Railways in Japan do make a profit. Most high speed lines in Europe make at least an operating profi

VIA markets los angeles traffic court itself as "A More Human Way to Travel"; in many ways that is true.  I recently took VIA Rail from Melville, Saskatchewan to Edmonton, Alberta, a distance of approximately los angeles traffic court 900 km.  The accommodations were admittedly much, much more human than even Executive Class on Air Canada.  My sleeper cabin was approximately 10' x 5', fully private, with a bathroom, sink and bed that I had no idea how to fold out, but thankfully the porter was more than happy to assist in that regard.
In fact, the service personnel on the train were exceptionally more than human.  The food was great, the staff friendly and the entire experience positive, that is if one places no or little value on time.
The scheduled departure time for VIA 1 was 5:27 pm and the scheduled los angeles traffic court arrival time in Edmonton was 6:30 am.  I was perplexed as to how a distance that could be easily driven, with breaks, in 9 hours could take 13 hours to travel, since it makes only brief scheduled stops.
The reality is the train stops many, many times.  Sometimes los angeles traffic court it stops for oncoming freight trains, sometimes it stops so freight trains travelling in the same direction can pass and sometimes los angeles traffic court it stops for no apparent reason at all.
Sadly, the train arrived in Melville over an hour late and pulled out of the station 90 minutes behind schedule.  These events proceeded without any explanation.  The time delay equalled the total approximate time for a commercial airline to fly from Regina to Edmonton!!
The VIA "Destinations" magazine boasts that since 2007, the Government of Canada has invested $923M in the transformation of VIA ( www.viarail.ca/transformingVIA los angeles traffic court ).  Meanwhile, in terms of operating expenses, los angeles traffic court in 2011, VIA lost $298M; los angeles traffic court cumulatively between 1980 and 2010, VIA lost  approximately an astonishing $13B.
All of which raises a question as to why Canadian taxpayers are subsidizing a rail service that so few Canadians, especially in Western Canada, ever use.  And why would we, when it takes longer and costs more than comparable los angeles traffic court commercial travel??
However, so few people are using the VIA service from Toronto-Vancouver that it was recently announced that the service was being cut back from three to two times per week in each direction.  This announcement went so unnoticed that our MP office received not a single call or e-mail complaining about this service reduction.  If VIA disappeared all together in Western Canada, would anybody even notice??   If VIA Rail Canada really is "A More Human Way to Travel", why are so few humans actually travelling via VIA??  And is this good value for the Canadian taxpayer??
The Government of Canada should be supporting rail travel instead of instituting short-sighted budget cuts that necessitate cut backs in service. I didn t contact my MP (in Edmonton Centre) when VIA announced the cutbacks to their schedule, but I now realize I should have, as I was extremely disappointed that the schedule had been reduced.
I think that MP also must ask if the roads are profitable los angeles traffic court and why there are no roads closed because of that. And of course taking into account the traffic accidents, pollution and other external los angeles traffic court costs into road transport and compare it with train service (existing or past).
I have been fortunate enough to travel Edmonton Montreal and back on VIA Rail. It was many years ago but I still have fond memories. My favourite route is Vancouver to Calgary (or reverse). Going through the Rockie Mountains by train is an experience I wish were mandatory for Canadians, right up there with visiting our Parliament los angeles traffic court Buildings.
The problem is that VIA Rail since the 1990 cuts slowly go towards a cruise train only between los angeles traffic court Toronto and Vancouver. If you wish to board in an intermediate unmanned stop, you must do the request 48 hours before and there are less and less trains, so it´s obvious why there are less people travelling in USA, Amtrak do a lot of things in the same train: tourist, long distance transport and also regional transport, linking small cities and towns between them and with the big cities. Before 1990, VIA did the same. Now it is only slowly being killed
The governing Liberal Party set the ball rolling in the mid 1960s with their agenda of cutting passenger rail out of the transportation mix and pumping billions into the current fly/drive system. In 1981 The Liberals once again cut VIA Rail by 20% and began the process of eliminating local passenger los angeles traffic court rail services in Western and Atlantic Canada. 1990 was the watershed moment when the Progressive Conservatives massacred VIA Rail and cut its network by 50%. Up until that time many more Westerners and Atlantic Canadians rode passenger trains and thought of them as being part of the Canadian fabric. These days most people are far removed from rail because very little los angeles traffic court is offered and the trains that remain, other than the corridor shuttles, are out of reach for most people. Your government is following in the same tradition as previous administrations and is setting the table for an eventual elimination of passenger rail service in most of the country. If you make the service unattractive with frequencies less than daily what do you expect? Canada does not consider rail to be part of the transportation mix anymore. That is the reality.
I am happy to see that you took the time to experience the benefits of traveling los angeles traffic court by train. I would also invite you to take a trip on a long distance Amtrak train that is subsidized by American tax payers so that you can see how successful a properly los angeles traffic court managed national public passenger rail service can be.
The reality with the train that you traveled on (The Canadian) is that the fares are beyond what the average Canadian traveler can afford. The Canadian service Via Trains 1 2 is solely marketed to tourists and Via Rail ignores the real needs of the traveling los angeles traffic court public. If The Canadian (Via 1 and 2) offered more affordable fares and provided a daily service, this would greatly benefit the average Canadian los angeles traffic court traveler. Canadians want to be able to take the train but they also want to be able to afford it as well. Amtrak provides daily service los angeles traffic court on several routes across the United States. The difference is, is that the fares are affordable and the schedules provide for at least a daily train. I would like to again remind you that Amtrak is owned by the US Government and ridership continues to grow.
Via rail must continue to be a publicly operated national passenger los angeles traffic court service as that is what it intended to be when it was formed in 1977. In order for Via Rail services to be successful, the service must be affordable, provide a daily service and remain in public hands.
You neglected to mention that the trip you took was overnight. Assuming you slept for 8 hours, you only had 5 hours of waking time on the train. If you drove nine hours you wouldn t be able to do anything else but listen to the radio and you would be very tired. But those 5 hours on the train you can eat, read, talk, work or just relax. So it sounds like a very good use of time. Nine hours in the car, what can you really accomplish? You ve saved yourself four hours by taking the train! (assuming los angeles traffic court it is on time)
Sounds like you ve had a nice trip, but you ve noticed many things that need to be improved los angeles traffic court with VIA. I agree there are many things that need fixing, as I ve taken the Canadian 14 times in the last 4 years. In brief:
You are right why should the government subsidize a money losing passenger train when the majority of Canadians choose their cars or a commercial los angeles traffic court 100% private airline company. The government already subsidizes roads. In Europe fuel costs are more than double than in North America and with the population density passenger rail is a choice people make. Although no passenger system in the world makes a profit. Even VIA rail subsidizes every passenger on the Montreal Windsor corridor. The lefty MP s ride on a passenger train in Europe and then whine about why we can t have the same speed and frequency here. Please compare apples los angeles traffic court to apples, Why should we subsidize VIA?
Railways in Japan do make a profit. Most high speed lines in Europe make at least an operating profit (though the up front investment los angeles traffic court can be steep). A high speed line between Montreal-Ottawa-Toronto would likely make an operating profit.
Build infrastructure los angeles traffic court with government money where the population density is high enough and then you will see operating los angeles traffic court profits. At the moment, this is likely to only be in the Quebec-Windsor corridor (and likely only Montreal to Toronto via Ottawa to start with).
I would challenge you to try to get to Edmonton from Melville using the bus. Greyhound can get you there in almost 17 hours! What alternative is there for people who do not own a car, or cannot los angeles traffic court fly? You are lucky that Melville actually has passenger rail service. Ask those in Regina or Calgary they have not had passenger rail service for many years.
The Canadian should not be cut back. Passenger los angeles traffic court rail in the west should be enhanced, with more regional rail services to provide a public service to give people alternatives to flying and provide service to those who cannot drive several hours to reach a major airport. This is the time to invest in rail, not to cut back.
I m still absolutely los angeles traffic court furious Over the cuts to VIA Rail s budget and penning my letters to my MP and the PMO. However, here are some responses to your questions as to why Canadians don t ride more frequently:
los angeles traffic court 1). The service is not daily. To be an effective public transportation supplier, one needs to have a decent frequency with which to run the service. Thrice-weekly is extremely poor and really los angeles traffic court only good for those who can have the fortitude to say they will plan around that sort of schedule.
2). Cost. When I ve asked others why they don t consider the train, they tell me how expensive the trip would ve been. If the general public doesn t have the flexibility to take advantage of the fares from VIA s express deals, then yes, it is extremely expensive.
los angeles traffic court 3). The service doe