4 ms·
I mean, absolute statements like yours can be easily disproven. If carbon is taxed, gasoline or kerosene becomes expensive, a rail system is justified for cost.
by travisporter 7y ago
I mean, absolute statements like yours can be easily disproven. If carbon is taxed, gasoline or kerosene becomes expensive, a rail system is justified for cost.
So you’re just saying give up on the dream, its too Late. Commercial rail is expensive, too slow.
Several big cities can be interconnected in a profitable way if NIMBYism changes. Why argue about an extensive rail network if even big cities like Houston and Dallas don’t have rail?
- microcolonel 7y ago> Why argue about an extensive rail network if even big cities like Houston and Dallas don’t have rail? Because the topic at hand is Amtrak, the U.S's national long-haul rail network, not the local mass transit operators of Houston and Dallas. This is why I contrasted the relatively useful short rail lines in Ontario, and in particularly their most useful legs, with long-haul rail networks like Amtrak and Via.
- Gibbon1 7y ago> Several big cities can be interconnected in a profitable way if NIMBYism changes. It's not even NIMBYism. Consider the utter hate that California's high speed rail gets on HN despite very much no one being negatively effected by it. Then consider what a freeway does when it's run through a city.