6 ms·

I certainly wouldn’t, and I’m willing to bet people like me are in the majority. Why waste a day in a train when I can drive for way less cost and stop whereve

I certainly wouldn’t, and I’m willing to bet people like me are in the majority. Why waste a day in a train when I can drive for way less cost and stop wherever I please or fly and get there much faster? Not to mention that if I drive some place Im not worried about transportation locally which would, in most places in the US, require renting a car or paying for ride shares.

theshrike79 6y ago
So you'll rather drive and do nothing else vs sitting in a train with a full restaurant with a bar, comfy chairs, wi-fi and a quiet spot for working[1][2]? I've done multiple 3 hour train trips this way, I'll NEVER choose driving over it. I can sit down and order food from downstairs, it'll be brought to my seat. I've got a quiet spot to work in with an 230V outlet and working Wifi. I can do billable work every minute I'm in the train. I can even close my eyes and take a nap. Compare this to driving, which would take an hour longer, I'd need to be 100% focused on the road all the time, I can't bill my hours, I can't relax. [1] https://www.vr.fi/en/facilities-and-services/working-on-the-train https://www.vr.fi/en/facilities-and-services/working-on-the-... [2] https://www.vr.fi/en/facilities-and-services/upstairs-of-the-restaurant-car https://www.vr.fi/en/facilities-and-services/upstairs-of-the...
- R0b0t1 6y ago
  If you're not billing your transit time you're making a mistake. I've heard of people double billing plane or train transit: one customer put you on the train, and the other customer pays for the work you do on the train.
  - theshrike79 6y ago
    Yep, this was the exact case. I can't bill transit from all clients, but I can still do billable work on the train for other clients. No way to do that while driving.
    - R0b0t1 6y ago
      Maybe I am misunderstanding. Do you drive for free? If you have to drive somewhere that gets billed to the client. This is totally normal, I work in a metro area adjacent to another. If I drive across state the person is paying for that hourly. If I could sit on a train instead someone would be paying to have me on the train, hourly, and if I was doing work that would also be billed hourly (I'd try to do work for the client that made me travel but not always possible).
- plandis 6y ago
  I have never been on a train in the US that is faster than driving and certainly not on a train with food I’d actually want to eat. Perhaps west coast trains are total crap compared to elsewhere in the US but your description doesn’t fit my experience at all. Chronically late trains, bad old seats (albeit better than planes), bad food, no WiFi or spotty at best, slower than a car, more expensive than a car. Plus the most important thing of all is that if you don’t drive you will need to rent a car (which is even more money) or ride share (which can be extremely slow outside of cities or even non-existent) I love public transit within a city but outside of dense cities it doesn’t seem to realistically make sense. My experiences with Amtrak don’t give me confidence in them. I also don’t realistically see building out more rail in the US for any reasonable price so we are stuck with prioritizing freight rail over passenger rail on existing rail.
  - theshrike79 6y ago
    My case was based in Finland. The Inter-city trains are on time every time unless there's an accident of some sort. The food isn't 5-star chef level, but still pretty good for train-food. They even have their own beer brand =) And yes, in most cases trains are faster than cars (Average speed between 100-200km/h depending on the route and train). They could be even faster but that'd require modifying the track so that fast trains don't fall of the tracks when cornering... Amtrak just sucks and needs a complete overhaul, the technology is there, but people refuse to accept it. It's like trying to sell cars to people used to horses, they just want faster horses because they can't fathom the alternative =)
- bluGill 6y ago
  Trains shouldn't have bars or restaurants. They waste space that could have more passangers. Instead it should be easy to get off, grab a sandwich and get on the next one. Or bring your meal with you.
  - theshrike79 5y ago
    Depends on the train of course. If it's a commuter train where people spend 30 minutes max and the trains go every 15 minutes on the same route, then no - it shouldn't have a restaurant in it. But when it's a 2-10 hour trip, of course there should be a place to sit down and buy something to eat or drink.
    - bluGill 5y ago
      Right, the train station. If there isn't another train on 30 minutes or less you don't have enough riders to pay for trains in the first place
      - theshrike79 5y ago
        There is a difference between trains and trains. I think the english language could use a different word for both =) A long-haul passenger train is perfectly capable of paying for itself even if the route isn't going on a 30 minute interval. This is the kind which has all kinds of on-board amenities. Not so much for a local commuter train, with mostly plain seating and maybe a toilet in every other car. This is basically a bus on rails.

theshrike79 6y ago

So you'll rather drive and do nothing else vs sitting in a train with a full restaurant with a bar, comfy chairs, wi-fi and a quiet spot for working[1][2]? I've done multiple 3 hour train trips this way, I'll NEVER choose driving over it. I can sit down and order food from downstairs, it'll be brought to my seat. I've got a quiet spot to work in with an 230V outlet and working Wifi. I can do billable work every minute I'm in the train. I can even close my eyes and take a nap. Compare this to driving, which would take an hour longer, I'd need to be 100% focused on the road all the time, I can't bill my hours, I can't relax. [1] https://www.vr.fi/en/facilities-and-services/working-on-the-train https://www.vr.fi/en/facilities-and-services/working-on-the-... [2] https://www.vr.fi/en/facilities-and-services/upstairs-of-the-restaurant-car https://www.vr.fi/en/facilities-and-services/upstairs-of-the...

R0b0t1 6y ago
If you're not billing your transit time you're making a mistake. I've heard of people double billing plane or train transit: one customer put you on the train, and the other customer pays for the work you do on the train.
- theshrike79 6y ago
  Yep, this was the exact case. I can't bill transit from all clients, but I can still do billable work on the train for other clients. No way to do that while driving.
  - R0b0t1 6y ago
    Maybe I am misunderstanding. Do you drive for free? If you have to drive somewhere that gets billed to the client. This is totally normal, I work in a metro area adjacent to another. If I drive across state the person is paying for that hourly. If I could sit on a train instead someone would be paying to have me on the train, hourly, and if I was doing work that would also be billed hourly (I'd try to do work for the client that made me travel but not always possible).
plandis 6y ago
I have never been on a train in the US that is faster than driving and certainly not on a train with food I’d actually want to eat. Perhaps west coast trains are total crap compared to elsewhere in the US but your description doesn’t fit my experience at all. Chronically late trains, bad old seats (albeit better than planes), bad food, no WiFi or spotty at best, slower than a car, more expensive than a car. Plus the most important thing of all is that if you don’t drive you will need to rent a car (which is even more money) or ride share (which can be extremely slow outside of cities or even non-existent) I love public transit within a city but outside of dense cities it doesn’t seem to realistically make sense. My experiences with Amtrak don’t give me confidence in them. I also don’t realistically see building out more rail in the US for any reasonable price so we are stuck with prioritizing freight rail over passenger rail on existing rail.
- theshrike79 6y ago
  My case was based in Finland. The Inter-city trains are on time every time unless there's an accident of some sort. The food isn't 5-star chef level, but still pretty good for train-food. They even have their own beer brand =) And yes, in most cases trains are faster than cars (Average speed between 100-200km/h depending on the route and train). They could be even faster but that'd require modifying the track so that fast trains don't fall of the tracks when cornering... Amtrak just sucks and needs a complete overhaul, the technology is there, but people refuse to accept it. It's like trying to sell cars to people used to horses, they just want faster horses because they can't fathom the alternative =)
bluGill 6y ago
Trains shouldn't have bars or restaurants. They waste space that could have more passangers. Instead it should be easy to get off, grab a sandwich and get on the next one. Or bring your meal with you.
- theshrike79 5y ago
  Depends on the train of course. If it's a commuter train where people spend 30 minutes max and the trains go every 15 minutes on the same route, then no - it shouldn't have a restaurant in it. But when it's a 2-10 hour trip, of course there should be a place to sit down and buy something to eat or drink.
  - bluGill 5y ago
    Right, the train station. If there isn't another train on 30 minutes or less you don't have enough riders to pay for trains in the first place
    - theshrike79 5y ago
      There is a difference between trains and trains. I think the english language could use a different word for both =) A long-haul passenger train is perfectly capable of paying for itself even if the route isn't going on a 30 minute interval. This is the kind which has all kinds of on-board amenities. Not so much for a local commuter train, with mostly plain seating and maybe a toilet in every other car. This is basically a bus on rails.