4 ms·

I will speak to the Chicago, Milwaukee, Madison, Minneapolis/St Paul region. Rail is not going to happen until you don't need a car in those cities. Chicago yo

I will speak to the Chicago, Milwaukee, Madison, Minneapolis/St Paul region. Rail is not going to happen until you don't need a car in those cities. Chicago you could do, but the others are not pedestrian friendly. Anyone traveling within that region will have a 95% chance of already owning a car. Unless the train gets you from Chicago to Minneapolis in an hour, people are just going to drive. The risk with car rental and money spent on Uber's isn't worth it. I feel like these types of comments come from people that live in NYC or LA. The rest of the country is so fuckin sparse. Your "walkable cities" idea doesn't make any sense and is completely unfeasible outside of major metro areas which land wise in the US is like 99%.

PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
For the record, I live in a tiny village in New Mexico. Also for the record, the overwhelming majority of the US population lives in metropolitan areas, not rural ones.
rtpg 2y ago
I don't see why Madison doesn't work. I've taken buses to Madison, you can get downtown. You can usually find some transport. Or you can just call a ride share or something! I've done Chicago -> Madison by bus, and honestly prefer it to the plane at least (even from the airport). More comfortable seats and I get out just at a station. High frequency bus lines feel like good indicators of where some trains could work, and it's not like bus services are dead. (Similarly, I did Portland -> Eugene on Amtrak and it was nice and chill! I roadshared to my final destination but I had to get from A to B somehow)