985
Anon likes trains (sh.itjust.works)
submitted 1 year ago by [M] to c/greentext@sh.itjust.works
304 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 32 points 1 year ago (19 children)

I've read articles in the past about high speed trains and/or just new train lines in general would get held up by little towns who didn't want to lose the commuter traffic since it was the only thing keeping them afloat. There are too many towns that exist literally just to serve motorists and now nobody wants to get rid of them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
    •
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago

    Anybody who is making money off existing transportation is going to be against public transportation. Cab companies lobby against rail everywhere, from city to burbs or airport to downtown. Trucking, for obvious reasons. Passenger rail can carry cargo at night. And of course anybody selling fuel to the mass of cars, the petro industry.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    They are just very short sighted. Just lobby to have a station and a have commuter stops and people will flock to those "cheaper" areas to live bringing in tons of tax revenue and boosting the local economy.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago* (6 children)

    These small towns would still be an hour+ away from large cities, even with European speed high speed rail.

    Like for me, the nearest "big town" is about 100 miles from me, which is about a 2hr drive. And, at least from some quick googling, it looks like most commuter rail in France tops out at about 100mph. A train would not bring in more people haha

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    You'd be suprised how many people commute more than an hour by car. The prospect of having affordable housing with more job opportunities will certainly bring in more people.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    France spends ~$15 million/mile for high speed commuter rail. Which means that line would cost $1.5 billion.

    I don't think it's bringing in that many more people. Even when you amortize it across all of the little cities it would go through

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Implying the line would stop at the town and not carry on to the next. Also, how much is being spent on building and maintaining freeways?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Yeah, while I'm a huge advocate for an American Shinkansen, there's really 4 zones of America for train speeds. East of the Appalachians its fast and easy and rail already works easy. West of them but east of the Mississippi, you're gonna need high speed rail, but it'll be somewhat similar to Europe. Between the Mississippi and the west coast, you're gonna need high speed rail and quite a bit of patience. And on the west coast, you'll hit up small cities, but honestly it'd be a great second high speed line after the New York-Chicago

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    That is so odd... I've only ridden Amtrak a few times, but I was amazed at how many stops were just some small town that happened to lie on the rail line.

    Most small towns that lie on a major highway and are supported by commuter traffic are only going to support a truck stop and a few fast food restaurants at best. Sure, a true high speed rail line would likely only stop in larger metropolitan areas, so those meager income sources may dwindle. But on the other hand if I were a rail commuter in one of those rural/suburban areas, I'd be much more likely to spend some time doing a bit of shopping or lingering in a restaurant during that transition from the train to my car after work, than if I were just passing through in my car.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Ignoring trains for a minute, there are even examples of towns in America being against new highways for the same reason. Breezewood, Pennsylvania is the town you see in that one meme image of "america". The state did some weird tax/federal funding loop shenanigans by routing a highway through some little pit stop town and, now that the laws have been relaxed, the county and the businesses don't care to fix it.

    Although laws have been relaxed since then, local businesses, including many traveler services like fast food restaurants, gas stations and motels, have lobbied to keep the gap and not directly connect I-70 to the Turnpike, fearing a loss of business. In order for a bypass to be considered, Breezewood's own Bedford County must propose it, which is "just not an issue that really appears on the radar for us," Donald Schwartz, the Bedford County planning director, said in 2017.[1]

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent