5 ms·

Trains are nice on vacations since I don't care about the price and it's a novel experience. It doesn't make sense to do in America since it's more expensive th

Trains are nice on vacations since I don't care about the price and it's a novel experience. It doesn't make sense to do in America since it's more expensive than having people drive and it limits people's freedom to stations instead of where they need to get to.

cenamus 2y ago
More expensive that driving? My public transport ticket for my whole state costs less than 400EUR, (whole country ~1000) while a car would run me around 6000/year, depending on how much I'm driving
- herbst 2y ago
  I am in Switzerland, public transport ticket is $3500 a year for one person. We are 2 and a dog. It's kinda sad, but a car is the WAY cheaper option for us.
  - mike_hearn 2y ago
    Which ticket do you mean? If you're thinking of an adult GA it's actually now ~$4,700/yr :( But, an adult GA is a premium ticket. That buys you unlimited travel on the entire network for a year. Not many travel patterns need that. If you just buy tickets as you need them and especially combined with a Halbtax it's not so bad. Where the crossover between car ownership and using public transport for everything occurs is going to depend a lot on your specific travel patterns and what kind of car you compare to.
    - herbst 2y ago
      That's a lot more than I remember, but doesn't surprise :) You are right tho. If I would live near a bus station that has more than 3 rides a day (which 98% of all Swiss do, rough estimate) I would probably just use a halbtax and a Region specific subscription. But if I use regular SBB tickets for like 10-15 short trips a year you are already getting closer to the GA. Depends on your patterns :)
      - mike_hearn 2y ago
        Hmm what do you define as a short trip? 10 trips/yr at $4700/yr would be $470 per trip, I don't even know how to spend that much by crossing the country: Zurich to Geneva Airport without a halbtax is $114 CHF.
- mplewis9z 2y ago
  And the average EU country is quite a bit smaller than the average US state, along with the EU being more densely populated - public transit certainly has some artificial/political roadblocks in the US, but it’s also fundamentally more challenging and expensive here.
  - vladvasiliu 2y ago
    Even so, at least in France, only major cities have an OK-ish public transit network (when it actually runs). But if you live on the outskirts 'cause you can't afford an apartment in the center? You're SoL. You maybe get a couple buses around rush hour. Hell, even in the Paris region, outside the closest suburbs, there are only a few train lines going into Paris. At best you'll need to ride a bus or two to grab one, but most often you'll take your car.
    - aborsy 2y ago
      Yeah. Public transport works in major metropolitan cities. It doesn’t work outside that.
  - rglullis 2y ago
    > EU country is quite a bit smaller than the average US state You don't need to drive cross the whole state for your daily commute, do you? > along with the EU being more densely populated Reversing cause-and-effect, here. Suburban sprawl happens because of the car-centric development, not the other way around.
    - charcircuit 2y ago
      >You don't need to drive cross the whole state for your daily commute, do you? I've done this before in America. It's over twice as cheap to drive than take a train.
      - rglullis 2y ago
        For your commute? Yeah, I can also take a plane from Germany to England and pay less than what it costs me for the taxi that I will need to get to the airport. Does that mean that flying EasyJet should be considered the most efficient means of transportation? What exactly are you trying to argue, here? - That the cost of one train ticket is higher than the cost of a car trip? - For one single passenger or for a family? - In the US or overall? - Are externalities factored in?
- IshKebab 2y ago
  €6k/year is a crazy price for a car. For me insurance, tax, servicing and depreciation are about £1k/year. And also that's an extremely cheap train ticket. In the UK it would be 10x that easily.
  - rsynnott 2y ago
    … Do you get free petrol?
    - cenamus 2y ago
      Fuel, mandatory insurance, yearly service (also mandatory here), highway tolls, parking fees, usually even the parking space at home, in apartments,... Just goes on and on
  - CalRobert 2y ago
    That depreciation number is extremely suspicious, unless your car is very old/cheap in which case your service number is suspicious (or you value your time at close to 0 GBP per hour). Also, your car has to park somewhere presumably, which uses land, and I assume your car uses fuel (or electricity, but unlikely if your car is that cheap)
    - IshKebab 2y ago
      I bought it for £12k when it was 3 years old (Skoda Octavia) and I'm hoping it will last 20 years at least. Service is like £200, insurance £230, MOT £50, tax £130 or something. Ok maybe more like £1.3k. Still waaaay less than €6k. Park it on the drive. Yeah I wasn't including fuel costs because they depend on how much you drive. I'm probably about at about £500/year at most (I work from home). When I commuted by car it would have been maybe £1k/year (£10/day but I lift shared).
      - rsynnott 2y ago
        Ah, okay, so the deprecation is more "this is what I imagine the deprecation to be" than anything else. You may expect maintenance costs to... increase as it gets older.
- aborsy 2y ago
  Nonsense. First, the money is pretaken from your salary under several categories (taxes, social changes, public transportation tax, and occasional taxes for specific lines). Then, a metro monthly pass is around $100 in Paris and $130 in NYC. In other words, after paying through taxes, you have to pay for tickets at market rates. That’s $1200 for city transport, not covering outer zones or intercity travel (unless you live in densely populated cities that have sufficient transportation, in which case you pay in rent). Then, you pay through wasting time, and other factors I mentioned in my other comment.
r0ckarong 2y ago
The irony of saying this about a place where walking most places is literally dangerous.
ulfw 2y ago
The first argument is BS as you have no idea what a non-existing service would be priced at. Your second argument on the other hand rings true and is the main reason high speed train service in the US makes less sense. Many cities have near-zero infrastructure locally to transport passengers to their final destination. Same goes for airports too though. It's very different for Paris - London where both cities have excellent subway networks or Tokyo - Osaka (ditto) or anywhere within China. The Taiwan HSR is also very successful since it got better connected to local trains including Taoyuan airport.
- charcircuit 2y ago
  For the first point I'm comparing against existing rail. It makes 0 sense for me to use the existing rail. Even when it is being subsidized it's still more expensive than driving.
  - CalRobert 2y ago
    Note that driving is also subsidized.
tiborsaas 2y ago
Driving takes active attention while being on a train liberates your commute/travel hours. That's also a form of freedom.
- arkh 2y ago
  The best is still to not have to commute. Work from Home when your job allows it should be the norm, not the exception. No time lost commuting, no fuel / electricity used to move and roads are less congested for people who have to commute due to their jobs requiring their physical presence.
- socalgal 2y ago
  as someone that just started using Waymo I can take a car without having to give it any attention. I love trains and public transportation in cities with good systems in place and lived without a car for 15 years. but, in areas without that already in place, my prediction would be that self driving cars are going to win. they are already functioning today and the experience is amazing. A good public transit system will take 50 to 70 years here with all the red tape but self driving cars are already here and will expand much faster I’m not judging them as better. I’m just predicting they’ll come first and make it even more challenging to get public transportation funded and approved
  - n4r9 2y ago
    Even for inter-city trips, though? Some quick googling suggests that Waymo costs around $3 per mile. That would have to come way down if you wanted to compete with trains over a thousand or more miles. And you'd still be way slower, and have less ability to stretch your legs, go to the bathroom etc... .
  - nikvaes 2y ago
    For people who are interested in the question whether self-driving cars are the solution to commuting: an video essay of why self-driving cars are worse for a city than public transport: https://youtu.be/040ejWnFkj0?t=1684 https://youtu.be/040ejWnFkj0?t=1684
barrenko 2y ago
[flagged]
sunnyam 2y ago
This mentality is why rail is always destined to fail in the US. That mentality didn't stop China, which has a comparable land area to the continental United States and allows it to benefit from highly efficient cargo operations all over the country. But if you want to keep the France comparison, let's compare a journey from Paris to Marseille with a journey from San Francisco to Los Angeles: Paris to Marseille: - by car: 7h30m (773km/480mi) - by train: 3h11m direct for 94 EUR/103 USD with luggage and WiFi, amongst others San Francisco to Los Angeles: - by car: 6h (613km/381mi) - note that I'm checking the route times at 8:24 BST and so it's night time in the US - hence less traffic. - by train (and bus): 8h30m with a change for 61 EUR/67 USD The SF to LA route covers less distance and requires a change, so the passenger would travel 6h by train and then a further 2h on a bus - and when you compare that to driving it doesn't make any sense to ever pick public transport. I do think there's more to it than just Americans not liking rail travel or preferring their cars. To build significant passenger rail infrastructure requires coordination at state government levels with all the stakeholders; funding; purcahsing land; technology to build modern and efficient railways etc. I don't believe the US has the capability to just build rail anymore - it would require significant investment in skills and manufacturing to increase capability to the point where it will be able to build the type of modern railway they would need to actually be a viable alternative.
- CalRobert 2y ago
  It's agonizingly slow (I used to take it to college in SLO) but between SF and LA you could take the Coast Starlight (you'd BART to Oakland first). It's 12 hours though. https://www.amtrak.com/coast-starlight-train https://www.amtrak.com/coast-starlight-train . I used to take the Chinatown busses and they were faster, or ride share on Craigslist (or, really aging myself here - remember Zimride?)
CalRobert 2y ago
These arguments also apply to planes, which remain popular. Also, not sure how it's more expensive than having people drive. I save 10k+ a year by not owning a car. And I can sit in the train and get work done, have a drink, sleep, whatever - can't do that while driving.

cenamus 2y ago

More expensive that driving? My public transport ticket for my whole state costs less than 400EUR, (whole country ~1000) while a car would run me around 6000/year, depending on how much I'm driving

herbst 2y ago
I am in Switzerland, public transport ticket is $3500 a year for one person. We are 2 and a dog. It's kinda sad, but a car is the WAY cheaper option for us.
- mike_hearn 2y ago
  Which ticket do you mean? If you're thinking of an adult GA it's actually now ~$4,700/yr :( But, an adult GA is a premium ticket. That buys you unlimited travel on the entire network for a year. Not many travel patterns need that. If you just buy tickets as you need them and especially combined with a Halbtax it's not so bad. Where the crossover between car ownership and using public transport for everything occurs is going to depend a lot on your specific travel patterns and what kind of car you compare to.
  - herbst 2y ago
    That's a lot more than I remember, but doesn't surprise :) You are right tho. If I would live near a bus station that has more than 3 rides a day (which 98% of all Swiss do, rough estimate) I would probably just use a halbtax and a Region specific subscription. But if I use regular SBB tickets for like 10-15 short trips a year you are already getting closer to the GA. Depends on your patterns :)
    - mike_hearn 2y ago
      Hmm what do you define as a short trip? 10 trips/yr at $4700/yr would be $470 per trip, I don't even know how to spend that much by crossing the country: Zurich to Geneva Airport without a halbtax is $114 CHF.
mplewis9z 2y ago
And the average EU country is quite a bit smaller than the average US state, along with the EU being more densely populated - public transit certainly has some artificial/political roadblocks in the US, but it’s also fundamentally more challenging and expensive here.
- vladvasiliu 2y ago
  Even so, at least in France, only major cities have an OK-ish public transit network (when it actually runs). But if you live on the outskirts 'cause you can't afford an apartment in the center? You're SoL. You maybe get a couple buses around rush hour. Hell, even in the Paris region, outside the closest suburbs, there are only a few train lines going into Paris. At best you'll need to ride a bus or two to grab one, but most often you'll take your car.
  - aborsy 2y ago
    Yeah. Public transport works in major metropolitan cities. It doesn’t work outside that.
- rglullis 2y ago
  > EU country is quite a bit smaller than the average US state You don't need to drive cross the whole state for your daily commute, do you? > along with the EU being more densely populated Reversing cause-and-effect, here. Suburban sprawl happens because of the car-centric development, not the other way around.
  - charcircuit 2y ago
    >You don't need to drive cross the whole state for your daily commute, do you? I've done this before in America. It's over twice as cheap to drive than take a train.
    - rglullis 2y ago
      For your commute? Yeah, I can also take a plane from Germany to England and pay less than what it costs me for the taxi that I will need to get to the airport. Does that mean that flying EasyJet should be considered the most efficient means of transportation? What exactly are you trying to argue, here? - That the cost of one train ticket is higher than the cost of a car trip? - For one single passenger or for a family? - In the US or overall? - Are externalities factored in?
IshKebab 2y ago
€6k/year is a crazy price for a car. For me insurance, tax, servicing and depreciation are about £1k/year. And also that's an extremely cheap train ticket. In the UK it would be 10x that easily.
- rsynnott 2y ago
  … Do you get free petrol?
  - cenamus 2y ago
    Fuel, mandatory insurance, yearly service (also mandatory here), highway tolls, parking fees, usually even the parking space at home, in apartments,... Just goes on and on
- CalRobert 2y ago
  That depreciation number is extremely suspicious, unless your car is very old/cheap in which case your service number is suspicious (or you value your time at close to 0 GBP per hour). Also, your car has to park somewhere presumably, which uses land, and I assume your car uses fuel (or electricity, but unlikely if your car is that cheap)
  - IshKebab 2y ago
    I bought it for £12k when it was 3 years old (Skoda Octavia) and I'm hoping it will last 20 years at least. Service is like £200, insurance £230, MOT £50, tax £130 or something. Ok maybe more like £1.3k. Still waaaay less than €6k. Park it on the drive. Yeah I wasn't including fuel costs because they depend on how much you drive. I'm probably about at about £500/year at most (I work from home). When I commuted by car it would have been maybe £1k/year (£10/day but I lift shared).
    - rsynnott 2y ago
      Ah, okay, so the deprecation is more "this is what I imagine the deprecation to be" than anything else. You may expect maintenance costs to... increase as it gets older.
aborsy 2y ago
Nonsense. First, the money is pretaken from your salary under several categories (taxes, social changes, public transportation tax, and occasional taxes for specific lines). Then, a metro monthly pass is around $100 in Paris and $130 in NYC. In other words, after paying through taxes, you have to pay for tickets at market rates. That’s $1200 for city transport, not covering outer zones or intercity travel (unless you live in densely populated cities that have sufficient transportation, in which case you pay in rent). Then, you pay through wasting time, and other factors I mentioned in my other comment.

r0ckarong 2y ago

The irony of saying this about a place where walking most places is literally dangerous.

ulfw 2y ago

The first argument is BS as you have no idea what a non-existing service would be priced at. Your second argument on the other hand rings true and is the main reason high speed train service in the US makes less sense. Many cities have near-zero infrastructure locally to transport passengers to their final destination. Same goes for airports too though. It's very different for Paris - London where both cities have excellent subway networks or Tokyo - Osaka (ditto) or anywhere within China. The Taiwan HSR is also very successful since it got better connected to local trains including Taoyuan airport.

charcircuit 2y ago
For the first point I'm comparing against existing rail. It makes 0 sense for me to use the existing rail. Even when it is being subsidized it's still more expensive than driving.
- CalRobert 2y ago
  Note that driving is also subsidized.

tiborsaas 2y ago

Driving takes active attention while being on a train liberates your commute/travel hours. That's also a form of freedom.

arkh 2y ago
The best is still to not have to commute. Work from Home when your job allows it should be the norm, not the exception. No time lost commuting, no fuel / electricity used to move and roads are less congested for people who have to commute due to their jobs requiring their physical presence.
socalgal 2y ago
as someone that just started using Waymo I can take a car without having to give it any attention. I love trains and public transportation in cities with good systems in place and lived without a car for 15 years. but, in areas without that already in place, my prediction would be that self driving cars are going to win. they are already functioning today and the experience is amazing. A good public transit system will take 50 to 70 years here with all the red tape but self driving cars are already here and will expand much faster I’m not judging them as better. I’m just predicting they’ll come first and make it even more challenging to get public transportation funded and approved
- n4r9 2y ago
  Even for inter-city trips, though? Some quick googling suggests that Waymo costs around $3 per mile. That would have to come way down if you wanted to compete with trains over a thousand or more miles. And you'd still be way slower, and have less ability to stretch your legs, go to the bathroom etc... .
- nikvaes 2y ago
  For people who are interested in the question whether self-driving cars are the solution to commuting: an video essay of why self-driving cars are worse for a city than public transport: https://youtu.be/040ejWnFkj0?t=1684 https://youtu.be/040ejWnFkj0?t=1684

barrenko 2y ago

[flagged]

sunnyam 2y ago

This mentality is why rail is always destined to fail in the US. That mentality didn't stop China, which has a comparable land area to the continental United States and allows it to benefit from highly efficient cargo operations all over the country. But if you want to keep the France comparison, let's compare a journey from Paris to Marseille with a journey from San Francisco to Los Angeles: Paris to Marseille: - by car: 7h30m (773km/480mi) - by train: 3h11m direct for 94 EUR/103 USD with luggage and WiFi, amongst others San Francisco to Los Angeles: - by car: 6h (613km/381mi) - note that I'm checking the route times at 8:24 BST and so it's night time in the US - hence less traffic. - by train (and bus): 8h30m with a change for 61 EUR/67 USD The SF to LA route covers less distance and requires a change, so the passenger would travel 6h by train and then a further 2h on a bus - and when you compare that to driving it doesn't make any sense to ever pick public transport. I do think there's more to it than just Americans not liking rail travel or preferring their cars. To build significant passenger rail infrastructure requires coordination at state government levels with all the stakeholders; funding; purcahsing land; technology to build modern and efficient railways etc. I don't believe the US has the capability to just build rail anymore - it would require significant investment in skills and manufacturing to increase capability to the point where it will be able to build the type of modern railway they would need to actually be a viable alternative.

CalRobert 2y ago
It's agonizingly slow (I used to take it to college in SLO) but between SF and LA you could take the Coast Starlight (you'd BART to Oakland first). It's 12 hours though. https://www.amtrak.com/coast-starlight-train https://www.amtrak.com/coast-starlight-train . I used to take the Chinatown busses and they were faster, or ride share on Craigslist (or, really aging myself here - remember Zimride?)

CalRobert 2y ago

These arguments also apply to planes, which remain popular. Also, not sure how it's more expensive than having people drive. I save 10k+ a year by not owning a car. And I can sit in the train and get work done, have a drink, sleep, whatever - can't do that while driving.