From: ahk@chinet.com   
      
   conklin  wrote:   
   >"Wayne Hines"  wrote:   
   >>On Sun, 11 May 2014 19:55:07 -0400, conklin wrote:   
   >>>"Nobody"  wrote:   
   >>>>Wayne Hines  wrote:   
   >>>>>On Thu, 08 May 2014 08:44:50 -0400, conklin wrote:   
      
   >>>>>>The press is reporting today that the Feds are in fact going to give   
   >>>>>>those living on the routes of trains hauling crude oil some warning   
   >>>>>>of the dangers they might face.  Or at least that seems the intent.   
   >>>>>>Given the profit involved to the carriers, I am wondering why the   
   >>>>>>Feds don't also insist on track upgrdes on those routes.   
      
   >>>>>Perhaps there is no need for track upgrades on those routes.   
      
   >>>>Thank you!   
      
   >>>Crappy track is ok with you.  Work for a RR?   
      
   >>George, in addition to being an expert on airport finances, are you also   
   >>a qualified railroad track inspector?   
      
   >You act as if train derailments are acts of God, not dependent on bad   
   >track.  As long as the RR industry assumes accidents are normal and victims   
   >can be paid off with a few dollars after 5-10 years in court, then it is   
   >just a cost of doing business and things will never be improved.  Airline   
   >accidents are approached quite differently and last year no one died in   
   >domestic airline accidents.  That would translate into zero oil train   
   >derailments.  But right now no one cares about oil trains.  As is obvious   
   >with your posts.   
      
   No one acts as if derailments were acts of God. It's just that no one at   
   all believes you until we hear the facts. You're unwilling to wait for facts.   
      
   --- SoupGate/W32 v1.03   
    * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)