8 ms·

Most countries are going to be bad when compared to Japan. Japan is also the third largest economy.

by Scarbutt 4y ago

TaylorAlexander 4y ago
Yeah I’m in the USA just jealous that they have trains in Spain.
- Aperocky 4y ago
  Interstate is marvelous. US is too big and too sparsely populated both on a large scale and small scale for trains like Europe, Japan and China. There's a part where no one talk about, and that's the infrastructure within the city are not conducive to trains. People get to a train station and they need to get around and unless you're talking about New York they really just need another car. This in comparison to European and Asian cities where your friend can just post you an address and you can use public transit all the way to the last block.
  - wumpus 4y ago
    There are parts of the US, namely the parts where a majority of people live, that are densely-populated enough for trains.
    - Aperocky 4y ago
      You didn't read the local scale problem did you? New England is as populated as Europe but that's moot because you still need a car when you get to the station because suburbia.
      - distances 4y ago
        In European cities you have bus service in trackless suburbia. Tracks are always better but need bus service in addition as practically you won't be building tracks everywhere.
  - mertd 4y ago
    It's a catch 22. The excuse for not building proper transit is sprawl and the excuse for sprawl is not having proper transit. Sprawl always wins in the US.
    - ben-schaaf 4y ago
      It's a very short sighted excuse to use for not building transit. Sure if you don't have a land-use plan, but then why build the transit in the first place. These things always go hand-in-hand; many towns started as a train station.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
  - nine_zeros 4y ago
    US is big is a silly way to reject trains. So are China and India. Both have extensive train networks that allow people to take a train instead of long road trips. The trains are packed. Mobility is super high and abundantly available. Quality may differ but it's improving because people want it. Either way, it keeps cars off the road leading to less pollution, less metal junk and less inflation. US land is amazingly well suited for HSR and cities are well suited for subways. We also have the money. The only problem is political.
    - newaccount2021 4y ago
    - dotnet00 4y ago
      Then again, at least the comparison with India doesn't work given the massive gulf in costs, safety standards and historical context (India's railway network being inherited from when it was a colony and there were less ethical 'restraints' on how to control costs). The US has a massive setup cost problem, any significant infrastructure project takes years of regulatory hurdles and then legal challenges as competitors and NIMBYs try everything they can to slow things down. Thus ending up being way more expensive than countries where they still have slums to ruthlessly tear down or land to seize from small-time farmers to make room for new infrastructure (not to imply that the way it works in the US is much better).
      - nine_zeros 4y ago
        > The US has a massive setup cost problem, any significant infrastructure project takes years of regulatory hurdles and then legal challenges as competitors and NIMBYs try everything they can to slow things down. This is exactly what I meant by political problems. > Thus ending up being way more expensive than countries where they still have slums to ruthlessly tear down or land to seize from small-time farmers to make room for new infrastructure (not to imply that the way it works in the US is much better). India razed slums and farms for trains, the US razed forests and farms for interstates. It's the same thing. Slums in India have a land value to them. The government doesn't get that land for free. Just pay out property owners market value+20% for infrastructure and build the thing that is so direly needed.
  - anonymoushn 4y ago
    The Yamanote Line doesn't run through the countryside. You could just build it around LA, and then build dense housing near stations once people don't need cars...
    - Aperocky 4y ago
      > build dense housing near stations once people don't need cars Ship has sailed, it usually works in the reverse. People aren't coming back from suburbia because there's stations where they don't need cars.
      - anonymoushn 4y ago
        I live in the burbs currently (3 minutes from a train station and convenience store). This station has a decently sized parking lot and people who want to have yards can always find parking there.
- goodpoint 4y ago
  That does not say much about Spain. It's a failure of the US.
hanoz 4y ago
The UK is the fifth largest and almost every public service is a complete omnishambles.
- hn_throwaway_99 4y ago
  I suggest dealing with the US healthcare system, or try taking public transportation in literally any city in the US and compare it to London.
  - bogomipz 4y ago
    Sure, then let's compare NYC to London: The train in NYC runs 24 hours a day 7 days a week. The London Tube stops at midnight. The train in NYC is much much cheaper, it's $2.75 to go anywhere on its almost 400km of track. London's Tube has zone-based pricing. The NYC subway cars are all air-conditioned. The NYC subway cars are far roomier than the Tube. NYCs subway is "cut and cover" and so the stations aren't nearly as deep and quicker to get in and out of.
    - nemo44x 4y ago
      Yeah but our trains are filthy and full of derelict and deranged people. I love the Subway but the Tube has a lot going for it.
    - mattlondon 4y ago
      For what it is worth, the tube does not entirely shut at midnight: https://tfl.gov.uk/campaign/tube-improvements/what-we-are-doing/night-tube https://tfl.gov.uk/campaign/tube-improvements/what-we-are-do... The equivalent cut-and-cover lines have Aircon and are roomy (they are now also entirely walk-through carriages https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4e/Bombardier_S_Stock_Circle_line_Interior_3.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4e/Bombardi...). The deep-level lines though are often uncooled. Public transport in London is notoriously expensive though it is true. One major failing of the NYC subway in my mind is the near total lack of signage. There is like one map per carriage (which is often hidden behind people standing or sitting), and the platforms have almost no signage or maps or directions. You look out the window to see where you are when you pull into a station and there are no signs. Perhaps there is a single letter initial every 30 meters or so... WTF? At least in London the station name is repeated all the way along the platform (along with route maps and network maps and colour-coded signs to other lines etc), there are like 8 maps in every carriage at above-head-height so you can see it over people etc. The express routes in NYC subway are awesome and I wish London had those
franciscop 4y ago
Spain has the 2nd largest high speed train network of the world, only after China (and only in the last few years, it was #1 before). So I don't think it's a problem of investment, it's a problem of how well you maintain things, if you overbuild and then cannot finish or maintain it then it's a problem that has little to do with economy. Another example of high speed train, they forced flight companies to make the Valencia <=> Madrid flights more expensive because people preferred going by plane than by train (faster, easier, way cheaper). Yup, instead of making the train better or cheaper, just force the private companies to be worse so the public infra can compete. Why was it so expensive? Because of it being many times overbudget? Why? Because everyone was taking money.
- Scarbutt 4y ago
  Fair enough. I should have also add that Japan is an engineering powerhouse.
- spaniard89277 4y ago
  As a Spaniard, I think that's highly suspicious of being one of those internal internal consumption narratives of how bad everything is. Do you have any proof of that scheme you're mentioning? I say this because, believe it or not, one of the things that Spain does right is building infrastructure on a budget. There has been corruption cases and places when it has been horrid, but in general is well managed. You'd be surprised how bad it is in many other countries deemed better by your average spaniard. In terms of cost overruns, time, and all kinds of nasty shit.
- dieortin 4y ago
  Flying is artificially cheap to the point the ticket prices make no sense. It's massively subsidized, so it's not really fair to compare it with the train. Anyways, I have to hard disagree on flying being faster and easier than going by train. Flying is a pretty horrendous experience in comparison, and if you account for the time spent in the airport and getting to it it's not faster either.
  - franciscop 4y ago

Most countries are going to be bad when compared to Japan. Japan is also the third largest economy.

TaylorAlexander 4y ago

Yeah I’m in the USA just jealous that they have trains in Spain.

Aperocky 4y ago
Interstate is marvelous. US is too big and too sparsely populated both on a large scale and small scale for trains like Europe, Japan and China. There's a part where no one talk about, and that's the infrastructure within the city are not conducive to trains. People get to a train station and they need to get around and unless you're talking about New York they really just need another car. This in comparison to European and Asian cities where your friend can just post you an address and you can use public transit all the way to the last block.
- wumpus 4y ago
  There are parts of the US, namely the parts where a majority of people live, that are densely-populated enough for trains.
  - Aperocky 4y ago
    You didn't read the local scale problem did you? New England is as populated as Europe but that's moot because you still need a car when you get to the station because suburbia.
    - distances 4y ago
      In European cities you have bus service in trackless suburbia. Tracks are always better but need bus service in addition as practically you won't be building tracks everywhere.
- mertd 4y ago
  It's a catch 22. The excuse for not building proper transit is sprawl and the excuse for sprawl is not having proper transit. Sprawl always wins in the US.
  - ben-schaaf 4y ago
    It's a very short sighted excuse to use for not building transit. Sure if you don't have a land-use plan, but then why build the transit in the first place. These things always go hand-in-hand; many towns started as a train station.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
- nine_zeros 4y ago
  US is big is a silly way to reject trains. So are China and India. Both have extensive train networks that allow people to take a train instead of long road trips. The trains are packed. Mobility is super high and abundantly available. Quality may differ but it's improving because people want it. Either way, it keeps cars off the road leading to less pollution, less metal junk and less inflation. US land is amazingly well suited for HSR and cities are well suited for subways. We also have the money. The only problem is political.
  - newaccount2021 4y ago
  - dotnet00 4y ago
    Then again, at least the comparison with India doesn't work given the massive gulf in costs, safety standards and historical context (India's railway network being inherited from when it was a colony and there were less ethical 'restraints' on how to control costs). The US has a massive setup cost problem, any significant infrastructure project takes years of regulatory hurdles and then legal challenges as competitors and NIMBYs try everything they can to slow things down. Thus ending up being way more expensive than countries where they still have slums to ruthlessly tear down or land to seize from small-time farmers to make room for new infrastructure (not to imply that the way it works in the US is much better).
    - nine_zeros 4y ago
      > The US has a massive setup cost problem, any significant infrastructure project takes years of regulatory hurdles and then legal challenges as competitors and NIMBYs try everything they can to slow things down. This is exactly what I meant by political problems. > Thus ending up being way more expensive than countries where they still have slums to ruthlessly tear down or land to seize from small-time farmers to make room for new infrastructure (not to imply that the way it works in the US is much better). India razed slums and farms for trains, the US razed forests and farms for interstates. It's the same thing. Slums in India have a land value to them. The government doesn't get that land for free. Just pay out property owners market value+20% for infrastructure and build the thing that is so direly needed.
- anonymoushn 4y ago
  The Yamanote Line doesn't run through the countryside. You could just build it around LA, and then build dense housing near stations once people don't need cars...
  - Aperocky 4y ago
    > build dense housing near stations once people don't need cars Ship has sailed, it usually works in the reverse. People aren't coming back from suburbia because there's stations where they don't need cars.
    - anonymoushn 4y ago
      I live in the burbs currently (3 minutes from a train station and convenience store). This station has a decently sized parking lot and people who want to have yards can always find parking there.
goodpoint 4y ago
That does not say much about Spain. It's a failure of the US.

hanoz 4y ago

The UK is the fifth largest and almost every public service is a complete omnishambles.

hn_throwaway_99 4y ago
I suggest dealing with the US healthcare system, or try taking public transportation in literally any city in the US and compare it to London.
- bogomipz 4y ago
  Sure, then let's compare NYC to London: The train in NYC runs 24 hours a day 7 days a week. The London Tube stops at midnight. The train in NYC is much much cheaper, it's $2.75 to go anywhere on its almost 400km of track. London's Tube has zone-based pricing. The NYC subway cars are all air-conditioned. The NYC subway cars are far roomier than the Tube. NYCs subway is "cut and cover" and so the stations aren't nearly as deep and quicker to get in and out of.
  - nemo44x 4y ago
    Yeah but our trains are filthy and full of derelict and deranged people. I love the Subway but the Tube has a lot going for it.
  - mattlondon 4y ago
    For what it is worth, the tube does not entirely shut at midnight: https://tfl.gov.uk/campaign/tube-improvements/what-we-are-doing/night-tube https://tfl.gov.uk/campaign/tube-improvements/what-we-are-do... The equivalent cut-and-cover lines have Aircon and are roomy (they are now also entirely walk-through carriages https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4e/Bombardier_S_Stock_Circle_line_Interior_3.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4e/Bombardi...). The deep-level lines though are often uncooled. Public transport in London is notoriously expensive though it is true. One major failing of the NYC subway in my mind is the near total lack of signage. There is like one map per carriage (which is often hidden behind people standing or sitting), and the platforms have almost no signage or maps or directions. You look out the window to see where you are when you pull into a station and there are no signs. Perhaps there is a single letter initial every 30 meters or so... WTF? At least in London the station name is repeated all the way along the platform (along with route maps and network maps and colour-coded signs to other lines etc), there are like 8 maps in every carriage at above-head-height so you can see it over people etc. The express routes in NYC subway are awesome and I wish London had those

franciscop 4y ago

Spain has the 2nd largest high speed train network of the world, only after China (and only in the last few years, it was #1 before). So I don't think it's a problem of investment, it's a problem of how well you maintain things, if you overbuild and then cannot finish or maintain it then it's a problem that has little to do with economy. Another example of high speed train, they forced flight companies to make the Valencia <=> Madrid flights more expensive because people preferred going by plane than by train (faster, easier, way cheaper). Yup, instead of making the train better or cheaper, just force the private companies to be worse so the public infra can compete. Why was it so expensive? Because of it being many times overbudget? Why? Because everyone was taking money.

Scarbutt 4y ago
Fair enough. I should have also add that Japan is an engineering powerhouse.
spaniard89277 4y ago
As a Spaniard, I think that's highly suspicious of being one of those internal internal consumption narratives of how bad everything is. Do you have any proof of that scheme you're mentioning? I say this because, believe it or not, one of the things that Spain does right is building infrastructure on a budget. There has been corruption cases and places when it has been horrid, but in general is well managed. You'd be surprised how bad it is in many other countries deemed better by your average spaniard. In terms of cost overruns, time, and all kinds of nasty shit.
dieortin 4y ago
Flying is artificially cheap to the point the ticket prices make no sense. It's massively subsidized, so it's not really fair to compare it with the train. Anyways, I have to hard disagree on flying being faster and easier than going by train. Flying is a pretty horrendous experience in comparison, and if you account for the time spent in the airport and getting to it it's not faster either.
- franciscop 4y ago