In 1911, Southern California had the largest interurban electric railcar line in the world. It stretched from Santa Ana in Orange Country to San Fernando in northern LA county, and from San Pedro and Santa Monica on the coast to San Benardino in the Inland Empire.
It is true that the Pacific Electric often needed subsidies, but then just about all of the major forms of transportation used in the U.S. are subsidised in one form or another. For example, the government builds freeways, and funds and runs the FAA and ICC at taxpayer expense. The subway recently built under Wilshire Blvd. was subsidised to the tune of $1 billion per mile.
In the 1940s, "National City Lines" (NCL) was formed by a conglomerate including a majority holding by Standard Oil (today's Exxon and Chevron). NCL proceeded to buy up about 50 light rail mass transit systems across the United States, wherever they could talk the owners into selling. There is no evidence that NCL tried to maintain and/or improve these light rail systems. Within a few years, they were shut down. In Chicago and New York, where they refused to sell, they are still in operation.
NCL was sued, but it was found that its actions were consistent with what some call the "free market" economy.
So, did Standard Oil buy up "failing" rail lines across the US because of altruism? Or did it have something to do with manipulating markets and governments, because it can?



Loading comments…
Posted April 2, 2008 | 07:04 PM (EST)