What is up with the train fetishists?
What is up with the train fetishists?
We built more than double europoors managed to conjure up though
the jew york times
Does anyone reads all these jewish journals anymore?
the trains represent an abstract outlet to their phallic obsession, high speed trains thrusting through the country, penetrating dark tunnels, bringing life inside them, it's all pathological
Train autists are insufferable faggots.
The ones in europe were almost definitely paid by american gibs too
i thought europeans cared about geography
trains are not even that popular in europe
Trains are wonderful, how can you NOT be a train fetishist.
The US has mostly freight railways.
I have a different autism
Trains are always on strike.
Steam trains are fun
ayn rand is right yet again
The thing is I see all these fags shill their plans for large national lines
I would love to get on an Amtrak and go to Atlanta. The problem? The public metro sucks and I am without a car
Why there are some many gricers here?
Los Angeles has the longest continuous metro on earth but people still complain their isn't a train stop in-between their apartments like china .
How do you live in America without a car? Are you a city slicker?
Atlanta does have a fairly decent metro thoughever.
Not him but I ride the bus in a major city in the South and either walk if it's <20 mins or take an Uber. It is a hellish environment to walk and bike (broken sidewalks, no bike lanes except in tiny fragments of certain neighborhoods, fast speed limits that everybody is breaking)
LA's metro has the complaint that you need to go into downtown to go anywhere else. Every civilized city has multinodal mass transit network design
I said
get on an Amtrak
Maybe for an American city but the main rail line isn't connected to the Braves ballpark or the actual Amtrak station
I have a car but I only drive about once a week. I can walk for most daily necessities and take the light rail to get to other neighborhoods, especially if I'm going to drink. I'll occasionally take the bus, it really isn't that bad but most people refuse to take it because its stigmatized as being for poor people, so they'll take the light rail but will refuse to take the bus.
This is in one of the bigger cities in the southeast
Trains don't cost me a minimum $10,000 loan, and an extra $200 a month in insurance.
Are you fucking retarded you can take the metro from down town to watts from what's to long beach to long to fuckin bum fuck san bernadido to east east la and Lancaster. But a guess watts and south Central is DTLA . Or norkwalk is DTLA and not some little bus depot in the sub urbs . Fuck off tourist
The funny thing about the disdain for buses mean that the light rail in my city ends up crowded as fuck with lots of vagrants and it usually stinks to high heaven. Meanwhile the buses are clean, everybody else is obviously poor but well-groomed, and the drivers keep the ride as smooth as possible on our shitty roads
Even after I get my new car, I'll probably continue riding the bus (parking is too expensive at my school so I already ride it there or bike over)
Okay but these things are never about local metro but an expensive national passenger rail line
This isn't going to help you in your everyday life
The Atlanta Amtrak station has a single train line that passes by in the middle of the night. If they were to invest in inter-city rail, they would find a new location for the station.
Probably not, but I at least wished there was a halfway decent bus network. Alternatives would be nice rather than just going into debt right out the gate.
Hell even if we produced more small cars, and allowed them to be driven in-town only it'd help.
The average amerimutt can barely handle thinking about themselves (hence the runaway personal debt problem) let alone other people
That is the underlying issue for most of our problems isn't it?
Both local metro and inter-city transit matters for people.
People are less likely to not own a car if they have to rent a car to leave the city. Arguably inter-city transit might be more important with the dawn of robi-taxis.
trains so good, that's why we closed them
Metro connects to major hubs where train riders are more likely to ride trains Compton long beach Hollywood Lancaster pasedan and azua
Let's connect the wealthy areas so the trains stations can remained unused.
Thanks for video
Trains are fine, but they serve specific purposes, they carry large amounts of stuff from one central point to another.
They’re very good at this, cheap, like city to city, or harbor to city, or country to country, not so much from a logistics centre to a local grocery store in a village from 1530
Same as boats and planes, they both serve their own purpose and place with respect to load, time, cost, volume, etc
Why is everything so all or nothing to these reddit folks? Same with energy, they think energy sources like nuclear, solar, and hydro have to compete with one another, when in reality they complement the issues of one another making the grid more resilient
Very odd thinking
American political landscape is very all or nothing, any modest or "sensible" proposal is turned into a culture war issue or is hamstrung by private interests who don't want to see it pass for financial or ideological reasons. This makes people silo themselves into the more and more extreme positions because nothing will effectively get done anyways even if you moderate
Do you need a train to the other side of the country for 95% of your travels?
What he's saying is that if people living in the center of major cities don't own a car it'd be nice if there was rail for them to other cities. Especially considering how obnoxious and prohibitive it is to own a car in such an area.
Case in point here Why assume HSR or public transit is going to exclusively be used at some insane distance like SF to NY? That's such a childish way of thinking and not how it works in any country where it exists
Yes, I'm well aware that HSR is intended to connect more than just SF to NY-level distances but Fresno to Bakersfield, LA to San Diego, etc. But HSR doesn’t get you to the grocery store, to your kid’s school, or across town during rush hour. It’s intercity, not intracity. Also you're not considering the opportunity costs involved. It's not a good idea just because you personally want the option in your life. Have you seen the boondoggle CAHSR has become? If you need to get to Fresno and Bakersfield that badly, there's a greyhound. If there isn't a greyhound, the HSR wasn't gonna help you anyways
Leftist/hypercollectivists do not seek freedom or options. They seek containment, security, direction. They don't want to own and maintain a house, they don't want to own and maintain a car, hence the hate for both.
It's kind of hilarious how narcissitic they are. They simply can't conceive as to why the average human loves their own personal mechanized horse to get around wherever whenever. They think everyone desires strict rules, schedules, grids, dependence.
It's fine if you want to rent a little box in a huge concrete jungle and take the train/bus everywhere, but this is not how the average person thinks. It's just annoying cringe to keep spamming shit like this.
There are no sensible national HSR proposals, just ferroequinophiles who want to bitch and whine they can't get their kink on
No, but if urban planning isn't shit you could feasibly walk there, or even take a bus if there's a good bus network whether urban planning is good or not..
Well that's an urban planning issue, not a HSR issue
It's mainly a question of efficiency. On every metric, trains as a mean of transport are more efficient than cars. Public transport also has a slew of positive effects that cars do not have (they declutter space, no traffic, promotes walking (and good health), promotes socialization, etc.).
If you've ever been on Anon Babble it's not trainchads seething over cars, it's bike/n/iggers and trying to drag everyone else down to their level.
True, but even so like I said having a decent bus network would account for it even without good city layout. And it's not like a bus network would be expensive for cities to create. The crux is that everybody owns a car because they need to own a car, and nobody wants to use public transport because they own said car already out of necessity.
Again that is a local government issue, not a HSR issue
Your fucking maps aren't gonna solve your issue of getting around your city
Yes I am so free with my government mandated car insurance and government mandated inspection and government funded roads. I am even more free because I am only allowed to build a single family home in the 10 square miles surrounding my land and I am not allowed to do anything else with my own property or the local government will tax me and evict me if I don’t pay and kill me if I don’t leave. So free.
Old steam engines really are awesome, but modern trains are so fucking gay.
Britain built neither so we get the worst of both worlds
No, in that case flying makes more sense and long distance routes are not really what inter-city train advocates want. The Amtrak long distance routes persist only because the congressmen in states where that's the only access to trains would get mad if they were discontinued.
Trains are more for nearby cities, like Charlotte-Atlanta, Atlanta-Nashville, Charlotte-Raleigh, LA-SF, LA-LV, LV-Phoenix, LA-Phoenix, Houston-Dallas, SA-Austin-Dallas, routes like that.
But the east coast has a long line of nearby cities (Atlanta-Charlotte-Raleigh-Richmond-DC-Baltimore-Philadelphia-NY-Boston) so a continuous route would make sense. Even if nobody actually rides all the way from Atlanta to Boston, there's a lot of smaller routes within that. Northeast corridor is already well served by rail. Charlotte-Raleigh have a conventional train service that is successful, and they're beginning to build a Raleigh-Richmond service, since the NCDOT supports inner-city trains. But Atlanta has basically nothing.
Everything you mention pales in comparison to simply not being able to go anywhere outside of the strict train schedule, routes, and being stuck with feral coons in your train car
WTF WHY CAN'T WE HAVE TRAINS
WHY DID EVERYONE MOVE OUT TO SUBURBS AND BUY CARS?? WAS THIS A CONSPIRACY BY BIG OIL AND BIG CAR??
every time
The 'feral coons' on the highway are statistically more dangerous than the ones in the train car.
they made San Andreas real??
they just passed by Kansas without stopping?
Too boring for them even kek
Charlotte to Raleigh isn’t even HSR; it’s conventional rail that serves a very narrow slice of travelers, and even then it’s not profitable. It's subsidized and niche, not a model for mass replication. Most people making that trip still drive because it's faster, more flexible, and more direct. That’s the reality for the vast majority of “nearby city pairs” in the US
They are the only ones economicly feasable. Why would we invest in passanger railways?
I'm tired of being made to feel like I'm a leftist because I support trains and solar power. You retards have to stop politicizing everything.
shut up fat, trains are cool as fuck
What is the annual profit of the interstate highway system?
I support trains, but we need to repeal the National Environmental Policy Act among other reforms before investing into creating new passenger rail. We can't just sink a bunch of money into environmental reviews and bureaucratic process, the money we invest needs to result in a train service.
Why are you making this into some driving vs trains thing?
People can still drive if they want, a lot of people still drive in Europe and Asia, its just another option. People shouldn't be expected to own a car to live, this results in significant expense and also results in a bunch of incompetent drivers on the road, since we can't revoke their license since that would mean revoking their mobility.
It’s not cars vs trains. It’s cost vs utilization. No one’s saying people shouldn’t have options but the issue is whether it makes any fiscal sense to spend hundreds of billions on something a small slice of the population will use. Just look at California HSR. It was sold as a reasonable alternative to driving or flying. Now it’s an embarrassing boondoggle that’s gonna be hundreds of billions above the original budget and still doesn't have any trains. A national HSR network would make CAHSR look efficient by comparison, especially with our current regulatory and permitting mess.
I have said nothing against public metro but national rail is absolute lunacy.
Yes, the CA HSR is a failure, and the problems that plagued it need to be solved before throwing more money into rail investment. I basically said this in the first part of my post if you read it.
But California is especially bad, their government is uniquely inefficient with a bloated process. CEQA is even more strict than NEPA. Their problems go well beyond rail, it costs them $900k to build an affordable housing unit- 3 times that of a market rate unit in Texas.
But the concept of HSR for nearby cities is good, but we need to reform our government process first before pouring money into it. But, if we simplify the process, exempt it from environmental reviews, use one firm with experience or build an in-house construction crew, then HSR between nearby cities becomes feasible and the costs will go down to near European levels adjusted for American COL, which is doable. We don't really need a national HSR network, I think just an Atlanta-Boston corridor, Texas triangle, west coast, then maybe connect LA, Phoenix, LV. But government reform must come first or it will be just like the CA HSR.
almost definitely
the mark of a reliable source
You can just grab an air taxi faster. Go to smaller airport with prop planes website there you go. We have 13000 airports for a reason
thirdie can't comprehend the idea of subsidizing public transit
neither can mutts
the sky is blue, what's new?
Overlay your image with the american and european passenger rail networks retard