3 ms·

This is a false conspiracy narrative that belongs on Reddit in the r/fuckcars filter bubble. Sure, the automotive industry stood to benefit from the decline of

This is a false conspiracy narrative that belongs on Reddit in the r/fuckcars filter bubble. Sure, the automotive industry stood to benefit from the decline of rail travel in the US. But they didn’t really need to do anything for that to happen on its own. Reality is far less interesting than that. Turns out when you have tons of fertile land, even pre-industrialization your population tends to spread out a bit (the vast majority of Americans used to be farmers). Today the US has 3-5X less population density than any country with high speed rail. Autos saw massive success in the US due to this fact, and their prevalence reduced the demand for rail travel as a side effect, it wasn’t some top down evil conspiracy. It’s fun to blame everything on evil big business or evil big government, but it’s also important to look at the first principles and base properties of the issue at hand first.

rebolek 2y ago
While you're right about average density, there are some spots with much higher density population that could certainly benefit from high speed train.
sdenton4 2y ago
Here's the source. There were actual-court cases which found that oil and car manufacturers conspired to monopolize and convert local public transit to buses from rail. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_conspiracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_consp... "Between 1938 and 1950, National City Lines and its subsidiaries, American City Lines and Pacific City Lines—with investment from GM, Firestone Tire, Standard Oil of California (through a subsidiary), Federal Engineering, Phillips Petroleum, and Mack Trucks—gained control of additional transit systems in about 25 cities.[a] Systems included St. Louis, Baltimore, Los Angeles, and Oakland. NCL often converted streetcars to bus operations in that period, although electric traction was preserved or expanded in some locations. Other systems, such as San Diego's, were converted by outgrowths of the City Lines. Most of the companies involved were convicted in 1949 of conspiracy to monopolize interstate commerce in the sale of buses, fuel, and supplies to NCL subsidiaries, but were acquitted of conspiring to monopolize the transit industry." This history also plays a large role in "Who Framed Roger Rabbit," as a bit of fun bonus lore...
- voidfunc 2y ago
  Street cars != Intercity Rail Also I'd argue street cars are way worse than busses which have route flexibility. The bigger problem is Americans don't like being around other Americans and really don't like public transit. It's not some giant conspiracy.
  - lukan 2y ago
    "and really don't like public transit." I don't like bad public transit either. "Americans don't like being around other Americans " There could be the option of having personal cabins for yourself.
  - lmm 2y ago
    > Street cars != Intercity Rail No, but the two feed into each other. Intercity rail loses most of its advantages if you have to hire a car at the destination. > Also I'd argue street cars are way worse than busses which have route flexibility. They're better for that very reason. You can move somewhere with a decent commute and know that the streetcar isn't going to disappear at the stroke of a pen.
    - emchammer 2y ago
      I know that you were talking about individual commutes here. The city of Oslo, Norway was considering having a shared trunk in one corner, where the metro, the streetcar, and the intercity rail all shared a stretch of track. I believe it was to make efficient use of existing right-of-way. I think that there were problems due to electrification (750 V vs 15 kV) and other political problems. There is a different section in Oslo where the streetcar and metro share a stretch of track using a clever interlocking.
- FredPret 2y ago
  Local public transit in the US is a very different beast to getting across the country. Manhattan may have high population density, and the public transit that goes with it; but building passenger rail thousands of miles to the other side of a sparsely populated continent just doesn’t add up in the same way.
drtgh 2y ago
https://jalopnik.com/did-musk-propose-hyperloop-to-stop-california-high-spee-1849402460 https://jalopnik.com/did-musk-propose-hyperloop-to-stop-cali... At the time, it seemed that Musk had dished out the Hyperloop proposal just to make the public and legislators rethink the high-speed train. He didn’t actually intend to build the thing. It was more that he wanted to show people that more creative ideas were out there for things that might actually solve problems and push the state forward. With any luck, the high-speed rail would be canceled. Musk said as much to me [Ashlee Vance] during a series of e-mails and phone calls leading up to the announcement.
- pembrook 2y ago
  Ahh the smoking gun...another conspiracy theory? Trying to convince internet leftists that a cabal of Evil Capitalists are not behind all of the worlds ills is like trying to convince internet right wingers that most vaccines work.
  - drtgh 2y ago
    Left, right, does such a dichotomy even matter? An influential person admitted that he had interfered the development of the high-speed railway at US with a vaporware project, which reported to him juicy economic revenues generated by investments and subsidies from all over the world. Just with vaporware. Should people think that this kind of interference does not happen with influential pockets because you call it a conspiracy, while they call it just business?
  - BlarfMcFlarf 2y ago
    I don’t really care what is in Elons heart. The lesson learned is the same regardless: ignore the nonsense gadgetbahns dreamed up by business people and focus on the real proven technologies in use already around to world.
wishinghand 2y ago
I’d take this comment more seriously if there weren’t car companies that bought up rail networks and shut them down.
Panzer04 2y ago
For what it's worth, I somewhat agree. High speed rail in particular is super expensive, and airplanes are surprisingly cheap and flexible in comparison.
epolanski 2y ago
I kinda agree, except on the car part, because cars dominate even densely populated areas where trams, metros and buses should.
- geraldwhen 2y ago
  You haven’t lived until you’ve been assaulted by a homeless person on a bus in the US! Buses are a joke. We cannot have public transit here without security to match, like at airports.
  - epolanski 2y ago
    US has a huge social problem that spills into a security one. Quite unsurprisingly Americans end up isolating from each other in suburbs, often gated neighborhoods with private schools, cars and live overall miserable and unhappy lives.
    - rhapsodic 2y ago
      [dead]
PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
> Today the US has 3-5X less population density than any country with high speed rail. This may be true when averaged across the entire country (or even just the lower 48). But it is absolutely not true if you consider various zones of the country as candidates for good rail service. Several such zones exist, among them: 1. the north east corridor, perhaps one of the largest and densest conurbations in the world 2. the roughly rectangular shape formed with the NW corner in Minneapolis, the NW corner in Milwaukee, the SE corner in Detroit and SW corner in <wherever the hell that is> 3. The triangle in Texas formed by Dallas/Ft. Worth, Austin and San Antonio All 3 have higher population densities than those found in non-urban parts of Europe; the latter have good to excellent train service, but none of these 3 do.
- pembrook 2y ago
  The problem is the equivalent driving times aren't crazy on those routes either though. When you factor in that you need a car in both your departing city and destination city (except for NYC), AND the fact that nearly every household in those regions owns one or multiple cars (which is not true in higher density/higher urbanization countries)...it begins to not make sense especially given the massive upfront cost of construction.
  - mnky9800n 2y ago
    You highlighted it. The real problem is when you get somewhere you still need a car.
    - mitthrowaway2 2y ago
      It's possible that would gradually start to change, starting around rail stations.
      - mnky9800n 2y ago
        That requires the area around rail stations to be built for pedestrians and bicycles, not cars. That doesn’t seem to be the case in many places in America.
aziaziazi 2y ago
I don’t understand the density argument: HST aren’t supposed to connect every places, that’s totally ineffective. Instead you build rails between major hubs (those that got the biggest airports usually) and add stops on some medium cities that happen to be on the way. It serves those living close enough of the connected cities that want to go close enough to another connected city. _close enough_ depends on the local connection options like regional trains, bus, bikes, trams… and if there’s nothing you just grab a cab or rental car. The city of departure can be reached with your own personal car which is usually a bit cheaper and faster (therefore more range). Most travels destination are big cities or close enough (business, tourism…). Rail planing is a Pareto game.
- pembrook 2y ago
  If you ran high speed rail between the two most populated cities in the US (NYC and LA), it'd be a 14 hour journey. And there's not that many conveniently placed major cities along the way where it even makes sense to add more than a few stops. I know we have a lot of rail enthusiasts here, but the average person tends not to like being stuck in a tube for 14 hours...even if that tube is substantially nicer and more roomy than an airplane. Let's not even talk about the cost of constructing that route.
  - mitthrowaway2 2y ago
    I don't think anyone is proposing to start with a NY to LA HSR line. It's more like NY to DC, LA to SF, and maybe expand from there little by little.
  - mnky9800n 2y ago
    Everyone wants to think about how practical things are. A high speed sleeper train across America would be cool. People should do more cool shit.
thfuran 2y ago
>the vast majority of Americans used to be farmers The vast majority of every agricultural society used to be farmers.

rebolek 2y ago

While you're right about average density, there are some spots with much higher density population that could certainly benefit from high speed train.

sdenton4 2y ago

Here's the source. There were actual-court cases which found that oil and car manufacturers conspired to monopolize and convert local public transit to buses from rail. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_conspiracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_consp... "Between 1938 and 1950, National City Lines and its subsidiaries, American City Lines and Pacific City Lines—with investment from GM, Firestone Tire, Standard Oil of California (through a subsidiary), Federal Engineering, Phillips Petroleum, and Mack Trucks—gained control of additional transit systems in about 25 cities.[a] Systems included St. Louis, Baltimore, Los Angeles, and Oakland. NCL often converted streetcars to bus operations in that period, although electric traction was preserved or expanded in some locations. Other systems, such as San Diego's, were converted by outgrowths of the City Lines. Most of the companies involved were convicted in 1949 of conspiracy to monopolize interstate commerce in the sale of buses, fuel, and supplies to NCL subsidiaries, but were acquitted of conspiring to monopolize the transit industry." This history also plays a large role in "Who Framed Roger Rabbit," as a bit of fun bonus lore...

voidfunc 2y ago
Street cars != Intercity Rail Also I'd argue street cars are way worse than busses which have route flexibility. The bigger problem is Americans don't like being around other Americans and really don't like public transit. It's not some giant conspiracy.
- lukan 2y ago
  "and really don't like public transit." I don't like bad public transit either. "Americans don't like being around other Americans " There could be the option of having personal cabins for yourself.
- lmm 2y ago
  > Street cars != Intercity Rail No, but the two feed into each other. Intercity rail loses most of its advantages if you have to hire a car at the destination. > Also I'd argue street cars are way worse than busses which have route flexibility. They're better for that very reason. You can move somewhere with a decent commute and know that the streetcar isn't going to disappear at the stroke of a pen.
  - emchammer 2y ago
    I know that you were talking about individual commutes here. The city of Oslo, Norway was considering having a shared trunk in one corner, where the metro, the streetcar, and the intercity rail all shared a stretch of track. I believe it was to make efficient use of existing right-of-way. I think that there were problems due to electrification (750 V vs 15 kV) and other political problems. There is a different section in Oslo where the streetcar and metro share a stretch of track using a clever interlocking.
FredPret 2y ago
Local public transit in the US is a very different beast to getting across the country. Manhattan may have high population density, and the public transit that goes with it; but building passenger rail thousands of miles to the other side of a sparsely populated continent just doesn’t add up in the same way.

drtgh 2y ago

https://jalopnik.com/did-musk-propose-hyperloop-to-stop-california-high-spee-1849402460 https://jalopnik.com/did-musk-propose-hyperloop-to-stop-cali... At the time, it seemed that Musk had dished out the Hyperloop proposal just to make the public and legislators rethink the high-speed train. He didn’t actually intend to build the thing. It was more that he wanted to show people that more creative ideas were out there for things that might actually solve problems and push the state forward. With any luck, the high-speed rail would be canceled. Musk said as much to me [Ashlee Vance] during a series of e-mails and phone calls leading up to the announcement.

pembrook 2y ago
Ahh the smoking gun...another conspiracy theory? Trying to convince internet leftists that a cabal of Evil Capitalists are not behind all of the worlds ills is like trying to convince internet right wingers that most vaccines work.
- drtgh 2y ago
  Left, right, does such a dichotomy even matter? An influential person admitted that he had interfered the development of the high-speed railway at US with a vaporware project, which reported to him juicy economic revenues generated by investments and subsidies from all over the world. Just with vaporware. Should people think that this kind of interference does not happen with influential pockets because you call it a conspiracy, while they call it just business?
- BlarfMcFlarf 2y ago
  I don’t really care what is in Elons heart. The lesson learned is the same regardless: ignore the nonsense gadgetbahns dreamed up by business people and focus on the real proven technologies in use already around to world.

wishinghand 2y ago

I’d take this comment more seriously if there weren’t car companies that bought up rail networks and shut them down.

Panzer04 2y ago

For what it's worth, I somewhat agree. High speed rail in particular is super expensive, and airplanes are surprisingly cheap and flexible in comparison.

epolanski 2y ago

I kinda agree, except on the car part, because cars dominate even densely populated areas where trams, metros and buses should.

geraldwhen 2y ago
You haven’t lived until you’ve been assaulted by a homeless person on a bus in the US! Buses are a joke. We cannot have public transit here without security to match, like at airports.
- epolanski 2y ago
  US has a huge social problem that spills into a security one. Quite unsurprisingly Americans end up isolating from each other in suburbs, often gated neighborhoods with private schools, cars and live overall miserable and unhappy lives.
  - rhapsodic 2y ago
    [dead]

PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago

> Today the US has 3-5X less population density than any country with high speed rail. This may be true when averaged across the entire country (or even just the lower 48). But it is absolutely not true if you consider various zones of the country as candidates for good rail service. Several such zones exist, among them: 1. the north east corridor, perhaps one of the largest and densest conurbations in the world 2. the roughly rectangular shape formed with the NW corner in Minneapolis, the NW corner in Milwaukee, the SE corner in Detroit and SW corner in <wherever the hell that is> 3. The triangle in Texas formed by Dallas/Ft. Worth, Austin and San Antonio All 3 have higher population densities than those found in non-urban parts of Europe; the latter have good to excellent train service, but none of these 3 do.

pembrook 2y ago
The problem is the equivalent driving times aren't crazy on those routes either though. When you factor in that you need a car in both your departing city and destination city (except for NYC), AND the fact that nearly every household in those regions owns one or multiple cars (which is not true in higher density/higher urbanization countries)...it begins to not make sense especially given the massive upfront cost of construction.
- mnky9800n 2y ago
  You highlighted it. The real problem is when you get somewhere you still need a car.
  - mitthrowaway2 2y ago
    It's possible that would gradually start to change, starting around rail stations.
    - mnky9800n 2y ago
      That requires the area around rail stations to be built for pedestrians and bicycles, not cars. That doesn’t seem to be the case in many places in America.

aziaziazi 2y ago

I don’t understand the density argument: HST aren’t supposed to connect every places, that’s totally ineffective. Instead you build rails between major hubs (those that got the biggest airports usually) and add stops on some medium cities that happen to be on the way. It serves those living close enough of the connected cities that want to go close enough to another connected city. _close enough_ depends on the local connection options like regional trains, bus, bikes, trams… and if there’s nothing you just grab a cab or rental car. The city of departure can be reached with your own personal car which is usually a bit cheaper and faster (therefore more range). Most travels destination are big cities or close enough (business, tourism…). Rail planing is a Pareto game.

pembrook 2y ago
If you ran high speed rail between the two most populated cities in the US (NYC and LA), it'd be a 14 hour journey. And there's not that many conveniently placed major cities along the way where it even makes sense to add more than a few stops. I know we have a lot of rail enthusiasts here, but the average person tends not to like being stuck in a tube for 14 hours...even if that tube is substantially nicer and more roomy than an airplane. Let's not even talk about the cost of constructing that route.
- mitthrowaway2 2y ago
  I don't think anyone is proposing to start with a NY to LA HSR line. It's more like NY to DC, LA to SF, and maybe expand from there little by little.
- mnky9800n 2y ago
  Everyone wants to think about how practical things are. A high speed sleeper train across America would be cool. People should do more cool shit.

thfuran 2y ago

>the vast majority of Americans used to be farmers The vast majority of every agricultural society used to be farmers.