Truck Driving Jobs

b00m · #11 09-09-2009, 01:44 AM

The economy will be in a dump for a time to come.The only way to bring real economic growth ,will be by bringing back the manufacturing jobs the USofA has been losing for quite a while.This economy lived unrealistically on cheap credit until now,when the bill has come due.The only job growth i can see is through the energy jobs that have been talked about.Too bad the government has it's nose to deep in this.

As far as trucking is concerned,you guys pointed out what is goinging on. Hopefully,some mega carrier(S) will go under soon and that way freight will be avaiable for the small owner op.That's right let small business flourish and thrive,not the super big corporations that are being controlled by anybody in this world with the right amount of $$$$.

SickRick · #12 09-09-2009, 02:27 AM

Fear & Desperation? Think I mentioned those factors in the "just say no to cheap freight" discussion.

Rail has been touting intermodal as a less expensive alternative to long haul truckload rates - and they ARE correct - it IS LESS EXPENSIVE to put the box on a train. If you are not under any predictable time constraints for DELIVERY, as a train pretty much "gets there, when it gets there". Seeing a lot of MAJOR CARRIERS boxes going by at RR X-ings. This is NOT a thing of the past, and we may see MORE OF IT in the future.

More boxes on trains means LESS boxes on trucks (duh), means carriers DESPERATE to stay in the game, that aren't BIG ENOUGH to load plan and leverage intermodal for the less time-constrained loads, will attempt to have rates that COMPETE with those of intermodal (which is foolish, as you CAN'T compete with a rig that can pull HUNDREDS of trailers at the same time).

Where WE used to think of intermodal as containers that come off container ships, go on trains, and WE drag them the last mile - there are probably more TRACTOR TRAILER type TRAILERS on these trains now, than ocean-going intermodal containers. And EVERY ONE OF THEM, means some DRIVER is NOT PULLING IT.

Oh yeah - we ain't seen NOTHING YET.

Rick

no_worries · #13 09-09-2009, 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SickRick

Fear & Desperation? Think I mentioned those factors in the "just say no to cheap freight" discussion.

Rail has been touting intermodal as a less expensive alternative to long haul truckload rates - and they ARE correct - it IS LESS EXPENSIVE to put the box on a train. If you are not under any predictable time constraints for DELIVERY, as a train pretty much "gets there, when it gets there". Seeing a lot of MAJOR CARRIERS boxes going by at RR X-ings. This is NOT a thing of the past, and we may see MORE OF IT in the future.

More boxes on trains means LESS boxes on trucks (duh), means carriers DESPERATE to stay in the game, that aren't BIG ENOUGH to load plan and leverage intermodal for the less time-constrained loads, will attempt to have rates that COMPETE with those of intermodal (which is foolish, as you CAN'T compete with a rig that can pull HUNDREDS of trailers at the same time).

Where WE used to think of intermodal as containers that come off container ships, go on trains, and WE drag them the last mile - there are probably more TRACTOR TRAILER type TRAILERS on these trains now, than ocean-going intermodal containers. And EVERY ONE OF THEM, means some DRIVER is NOT PULLING IT.

Oh yeah - we ain't seen NOTHING YET.

Rick

Intermodal satisfies one segment of the freight market. If time and service constraints are relatively lax, intermodal is a great way to go. A small carrier can't compete against the commoditized segment of the industry. The same goes for those trying to compete against the big carriers. You can't do it for less than they can and still make a comparable living. Why try? The small guy has to leverage those things he CAN do well and find his niche.

As a sidenote, intermodal volumes have fallen faster than truck volumes during this decline. Even when thing turn around, rail will always have constrained capacity. There is only so much rail out there. Yes, they're raising overpasses back east to allow the double-stack trains, but what are they going to do after that? With that capacity restraint comes pricing power. Rail's bread and butter is bulk commodities. Intermodal will get priced out before bulk because trucks provide an alternative. Obviously, none of this is a concern until things turn around down the road, but the fears about intermodal taking over freight are way overblown. The projections show trucks actually increasing their share of tonnage moved over the next 10-15 years. Oh, and a lot of those trailers you see on trains, especially the east to west trains, are empty trailers being repositioned.

heavyhaulerss · #14 09-09-2009, 08:08 PM

yes I guess I think I know where we are at. lets see... the government has been telling us to reduce our debt levels, & at the same time put us in so much debt via this stimulus, that by just the tax burden we will have to face for decades to come, we will all be in debt... debt to the government, via taxes, though under different titles. the more responsible we are, the less responsible the government is. I am ready for a revolution.

no_worries · #15 09-10-2009, 12:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heavyhaulerss

yes I guess I think I know where we are at. lets see... the government has been telling us to reduce our debt levels, & at the same time put us in so much debt via this stimulus, that by just the tax burden we will have to face for decades to come, we will all be in debt... debt to the government, via taxes, though under different titles. the more responsible we are, the less responsible the government is. I am ready for a revolution.

Other than a brief respite during the Clinton years, that's been the story since at least the early 80's. No sense getting all fired up about it now.

GMAN · #16 09-10-2009, 02:38 AM

Rail has limited capacity. Even if they start double stacking containers on these rail cars, they may need to reinforce rails to support the added weight. That takes time. Other than limited capacity, rail also has a service problem. They cannot give door to door service as can trucks. They also cannot meet the demands of the market as well as trucks. It can take 2 weeks or longer to travel across the country for a rail car when a truck can move the same load in 2-4 days. There are too many products that need to have shorter delivery times than rail can offer.

I don't see rail dramatically affecting trucking in the near term. Whether this country manufacturers or distributes their products they must be moved by truck. Even if it goes by rail, they still cannot get it to the consumer without trucks. It is possible we could have a little uptick leading up to Christmas. I expect consumers to be more conservative in their buying this holiday season. I don't see any more clarity in the economy than we had a year ago. People don't yet know how much their tax burden will go up with this out of control president and congress. They can't print the money fast enough. When people are scared they don't spend money. Spending would help the economy, but until consumer confidence returns they are going to hold their money close. Some people don't know if they will have a job when Christmas gets here. There is still much uncertainty. People have become much more suspicious of the congress and president and for good reason. I don't see any more confidence than a few months ago.

no_worries · #17 09-10-2009, 11:10 PM

No more clarity? We're talking macro here, not micro. A year ago (almost anyway) we were looking into an abyss. Nobody knew if the banking system would survive, credit was locked up tighter than a you-know-what, the question regarding manufacturers was not who would go under but who would be left, and home values were declining at never before imagined rates. It's a night and day difference today.

As for taxes; outside of the self-employed, taxes have a negligible impact on planned spending. In any case, taxes aren't going to go up significantly enough to impact consumer spending in the short term.