5 ms·

Quality of life also doesn't cost money. Road infrastructure in the United States might as well be a form of digging holes and then refilling it back up again.

• wombatpm 2y ago
  I think you fail to grasp just how big the US is. Driving from Chicago to Minneapolis is ~430 miles/ 6.5 hours depending on weather and traffic. Every 10 miles or so there is an exit and usually some small town. Every 50 to 100 miles a bigger town. As I recall, after the Chicago suburbs you hit Rockford, Janesville, Madison, Baraboo, Tomah, Eau Claire, Menominee, and Hudson before you get to the St Paul collar communities. So 9 stops on on a single track running between two major cities, with only 1600 more miles to Seattle. And while the distance between stops increase, the population greatly decreases as you head west. Now road construction could be better. Because while Illinois has 300k lane-miles of road, it seems like they only have 200k of asphalt and 100k under construction at any given point in time.
  • Jensson 2y ago
    Scandinavia is sparser than USA and as large as the larger populated states, still has asphalted roads and public stuff even up north.
    • spiderfarmer 2y ago
      American exceptionalism at its finest.
    • jandrese 2y ago
      This is a bit misleading as those countries tend to have the vast majority of the population crowded into a handful of cities that are fairly close together and then a vast untamed wilderness where close to nobody lives. It's easy(ish) to have rail between Oslo and Bergen, less practical to extend that rail to Oldervik.
  • kiba 2y ago
    I think you fail to grasp just how big the US is. Driving from Chicago to Minneapolis is ~430 miles/ 6.5 hours depending on weather and traffic. Every 10 miles or so there is an exit and usually some small town. Every 50 to 100 miles a bigger town. Why do people trot this out every time? Driving or traveling across the US isn't particularly relevant to most people's life experience. Ok, I'll bite. Yes, the United States is big, but some areas are more dense than other and would need good heavy investment in public transit infrastructure. For example, the north eastern corridor would in particular benefit from investment in true high speed rail. There's also the need for investment in freight infrastructure, especially if we want to take off more trucks off the road. This is a safety benefit too. Less vehicles on the roads just mean less people risking their neck. Now let's talk more local public transit. Atlanta for example, really need to expand heavy rail. Traffic there is one of the worst in the country. MARTA at time outpaces cars, even with all the stops they have to make. Rather, a lot of time is eaten up just waiting for the train. A more frequent schedule would help here, but Georgia would need to actually contribute funding to make this possible. If they extend it more into the surburb, I would have less of an incentive to move. As now, I am considering moving because of how frequent I commute into Atlanta.
    • Workaccount2 2y ago
      Public transit falls apart when you realize that less traffic on the roads makes driving a car that much more desirable.
      • Jensson 2y ago
        Public transit is also more desirable the less it is used, having several seats to yourself in rush hour would make way more people want to use it.
    • readthenotes1 2y ago
      Without leaving town, I can drive nearly 200km on any given weekend to visit friends. It is common for me to go 50km. With the suburb architecture of many US cities, local rail is nearly irrelevant outside the city center