4 ms·

> longer they will use trains There isn't really any data backing up this claim. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/w/edn-20230918-1 htt

by qwytw 3y ago

> longer they will use trains There isn't really any data backing up this claim. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/w/edn-20230918-1 https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/w/e... Planes are much popular and this data seems to include commuters so the proportion of people travelling medium to long distances by train is much lower (and most medium/intercity travel is obviously usually done by car and not trains..) Amongst other significant issues (e.g. cross border travel) high-speed trains tend to be quite expensive, so unless you're travelling alone a car is usually cheaper.

AnthonyMouse 3y ago
This is what I still can't comprehend about Amtrak. I priced out a bus trip to a few states away and it was <$40. Amtrak cost more than a plane ticket. Is it astonishingly overpriced because nobody uses it and then nobody uses it because it's astonishingly overpriced?
- coliveira 3y ago
  Train systems require heavy government investment until they can (maybe) produce any profit. But the same is true for other transportation systems: the auto industry is also heavily subsidized at all levels in the US, you just don't hear the numbers.
  - rayiner 3y ago
    Amtrak is heavily subsidized: the federal government pays for its capital expenses (tracks, tunnels, etc); Amtrak is expected to cover its operating expenses (employees, etc). Very common arrangement all over the world.
- ambichook 3y ago
  you can fly several states over for $40? damn, if i were to fly from, say melbourne to sydney, capital cities of neighboring states, it'd be at minimum $150 AUD (~$100 USD) round trip. interstate travel is way more accessible there huh?
  - nkurz 3y ago
    I think you misread him. He was said that the bus (ground transport) was $40, and that the train (Amtrak) was more than a plane. He didn't say how much the plane cost. Your $100 USD for a short flight is probably the low end of a reasonable estimate here in the US too.
    - ambichook 3y ago
      ah, yes i see that now, my bad :)
      - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
        It's not really that different though. Google is showing me a round trip flight between New York and Miami for $55. Amtrak wants more than four times that, and it's 27 hours each way instead of 3. I feel like the premise of a train is that it costs less than a plane and uses less fuel per passenger, so it should be slower but have the countervailing advantage of being less expensive. That is not what I'm observing.
  - Symbiote 3y ago
    In Europe, yes. https://www.ryanair.com/gb/en/lp/promotion/getaways https://www.ryanair.com/gb/en/lp/promotion/getaways That page shows me flights to Bulgaria, France and Italy for around €25. It is more like €50 if you aren't flexible, and more again if you need business-friendly times.
    - ambichook 3y ago
      fascinating! i would assume then that has an impact on the culture in europe as to how far is considered a "long" drive then, it never occurred to me that it could be that flights are so cheap, i always assumed the main reason for the difference in attitude was just because the countries were so much smaller and therefore local cultural differences became apparent much sooner!
    - cycomanic 3y ago

by qwytw 3y ago

AnthonyMouse 3y ago

This is what I still can't comprehend about Amtrak. I priced out a bus trip to a few states away and it was <$40. Amtrak cost more than a plane ticket. Is it astonishingly overpriced because nobody uses it and then nobody uses it because it's astonishingly overpriced?

coliveira 3y ago
Train systems require heavy government investment until they can (maybe) produce any profit. But the same is true for other transportation systems: the auto industry is also heavily subsidized at all levels in the US, you just don't hear the numbers.
- rayiner 3y ago
  Amtrak is heavily subsidized: the federal government pays for its capital expenses (tracks, tunnels, etc); Amtrak is expected to cover its operating expenses (employees, etc). Very common arrangement all over the world.
ambichook 3y ago
you can fly several states over for $40? damn, if i were to fly from, say melbourne to sydney, capital cities of neighboring states, it'd be at minimum $150 AUD (~$100 USD) round trip. interstate travel is way more accessible there huh?
- nkurz 3y ago
  I think you misread him. He was said that the bus (ground transport) was $40, and that the train (Amtrak) was more than a plane. He didn't say how much the plane cost. Your $100 USD for a short flight is probably the low end of a reasonable estimate here in the US too.
  - ambichook 3y ago
    ah, yes i see that now, my bad :)
    - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
      It's not really that different though. Google is showing me a round trip flight between New York and Miami for $55. Amtrak wants more than four times that, and it's 27 hours each way instead of 3. I feel like the premise of a train is that it costs less than a plane and uses less fuel per passenger, so it should be slower but have the countervailing advantage of being less expensive. That is not what I'm observing.
- Symbiote 3y ago
  In Europe, yes. https://www.ryanair.com/gb/en/lp/promotion/getaways https://www.ryanair.com/gb/en/lp/promotion/getaways That page shows me flights to Bulgaria, France and Italy for around €25. It is more like €50 if you aren't flexible, and more again if you need business-friendly times.
  - ambichook 3y ago
    fascinating! i would assume then that has an impact on the culture in europe as to how far is considered a "long" drive then, it never occurred to me that it could be that flights are so cheap, i always assumed the main reason for the difference in attitude was just because the countries were so much smaller and therefore local cultural differences became apparent much sooner!
  - cycomanic 3y ago