T3G
Senior Member
What, doing a service for the public benefit? Are you crazy? Far more important to protect CPKC's corporate profits at all costs, instead...
/s
|
|
|
- Thread starter drum118
- Start date
/s
urbanclient
Active Member
Undead
Senior Member
I support more passenger service, of course. But remember that freight rail is much more important to the economy than passenger rail in this country. This is not to excuse poor passenger service, but the "CN bad" narrative is a boring cliche at this point.
T3G
Senior Member
Is it a cliche if CPKC refuses to allow GO run to more service so that they can run a paltry 8 freight trains a day? With a bit of creativity, they'd both be able to co-exist, as in Europe. As someone who has to rely on this corridor on a daily basis, I'm getting really tired of apologies being made for this appalling level of service. Time to figure it out.
urbanclient
Active Member
That justification is what CN and CPKC use to curtail passenger rail expansion as they rest on their laurels. CN spent more on dividends and stock buybacks than they did on capital investments recently.
"We're more important than passenger rail, therefore we should stay more important."
Freight being a much larger part of GDP is a self-reinforcing cycle. The relative gap can be closed if dedicated passenger lines were built i.e. Alto. Not saying passenger rail will actually beat freight for a sparsely populated country like Canada.
Australia is the best counterexample: a large and sparse country with 3,000+ km of electrified passenger rail. And yet Australia has a higher car ownership rate, while relying more on freight rail than trucks (compared to Canada).
Last edited:
Jonny5
Senior Member
Has an eerie post-apocalyptic feel to it, like that's where the train stopped forever when the first nuke went off over Toronto. Only need the building on the right to look a bit run down.