| >> |
04/23/10(Fri)14:26 No.711333>>711283
Amurrka r
biggur. Get it?
>>711280
Interstate
highways are only clogged in urban areas. Generally, most of our
interstates are pretty open and unclogged.
It will cost more, I
know because I've traveled this country via bus, train, plane, and car.
By -far- the cheapest method is a personal vehicle with a good ratio of
miles to gallon. I made it from New Orleans to Denver on less than $100.
And
I don't have social anxiety, but anyone travelling with children won't
want to make them sleep in what is effectively a public area. On a
plane, it's somewhat different, but on a train or a bus, you're not
going to be able to keep track of them the whole time. Especially if you
plan on sleeping at any point during the ride.
And it's not
shocking to ask a public service to work as intended, provided that is
feasible. In this case, it isn't. In order to have trains or buses which
were capable of inter-city transit at a price and a frequency that
would satisfy the American public, and actually convince them to get out
of their cars, one would have to send off an excessive number of
unpopulated trains and buses. It's not just like you can put more trains
on the tracks during higher volume periods, or make your schedules
fluid. You have to keep a rigid schedule, and if that means sending a
train from Chicago to Indianapolis with two people on it, then so be it.
You
would think so, but like I said before, a high volume of customers will
increase the amount of runs for each branch of transit which carry few
people. Sure, they know that during Christmas people will be travelling,
but other than that the more people that use the transit system, the
more inherent instability in passenger count you will have.
Granted,
I'm all for intra-city transit systems, but in an inter-city sense,
over the entire huge expanse of land we have, it's not really feasible. |
