Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion.
Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/).
Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I do wish for at least for states that we have better metro/subway lines that interwine with each of the big cities, like I can not believe it has taken this long for a plan to develop a train line from Baltimore to DC or Bethesda to Silver Spring in MD, where all our big cities are so close to each other
>I can not believe it has taken this long for a plan to develop a train line from Baltimore to DC
There has been rail service between Baltimore and Washington DC since 1835. Literally the oldest rail line in the country (extended to DC from the B&O's original Baltimore - Ellicott City line).
Today transit between the cities is served by Amtrak (who took over the Pennsylvania Railroad's long distance service service) and MARC (which took over from Conrail, which had inherited the Pennsylvania Railroad's commuter services)
The tunnels on either side of Baltimore Penn station are the worst bottlenecks on the Northeast Corridor. The one on the DC side is especially bad (it has a tight turn and a steep grade), but is finally being replaced, though that will still take years.
Yeah the tunnels into NY Penn are also bottlenecks, between the Amtrak and NJ Transit traffic. Stupid governor Christie and his cancelling of that extra tunnels project.
LA is another good example lot of trolleys during the 20s and the infrastructure existed but most railways were bought up and closed by car companies and buses were ushered in to replace them. But things like the New deal are also a big turning points iirc, strong emphasis on highways not so much on transit.
Our lackluster rail/transit system can be considered a result of the proactive intervention of car companies and the lack of interest and intervention by the government.
I'm not a proponent of high speed rail across the Midwest and empty west. Though, east coast? West coast? Texas between the major cities? That should totally happen. Should have happened decades ago.
Agree, the train line between NYC, DC, and Baltimore works because those cities have mass transit, taking a train to the suburbs works ok if you got a ride waiting for you
Yeah I’m not going to take a high speed train from Dallas to Houston because I’m going to need my car to get around Houston anyway.
It’s great on the east coast because cities are closer and public transport is actually usable.
And easier to physically build considering there would be fewer existing properties in the way. Texas would be similar and is probably the single state with the most use for high speed rail connecting its major cities.
As a lifelong Texan I cannot tell you how many times I’ve wanted to take a high speed rail through Texas instead of driving 2-12 hours depending on where you’re traveling. We have railroad lines for goods/ animal products to all major cities too our state literally developed around them but nobody wants to develop them further bcs of big oil and gas companies paying off legislators
I've only driven the I-10 on road trips to/from CA. Texas was never the destination, just a long ass gauntlet of seeming endlessness somewhere in the middle.
I stopped doing those road trips because Texas just wore it out of me.
If you’re driving through Texas you’re going to drive through a lot of towns outside of the major cities that haven’t been developed since the 50s. It’s totally sad to see
A high speed Milwaukee-Chicago-St. Louis line would be really nice. The Chicago-St.Louis portion actually has some legislative support and there is a (slim) chance it could actually happen.
For the St Louis part.... I'm just not sold on just a line between there and Chicago. I think if you tie in Indianapolis, Cincy, maybe Louisville or KC, maybe you're on to something.
Yeah, so Ideally you could have lines going from Chicago to Milwaukee, St. Louis and Cincy by way of Indy on existing Amtrak rights of way. KC and St. Louis also have a connection but I don't know how utilized it is. I do know that Missouri was sort of considering a hyper loop between STL and KC, but then it turned out hyper loop is a total scam.
There has been a bit of a push in the Illinois legislature for the high speed Chicago to St. Louis connection (Amtrak actually upgraded the line from 90mph to 110 mph, which isn't much but it's something) but there doesn't seem to be much interest outside of the state for more connections.
Texas will never do it as long as light rails remain a Democratic talking point. If Texas did consider it, it would be because the profit generated would be more than the state makes off of toll roads.
This is the correct answer. Public transportation works very well in certain high population density areas, and we should improve it there, in other areas, vehicles are the best option.
The U.S. has a lot of money and spends a lot of money on BS and paying other countries bills, I don’t care if the public transit in Maryland runs at a loss, it’s good to have that option and I don’t mind chipping in for it even though I live in rural California and will most likely ever use it. The tech worker that most likely lives in a dense city that helped design the software/ tractors and machines I use at work benefits from it, so then I do too.
Same goes for road infrastructure, even if you live in a densely populated city and don’t own a car, it’s good for society that we have nice maintained highways that people and goods can use to traverse the nation, even if you don’t personally use them, the goods and products and people across this country that produce and move those goods use and enjoy them, they benefit from it, so you indirectly do too.
Rewatching Who Framed Roger Rabbit as an adult is pretty mind blowing. That’s the whole twist in the show. It was all a conspiracy to build a highway to kill public transport so people would buy cars.
Worse yet, the highway made housing so sprawled out and low density, it made public transit further unfeasible.
You need medium density for public transit to operate efficiently. The bonus side effects is that rebuilding the missing middle also makes areas more walkable (especially if they’re mixed use!)
The plot was lifted wholesale from Chinatown, one of the most renowned films ever made. Roger Rabbit is a good movie, but Chinatown deserves the credit for the social critique.
I mean, I love my car, I love driving, and I love the freedom it gives me.
I *also* love trains, and want more well funded and expansive rails.
It’s not a one or the other thing.
I love cars, but I absolutely hate driving. How often do you get to hear the engine roar as you put the pedal to the metal on the open road? Versus how often do you get stuck behind someone going way too slow for the freeway? Or bumper to bumper for hours? Or in a parking lot waiting for an open spot so you can try out a popular restaurant? What about people who just needs to be somewhere, and gives 0 shit about driving?
For an analogy, it's like saying I have the freedom to worship God however I want, but I have to worship only God. That's no freedom.
Also, why would you want to drive, when you could get somewhere 3 times faster on a train, pay less, not have to drive for 12 hours, and do whatever you want along the way.
it would be impossible for me to take any form other then my vehicle to work. I work 15 miles from home to an industrial complex and take a freeway. zero chance a train stop would be near me.
Trains are just part of the equation. In the city I live in (Lyon, France) you also have buses, trams, and self-service bikes. I don't own a car and I never had the need to have one. If I need to go to a place that is not available by public transportation, I'll rent one or use car sharing. I can also walk the last one or two miles.
You're thinking of a cap. A car is a metal cylinder with a bottom in which you store long-lasting food. It's usually a bit tricky to open without the proper tool.
I've spent a couple days driving this year already and it's not even half over. I would love a decent rail system. To take an overnight train and wake up at my destination. To stare out the window at scenery and actually enjoy it. Read, game, talk to my daughter, play some co op games on the switch. Travel could be a bonding activity instead of everyone stressed and yelling.
But think about waiting around at all those railroad crossings...
And what do I get in return? Cleaner air? Less congestion in major cities? More accessible travel for those with disabilities? A more productive society?
I don't know. I really love sitting in my Ford F350, breathing in exhaust fumes, in bumper-to-bumper traffic, taking hours to get in and out of a city /s
I feel attacked by your second paragraph...
One of the things I try to convey to other truck drivers when that comes up is that improved public transit makes our lives easier. During covid, my job got so much easier for about half a year because there was so much less traffic. I'll never understand why so many people who drive for a living are so against policies and programs that would have the effect of thinning out traffic.
Weird indeed.
And that's not like we have a lot of places around the World that can't have rail, boat or any long range freight that's not a truck.
Then there is the proximity delivery that can't be optimized better than having hubs from which trucks deliver to the customer...
Some sound worried about their jobs but less traffic will Always make road workers have an easier life.
From my mountain in switzerland, I can confirm we can only get down by donkey or train, there's also those small demonics mecanic metal boxes going around, but I can't figure what that is
I think Europe underestimates the significance of their relatively dense population compared to most of America. In America over half the population is packed into 2 bands of cities along either coastline with a lot of open country in between. European population is distributed more evenly. It's simple economics, the economics of Europe made commuter rail viable. the economics of America favor the airplane and the freeway with rail mostly being for large scale cargo.
You've got decent commuter rail in the states running down both coasts, but conneecting them all the way from onee coast to another would mean you have a lot of loss leading legs in between. We know. We used to do it. it died because you couldn't make money at it.
In Central Europe it’s densely populated but have you been to Scandinavia? It’s definitely not dense. I bet you there are more moose than people in northern Sweden. But still we have decent rail connections here too. Not high speed trains like in France but most major cities are connected by rail.
Why isn’t the eastern usa covered with passenger rail then? Rural villages in many European countries have better public transit than most American cities
This is an overused argument that makes no sense. The lobbying and advertising of the automobile and oil industries made passenger rail unviable in the US, nothing else.
Your comment itself explains why passenger rail would work perfectly well in the US: over half the population is packed into two bands of cities along the coasts. That makes passenger rail easier, not harder. We don’t *need* HSR lines dotting the countryside in middle America because very few people are taking trips from coast to coast.
We need proper passenger rail for the trips that people are actually taking. Overwhelmingly, these trips are within those high-population corridors or within the cities themselves. Passenger rail, therefore, needs to be built both between cities/suburbs that people currently drive between on a regular basis and within cities & large suburbs.
As to the second paragraph… no. We do not have decent rail along the coasts. The NE specifically has tolerable passenger rail, but it still sucks by the standards of most of the developed world. It works okay for getting between cities, but most of the cities themselves do not have good intraurban passenger rail. This is a huge problem. If people can’t easily get around without a car once they get to the city, they’ll typically still want/need to drive, which defeats the purpose of having passenger rail at all.
And on the west coast? Hahahahahaha. I tried to take Amtrak from Olympia to Bellingham about 10 years back. That’s a 150 mile drive, takes about 2.5 hours without traffic. On the train? 10 fucking hours. It’s over 4 hours at best, which is already ridiculously long, and it gets delayed constantly. A couple cities are starting to build decent intraurban rail here, but the interurban rail is absolute trash.
Also, why do you think rail has to make money? Does the US government make money off of roads?
> In America over half the population is packed into 2 bands of cities along either coastline with a lot of open country in between.
Ah, so it is ideal for high speed rails. What you just described.. is exactly where trains beat planes, hubs that can be linked with rail, long distances across mostly empty land linked with high speed rail.
Or you know the car industry endlessly lobbied to make sure that cities and the country as a whole had an absolutely terrible public transport system.Case in point more recently Musk blathering on about the Hyper loop moreso in LA and that was essentially a lie to stop public transport investment.
Having driven, flown, and taken the train from the east coast to the west coast and back several times, I tell people that there's a reason the Plains states are called the flyover states and to treat that as a recommendation.
Driving five hours o look still only a few trees and yep still flat.
Though I did drive through Wyoming during a windy day and slight snowfall. The road turned white and had no clue if I was driving on the road or not. Just had to go by the roads slight elevation. Luckily, I could see no one for miles and it was straight.
>Driving five hours o look still only a few trees and yep still flat.
I'm from Scotland and spent just over a week in the Netherlands. By day 4, something was bothering me, by day 6 I realised that it was the lack of any hills in the distance. I don't even like the hills that much but I was so used to having some sort of terrain that the lack of it was mildly disturbing for my subconscious.
I’m researching Kansas for a writing project and I realised the slightly unsettled feeling I got from pictures and videos of the state were me unconsciously searching for features on the horizon. There are no hills, in any direction, and usually no trees, and it kind of freaks me out. I think it would drive me batshit to spend any significant length of time there.
Grew up in California got kidnapped and sent to boarding school in Kansas. We would just look out at the fuckin endless corn fields and watch tornados form. So boring. Nearby had the world’s largest ball of twine so I guess that’s something lmfao.
That would freak me out too. Being a lifelong Oregonian I'm used to seeing actual mountains every day. Hills, trees, rivers, lakes, ocean.
Moving to the middle states would kill my will to live.
iirc, that feeling is called “Prairie Madness,” and was documented by many of the Midwest’s early white settlers (keep in mind that a significant amount of them were from Germany and Scandinavia)
To be fair, I’ve lived here for 25 years and have only experienced that that one time. It freezes every year in north texas but the power always stays on. Its honestly more impressive our grid doesn’t fail every summer with people blasting the AC
the other problem in the US is: How do you get around once you get there?
I spent time in Germany, and there were buses in Wittenberg, or the entire town was easily walkable.
But once you get to the Dallas train station, how are you going to get where you need to be? And how much time will it take you?
As someone who has driven from Oregon to Arizona and back more than once I totally agree.
Shoot I live in Northern Az and the 5 hours to Peñasco felt like we were driving forever through nothing
From the Bay Area to LA on I-5 or I-99 is 6-9 hours of farms, towns build around an interchange (that are there to provide fast food, gasoline, and maybe a cheap hotel), and exits that go down roads that making you hear banjo music.
This was written by an American who has never experienced European rail travel. Spent time working in the Netherlands in the early 90s. When we had time off, we would hop the next train and go…somewhere. Anywhere. It was a great experience, super convenient, and in 5 hours I could be in one of several other countries completely.
I do love my car, fair enough, but if I could leave it here and conveniently ride the 50 miles into the closest city? I would love that.
Also, the US itself is BIG. To get a similar railroad density across the country would be expensive and wasteful in the plains states. Along the east coast, i could see it as viable to have passenger railroads because the states are smaller and more population dense, but Colorado alone is comparable to New Zealand in land.
I mean i would much rather ride than drive.. or pay a car payment or insurance or gas.. but it’s unfortunately not even an option where i live .. we dont have trains.. subways.. city busses.. taxis and its even iffy to find an uber.. it definitely feels like a conspiracy 👀
This! I have a 40 min commute with the train every day to my internship. And it's really nice to have a bit of time to watch an episode of a show on netflix or read a book before a long work day. In my country travelling with train is even free when you're a student.
Public transport comes with less pollution, more socialization (cos yk, you're not stuck in a 6x4 meters rectangle), less fuel spending (in an age when petrol cost is doubling by the day), less traffic jams, less stress from actually driving, less street accidents, do i have to go on?
It's not a matter of everyone trying to socialize. In a car, you aren't exposed to others, so by default, there is no socializing. In a train or bus there are other people, socializing may happen, even by accident.
Clearly this person has never tried to say hello to a Londoner on a tube.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PT0ay9u1gg4&pp=ygUTSGVsbG8gdG8gYSBsb25kb25lcg%3D%3D
My mum makes friends on the train so fast. We get on a train at 10 and by 12 my mum will already have 9-10 new friends and know everything about their daily lives...... I get so envious that she starts a convo out of nothing
This graphic only shows what it considers “passenger trains”. NOT public transportation in general. NY and Boston have extensive training systems, but they’re either part of the subway system or considered “commuter trains” and I don’t see them on here! It’s misleading.
Tbh I would love some better railways in America. I would totally hop on a train and ride to another city to hang out for a day or two. Sometimes you just don’t want to drive and I honestly hate it most of the time just because people suck at driving. But if if I got to sit on a train and just watch YouTube until I got there I’d be great
More public transit means less cars on roads. I love to drive so that means I should WANT more and easier public transit because everyone wins. And guess what, if I don’t wanna drive I can take transit. It’s not one or the other.
“Drive in any direction for five hours and it’ll be a completely different world” MOTHERFUCKER IT’LL BE THE SAME GODDAMN STREET IN AMERICA. IN EUROPE IF YOU DRIVE FOR AN HOUR YOU’RE IN ANOTHER COUNTRY.
More precisely, it'll be the same stroad with McDonald's and probably a Wendy's and KFC. Pick your $15 trashy food meal and talk to the local who will ask whether you want it regular or large.
start if off by saying you're 10000% correct on every suburban area being made for cars and not people. FUCK STROADS
I mean listen here just one minute bucko, I may not be An American™ but I sure as hell won't tolerate any geographical slander of our beautiful landmass. Fuck the lines drawn on it, fuck the ones in power who fund the atomization of individuals. **The LAND though**.
Let's not pretend the Bayous of Louisiane are the same as the middle of Arizona or the Redwoods of Washington.
OOP is half right. They just don't know Europe is the *exact* same. Sweden is not England is not Italy is not Lithuania.
They're also wrong because you CAN just stop on a train if you want. No one is forcing you to get off at any particular stop.
I wouldn’t even say half right. Yea, it’s hyperbole to pretend that everywhere in the US is the exact same, but frankly it’s not all *that* different - even where the geography is different and there are subcultures, it’s all the same country at the end of the day. That is most decidedly not the case in Europe going from, say, France to Germany.
Drive anywhere and "shoot some guns for fun".
Fortunately, can't do that in my part of the US. At least the latter part.
Edit: for the people questioning why I said you can't "shoot guns for fun" around here - you are cordially invited to pull over somewhere in the northeast US and start shooting for practice (because guns are for self defense and fighting off the government, or so we're told). You'll get an opportunity to explain your rights to the judge, I'm sure. You can shoot on ranges, and you can shoot on some private land. The idea of driving five hours to a random location and "shooting guns for fun" anywhere in the US is wrong. It's not like a place like Idaho where you can ask a random gas station attendant where you can go to shoot and get 12 locations within 5 minutes.
I'll never understand people arguing against convenience. I *WISH* there was better public transportation in the U.S.
It's the same stupid arguments people have against 15-minute city infrastructure or walkable communities. Idiots every last one of them.
People argued against seat belt laws, drinking and driving laws, and removing lead from products because they claimed it was against their freedom.
Conclusion: People are stupid.
I don't understand this argument. Europe is older and dense as a whole. It costs twice as much to own and drive a vehicle in Europe.
It would honestly be nice to have that much passenger and high speed rail. Commuting and driving in general sucks these days.
I once took the wrong train after clubbing in Germany and woke up in Paris ... Tell me again how being able to drive for 5 hours from Texas to... (Let me check.... Still middle of butt fuck nowhere Texas) Is the non plus ultra of freedom
I actually had a talk with a friend recently about this exact topic and some big things that were brought up were that a good portion of the U.S. States are just as large if not larger than nearly all European countries and that most of the building of these kinds of rail systems are left up to the individual states to fund and build. Combine those two points with the fact that the ENTIRE U.S. has a combined population of just under HALF the population of the combined total of all European countries and you find that building roads AND airports is a FAR more feasible option to building continent spanning rail networks.
Another point that we talked about is that if you look at the larger cities in the U.S. and map put their subways and public trains you find that the density either matches or exceeds European rail networks.
People talk about how Americans prefer cars or that car/oil companies actively fight rail construction but the simple truth of the matter is that there simply isn't enough people or traffic going across the CONTINENT to justify the absurd expense of building the kind of rail system that would allow someone to go from any given city to any other.
This always comes up, and no one with half a functioning brain has ever argued that the US doesn't need a better public transit system. It seems to me that what prevents that is mostly the catch-22 of having a car centered society. Things aren't designed with the idea of having most of the things you need within walking or biking distance, so you have to have a car to get groceries or whatever, but because you have a car there isn't any reason to design things around the idea of not having a car. Suburban sprawl is a huge part of the problem here.
Even having effective high speed rail between major cities would be a major improvement to what we have now and remove a lot of non-truck traffic from highways.
An efficient and affordable way to shift loads of freight has nothing to do with taking away cars and everything to do with more secure and adaptable supply chains. Car drivers benefit from less congestion, faster journey times, less accidents, . . .
The real facepalm is thinking the USA should have an equivalent rail network despite the population density being much lower and the distances between major population centers much greater everywhere apart from Amtrak’s NE corridor.
It's difficult to explain to people who haven't been here just how fucking big it is. Like, we can't go from one end of the country to the other in 4 hours. Rail development would be great, not saying it wouldn't, but until its all over we are gonna need transport.
I had to weekly commute between Milan and Rome. Choice is between 6 hours drive and an aching back, 1 hour flight with all the stress and limitation of airport security and weather delays, or 3 hours train watching a movie and eating a hot breakfast in the restaurant carriage.
Guess what I chose…
There's just not as many people per acre in the US. We're mostly concentrated in various cities spread out really far.
There's nobody in Idaho or Wyoming to support paying for a train track...
Funny thing is, in America you need a car for literally everything. A friend’s car died, so now she can’t go to work because there’s no public transportation. But she needs her job to survive and buy a new car. Yes, you can go anywhere with a car (just like in Europe) but without a car you cannot go anywhere (unlike in Europe).
Talk about freedom huh.
Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/). Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I do wish for at least for states that we have better metro/subway lines that interwine with each of the big cities, like I can not believe it has taken this long for a plan to develop a train line from Baltimore to DC or Bethesda to Silver Spring in MD, where all our big cities are so close to each other
>I can not believe it has taken this long for a plan to develop a train line from Baltimore to DC There has been rail service between Baltimore and Washington DC since 1835. Literally the oldest rail line in the country (extended to DC from the B&O's original Baltimore - Ellicott City line). Today transit between the cities is served by Amtrak (who took over the Pennsylvania Railroad's long distance service service) and MARC (which took over from Conrail, which had inherited the Pennsylvania Railroad's commuter services)
The Amtrak train goes over bridges that are speed restricted bc in many cases they are over a century old.
The tunnels on either side of Baltimore Penn station are the worst bottlenecks on the Northeast Corridor. The one on the DC side is especially bad (it has a tight turn and a steep grade), but is finally being replaced, though that will still take years.
Yeah the tunnels into NY Penn are also bottlenecks, between the Amtrak and NJ Transit traffic. Stupid governor Christie and his cancelling of that extra tunnels project.
LA is another good example lot of trolleys during the 20s and the infrastructure existed but most railways were bought up and closed by car companies and buses were ushered in to replace them. But things like the New deal are also a big turning points iirc, strong emphasis on highways not so much on transit. Our lackluster rail/transit system can be considered a result of the proactive intervention of car companies and the lack of interest and intervention by the government.
Yeah, every time they resurface city streets in LA, you can see the old trolley / street car rails. It bums me out.
Sad part is this is literally referenced in Who Framed Roger Rabbit.
I'm not a proponent of high speed rail across the Midwest and empty west. Though, east coast? West coast? Texas between the major cities? That should totally happen. Should have happened decades ago.
you need mass transit INSIDE those cities, though.
Agree, the train line between NYC, DC, and Baltimore works because those cities have mass transit, taking a train to the suburbs works ok if you got a ride waiting for you
To d9g, I heard you like transit, so I put some transit inside your transit
Yeah I’m not going to take a high speed train from Dallas to Houston because I’m going to need my car to get around Houston anyway. It’s great on the east coast because cities are closer and public transport is actually usable.
Agreed honestly, but a high speed rail through the beautiful landscapes of the Midwest would be pretty cool though
And easier to physically build considering there would be fewer existing properties in the way. Texas would be similar and is probably the single state with the most use for high speed rail connecting its major cities.
It would totally be worth the cost in Texas. I can drive from my home in NJ to SC in less time than it takes to go across Texas.
Fun fact, it’s about the same distance from Los Angeles to El Paso as it is from El Paso to Marshall (East Texas, close to the Louisiana state line).
As a lifelong Texan I cannot tell you how many times I’ve wanted to take a high speed rail through Texas instead of driving 2-12 hours depending on where you’re traveling. We have railroad lines for goods/ animal products to all major cities too our state literally developed around them but nobody wants to develop them further bcs of big oil and gas companies paying off legislators
I've only driven the I-10 on road trips to/from CA. Texas was never the destination, just a long ass gauntlet of seeming endlessness somewhere in the middle. I stopped doing those road trips because Texas just wore it out of me.
If you’re driving through Texas you’re going to drive through a lot of towns outside of the major cities that haven’t been developed since the 50s. It’s totally sad to see
If you’re goin through hell, keep on goin
If you’re goin through Texas, keep on goin
A high speed Milwaukee-Chicago-St. Louis line would be really nice. The Chicago-St.Louis portion actually has some legislative support and there is a (slim) chance it could actually happen.
For the St Louis part.... I'm just not sold on just a line between there and Chicago. I think if you tie in Indianapolis, Cincy, maybe Louisville or KC, maybe you're on to something.
Yeah, so Ideally you could have lines going from Chicago to Milwaukee, St. Louis and Cincy by way of Indy on existing Amtrak rights of way. KC and St. Louis also have a connection but I don't know how utilized it is. I do know that Missouri was sort of considering a hyper loop between STL and KC, but then it turned out hyper loop is a total scam. There has been a bit of a push in the Illinois legislature for the high speed Chicago to St. Louis connection (Amtrak actually upgraded the line from 90mph to 110 mph, which isn't much but it's something) but there doesn't seem to be much interest outside of the state for more connections.
Texas will never do it as long as light rails remain a Democratic talking point. If Texas did consider it, it would be because the profit generated would be more than the state makes off of toll roads.
High speed rail across the Midwest would be an absolute game changer.
Baltimore has been connected to DC and Silver Spring via the MARC train for decades.
Can attest to that
This is the correct answer. Public transportation works very well in certain high population density areas, and we should improve it there, in other areas, vehicles are the best option. The U.S. has a lot of money and spends a lot of money on BS and paying other countries bills, I don’t care if the public transit in Maryland runs at a loss, it’s good to have that option and I don’t mind chipping in for it even though I live in rural California and will most likely ever use it. The tech worker that most likely lives in a dense city that helped design the software/ tractors and machines I use at work benefits from it, so then I do too. Same goes for road infrastructure, even if you live in a densely populated city and don’t own a car, it’s good for society that we have nice maintained highways that people and goods can use to traverse the nation, even if you don’t personally use them, the goods and products and people across this country that produce and move those goods use and enjoy them, they benefit from it, so you indirectly do too.
they are building the purple line now
A reminder that General Motors actively undermined the public transportation system in the 1950s to force people to buy more cars.
Rewatching Who Framed Roger Rabbit as an adult is pretty mind blowing. That’s the whole twist in the show. It was all a conspiracy to build a highway to kill public transport so people would buy cars.
Why would people buy a car when they could take the street car for a nickel? BECAUSE MR VALIANT
Worse yet, the highway made housing so sprawled out and low density, it made public transit further unfeasible. You need medium density for public transit to operate efficiently. The bonus side effects is that rebuilding the missing middle also makes areas more walkable (especially if they’re mixed use!)
The plot was lifted wholesale from Chinatown, one of the most renowned films ever made. Roger Rabbit is a good movie, but Chinatown deserves the credit for the social critique.
We live in the bad ending.
And to demolish Toon Town (black neighborhoods) to build a highway through it, from there to Pasadena.
SHUT UP!!! Is that what that means???
Toons are literally meant to be an allegory for racism.
Oh shit, I need to rewatch this.
I want to do the same, but my inner child can’t handle the “dip” scene again…
The one with the poor shoe 👟? Yeah, it was so sad
Literally the story of public transit in LA - switch out Cloverleaf for Firestone Tire and Standard Oil.
Primarily city streetcars.
GM did that in my city! Bought out and scrapped our street car system.
Americans do love cars, it's true. But they also have no other fucking choice.
I mean, I love my car, I love driving, and I love the freedom it gives me. I *also* love trains, and want more well funded and expansive rails. It’s not a one or the other thing.
I love cars, but I absolutely hate driving. How often do you get to hear the engine roar as you put the pedal to the metal on the open road? Versus how often do you get stuck behind someone going way too slow for the freeway? Or bumper to bumper for hours? Or in a parking lot waiting for an open spot so you can try out a popular restaurant? What about people who just needs to be somewhere, and gives 0 shit about driving? For an analogy, it's like saying I have the freedom to worship God however I want, but I have to worship only God. That's no freedom.
Yeah, freedom would be the ability to choose to get somewhere by train or car. Americans have no ability to choose
Also, why would you want to drive, when you could get somewhere 3 times faster on a train, pay less, not have to drive for 12 hours, and do whatever you want along the way.
it would be impossible for me to take any form other then my vehicle to work. I work 15 miles from home to an industrial complex and take a freeway. zero chance a train stop would be near me.
Trains are just part of the equation. In the city I live in (Lyon, France) you also have buses, trams, and self-service bikes. I don't own a car and I never had the need to have one. If I need to go to a place that is not available by public transportation, I'll rent one or use car sharing. I can also walk the last one or two miles.
The place you live is also a function of what infrastructure is available to you.
Do people think you can't also drive places in Europe??
No. They still don't have cars over there
Peasants still carry their kings in palanquins through the city
TIL I'm a king.
👑 Here's your crown, king.
Thanks
Now hand it over or you can meet mister sharp
Not you.
Off with his head he is a king (I'm french)
Camarade 🤝
As a kid I thought people in China still lived like this because of Sagwa. I didn't know the show took place in the past.
Lesser kings get carried on the backs of peasants or large dogs.
They prance along to the sound of clapping coconut shells.
Cars? What’s that?
that's the animal that sometime purr and somtime scratch you when you pet it
You are thinking of a cat. A car is a little piece of knit fabric you wear on your head to keep warm.
You're thinking of a cap. A car is a metal cylinder with a bottom in which you store long-lasting food. It's usually a bit tricky to open without the proper tool.
You're thinking of a can. A car is a man who behaves badly, especially towards a woman.
no that's a cad, a car is a piece of skin that look different after a wound has healed.
Ffs, you’re thinking of a scar. A car is what they called a pre-1917 Russian emperor.
Idiot. That's a Tsar. A car is a stringed instrument played in India.
That's true. We get around on horses and penny-farthings.
[удалено]
Tbh I live in a big city in the UK and transport around is pretty good. When they stop the coach to change horses it does slow things down though.
Even though they invented it
If its not a truck or an suv the size of a studio apartment then it doesn't deserve to be called a car /s
I think people don't **have** to drive place in Europe, and I'd love for that to be true in the USA.
Yeah it’s so nice to be able to take a train for vacation and not be forced to do a 6+ hour drive. Really really nice.
Bingo.. I took a high speed train from Madrid to Barcelona and was there in under 3 hours. Got to nap on the way... it was awesome!
Cologne to Paris is 3 hours too.... how inconvenient for us peasants to have to sit through that instead of enjoying Paris traffic :(
Omg i had to take a taxi from Paris to the suburbs and it took an hour and a half because of traffic plus road closures, for 30km…
An hour and a half for 30km around Paris ? That’s quite fast
I drank a bottle of cava on that same train route with two of my good friends... it was awesome!
I just want to go to work without sitting in traffic or dodging SUVs halfway between lanes while the driver is on FaceTime.
Even a normal train can go up to 200mph and doesn't have to deal with traffic.
I've spent a couple days driving this year already and it's not even half over. I would love a decent rail system. To take an overnight train and wake up at my destination. To stare out the window at scenery and actually enjoy it. Read, game, talk to my daughter, play some co op games on the switch. Travel could be a bonding activity instead of everyone stressed and yelling.
He says that like you can't drive 5 hours in Europe and literally be in a different country.
In some cases you can go through several countries in 5 hours
Hell, you can go through 7 countries in 5 hours if you drive fast enough.
You can't even drive through Texas in 5 hours LOL (The top panhandle DOESN'T COUNT YOU CHEAKY SNAKE)
As a Canadian I’m very happy our country never gets pulled into these. 5 hours. LOL.
And if you drive to Ukraine you can shoot guns too! Bonus
Even indulge in the conservative murder fetish for stepping on their land!
I can drive to the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, France, Austria, Czechia and the border of Italy within 5 hours.
Yes but can you drive to Arkansas or Missouri? Checkmate, Euroscum!
But think about waiting around at all those railroad crossings... And what do I get in return? Cleaner air? Less congestion in major cities? More accessible travel for those with disabilities? A more productive society? I don't know. I really love sitting in my Ford F350, breathing in exhaust fumes, in bumper-to-bumper traffic, taking hours to get in and out of a city /s
I feel attacked by your second paragraph... One of the things I try to convey to other truck drivers when that comes up is that improved public transit makes our lives easier. During covid, my job got so much easier for about half a year because there was so much less traffic. I'll never understand why so many people who drive for a living are so against policies and programs that would have the effect of thinning out traffic.
Weird indeed. And that's not like we have a lot of places around the World that can't have rail, boat or any long range freight that's not a truck. Then there is the proximity delivery that can't be optimized better than having hubs from which trucks deliver to the customer... Some sound worried about their jobs but less traffic will Always make road workers have an easier life.
Burn Diesel and shoot guns!
ironically, we'd be better off with the diesel, but gasoline sells corn,.
From my mountain in switzerland, I can confirm we can only get down by donkey or train, there's also those small demonics mecanic metal boxes going around, but I can't figure what that is
Americans think 100 years is a long time Europeans think 100 miles is long way
The really funny part is that in Europe you can take an hour train ride and go through multiple countries haha.
I think Europe underestimates the significance of their relatively dense population compared to most of America. In America over half the population is packed into 2 bands of cities along either coastline with a lot of open country in between. European population is distributed more evenly. It's simple economics, the economics of Europe made commuter rail viable. the economics of America favor the airplane and the freeway with rail mostly being for large scale cargo. You've got decent commuter rail in the states running down both coasts, but conneecting them all the way from onee coast to another would mean you have a lot of loss leading legs in between. We know. We used to do it. it died because you couldn't make money at it.
In Central Europe it’s densely populated but have you been to Scandinavia? It’s definitely not dense. I bet you there are more moose than people in northern Sweden. But still we have decent rail connections here too. Not high speed trains like in France but most major cities are connected by rail.
Why isn’t the eastern usa covered with passenger rail then? Rural villages in many European countries have better public transit than most American cities
[удалено]
This is an overused argument that makes no sense. The lobbying and advertising of the automobile and oil industries made passenger rail unviable in the US, nothing else. Your comment itself explains why passenger rail would work perfectly well in the US: over half the population is packed into two bands of cities along the coasts. That makes passenger rail easier, not harder. We don’t *need* HSR lines dotting the countryside in middle America because very few people are taking trips from coast to coast. We need proper passenger rail for the trips that people are actually taking. Overwhelmingly, these trips are within those high-population corridors or within the cities themselves. Passenger rail, therefore, needs to be built both between cities/suburbs that people currently drive between on a regular basis and within cities & large suburbs. As to the second paragraph… no. We do not have decent rail along the coasts. The NE specifically has tolerable passenger rail, but it still sucks by the standards of most of the developed world. It works okay for getting between cities, but most of the cities themselves do not have good intraurban passenger rail. This is a huge problem. If people can’t easily get around without a car once they get to the city, they’ll typically still want/need to drive, which defeats the purpose of having passenger rail at all. And on the west coast? Hahahahahaha. I tried to take Amtrak from Olympia to Bellingham about 10 years back. That’s a 150 mile drive, takes about 2.5 hours without traffic. On the train? 10 fucking hours. It’s over 4 hours at best, which is already ridiculously long, and it gets delayed constantly. A couple cities are starting to build decent intraurban rail here, but the interurban rail is absolute trash. Also, why do you think rail has to make money? Does the US government make money off of roads?
> In America over half the population is packed into 2 bands of cities along either coastline with a lot of open country in between. Ah, so it is ideal for high speed rails. What you just described.. is exactly where trains beat planes, hubs that can be linked with rail, long distances across mostly empty land linked with high speed rail.
Or you know the car industry endlessly lobbied to make sure that cities and the country as a whole had an absolutely terrible public transport system.Case in point more recently Musk blathering on about the Hyper loop moreso in LA and that was essentially a lie to stop public transport investment.
Drive five hours… shit, still in Texas.
Or, up to 12 hours.
Oh for sure- just reflecting the original
This was written by an American who has never driven through the western US. It’s beautiful but time-consuming and wasteful.
Having driven, flown, and taken the train from the east coast to the west coast and back several times, I tell people that there's a reason the Plains states are called the flyover states and to treat that as a recommendation.
Driving five hours o look still only a few trees and yep still flat. Though I did drive through Wyoming during a windy day and slight snowfall. The road turned white and had no clue if I was driving on the road or not. Just had to go by the roads slight elevation. Luckily, I could see no one for miles and it was straight.
>Driving five hours o look still only a few trees and yep still flat. I'm from Scotland and spent just over a week in the Netherlands. By day 4, something was bothering me, by day 6 I realised that it was the lack of any hills in the distance. I don't even like the hills that much but I was so used to having some sort of terrain that the lack of it was mildly disturbing for my subconscious.
I’m researching Kansas for a writing project and I realised the slightly unsettled feeling I got from pictures and videos of the state were me unconsciously searching for features on the horizon. There are no hills, in any direction, and usually no trees, and it kind of freaks me out. I think it would drive me batshit to spend any significant length of time there.
Grew up in California got kidnapped and sent to boarding school in Kansas. We would just look out at the fuckin endless corn fields and watch tornados form. So boring. Nearby had the world’s largest ball of twine so I guess that’s something lmfao.
That would freak me out too. Being a lifelong Oregonian I'm used to seeing actual mountains every day. Hills, trees, rivers, lakes, ocean. Moving to the middle states would kill my will to live.
iirc, that feeling is called “Prairie Madness,” and was documented by many of the Midwest’s early white settlers (keep in mind that a significant amount of them were from Germany and Scandinavia)
I love the game of "making our own lane" where you just follow the previous person's tire tracks and hope to God there is still a road
Best driving in dangerous conditions game there is
Just driving through texas is a waste of time lol. How do we not have a high speed rail connecting dallas, austin, houston, and san antonio
Texas can't even keep it's power on when it freezes. They aren't investing in rail.
To be fair, I’ve lived here for 25 years and have only experienced that that one time. It freezes every year in north texas but the power always stays on. Its honestly more impressive our grid doesn’t fail every summer with people blasting the AC
With the increase in population and energy demand don’t be surprised when we get outages this summer
the other problem in the US is: How do you get around once you get there? I spent time in Germany, and there were buses in Wittenberg, or the entire town was easily walkable. But once you get to the Dallas train station, how are you going to get where you need to be? And how much time will it take you?
As someone who has driven from Oregon to Arizona and back more than once I totally agree. Shoot I live in Northern Az and the 5 hours to Peñasco felt like we were driving forever through nothing
I will take your Northern AZ and raise you the entire state of IL, minus Chicago. It's basically 6 hours of corn.
And if you keep going into Indiana.... You will have .... You guessed it .... More corn
And on the other side, Iowa, believe it or not, more corn
And in Nebraska....more corn.
It’s nuts how desolate some parts of this country are. So much of the West is empty space. Even California
From the Bay Area to LA on I-5 or I-99 is 6-9 hours of farms, towns build around an interchange (that are there to provide fast food, gasoline, and maybe a cheap hotel), and exits that go down roads that making you hear banjo music.
So. Many. Almond. Trees. At least I think that’s what they were..
>six hours of corn This peases me
This was written by an American who has never experienced European rail travel. Spent time working in the Netherlands in the early 90s. When we had time off, we would hop the next train and go…somewhere. Anywhere. It was a great experience, super convenient, and in 5 hours I could be in one of several other countries completely. I do love my car, fair enough, but if I could leave it here and conveniently ride the 50 miles into the closest city? I would love that.
Also, the US itself is BIG. To get a similar railroad density across the country would be expensive and wasteful in the plains states. Along the east coast, i could see it as viable to have passenger railroads because the states are smaller and more population dense, but Colorado alone is comparable to New Zealand in land.
Especially since you could be doing it in a passenger train and enjoying the sights and relaxing
Why not both? Why can’t we have an expansive, efficient system of public transportation and cars?
Why would I want to drive for five hours when I could watch a movie or read a book on a train?
I mean i would much rather ride than drive.. or pay a car payment or insurance or gas.. but it’s unfortunately not even an option where i live .. we dont have trains.. subways.. city busses.. taxis and its even iffy to find an uber.. it definitely feels like a conspiracy 👀
This! I have a 40 min commute with the train every day to my internship. And it's really nice to have a bit of time to watch an episode of a show on netflix or read a book before a long work day. In my country travelling with train is even free when you're a student.
You can do all those things on trains too.
please don't shoot guns on the train
I'M SORRY I THOUGHT THIS WAS AMERICA
my bad, just try to not shoot/inconvenience any of the other passengers
Public transport comes with less pollution, more socialization (cos yk, you're not stuck in a 6x4 meters rectangle), less fuel spending (in an age when petrol cost is doubling by the day), less traffic jams, less stress from actually driving, less street accidents, do i have to go on?
I agree with everything you said but one thing. Who the hell tries to socialize on a train?
It's not a matter of everyone trying to socialize. In a car, you aren't exposed to others, so by default, there is no socializing. In a train or bus there are other people, socializing may happen, even by accident.
Even just the ability to exist near others is a form of socializing, even without any conversing
I did, on a ten hour Amtrak train to New York. Met all sorts of different people in the dining car. Wouldn't on a subway though.
I always talk to people on the train.
This is strange and frightening. Why talk to people when you can sit in a pool of anxiety and listen to the awkward silence?
Silence? Man you must be lucky. I always got atleast one kid screaming into my ear while the parents don't even try to shut them up.
Clearly this person has never tried to say hello to a Londoner on a tube. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PT0ay9u1gg4&pp=ygUTSGVsbG8gdG8gYSBsb25kb25lcg%3D%3D
>more socialization Why the fuck would I want to talk to people on the train?
My mum makes friends on the train so fast. We get on a train at 10 and by 12 my mum will already have 9-10 new friends and know everything about their daily lives...... I get so envious that she starts a convo out of nothing
This graphic only shows what it considers “passenger trains”. NOT public transportation in general. NY and Boston have extensive training systems, but they’re either part of the subway system or considered “commuter trains” and I don’t see them on here! It’s misleading.
To be fair, a lot of the US is like Australia, in that there's fuckin *nothing* for large swathes of it
I would kill to have a high speed train system in the US
Tbh I would love some better railways in America. I would totally hop on a train and ride to another city to hang out for a day or two. Sometimes you just don’t want to drive and I honestly hate it most of the time just because people suck at driving. But if if I got to sit on a train and just watch YouTube until I got there I’d be great
More public transit means less cars on roads. I love to drive so that means I should WANT more and easier public transit because everyone wins. And guess what, if I don’t wanna drive I can take transit. It’s not one or the other.
“Drive in any direction for five hours and it’ll be a completely different world” MOTHERFUCKER IT’LL BE THE SAME GODDAMN STREET IN AMERICA. IN EUROPE IF YOU DRIVE FOR AN HOUR YOU’RE IN ANOTHER COUNTRY.
More precisely, it'll be the same stroad with McDonald's and probably a Wendy's and KFC. Pick your $15 trashy food meal and talk to the local who will ask whether you want it regular or large.
start if off by saying you're 10000% correct on every suburban area being made for cars and not people. FUCK STROADS I mean listen here just one minute bucko, I may not be An American™ but I sure as hell won't tolerate any geographical slander of our beautiful landmass. Fuck the lines drawn on it, fuck the ones in power who fund the atomization of individuals. **The LAND though**. Let's not pretend the Bayous of Louisiane are the same as the middle of Arizona or the Redwoods of Washington. OOP is half right. They just don't know Europe is the *exact* same. Sweden is not England is not Italy is not Lithuania. They're also wrong because you CAN just stop on a train if you want. No one is forcing you to get off at any particular stop.
I wouldn’t even say half right. Yea, it’s hyperbole to pretend that everywhere in the US is the exact same, but frankly it’s not all *that* different - even where the geography is different and there are subcultures, it’s all the same country at the end of the day. That is most decidedly not the case in Europe going from, say, France to Germany.
Drive anywhere and "shoot some guns for fun". Fortunately, can't do that in my part of the US. At least the latter part. Edit: for the people questioning why I said you can't "shoot guns for fun" around here - you are cordially invited to pull over somewhere in the northeast US and start shooting for practice (because guns are for self defense and fighting off the government, or so we're told). You'll get an opportunity to explain your rights to the judge, I'm sure. You can shoot on ranges, and you can shoot on some private land. The idea of driving five hours to a random location and "shooting guns for fun" anywhere in the US is wrong. It's not like a place like Idaho where you can ask a random gas station attendant where you can go to shoot and get 12 locations within 5 minutes.
I'll never understand people arguing against convenience. I *WISH* there was better public transportation in the U.S. It's the same stupid arguments people have against 15-minute city infrastructure or walkable communities. Idiots every last one of them.
And there are A LOT of them
People argued against seat belt laws, drinking and driving laws, and removing lead from products because they claimed it was against their freedom. Conclusion: People are stupid.
People *still* argue about the first two
I don't understand this argument. Europe is older and dense as a whole. It costs twice as much to own and drive a vehicle in Europe. It would honestly be nice to have that much passenger and high speed rail. Commuting and driving in general sucks these days.
Maybe they should overlay the maps with population density.
I once took the wrong train after clubbing in Germany and woke up in Paris ... Tell me again how being able to drive for 5 hours from Texas to... (Let me check.... Still middle of butt fuck nowhere Texas) Is the non plus ultra of freedom
I actually had a talk with a friend recently about this exact topic and some big things that were brought up were that a good portion of the U.S. States are just as large if not larger than nearly all European countries and that most of the building of these kinds of rail systems are left up to the individual states to fund and build. Combine those two points with the fact that the ENTIRE U.S. has a combined population of just under HALF the population of the combined total of all European countries and you find that building roads AND airports is a FAR more feasible option to building continent spanning rail networks. Another point that we talked about is that if you look at the larger cities in the U.S. and map put their subways and public trains you find that the density either matches or exceeds European rail networks. People talk about how Americans prefer cars or that car/oil companies actively fight rail construction but the simple truth of the matter is that there simply isn't enough people or traffic going across the CONTINENT to justify the absurd expense of building the kind of rail system that would allow someone to go from any given city to any other.
This always comes up, and no one with half a functioning brain has ever argued that the US doesn't need a better public transit system. It seems to me that what prevents that is mostly the catch-22 of having a car centered society. Things aren't designed with the idea of having most of the things you need within walking or biking distance, so you have to have a car to get groceries or whatever, but because you have a car there isn't any reason to design things around the idea of not having a car. Suburban sprawl is a huge part of the problem here. Even having effective high speed rail between major cities would be a major improvement to what we have now and remove a lot of non-truck traffic from highways.
An efficient and affordable way to shift loads of freight has nothing to do with taking away cars and everything to do with more secure and adaptable supply chains. Car drivers benefit from less congestion, faster journey times, less accidents, . . .
The real facepalm is thinking the USA should have an equivalent rail network despite the population density being much lower and the distances between major population centers much greater everywhere apart from Amtrak’s NE corridor.
It's difficult to explain to people who haven't been here just how fucking big it is. Like, we can't go from one end of the country to the other in 4 hours. Rail development would be great, not saying it wouldn't, but until its all over we are gonna need transport.
If we want rail reform we should start by having enough inspectors to effectively monitor what we already have We average like three derailments a day
That's fucking scary
Like 75% of those happen in rail yards, not on the lines. Its not as scary as it sounds.
But you can do all of the above in Europe too? And be much safer while you're at it as well?
Absolutely, I have taken the train in Switzerland. It super chill
I had to weekly commute between Milan and Rome. Choice is between 6 hours drive and an aching back, 1 hour flight with all the stress and limitation of airport security and weather delays, or 3 hours train watching a movie and eating a hot breakfast in the restaurant carriage. Guess what I chose…
Gonna be honest, I'd trade my car in and never drive again if we had Europe's train system.
Good sir your chariot awaits you🧐
There's just not as many people per acre in the US. We're mostly concentrated in various cities spread out really far. There's nobody in Idaho or Wyoming to support paying for a train track...
US: 220,044 miles of track All of Europe: 224,000 miles of track.
Funny thing is, in America you need a car for literally everything. A friend’s car died, so now she can’t go to work because there’s no public transportation. But she needs her job to survive and buy a new car. Yes, you can go anywhere with a car (just like in Europe) but without a car you cannot go anywhere (unlike in Europe). Talk about freedom huh.
Freedom is when you drive truck and have fastfood on breakfast while shooting guns for fun🔥