It's Amtrak, without the 'c'. You're comparing apples and oranges because it, unlike everything else discussed in this thread, is not a private company. It's a quasi-government entity. Kind of like the postal service. It is not in business to make a profit, but to provide a service to the country.
Find me a country that invests LESS in their rail infrastructure than the U.S. Our rail system is a joke when comparing to other countries. Japan has been running their bullet trains for 20+ years, and you can set your watch to them. The U.K., Germany, Spain, France. All of them have rail systems that rock. But not us.
We should have gotten to the point of providing 150mph+ travel long ago between major cities like DC-PHL-NY, CHI-DTW, HOU-DAL, ORL-TPA, etc. We could go on and on about FRA regulations and how they alone have stiffled any chance Amtrak ever had at becoming something of value. But that's a conversation to be had on a rail forum.
And, SmartestLoser, what was the FAA's budget last year? How about highway subsidies? Let me tell you that they were a LOT more than the $1B Amtrak got. This year Bush proposed somewhere in the neighborhood of $200M or less. It's clear that his administration wants to pass it off to investors to privatize it. That's probably a good idea, actually if they are willing to put up the money to upgrade, maintain and operate the infrastructure. The Northeast and a few intercity routes elsewhere in the country will do just fine. But people, for example, in Debuke, IA might as well kiss any rail travel to their region goodbye.
