3 ms·

> And today the railroad system in the USA sucks compared to other developed countries and even China. Nonsense. The US has the largest freight rail system in

by 9rx 1y ago

> And today the railroad system in the USA sucks compared to other developed countries and even China. Nonsense. The US has the largest freight rail system in the world, and is considered to have the most efficient rail system in the world to go along with it. There isn't much in the way of passenger service, granted, but that's because people in the US aren't, well, poor. They can afford better transportation options. > It turns out that boom-and-bust capitalism isn’t great for building something that needs to evolve over centuries. It initially built out the passenger rail just fine, but then evolution saw better options come along. Passenger rail disappeared because it no longer served a purpose. It is not like, say, Japan where the median household income is approaching half that of Mississippi and they hold on to rail because that's what is affordable.

ambicapter 1y ago
Yeah, a cheap transportation option is a terrible thing to have... /s
- 9rx 1y ago
  It's not that it would be terrible, but in the real world people are generally lazy and will only do what they actually want to see happen. Surprisingly, we don't yet have magical AI robots that autonomously go around turning all imagined ideas into reality without the need for human grit. Since nobody really wants passenger rail in the US, they don't put in the effort to see that it exists (outside of some particular routes where they do want it). In many other countries, people do want board access to passenger rail (because that's all they can afford), so they put in the effort to have it. ~200 years ago the US did want passenger rail, they put in the work to realize it, and it did have a pretty good passenger rail network at the time given the period. But, again, better technology came along, so people stopped maintaining/improving what was there. They could do it again if they wanted to... But they don't.
  - lazyasciiart 1y ago
    What an ironic side thread in a conversation about people who are confidently ignorant.
    - 9rx 1y ago
      I am not sure the irony works as told unless software and people are deemed to be the same thing. But what is there to suggest that they are?
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
Detrytus 1y ago
> There isn't much in the way of passenger service, granted, but that's because people in the US aren't, well, poor. They can afford better transportation options. This is so misguided view... Trains (when done right) aren't "for the poor", they are great transportation option, that beats both airplanes and cars. In Poland, which isn't even close to the best, you can travel between big cities with speeds above 200km/h, and you can use regional rail for your daily commute, both those options being very comfortable and convenient, much more convenient than traveling by car.
- 9rx 1y ago
  Poland is approximately the same geographical size as Nevada. In the US, "between cities" is more like New York to Las Vegas, not Las Vegas to... uh, I couldn't think of another city in Nevada off the top of my head. What under-serviced route were you thinking of there? What gives you the idea that rail would be preferable to flying for the NYC to LAS route if only it existed? Even as the crow flies it is approximately 4,000 km, meaning that at 200 km/h you are still looking at around 20 hours of travel in an ideal case. Instead of just 5 hours by plane. If you're poor an additional 15 hours wasted might not mean much, but when time is valuable?
  - danans 1y ago
    > In the US, "between cities" is more like New York to Las Vegas, not Las Vegas to... uh, I couldn't think of another city in Nevada off the top of my head. What under-serviced route were you thinking of there? Why would you constrain the route to within a specific state? In fact, right now a high-speed rail line is being planned between Las Vegas and LA. But outside of Nevada, there are many equivalent distance routes in the US between major population centers, including: Chicago/Detroit Dallas/Houston LA/SF Atlanta/Charlotte
    - AnimalMuppet 1y ago
      Is being build? Um, not quite. Is being planned. Is arranging for right-of-way. But to the best of my knowledge, actual construction has not started.
hodgesrm 1y ago
This analysis seems wrong for at least a couple of reasons. 1. Freight is easier to manage and has better economics on a dedicated network. The US freight network is extremely efficient as others have pointed out. Other networks, e.g., Germany, instead prioritized passenger service. In Germany rail moves a small proportion of freight (19%) compared to trucks. [0] It's really noticeable on the Autobahn and unlike the US where a lot of truck traffic is intermodal loads. 2. The US could have better rail service by investing in passenger networks. Instead we have boondoggles like the California high-speed rail project which has already burned through 10s of billions of dollars with no end in sight. [1] Or the New Jersey Transit system which I had the pleasure to ride on earlier today to Newark Airport. It has pretty good coverage but needs investment. [0] https://dhl-freight-connections.com/en/trends/global-freight-transport-statistics-international-europe-and-germany/ https://dhl-freight-connections.com/en/trends/global-freight... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_High-Speed_Rail https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_High-Speed_Rail
- 9rx 1y ago
  > This analysis seems wrong for at least a couple of reasons. How so? > The US freight network is extremely efficient as others have pointed out. 'Others' being literally the comment you replied to. > The US could have better rail service by investing in passenger networks. Everything there is can be improved, of course, but to what significance here?
anton-c 1y ago
Yeah the best in the world freight industry that is being sued by every company in America for their decades long price fixing scandal. Cant find the list of plaintiffs right now but it had ford and frito lay and hundreds of others. An update from yesterday: https://www.mlex.com/mlex/antitrust/articles/2355294/us-rail-giants-fuel-charges-probed-by-judge-in-long-running-price-fixing-case https://www.mlex.com/mlex/antitrust/articles/2355294/us-rail...

by 9rx 1y ago

ambicapter 1y ago

Yeah, a cheap transportation option is a terrible thing to have... /s

9rx 1y ago
It's not that it would be terrible, but in the real world people are generally lazy and will only do what they actually want to see happen. Surprisingly, we don't yet have magical AI robots that autonomously go around turning all imagined ideas into reality without the need for human grit. Since nobody really wants passenger rail in the US, they don't put in the effort to see that it exists (outside of some particular routes where they do want it). In many other countries, people do want board access to passenger rail (because that's all they can afford), so they put in the effort to have it. ~200 years ago the US did want passenger rail, they put in the work to realize it, and it did have a pretty good passenger rail network at the time given the period. But, again, better technology came along, so people stopped maintaining/improving what was there. They could do it again if they wanted to... But they don't.
- lazyasciiart 1y ago
  What an ironic side thread in a conversation about people who are confidently ignorant.
  - 9rx 1y ago
    I am not sure the irony works as told unless software and people are deemed to be the same thing. But what is there to suggest that they are?
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]

Detrytus 1y ago

> There isn't much in the way of passenger service, granted, but that's because people in the US aren't, well, poor. They can afford better transportation options. This is so misguided view... Trains (when done right) aren't "for the poor", they are great transportation option, that beats both airplanes and cars. In Poland, which isn't even close to the best, you can travel between big cities with speeds above 200km/h, and you can use regional rail for your daily commute, both those options being very comfortable and convenient, much more convenient than traveling by car.

9rx 1y ago
Poland is approximately the same geographical size as Nevada. In the US, "between cities" is more like New York to Las Vegas, not Las Vegas to... uh, I couldn't think of another city in Nevada off the top of my head. What under-serviced route were you thinking of there? What gives you the idea that rail would be preferable to flying for the NYC to LAS route if only it existed? Even as the crow flies it is approximately 4,000 km, meaning that at 200 km/h you are still looking at around 20 hours of travel in an ideal case. Instead of just 5 hours by plane. If you're poor an additional 15 hours wasted might not mean much, but when time is valuable?
- danans 1y ago
  > In the US, "between cities" is more like New York to Las Vegas, not Las Vegas to... uh, I couldn't think of another city in Nevada off the top of my head. What under-serviced route were you thinking of there? Why would you constrain the route to within a specific state? In fact, right now a high-speed rail line is being planned between Las Vegas and LA. But outside of Nevada, there are many equivalent distance routes in the US between major population centers, including: Chicago/Detroit Dallas/Houston LA/SF Atlanta/Charlotte
  - AnimalMuppet 1y ago
    Is being build? Um, not quite. Is being planned. Is arranging for right-of-way. But to the best of my knowledge, actual construction has not started.

hodgesrm 1y ago

This analysis seems wrong for at least a couple of reasons. 1. Freight is easier to manage and has better economics on a dedicated network. The US freight network is extremely efficient as others have pointed out. Other networks, e.g., Germany, instead prioritized passenger service. In Germany rail moves a small proportion of freight (19%) compared to trucks. [0] It's really noticeable on the Autobahn and unlike the US where a lot of truck traffic is intermodal loads. 2. The US could have better rail service by investing in passenger networks. Instead we have boondoggles like the California high-speed rail project which has already burned through 10s of billions of dollars with no end in sight. [1] Or the New Jersey Transit system which I had the pleasure to ride on earlier today to Newark Airport. It has pretty good coverage but needs investment. [0] https://dhl-freight-connections.com/en/trends/global-freight-transport-statistics-international-europe-and-germany/ https://dhl-freight-connections.com/en/trends/global-freight... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_High-Speed_Rail https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_High-Speed_Rail

9rx 1y ago
> This analysis seems wrong for at least a couple of reasons. How so? > The US freight network is extremely efficient as others have pointed out. 'Others' being literally the comment you replied to. > The US could have better rail service by investing in passenger networks. Everything there is can be improved, of course, but to what significance here?

anton-c 1y ago

Yeah the best in the world freight industry that is being sued by every company in America for their decades long price fixing scandal. Cant find the list of plaintiffs right now but it had ford and frito lay and hundreds of others. An update from yesterday: https://www.mlex.com/mlex/antitrust/articles/2355294/us-rail-giants-fuel-charges-probed-by-judge-in-long-running-price-fixing-case https://www.mlex.com/mlex/antitrust/articles/2355294/us-rail...