"why doesn't america just make trains bro" maybe because in order to traverse a quarter of the width of this country it will take eight hours at full highway speed, and high speed rail (>100mph) is expensive as shit to get right. Amtrak is trying but people would rather just have a car because YOU NEED ONE ANYWAY IF YOU ARE NOT SMACK DAB IN THE MIDDLE OF A CITY. America is fucking huge. A single state can be the size of a full European country.

the only valid use case for rail here has been avoiding traffic in dense metro areas or specific inter city projects which I fully support because who the fuck wants to drive in NYC or Chicago and deal with parking, and there is a good story for hopping between hubs to travel, plus air travel being shaky here makes a stronger case, but I'd still rather just hop in my car and road trip it because it's more fun.

@7666 Also, there's this thing called population density where a station can only serve people within a given radius, and the total number served is dependent on population density within that radius and the ease of the train compared with just driving or flying. But good luck trying to explain that to ubanists.

@7666

>A single state can be the size of a full European country.

yea but like... that's how it works here too bruh

for things other than going to the country next door you take a flight, alternatively a sleeper train if you're okay with delays

you do not need to be able to take a train USA coast-to-coast as something other than some sort of trans siberian express journey for a train network to be valid

@whiteline @7666 and many european rails have had progress visible on google maps instead of meetings where they say if the budget doubles we'll really do it this time, everyone wants rail until it's through their land

@whiteline In your example everything is going to be a flight. Distances between major metro areas can be 6+ hours, even inside the same state, see the difference between LA and SF in California as an example, and why their big train system project is taking forever and taking billions to make.

@becomethewaifu I mean yes but the coastlines are well over a thousand miles long each. Even the concept of "regional" is massive in comparison for what it takes to accomplish in Europe.

@7666 yeah but you don't just connect major metro areas, you connect smaller places as well...

@7666 @whiteline
>see the difference between LA and SF in California as an example, and why their big train system project is taking forever and taking billions to make.
you have to admit part of that is government budget and time mismanagement, like HS2 in Britain.

@whiteline Oh good more money and complexity

@whiteline @7666 Yeah, and then you get to that population center in another state, and you either take an Uber or taxi everywhere (sketchy and pricey) or hope they have good public transportation, which is a crapshoot. And if you have to go somewhere a little more out of the way, then your choices are a Greyhound bus, which is the transportation method of choice for junkie vagrants, or just driving there.

You guys act like train transportation is a foreign concept to us. The railroads are a major part of our country's history, and trains were the transportation method of choice between 1870 and 1950. We just moved on because they don't work well for how the country's structured.

@7666 @whiteline we spend trillions on surveillance and weapons, the least they can do for us paying for all that is give us some trains

@7666 bro doesnt know what a network is

@7666 bro is trying to imply that the reason theres no trains in america isnt just oil and car companies lobbying

@fiore It is partially that but it is also public perception that public transit is for the poor, a much stronger need for "freedom" even if that's partially bullshit (but being able to go wherever whenever is nice), and the extreme costs of subsidizing new rail investments which generally means higher taxes if they can't finally get over the hump of taxing the rich.

Oil will be defeated eventually by EVs or middle east hubris, not by Americans subjugating themselves to a limited set of predetermined destinations and timetables.

@7666 the public perception you talk about is made up of propaganda and corporate sponsorship . public transit done well means progressively more capillar and slower means of transport the further away from big centers you get , true : you can still reaxh most places . and when you have to be somewhere public transit doesmt reach , sure , use a car ! nobody ever implied having functional public transit means sunsetting cars . trains are Just Plain Better tho , and whenever possible i will always prefer it !

@fiore The limits of my enjoyment of trains are in metro areas where they are genuinely easier to deal with. Subways/light rail are great. Commuter rail is fantastic. And I'd like to see intercity rail. But beyond that is where I draw the line, but some people get so uppity about having public transit EVERYWHERE it makes me believe they do it because they either can't drive or can't afford a car.

@7666 i've taken 8h express trains that don't stop for hours on end here. I'm sure the greatest country on earth can figure it out

@7666 what else is there other than high speed intercity railing ?? i cant imagine anything bigger scope than that ?

@fiore @7666

> oil and car companies lobbying

It's a whole lot more than that. All our freight railroad companies originally had passenger transport divisions and they closed them because they were not profitable. We do have the Amtrak, but AFAIK it doesn't even own the rails it rides on.

Now, such lobbying did affect intra-area rail, such as SoCal's old Red Car system, but as soon as people could drive longer distances (using the US and Interstate highway systems) instead of ride the trains, they did.

@lnxw37b2 @7666 i wonder why the one more corporately profitable type of infrastructure got better faster than the kind that would require public investment of public money for the people hmm

@technolyze @7666 @whiteline Just reallocate the budget, the trains will actually have positive returns directly and indirectly over their lifespan unlike all that other nonsense.

@fiore >high speed intercity railing

guffawing at this

@7666 Why does it matter that it takes a (short) while though?

If the train cars are comfortable and configured for multi-day occupation with private compartments, there's no reason that should be a problem.

(Sleeper train compartments are basically mini apartments in some countries.)

Outside of real emergencies, that should be perfectly fine.

@lispi314 nobody wants to do this

@becomethewaifu @7666 the california situation is INSANE

@7666 you see i'm much less "everything needs to be public transit at all time" than the average person here, but just next week i'm traveling to Hamburg, which is 7.5 hrs direct, and i didn't even contemplate doing that with a car. Train's less expensive, faster, leaves me with time to do other shit and i don't have to look for and pay for parking.

having a car is fine and is even usually fun if you don't get stuck in commuter traffic, but pretending that you can't get good or fast rail travel across large distances because "the country is big" is just demonstrably wrong.