5 ms·

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 par

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.

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.