Washington State the fell down were
were not specifically the consequence
above they're being aging infrastructure that the one in Washington had an
oversized truck going over it the one in Minnesota had cracks that nobody knew
about
but they're both more than 50 years old I mean it that we have to eat when you
invest
in your infrastructure when you invest in your country you are providing the
soil in which business grows
I'm I'm doing business here the show is a business I can't do without
infrastructure
II need decent broadband I need roads to get here and back I need up but post
office that will deliver
you know the the check from my advertiser a bit there's there's there's
all kinds of infrastructure
that that every business in america needs and you're arguing
for 19th or early 20th century infrastructure
in the 21st century and understand why Tom an absolutely not I agree with you
infrastructure is vital but it's how we provide it
we have to be able to modernize and the current mechanism that we are doing that
funneling tax dollars through the federal government is not the most
efficient way we can accomplish that
so you think that we should give it to the Koch brothers not the billionaires
by the railroads
I think that private companies could handle I transportation infrastructure
much better than the government had
you know I used to live in Denver on I used to take the reminder to and from
New York City
and while most to the Northeast Corridor the tracks are owned by Amtrak in
congress is not
seen fit to provide them with enough money to upgrade those tracks arm
on the Vermonter a lot of the tracks were owned by four different private
railroad companies that were on the freight business
and they didn't give a rats ass about about passenger rail
and so we had to go like a hundred miles on our way over to Springfield Missouri
and make a turn in your own thirty miles an hour party the way
all because we're it had been privatized
there are some things that particularly when it comes to infrastructure
they're appropriately done by government
taxpayers dollars again this goes back to my thing what don't you get about the
difference between an investment an expense
you put a billion dollars into infrastructure as dwight eisenhower's
elite white aznar put in today's dollars almost a trillion dollars in the
infrastructure the interstate highway system
and he made back in today's dollars probably forty or fifty trillion dollars
in tax revenue from the increased economic activity as a consequence that
that's what China is doing it for japan's doing that's what every
every advance European country has done why are we so stupid Michael
all the problem is that your you're right we have to go to congress if
amtrak was private and they would be able to close the lines that are losing
money
and then be able to take down reinvest in lines quite possibly the matter that
actually could
be operable the way that way to say are you trying to tell me that
infrastructure should make money
and he has to buy mean by the eurozone do you think that the road he do to
easing mass Avenue on from the heritage foundation and and and the studio which
is next door
do you think that that road should make money it provides local tax dollars
through property taxes and then all the business taxes around it
it makes money by facilitating commerce if Amtrak ran at a hundred percent loss
it would still make a profit for the united states government because it is
stimulating
business amtrak does not stimulate business Tom
II you serious if he does not the northeast corner is the only one that is
viable commuters do not take Amtrak pretty much anywhere else
and and Andrew and three maybe that's because ames run half
for on long-distance lines with hemorrhage money it
it is not a commercially viable enterprise
it doesn't have to be commercially viable Michael its infrastructure
when people travel
you know they're they're you even if even a suburb is immune to people
because
baru Gua Gua give you know the long haul Amtrak lines are probably most people
take vacations
when the taking those occasions are staying in hotels those hotels are
paying tax dollars there
be eating in restaurants as restaurants are paying tax on large at the and and
and to the extent to which
our real is not used by by a
you know a.m.
as as you point out is not heavily use go to Europe
go to Japan go to China China in five years built
a a high-speed rail the runs almost three hundred miles an hour
equal in a Chicago to New York it took five years to build that is creating an
economic explosion in China
and it and and they don't care about that rail system makes a penny
cuz its stimulating their economy that's what
infrastructure does sure but if you're if you're making that argument and
they're much cheaper ways
much cheaper infrastructure that can stimulate the economy that way look at
road that's why I
amtrak has such a hard time on the long haul I
routes because you have people that take the interstate it's much cheaper
its easier for everyone you have much more convenient we they are stimulating
the economy to travel and they're taking the interstate
Amtrak is not a viable way it up inconvenient it's only on time as it is
right now
as it is right now a daddy funded by 35 years a reaganomics
a yes outside the Northeast Corridor sure so let's
go back you know we were the envy the world you know the Lincoln
link in biz actually built the railroads and in all those dollars all that money
off the J goldin his buddies Sanderson those guys
you know the the golden spike in eighteen was a 64 67
arm it we had and and that rail infrastructure that we had facilitated
the industrial revolution that
that turn America into the in real the world and then you know when when
reaganism came in and we sand and and
idiots in congress couldn't figure out the difference between and investment
and expense it was like oh we can't afford to pay for this
of course we can't afford not to it will generate more tax dollars than it costs
if it's done right
well I don't know about you but i wanna look back to the infrastructure the
eighteen sixties I'd rather look to the future
we have self-driving cars coming out they need roads that are able to operate
we should not keep taking money it's inefficient
bigoted its inefficient Michael you know it have you seen a CSS X
ads you can move you know a ton of freight 400 miles on a single gallon
fuel
yep that's another thing are frayed is that all rail freight is miles ahead of
europe
it's really hard to make these comparisons on a macro level because
we're just completely different place we r
much more spread out in Europe
China and Japan we just have a completely different system a completely
different economy
and try to make these comparisons is really you have to take it on cable if
you're if you're
if you're making a case for you know Amtrak from Chicago to Los Angeles
I might I disagree with you but there are large parts of the United States
where
well any I think we both had our Cesar this Michael
Michael Sargent heee I appreciate your good natured back
thank you for figure not taken effect michael's argue with the heritage
foundation heritage .org his new piece which is over the daily signal I paid
daily signal that comp
ignore politicians thank you Michael