Comments on: The Rail Runner’s “Hand Grenades”

By: Andrew

Andrew — Sun, 08 Apr 2012 02:09:43 +0000

Actually they don’t.

By: Paul Gessing

Paul Gessing — Sun, 19 Feb 2012 21:28:05 +0000

Yes, the freight railroads which are profitable own and maintain the tracks. Amtrak forces these companies to “share” their tracks at a bargain-basement price.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Sun, 19 Feb 2012 16:03:57 +0000

You’re over looking freight, though freight trains share the same tracks as passenger trains.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 06:29:45 +0000

That doesn’t change the situation that it is there regardless of economic conditions.

If you want to complain about some thing being mismanaged fine, but that is quite different than genocide.

By: Jerry

Jerry — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 17:02:21 +0000

A road is a public service, however it’s efficiency is infinitely higher than a rail in a rural area (not LA) based on usage and quantity of people served. This is an example of mass transit design concepts that work in a higher density area forced down our throats in NM. Too much money for any level of return. Even if the RailRunner never pays it’s way, the debt was self-serving for the previous Gov.

By: Paul Gessing

Paul Gessing — Sun, 29 Jan 2012 20:11:11 +0000

I don’t like it. Would love to privatize it. My homeowners association could do it for a fraction of the cost.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Sun, 29 Jan 2012 05:03:55 +0000

What about the “pinko” road in front of your home?

By: Andrew

Andrew — Sun, 29 Jan 2012 05:02:39 +0000

Paul, you still conveniently over look the economics of road in front of your home.

So until you are honest about roads, you have no right to comment on railroads!

By: Paul Gessing

Paul Gessing — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 18:57:24 +0000

Yes, I suppose new debt could be issued to pay off the old. That would keep the Ponzi scheme going for awhile longer. Statistically, our inflation rate is not that high. I don’t know that relying on the federal government to inflate away the problem is a sound approach.

By: Dudley Horscroft

Dudley Horscroft — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 10:50:24 +0000

Presumably these $235M payments are bond repayments. If so, there will be nothing to prevent New Mexico issuing new bonds at the time to pay off the old bonds. So – situation unchanged.

Bonds must be repaid – either as a result of a sinking fund set aside for the repayments, or by issuing new bonds. And by the rate of inflation in the USA, the purchasing power value of the repayments will be little more than half the current purchasing power value. A good deal for New Mexico, if not for the lenders.