4 ms·

I wish we had more trains. Not just for passengers, but in general. They just get the best cost per mile per pound were gonna get on planet Earth, since the phy

by zanny 13y ago

I wish we had more trains. Not just for passengers, but in general. They just get the best cost per mile per pound were gonna get on planet Earth, since the physics of cars requires constant acceleration / deceleration and 2 dimensions of movement, and planes require lift. I'd love a train from Miami to Boston that hits all the major cities and averages something between the terrible 80 mph Amtrack trains and the way too expensive per mile (or km in a more civilized country =P) bullet trains in Korea or Japan. Also, that doesn't cost $200 and doesn't take 2 days trip. It should be so much cheaper taking a vacation on wheels than paying the cost to get luggage airborne, and it really is the infrastructure being awful. Wow, a round trip ticket to Austin is around $800. That is just unacceptable.

newbie12 13y ago
The fundamental problem is that the ground experience is managed by the airports, which are usually unionized governmental entities with little concern for the customer's time, and by the TSA. Similarly, despite very compelling economics, interstate passenger rail is a failure in the US because the government corporation Amtrak has a monopoly, deals with some of the most absurd unions in America, and doesn't seriously innovate.
- seanmcdirmid 13y ago
  This post is drool. "Blame the unions" is the new right wing "blame Jews" I guess. Most airports in the states are reasonably run and don't waste our time, compared to many other European and Asian countries. Passenger rail doesn't work well in the states given the distances involved, we just aren't that dense. Where it does make sense in the eastern corridor, Amtrak is able to make a profit. Amtrak long haul routes however exist only for those afraid to fly. Long haul routes in china only make money because they have much more volume than us, and people who don't mind traveling 2 days from shanghai to urumuqi to save on a 6 hour flight.
- cafard 13y ago
  You don't suppose US population density has something to do with this, do you? Rail does well enough in the Mid-Atlantic and NE states, between Boston and Washington.

by zanny 13y ago

newbie12 13y ago

The fundamental problem is that the ground experience is managed by the airports, which are usually unionized governmental entities with little concern for the customer's time, and by the TSA. Similarly, despite very compelling economics, interstate passenger rail is a failure in the US because the government corporation Amtrak has a monopoly, deals with some of the most absurd unions in America, and doesn't seriously innovate.

seanmcdirmid 13y ago
This post is drool. "Blame the unions" is the new right wing "blame Jews" I guess. Most airports in the states are reasonably run and don't waste our time, compared to many other European and Asian countries. Passenger rail doesn't work well in the states given the distances involved, we just aren't that dense. Where it does make sense in the eastern corridor, Amtrak is able to make a profit. Amtrak long haul routes however exist only for those afraid to fly. Long haul routes in china only make money because they have much more volume than us, and people who don't mind traveling 2 days from shanghai to urumuqi to save on a 6 hour flight.
cafard 13y ago
You don't suppose US population density has something to do with this, do you? Rail does well enough in the Mid-Atlantic and NE states, between Boston and Washington.