5 ms·

Sure but this is not a fundamental issue with public transport, it's an issue with the implementation of public transport in the US. There are plenty of places

Sure but this is not a fundamental issue with public transport, it's an issue with the implementation of public transport in the US. There are plenty of places where it's done well, and it is felt deeply. Living in major city in the Netherlands I have never felt any need to own a car. I've been quite open to it a few times and I can afford it no problem, but it was just not worth the hassle, it's just an inferior option.

ToValueFunfetti 1y ago
I don't think you can compare public transport outcomes in the Netherlands with those of the US and use it as an indictment of the US implementation. The US has 50% more crime (including 5x more homicides) and ~$12k extra income (ie Americans can afford a little more comfort); the Netherlands has 5x the population density. Comparing the results of transporting a very different population through very different places doesn't reflect on either implementation on its own.
- bluGill 1y ago
  Population density is similar in the us and the netherlands, when you only count places that matter for transit. Farmers rarely get transit. Look only at the cities and not the rocky mountains and the us is plenty dense
  - Calavar 1y ago
    Not that simple. Take Amtrak Northeast Regional. Service from NYC to Washington D.C is a very busy business travel route that goes down the densest population corridor in the country, but it still crosses areas (especially in northeast Maryland) that could be properly described as rural farmland.
    - bluGill 1y ago
      That area is still very dense compared to what trains pass through elsewhere in the world. Of course as a tiny country the Netherlands has nothing to compare with. However France has plenty of not dense farmland their trains pass through. Spain has even worse terrin that their trains pass through and again a great system.
- fragmede 1y ago
  The Netherlands as a whole is less dense than NYC. If density were the issue, why does public transportation in NYC have problems that the Netherlands does not?
- queenkjuul 1y ago
  Nobody lives in the all the empty land in the US. The majority of people in the US live in urban areas. The density argument never makes any sense. We're talking about public transit within a single city, not between Chicago and Denver.
- piva00 1y ago
  The population density of a whole massive country like the USA doesn't matter for public transportation that reaches its largest cities, you have pockets of very high density and an immense flyover space where few people live. With the density of the Northeast Corridor you could have the exact same setup as the Netherlands has, the Northeast is only 20% less dense than the Netherlands while housing 50m people, there's almost a whole France in there but nowhere close to the infrastructure the Netherlands nor France have to move people around. The USA is massive so there's a lot more space for localised solutions that work for different parts of the country, the West and East coasts could have similar solutions to interconnect the whole N -> S, there's enough density for it. If Sweden with 10m people and a frigid climate can run trains, public transportation, etc. in all major population areas along an area equivalent to the whole West Coast then I don't see any reason, except cultural-political ones, the USA couldn't.
dr_dshiv 1y ago
But public transport in the Netherlands works because society as a whole isn’t broken. There aren’t even any noticeable homeless populations, for godsakes. Which is why I’m happy to pay taxes there. It’s really worth it in quality of life.
johnfn 1y ago
My point is that we've had 50+ years of "trying to do it well" in the US. For all the claims that "it has been done better in other countries", how come not a single city in the US has been able to extract the je ne sai quoi of what makes it work over there when it doesn't work here? What exactly is the time horizon for fixing all our issues? 50 years wasn't long enough to make a dent - if anything, things have gotten worse in that time.
- hackable_sand 1y ago
  My city's public transportation is excellent. It's a vital service for people like me who don't drive and need timely transport loops.
- conception 1y ago
  Wait, are you arguing that we’ve tried to do it well in the US?
  - johnfn 1y ago
    What I'm saying if we've had 50 years to try to get it right and we have failed.
    - verzali 1y ago
      Plenty of other places have figured it out. There's nothing so special about America that it can't work there too.
    - keeda 1y ago
      As the sibling comments suggest, I don't think the US has really been trying to very hard get it right. Leaving alone European countries, I've experienced and commuted using better public transportation in poorer countries of varying sizes 2+ decades ago.
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago
  > how come not a single city in the US has been able to extract the je ne sai quoi of what makes it work over there when it doesn't work here? Manhattan sort of nails it. Between the subway, Metro-North, LIRR and taxi system you don’t need to own a car and it massively increases life expectancy.

ToValueFunfetti 1y ago

I don't think you can compare public transport outcomes in the Netherlands with those of the US and use it as an indictment of the US implementation. The US has 50% more crime (including 5x more homicides) and ~$12k extra income (ie Americans can afford a little more comfort); the Netherlands has 5x the population density. Comparing the results of transporting a very different population through very different places doesn't reflect on either implementation on its own.

bluGill 1y ago
Population density is similar in the us and the netherlands, when you only count places that matter for transit. Farmers rarely get transit. Look only at the cities and not the rocky mountains and the us is plenty dense
- Calavar 1y ago
  Not that simple. Take Amtrak Northeast Regional. Service from NYC to Washington D.C is a very busy business travel route that goes down the densest population corridor in the country, but it still crosses areas (especially in northeast Maryland) that could be properly described as rural farmland.
  - bluGill 1y ago
    That area is still very dense compared to what trains pass through elsewhere in the world. Of course as a tiny country the Netherlands has nothing to compare with. However France has plenty of not dense farmland their trains pass through. Spain has even worse terrin that their trains pass through and again a great system.
fragmede 1y ago
The Netherlands as a whole is less dense than NYC. If density were the issue, why does public transportation in NYC have problems that the Netherlands does not?
queenkjuul 1y ago
Nobody lives in the all the empty land in the US. The majority of people in the US live in urban areas. The density argument never makes any sense. We're talking about public transit within a single city, not between Chicago and Denver.
piva00 1y ago
The population density of a whole massive country like the USA doesn't matter for public transportation that reaches its largest cities, you have pockets of very high density and an immense flyover space where few people live. With the density of the Northeast Corridor you could have the exact same setup as the Netherlands has, the Northeast is only 20% less dense than the Netherlands while housing 50m people, there's almost a whole France in there but nowhere close to the infrastructure the Netherlands nor France have to move people around. The USA is massive so there's a lot more space for localised solutions that work for different parts of the country, the West and East coasts could have similar solutions to interconnect the whole N -> S, there's enough density for it. If Sweden with 10m people and a frigid climate can run trains, public transportation, etc. in all major population areas along an area equivalent to the whole West Coast then I don't see any reason, except cultural-political ones, the USA couldn't.

dr_dshiv 1y ago

But public transport in the Netherlands works because society as a whole isn’t broken. There aren’t even any noticeable homeless populations, for godsakes. Which is why I’m happy to pay taxes there. It’s really worth it in quality of life.

johnfn 1y ago

My point is that we've had 50+ years of "trying to do it well" in the US. For all the claims that "it has been done better in other countries", how come not a single city in the US has been able to extract the je ne sai quoi of what makes it work over there when it doesn't work here? What exactly is the time horizon for fixing all our issues? 50 years wasn't long enough to make a dent - if anything, things have gotten worse in that time.

hackable_sand 1y ago
My city's public transportation is excellent. It's a vital service for people like me who don't drive and need timely transport loops.
conception 1y ago
Wait, are you arguing that we’ve tried to do it well in the US?
- johnfn 1y ago
  What I'm saying if we've had 50 years to try to get it right and we have failed.
  - verzali 1y ago
    Plenty of other places have figured it out. There's nothing so special about America that it can't work there too.
  - keeda 1y ago
    As the sibling comments suggest, I don't think the US has really been trying to very hard get it right. Leaving alone European countries, I've experienced and commuted using better public transportation in poorer countries of varying sizes 2+ decades ago.
JumpCrisscross 1y ago
> how come not a single city in the US has been able to extract the je ne sai quoi of what makes it work over there when it doesn't work here? Manhattan sort of nails it. Between the subway, Metro-North, LIRR and taxi system you don’t need to own a car and it massively increases life expectancy.