We have cars

>>3150551
What can you do with a car that you can't do with a train?

who the fuck told u murrica is the best
unless u live in a third world country

because capitalism
cars make more profits than trains

there's no macdonalds on the train

>>3150553
Privacy

america is a very individualistic nation

>>3150556
You could put one on.

Would you want to be stuck with hundreds of Americans in a limited space for hours? Neither would Americans.

That is why there is no support for cross country high speed trains in the USA.

>>3150556
>implying McDonalds wouldn't be a downgrade from dining car food.

Trains were once as American as apple pie, but now the Republicans hate them. It's all about cars and any attempt to build up mass transit services is met with a solid "What are you, socialist?".

>>3150569
Don't tell Boeing that, they might stop making passenger jets.

>>3150564
>interstates with greasy fast food every 5 miles
>implying macdonalds-on-wheels can satisfy them

>>3150598
If trains are socialistic, what are airplanes?

>>3150623
Freedom.

>>3150629

auto lobby was too strong while the train lobby was sucing its own dick around the 50's. plus we built them spiffy new highways. I would love to have trains it would oil consumption and make traveling around the country so much easier. I worry about the crash rate though, it seems like i hear about two trains collided somewhere in europe. Plus dumbass people would think its just the gov trying to impede on their right to own a car lawl

>>3150707
If private individuals want to build rail lines,let them.Amtrak is a money pit and I see no reason to pay for any thing like that. I rarely leave my area so I don't need them anyway.

If private individuals want to build roads, let them. Highways are a money pit and I see no reason to pay for any thing like that. I rarely leave my area so I don't need them anyway.

>>3150738
I am fine with that. Wal mart and other store would have buidl them and I wouldn't be subject to confiscatory taxes to waste on their upkeep.

>>3150722
think of the jobs. THINK OF THE JOBS!

Yeah, Steve Jobs is a godsend for mass transit. You just put on the iPod and viola, your own private iSpace.

america is a big country. its unfeasible to have miles and miles of high-speed track going across vast plains only to connect to low density suburbs where ridership would be ridiculously low as most people would prefer there cars. high speed rail is only possible for america in high density regions like new york or california

>>3150549
Coz trains are not economically sustainable for people transport.

>>3150799
But those low density suburbs are the result of a policy of building miles and miles of highways to connect housing across vast plains. Now we have increasing urbanisation which makes for denser suburbs and thus makes building miles and miles of tracks economically feasible.

>>Trains
>>Socialistic


WHen, by hell, are you going to stop being a little nut, America?

>>3150829
Trains are heavily subsided worldwide, otherwise nobody would invest in such costly transport system

>>3150823
like i said, only feasible in big city areas like new york or california. you're not gonna build a cross-country railroad in America like they do in France or Japan, it's simply too huge.

>>3150842
>>3150842
no.jpg

>>3150851
china make it! Why can"t we?
It's not to link East and West, but we could rely big cities

>>3150842
Originally rail lines were built as purely commercial enterprises. And they were profitable too. Then the government decided to build roads for cars and since it was all paid with taxes that meant the roads got an unfair advantage over railroads. If instead every road was a privately built toll road (no tax subsidies!) then railroads would be very competitive. Of course, in both cases the cost of transport would be much higher than today. Because currently both transport modes are heavily subsidised, roads more so than trains.

>>3150860
China is socialist, wer are not.

>>3150868
What about when oil prices are becoming evil?

Its mostly because if you live outside a city, lets say suburbs or rural area. There arent tracks that go to a bigger station which connects you to bigger cities/ other areas.

I live about 20 mins outside NYs capital but I never go to NYC for a day to attend a concert & shit like that. There are some train tracks in my town but theyre about 2-3 miles from my place. Would take me a long ass time to walk there with the terrain & weather. Id just stick to my car but id be all for having a great rail system with that pasmo like shit. One of the things america lacks.

There's no use in building it just to say we have it. There's already Amtrak. You can go from New York to Montreal, Boston to Washington DC, Chicago to New Orleans, Vancouver to Seattle and so on, and it's a giant waste of money, it doesn't even break even. If there's ever need for a train system that's actually practical and profitable, then people will be on that in a second trying to make a dime. The fact that no one is out there trying to make money off the idea means it's a bad one.

>>3150928
that works in other countries, but not in america....

pfffffff

>>3150987
we have cars in American. Public transportation is for poor people. Said poors will inevitably wreck the trains making them dangerous and crappy. No thanks, unless you price the tickets outside the buying range of anyone making under 25k a year

America has more miles of rail than any other country in the world. And we hate them. Imagine if we liked that shit.

>>3150919
>Its mostly because if you live outside a city, lets say suburbs or rural area. There arent tracks that go to a bigger station which connects you to bigger cities/ other areas.

I live in a rural area. We have bus mass transit available, which connects to an area Amtrak station, which in turn has multiple trains a day headed to Chicago, which in turn is connected fucking everywhere. Fuck, I know people who use the trains all the damn time just to run to the Chicago area because it's cheaper than gas.


Seriously, this is a non-fucking issue. America has trains, Americans use trains (just not as much as planes), and America is expanding high-speed rail.

I'd your trains

>>3150987
True just having train connections from nyc to bos, etc etc isnt going to help it used much. Theres just too much ground to cover even after once youve reached your destination. There isnt a dam station every 2-5 miles.

>>3151006
Agreed the subways in nyc are utter shit. Graffiti, destroyed seats & that minty fresh urine smell make them horrible. I dont know why some asshats cant keep shit nice.

>>3151047
>True just having train connections from nyc to bos, etc etc isnt going to help it used much. Theres just too much ground to cover even after once youve reached your destination. There isnt a dam station every 2-5 miles.


Just having airline flights from nyc to bos , etc, etc isn't going to help it get used much. There's too much ground to cover even after once you've reached your destination. There isn't a damn airport every 2-5 miles. Derp.

Why would i want to sit on a train with a bunch of poor people? America isn't some over crowded country, we easily get place to place in our own cars..

Sill Europeans, trains are for freight!

>>3151028
Thats true but the frequency of the buses is very shitty & its a bitch in the winter.

>>3151074
I was talking more about local instate transport instead of interstate transport. There just isnt a viable option for a quick transportation using trains/buses in america. Say you wanted to visit a friend in nyc but they werent going to be able to pick you go. He gives you directions on which bus to take once you arrive in nyc. You get off at the bus stop in his town & his house isnt anywhere nearby & the bus doesnt go in the direction of his house. See what I was trying to say? You really need to know the distances & timings outside a city.

>>3151167

This is why they invented taxis and rental cars.