3 ms·

Feels like this is the curse of modern US politics. I'm convinced the majority of people that "want high speed rail in CA" don't live in CA. Further away they

by taeric 10mo ago

Feels like this is the curse of modern US politics. I'm convinced the majority of people that "want high speed rail in CA" don't live in CA. Further away they live, the stronger they will argue for why we should have it.

bluGill 10mo ago
Just to defend myself (similar to what I said in a different thread): I live in an area that would be marginal for high speed rail, but I still want it. If the US can get a great high speed rail network it would make sense to bring that to me, but as one of the last lines built! If CA can't build a good HSR where it should obviously work out there is no way it is worth trying here. They have to make the mistakes and then learn from them (this is the harder part!) in order to bring something to me where there can be no mistakes.
- taeric 10mo ago
  Don't get me wrong. I used transit for the majority of my career. Biked for as much of it. Love the ideas. The VAST majority of people I would see have conversations about this seem to want others to take transit so that traffic is better for them in their car.
  - bluGill 10mo ago
    The vast majority of people I know have never lived where there was a transit system that would be useful for them. So of course they want other people to use it without planning on using it themselves. Give them a system that is worth using and they will use it (there will be a multi-year delay before they try/start using it though).
    - taeric 10mo ago
      I've lived in Atlanta and Seattle. Both have perfectly workable transit. Even if Atlanta does seem to have gotten a bit worse over the years.
      - bluGill 10mo ago
        Workable is not a great endorsement. If things are not fast and frequent people will prefer to drive even if transit could work. Also both have workable transit only for some destinations - I don't live in either city, but I'd guess without looking getting downtown is easy but if your destination is one suburb over it is technically possible but you could baby crawl faster.
        cogman10 10mo ago
        Yup, it's something I think people need to experience. I lived in the UK for 2 years without a car and it ultimately did not negatively impact me (other than needing to memorize local bus routes). I lived in towns as small as 10000 people (Newtown, Wales) and they had both a connected rail system and a couple of bus routes serving the town and connecting it to other towns. Buses absolutely can work in even quiet rural locations, they just need to be properly funded and prioritized. They also need to be subsidized. The American notion that public transit needs to either run net zero or turn a profit is backwards and fundamentally stopping it from working well.
        taeric 10mo ago
        I mean, yes. But I hate to point out that even in Tokyo, having a car is faster than not. Just a lot more expensive.
      - panick21_ 10mo ago
        Seattle LRT has about the same usage as some german systems trams that are like 20x smaller. For a whole lot of the population that life around Atlanta and Seattle the public transport isn't workable.
        taeric 10mo ago
        It is workable for far more people than will make it work. Particularly in tech jobs. The underlying issue remains that it is seen as a poor person option. As soon as people can afford a car, they get one. Back when I didn't have a car, my future wife and I saw a comedian that literally had a joke about being above the poverty line of "do you take the bus?"
OkayPhysicist 10mo ago
You run in very different social circles than I do. The only complaint I have ever heard about California's high speed rail plan (as a life-long Bay Area resident) is how damn long it's taking because of the yokels claiming it'll annoy their cows and almonds.
- taeric 10mo ago
  My assertion is most people arguing online about this do not live near the impacted areas. Happy to be proven wrong on this. I just have a lot of sour taste to the whole thing with how many people constantly harp on public transit, but then want me to see their brand new car.
  - yannyu 10mo ago
    Two things can be true: 1) I wish we had better rail transit in the bay area and to the areas surrounding the bay 2) I have to own a car to get to places in Northern California These don't seem like remotely contradictory positions.
    - taeric 10mo ago
      Largely fair. Ish. If you are dreaming of Tokyo level public transit, though, you are dreaming of far fewer cars for the people that live there.
      - yannyu 10mo ago
        It's a chicken and egg issue. We don't build dense, mixed-use housing and commercial, we don't build transit. There's no way to live a Tokyo-like lifestyle in 95% of California. And the places where you can are often exorbitantly expensive.
  - OkayPhysicist 10mo ago
    The SF-LA transit project isn't a replacement for driving, it's a replacement for flying. Cars are replaced by local transit, the CA high speed rail line goes through a whole lot of nothing (read: the worst farmland they could route through) between SF and LA. Are you sure you live around here if you're this off-base with the basic premise?

by taeric 10mo ago

bluGill 10mo ago

Just to defend myself (similar to what I said in a different thread): I live in an area that would be marginal for high speed rail, but I still want it. If the US can get a great high speed rail network it would make sense to bring that to me, but as one of the last lines built! If CA can't build a good HSR where it should obviously work out there is no way it is worth trying here. They have to make the mistakes and then learn from them (this is the harder part!) in order to bring something to me where there can be no mistakes.

taeric 10mo ago
Don't get me wrong. I used transit for the majority of my career. Biked for as much of it. Love the ideas. The VAST majority of people I would see have conversations about this seem to want others to take transit so that traffic is better for them in their car.
- bluGill 10mo ago
  The vast majority of people I know have never lived where there was a transit system that would be useful for them. So of course they want other people to use it without planning on using it themselves. Give them a system that is worth using and they will use it (there will be a multi-year delay before they try/start using it though).
  - taeric 10mo ago
    I've lived in Atlanta and Seattle. Both have perfectly workable transit. Even if Atlanta does seem to have gotten a bit worse over the years.
    - bluGill 10mo ago
      Workable is not a great endorsement. If things are not fast and frequent people will prefer to drive even if transit could work. Also both have workable transit only for some destinations - I don't live in either city, but I'd guess without looking getting downtown is easy but if your destination is one suburb over it is technically possible but you could baby crawl faster.
      - cogman10 10mo ago
        Yup, it's something I think people need to experience. I lived in the UK for 2 years without a car and it ultimately did not negatively impact me (other than needing to memorize local bus routes). I lived in towns as small as 10000 people (Newtown, Wales) and they had both a connected rail system and a couple of bus routes serving the town and connecting it to other towns. Buses absolutely can work in even quiet rural locations, they just need to be properly funded and prioritized. They also need to be subsidized. The American notion that public transit needs to either run net zero or turn a profit is backwards and fundamentally stopping it from working well.
      - taeric 10mo ago
        I mean, yes. But I hate to point out that even in Tokyo, having a car is faster than not. Just a lot more expensive.
    - panick21_ 10mo ago
      Seattle LRT has about the same usage as some german systems trams that are like 20x smaller. For a whole lot of the population that life around Atlanta and Seattle the public transport isn't workable.
      - taeric 10mo ago
        It is workable for far more people than will make it work. Particularly in tech jobs. The underlying issue remains that it is seen as a poor person option. As soon as people can afford a car, they get one. Back when I didn't have a car, my future wife and I saw a comedian that literally had a joke about being above the poverty line of "do you take the bus?"

OkayPhysicist 10mo ago

You run in very different social circles than I do. The only complaint I have ever heard about California's high speed rail plan (as a life-long Bay Area resident) is how damn long it's taking because of the yokels claiming it'll annoy their cows and almonds.

taeric 10mo ago
My assertion is most people arguing online about this do not live near the impacted areas. Happy to be proven wrong on this. I just have a lot of sour taste to the whole thing with how many people constantly harp on public transit, but then want me to see their brand new car.
- yannyu 10mo ago
  Two things can be true: 1) I wish we had better rail transit in the bay area and to the areas surrounding the bay 2) I have to own a car to get to places in Northern California These don't seem like remotely contradictory positions.
  - taeric 10mo ago
    Largely fair. Ish. If you are dreaming of Tokyo level public transit, though, you are dreaming of far fewer cars for the people that live there.
    - yannyu 10mo ago
      It's a chicken and egg issue. We don't build dense, mixed-use housing and commercial, we don't build transit. There's no way to live a Tokyo-like lifestyle in 95% of California. And the places where you can are often exorbitantly expensive.
- OkayPhysicist 10mo ago
  The SF-LA transit project isn't a replacement for driving, it's a replacement for flying. Cars are replaced by local transit, the CA high speed rail line goes through a whole lot of nothing (read: the worst farmland they could route through) between SF and LA. Are you sure you live around here if you're this off-base with the basic premise?