The Truth is That The US Beats Europe in Rail Efficiency by Not Wasting it on the Inefficiency of Moving People......

polifrog




Our nation is more efficient and cleaner when we trust our markets. When we do not and let others convince us of our needs then we subject ourselves to the inefficiencies of personal and political bias. It is why so many believe the lie that it is more efficient to move people by rail that by other modes of transportation. We are being convinced of a lie.

Warren Meyer:

The US rail system, unlike nearly every other system in the world, was built (mostly) by private individuals with private capital. It is operated privately, and runs without taxpayer subsidies. And, it is by far the greatest rail system in the world. It has by far the cheapest rates in the world (1/2 of China’s, 1/8 of Germany’s). But here is the real key: it is almost all freight.

As a percentage, far more freight moves in the US by rail (vs. truck) than almost any other country in the world. Europe and Japan are not even close. Specifically, about 40% of US freight moves by rail, vs. just 10% or so in Europe and less than 5% in Japan. As a result, far more of European and Japanese freight jams up the highways in trucks than in the United States. For example, the percentage of freight that hits the roads in Japan is nearly double that of the US.

You see, passenger rail is sexy and pretty and visible. You can build grand stations and entertain visiting dignitaries on your high-speed trains. This is why statist governments have invested so much in passenger rail — not to be more efficient, but to awe their citizens and foreign observers.

But there is little efficiency improvement in moving passengers by rail vs. other modes. Most of the energy consumed goes into hauling not the passengers themselves, but the weight of increasingly plush rail cars. Trains have to be really, really full all the time to make for a net energy savings for high-speed rail vs. cars or even planes, and they seldom are full. I had a lovely trip on the high speed rail last summer between London and Paris and back through the Chunnel — especially nice because my son and I had the rail car entirely to ourselves both ways.

The real rail efficiency comes from moving freight. As compared to passenger rail, more of the total energy budget is used moving the actual freight rather than the cars themselves. Freight is far more efficient to move by rail than by road, but only the US moves a substantial amount of its freight by rail. One reason for this is that freight and high-speed passenger traffic have a variety of problems sharing the same rails, so systems that are optimized for one tend to struggle serving the other.

out

DC. Street Thug Rep. Bob Etheridge Lies About Renee Ellmers on Taxes...

polifrog




Ace has already done a piece on this. Good work Ace, and thanks for the Ellmers plug!

This charge reminds me of a similar charge by Carter Wrenn/ Bernie Reeves against Bill Randall’s support of the Fair Tax during the primaries. The Reeves’ attack was bit more nuanced but was based on the same chosen ignorance of the Fair Tax as Etheridge’s. They both feigned ignorance in an effort to make an unfair and untrue political attack on an opponent. Bernie Reeves lost in the run off.

The Fair Tax calls for replacing the income tax with a 23% national sales tax thus eliminating the IRS as we know it. The sales tax by nature would hit even the lowest wage earners but there would be a prebate based on what is considered poverty level and the poor would be reimbursed upfront each month for the 23% they would pay at time of purchasing goods.

Whether born of ignorance or more likely by design, Etheridge’s charge that Renee Ellmers wants to raise our taxes by 23% is false . Whether on the streets of DC accosting college students or campaigning against Renee Ellmers, Bob Etherige is a thug and a liar.

out

Rep GK. Butterfield - Promulgating Outdated Myths...

polifrog



This past Saturday Rep. G.K. Butterfield repeated two myths that gained unwarranted circulation over the past decade but have subsequently been shown as false.


Via Wahington Daily News:

In his speech, Butterfield said the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act helped stabilize a freefalling economy, but it passed with zero Republican votes.

“The Republicans made a political decision to be the party of ‘No,’” he said, sounding a theme often aired by the White House.

Butterfield said the federal government enjoyed a $230 billion surplus when Democratic President Bill Clinton left office.

The surplus was erased as Bush, the GOP — and supportive Democrats he didn’t mention — launched measures including the war in Iraq, which has cost thousands of lives and $1 trillion, according to Butterfield.

To any of this one must suspend the reality that our congress has control over the nation's purse. The surplus he attributes to Clinton was in fact crafted by the Gingrich Congress. Bill Clinton was the lucky beneficiary of that success.

This myth of the "Clinton surpluses" allowed Obama to claim the mantle of fiscal prudence and that he in conjunction with Democrats in congress would cut national spending:

"When George Bush came into office, our debt -- national debt was around $5 trillion. It's now over $10 trillion. We've almost doubled it. ... But actually I'm cutting more than I'm spending so that it will be a net spending cut." -- Obama, during an Oct. 7, 2008, debate in Nashville

And that brings us to the second myth presented by GK Butterfield and Obama -- that of the "Bush" debt. Although, conservatives under Bush wallowed in debt spending to an unpalatable degree, it was not until Pelosi gained control over the national purse that the deficits Obama and Butterfield refer to were created. In fact, national debt was declining under Bush after the 9/11 economic shock until Pelosi forced increased spending during the last two years of Bush.

In both cases G.K. Butterfield asks us to believe that our Presidents control the nation's purse when, in fact, the congress does. The fact that G.K. Butterfield believes that his constituents will believe such blather attests to a contempt for his constituents. For G.K. Butterfield to continue to promulgate these myths in the face of the past two years congressional profligacy indicates a tin ear to reality and an example of immoral governance.

Although G.K. Butterfield could use a refresher course on how our constitutional republic operates, no understanding of our system of governance can alter the roots of his immoral governance.



out

GM Lies Like any other Arm of Government

polifrog


Updated with video below...



----

Ed Whitacre Chairman and CEO of Government Motors claimed that the 5 or 6 billion government loaned to GM was repaid. There was no mention of the other 50 billion GM borrowed from the government, but whatever.

I went to Yahoo Finance to see what GM has been doing that has allowed it to repay 5.8 billion dollars. Unfortunately most of the info was unavailable or simply not able to be computed due to the lack of PROFIT.

GM's finances seem to be utterly opaque. P/E or share price over earnings? Dunno. Key Statistics? The button is inoperable. Whatever, it is a government run corporation and follows a new set of accounting rules.

I did, however, find some interesting details here...

60% is owned by the Government
17.5% is owned by voluntary employees’ beneficiary association (VEBA), which is supervised by an independent board
11.7% is owned by the Canadian/Ontario governments
10% is owned by the Motor Liquidations Company (MLC) , or commonly known as, the old GM
There are three different piles of money General Motors owes the U.S. treasury:
1. $6.7 billion pure loan. That first payment was made in late December or mid-December of about $1 billion. There is $5.7 billion of that debt remaining outstanding.
2. preferred shares - $2.1 billion worth of preferred shares that pay dividends and can be sold anytime. This is owned by governments and the UAW VEBA.
3. 60.8% of common stock

According to The Christian Science Monitor

General Motors reported a relatively small loss for 2009 and said it has "a chance" at profits this year – a sign that the largest US automaker is making headway toward recovery from its collapse into bankruptcy.

Yet the company repaid a 5.8 billion dollar loan? From what? There was no profit out of which to pay it.

The answer can be found at FOX business.




GM paid off the loan with a "loan". Government Motors is like any government entity in that there are multiple pockets out of which money is paid, and into which money flows. Financial accountability enters the realm of, well....none. Just another example of opaque government and without accountability.

I ask, would a company not so entwined with government get away with such fraud? Apparently Enron's mistake was in not having been a government sock puppet.

Consider Toyota's treatment this summer. Bottom line, Toyota pays for their errors either real or media made out of their own pocket. GM has no pockets other than yours and mine....

I suspect this is a poor attempt by the Obama administration to burnish its reputation in regard to the many bailouts the Democrat party has been hammered with before the November elections. At this point the uninformed, on which the Democrat party relies, believes that GM paid off its loan and that the administration did the right thing.

I hope this despicable chicanery back fires on the administration.




out