This again? The answer is no one knows. We heard legends about it but the prophecy says line go up!
Is there any parody porn about TSA? I want to masturbate to it. As long as it’s not too noncon (like TSA in real life), I don’t really care about the details (I’m ok with any gender, large insertions/fisting, etc.).
TSA exists, therefore…
Honestly I think it’s just sticker shock. I would say that as soon as we get some people would be more willing to get more, but no, because people are hesitant to expand existing rail. MARTA please expand, I beg you. Oh great spirits of public transit, I pray that you soften the NIMBYs’ hearts.
It’s so upsetting that every small town in my state has an old historic train stop but none of them are actually passenger train stops anymore. Once you see it you can’t unsee it. I am 15 minutes from my town’s historic train stop which is a steak house now. My parents are about the same distance from theirs, probably even closer, but it’s a museum or something. Can I just take a walk to the train, ride down, and see them? Nope. Gotta deal with the hellscape that is metro Atlanta traffic.
soften nimby hearts
They can soften the nimbys’ hearts, but ill take them cooked to charcoal if that’s what it takes.
Glorious coal for scenic steam locomotives. It’s a win-win
Still cleaner than even the cleanest electric car, just by physics.
In theory, you could make a carbon-neutral coal-burning steam locomotive. You would need to make synthetic coal out of atmospherically-captured CO2. But in theory it would be possible…
Nope. Thermodynamics.
You’d just be making batteries at that point
And the making wouldn’t be free
Americans can’t do high speed rail because we have aircraft, automobile, and petroleum industries who don’t want us to.
ah, the free market
Exactly!
In the words of someone who decided to not stop 9/11:
You dont fuck with billion dollar corporations.
Americans can’t do trains because it requires public infrastructure (rails), which apparently we are allergic to.
I’ve read articles in the past about high speed trains and/or just new train lines in general would get held up by little towns who didn’t want to lose the commuter traffic since it was the only thing keeping them afloat. There are too many towns that exist literally just to serve motorists and now nobody wants to get rid of them.
That is so odd… I’ve only ridden Amtrak a few times, but I was amazed at how many stops were just some small town that happened to lie on the rail line.
Most small towns that lie on a major highway and are supported by commuter traffic are only going to support a truck stop and a few fast food restaurants at best. Sure, a true high speed rail line would likely only stop in larger metropolitan areas, so those meager income sources may dwindle. But on the other hand if I were a rail commuter in one of those rural/suburban areas, I’d be much more likely to spend some time doing a bit of shopping or lingering in a restaurant during that transition from the train to my car after work, than if I were just passing through in my car.
If i had a 24/7 high speed line to the big city from fuvkoffnowhere, i might choose to live in fuvkoffnowhere
Anybody who is making money off existing transportation is going to be against public transportation. Cab companies lobby against rail everywhere, from city to burbs or airport to downtown. Trucking, for obvious reasons. Passenger rail can carry cargo at night. And of course anybody selling fuel to the mass of cars, the petro industry.
But they could be fucking train stop bucolic paradise exurbs from (bigcity)!
They are just very short sighted. Just lobby to have a station and a have commuter stops and people will flock to those “cheaper” areas to live bringing in tons of tax revenue and boosting the local economy.
Okay but the auto industry isnt paying me to want that and big city people are scary.
These small towns would still be an hour+ away from large cities, even with European speed high speed rail.
Like for me, the nearest “big town” is about 100 miles from me, which is about a 2hr drive. And, at least from some quick googling, it looks like most commuter rail in France tops out at about 100mph. A train would not bring in more people haha
You’d be suprised how many people commute more than an hour by car. The prospect of having affordable housing with more job opportunities will certainly bring in more people.
France spends ~$15 million/mile for high speed commuter rail. Which means that line would cost $1.5 billion.
I don’t think it’s bringing in that many more people. Even when you amortize it across all of the little cities it would go through
Implying the line would stop at the town and not carry on to the next. Also, how much is being spent on building and maintaining freeways?
Even when you amortize it across all of the little cities
Please read the comment in it’s entirety before responding ❤️
Yes but that might take a few years, we need to prop up our shitty city now…
And the construction crews wont eat at our shit hole restaurants.
that is such an absurd and pointless reality
Add some violence, and that’s america!
It’s literally socialism!
it requires cooperation with the project across all of these counties that the railway runs through. and they’re all corrupt or subject to democracy or whatever
Cheaper? come to the UK, where flying can be less expensive than rail
A rail system is expensive, but the alternatives are even more expensive. The roads cost more to maintain and fuck do i know how planes keep getting cheaper. Maybe no tax and city funding?
You guys pay to get railed in UK?
woah i wouldn’t pay for that
Yeah i got used to TSA sexually assulting me just to get to the to my plane
And you’d miss it, right?
Doesn’t Europe have an extensive passenger train network?
Also, I recently rode on Amtrak for a long trip from Columbia, SC to Baltimore, MD. This was my first time on any kind of train other than a subway or metro line. It had its drawbacks (incredibly long travel time and delays), but I always felt safe, and I had a lot more room than I would have had on any flight. The major drawbacks where the seats were somewhat uncomfortable and things like that are largely due to the fact that the cars were pretty old, and not inherent to train travel if it was properly maintained. The cost was much less, and the free parking was such a great bonus.
Also, I recently rode on Amtrak for a long trip from Columbia, SC to Baltimore, MD. This was my first time on any kind of train other than a subway or metro line. It had its drawbacks (incredibly long travel time and delays)
I thought about taking an Amtrak to Boston for a trip since it was a vacation and I wasn’t in a huge rush travel wise. By “incredibly long travel time” in my case it would have gone from ~3 hours (two roughly one hour flights with a very short layover you’ve got to haul ass through because for some reason the relevant gates are both at the far ends of different concourses at Dulles) to about a day. Wasn’t in a rush, but that’s a bit too far to the other extreme.
Europe has an extensive passenger train network, but most of it is not high speed rail.
I looked on travelling from Madrid to Paris and it takes 2 hours if you fly (and then some time before for travelling from the city center to the airport, luggage check-in etc.), 11 hours with train and 13.5 hours with car. I think there are high speed rails between Madrid and Barcelona and in France, but still it takes that long time. The cost is similar.
Trains are really good but they have limitations, each type of travel has its advantages.
When I checked how long distance it was between Columbia, SC and Baltimore, MD I realised it was much shorter than Madrid - Paris. So I checked Munich - Paris instead which is only a 10 km longer than Columbus - Baltimore. It takes 7 hours with train and 8.5 - 9 hours with car. The flight takes 1 hour 35 minutes but the estimated time for travelling from central Munich to the airport, transfer time, flight, transfer and travel to central Paris is 5 hours.
With delays, my actual time was around 11 hours. The last leg, from Washington, DC to Baltimore was actually on high speed commuter rail, and that was phenomenal. The cars were newer and the speed was far greater. I imagine if most traffic in the northeast US is like that, it’s actually pretty good.
Thanks for the European info. It’s interesting to know we have similar challenges. I would think, though, that high speed rail would be easier to implement in Europe since you don’t seem to have as many people stuck on automobile culture as we do in North America. However, I could see politics being an issue, wherever you go for various reasons.
Doesn’t Europe have an extensive passenger train network?
Yes and no. It depends on which part of Europe you are in.
It’s a bit like that in the States, with a lot of the infrastructure appearing to be concentrated in the Northeast.
Where there are lots of people close together, weird how that works…
No. Used to be everywhere. That’s just where people held onto it after.
It does, though there are some issues with track sizes that are being solved here and there every 10 years. Depends on what someone means by “high speed rail” though, since most people think “maglev” as if it isn’t almost the same bullcrap as hyperloop in terms of viability.
Why would Americans care about trains when they’re gonna be a billionaire any day now and have their own private jet?
/s
They’ll only be a billionaire if they pull themselves up by their bootstraps.
I live in South Korea and HSRs are pretty much the only mode of (intercity) transportation that is relevant. Buses take too long, planes are expensive, while HSR(KTX)s are marginally cheaper than buses and take about ⅔ of a time.
Of course, our country’s much much smaller than US/Canada so even the farthest lane takes only about 2.5 hours. It’s pretty cool.
Meanwhile, right wing parties in Quebec are fighting against a tramway project in Quebec city, that the entire country agreed to pay for, for which we have already invested half a billion, build stations, etc. They call it “War on cars”.
Where do I enlist?
Honest fuck this.
So you love driving and more people on the road will get off the road and take the train. It means you can drive even more! Why wouldn’t you want that.
Because the joy of driving isnt getting there fast or the union of man and machine or anything like that.
It’s fucking up other people’s shit.
Because they don’t give a shit about driving? They care a lot more about their family members that own car dealerships, or are involved with the petrochemical industry.
Or they saw that American rightwing grifters talk like this so they are cargo culting the fuck out?
The US has been fighting for years to put a high speed rail in between DC and New York. Every right-wing neighborhood in between is throwing signs out stop the maglev.
I mean, some of this is just silly and entirely based on the locations involved. For instance, a flight from Chicago to Florida is going to be cheaper and faster than Rail, and you’re not going to just hop off wherever the hell you want. And no you can’t just hop on the next one, you miss your train departure and you’re SOL.
I do also question the “safety” aspect. I’m pretty sure both trains and planes have extremely high safety rates, and are pretty much on par with each other.
Also… why is “on the ground” a bullet point? You’re on the ground 99.9% of your life, you telling me it’s not cool as shit to be flying through the air?
would suck tho
As it’s run now, yes.
Because rail is the abused bastard and air travel has the government pay for most of it’s everything.
Cars too. The government buys your roads, your gas, your parking, and part of your car for you. Only trains need to more than vaguely gesture at paying their own way in this country.
Yes, the theoretical maximum speed for a plane is faster, but we dont fly supersonic anymore, and supersonic trains still exist.
hop on hop off
As run right now, sure. If we invested half as much in trains as cars and planes? Oh, easily. And even right now, amtrak’s ‘trip insurance’ is basically license to do exactly that. I have used it this way before.
air travel is murdering the planey
Shut the fuck up, hippie
Every time I take an airplane, I feel tired and worn out. I don’t want to do anything for the rest of the day except take a nap.
Trains are no problem.
The main reasons might be relatively low oxygen at altitude (cabins are usually pressurized somewhere between 1/3rd to 1/2 atmosphere) and uncomfortable seats. But I think the whole dreary process of getting on and off the airplane is part of it, too. Train stations are so much more low key, even in large metropolitan areas.
You also don’t have to show up 2 hours in advance to a train station and plan your entire day(or two) around a trip.
I kind of like the thought of me pissing in the train and it travelling 300+ kph sideways and 9.8 m/s² downwards
Train infrastructure is so underfunded (thx oil) that you can still get the fingering at most train stations for a really reasonable fee.
