4 ms·

An explanation I once read, and I think makes total sense, is WWII. Europe was heavily destroyed after WWII with no exception to railway tracks. They needed to

An explanation I once read, and I think makes total sense, is WWII. Europe was heavily destroyed after WWII with no exception to railway tracks. They needed to be rebuild. They were, but with a much better technology than what was there in the 1800s. This allowed faster trains, better technology overall to be "deployed" and ultimately better initial adpotion which started a positive feedback loop. Meanwhile railway tracks were never bombed and never needed to be rebuilt like they were in Europe, so the infrastructure didn't allow for the technological improvements and the positive feedback look never started. What they forgot to mention in the article (or I missed) is that train is extremly expensive and has gotten more expensive over the years. I cannot do it right now but I'd bet the price per km is much higher that what it is for a plain ride or even a car ride (if the car is full, meaning 4 train tickets vs card ride) which very frustrating when the consensus is "we need to take the train more often, driving is not good" while salaries stagnate and inflation is having the time of its life.

gmueckl 2y ago
That WW2 theory seems like a bit of an odd take, although not a completely outlandish one. I also noticed that in the late 19th century, railways received a lot of government support and that is what enabled a dense network of passenger train stations in city centers in the first place. At least in Germany, there are options to bring the cost of long distance train tickets down considerably. Booking far enough in advance can get you almost any long distance ticket to proces comparable with flying. If you do that a 3 or 4 times a year, consider getting a Bahncard 25, which is a cheap 25% off coupon for a year. It just needs a few train rides to completely amortize. Just don't forget to cancel it in time when you no longer need it (that's the catch). I don't know if other countries have similar options and how effective they are.
afiori 2y ago
> What they forgot to mention in the article (or I missed) is that train is extremly expensive and has gotten more expensive over the years. Expensive for the user or expensive for the state? I believe that almost everywhere in the west the cost-per-trip from the state POV is wildly in favour of trains.
- maaaaattttt 2y ago
  For the user. But it's not linear and the longer the distance the more expensive it becomes compared to other form of transportations.
  - afiori 1y ago
    No I meant that if things were planned differently decades ago and we developed train networks together with road networks (eg IIRC switzerland requires new wharehouses to have a rail connection) then a good 90% of intercity trips (both people and goods) could be on rail and be way more efficient. I would not be as convenient as taking a car everywhere with no traffic and easy parking, but more convenient than being stuck in traffic everywhere.
Gud 2y ago
How do you explain countries that weren't bombed but have excellent railway? For example Switzerland, which has one of the best railways in the world. Additionally Sweden had fantastic railway back in the days but it has been slowly deteriorating since the 80s. FWIW taking the train in Switzerland is pretty cheap. Definitely cheaper having a car.

gmueckl 2y ago

That WW2 theory seems like a bit of an odd take, although not a completely outlandish one. I also noticed that in the late 19th century, railways received a lot of government support and that is what enabled a dense network of passenger train stations in city centers in the first place. At least in Germany, there are options to bring the cost of long distance train tickets down considerably. Booking far enough in advance can get you almost any long distance ticket to proces comparable with flying. If you do that a 3 or 4 times a year, consider getting a Bahncard 25, which is a cheap 25% off coupon for a year. It just needs a few train rides to completely amortize. Just don't forget to cancel it in time when you no longer need it (that's the catch). I don't know if other countries have similar options and how effective they are.

afiori 2y ago

> What they forgot to mention in the article (or I missed) is that train is extremly expensive and has gotten more expensive over the years. Expensive for the user or expensive for the state? I believe that almost everywhere in the west the cost-per-trip from the state POV is wildly in favour of trains.

maaaaattttt 2y ago
For the user. But it's not linear and the longer the distance the more expensive it becomes compared to other form of transportations.
- afiori 1y ago
  No I meant that if things were planned differently decades ago and we developed train networks together with road networks (eg IIRC switzerland requires new wharehouses to have a rail connection) then a good 90% of intercity trips (both people and goods) could be on rail and be way more efficient. I would not be as convenient as taking a car everywhere with no traffic and easy parking, but more convenient than being stuck in traffic everywhere.

Gud 2y ago

How do you explain countries that weren't bombed but have excellent railway? For example Switzerland, which has one of the best railways in the world. Additionally Sweden had fantastic railway back in the days but it has been slowly deteriorating since the 80s. FWIW taking the train in Switzerland is pretty cheap. Definitely cheaper having a car.