this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2025
774 points (98.3% liked)
Greentext
6530 readers
1686 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The only national passenger train service I know of is Amtrak, which shares its tracks with freight carriers. So the current infrastructure isn't designed for high-speed rail and freight carriers usually get priority.
Also, The US is really big, so everything isn't a short train ride away from everything else. If I wanted to visit the Grand Canyon from where I live, it's over 2,000 miles away. That's 30 hours of driving just by car.
collapsed inline media
collapsed inline media
There's absolutely no good reason why you shouldn't be able to take a train from LA to Seattle or Miami to El Paso. The US coastline is plenty dense, with highway exits every five or ten miles state after state after state.
I have heard that China has made significant efforts in this area, but that really is a massive change in just over a decade.
Meanwhile, the UK will take as long to build a single high-speed line.
UK deliberately defunded their HR connection between Manchester and London. The Tories sold off the land in a rapid auction, just to make sure Labour couldn't take over and finish the job after the next election.
The secret is slavery.
Actual Footage! China's Modern Track Laying Methods For High Speed Railways
collapsed inline media
I guess paying for labour isn't something that can happen, it has to be slaves.
Well the US has slavery for prisoners(13th amendment), yet STILL no modern rail infrastructure.
In China, the only time you get a good thing is if someone does ten bad things.
A small price to pay for Christianity, Liberty, and Prosperity
The secret to it being affordable, doesn't mean it can't be done any other way. Authoritarian government also helped a lot in getting it done this fast but still doesn't mean it can't be done. Just not as fast and as cheap as China did.
They're not supposed to. Passenger traffic on Amtrak should be getting priority but the rail lines basically say "fuck it" and do what they want.
Some asshole Mba/lawyers figured out that if they made the trains physically too long to fit onto the pull outs, then they could just shrug and say "golly, we'd love to pull over for you, but we just can't lmao" and it's perfectly fine. It's called Precision Scheduled Railroading
Seems like an easy solution would be fining the shit out of them for that. Or requiring an expensive permit for overly long trains.
Well, see, for that to happen, you'd need politicians who aren't complicit in trying to rip the wiring out of the walls. Also, regulating railroads is hella complicated in the US because we've got a bunch of ancient laws that give the railroads more rights than God, to the point where you almost stop being a citizen when you step onto railroad right of way. We COULD deal with that, but it'd be almost as much of an almighty fucking lobbyist shitshow as when we try to regulate oil.
Lmao, money concentration wins over all the things human.
We deserve ourselves as a species.
Not sure if the rest of the species do.
With 300mph trains instead is highways that's 7 hours, k, let's say 10 hours of leisure, dining, sightseeing.
(vs 2h airport + 4h flight + 1 or 2h airport taxiing & stuff again)
The railroad infrastructure seems expensive just bcs it is presented that way (and planes & roads arent).
~~presented~~ regulated that way: companies can buy kerosene for airplanes tax-free, but need to pay tax on electricity for trains. Funding for airports and trainstations differ greatly from high ways. Governments hand out money to make the best mode of transportation (from their pov) also the cheapest.
Yes.
But else laws got passed bcs it was presented like how airplanes deserve being untaxed (to the cost of taxpayers) but railroad doesn't.
You can try to change those laws & get the same lobby propaganda in return.
Like how is there always money for another lane but much cheaper infrastructure is crumbling.
Yeah, no, corruption & short-term gains are the main factors by which the gov decided what is best.
And why more socialist or even communist states tend to have that sorted out better.
Cars were never that tho.
Yes, the US is really big, and we have a bunch of mountains, but there's still no good reason why reasonable train infrastructure doesn't exist. We have train lines from Seattle to LA, SF to Chicago (and transfers to NYC and DC), and NYC to Miami, but they're all super slow and have to share with even slower freight sometimes.
I live in Utah and know a bunch of people who would take a train to Vegas almost every weekend if it existed and was somewhat fast. I'd take one from SLC to LA if it existed, and I'd consider one across the country if it was reasonably priced. But no, the train takes twice as long as a car for most destinations, and is often more expensive than an airplane, so why would I ever take the train outside of the train being the point (i.e. as a novelty)?
Make them fast and convenient and people will rife them. Apparently Amtrak gets decent usage in the NE because they're fast and convenient. Do that for the west and people will use them.