> For them to be useful, you would need to have rails covering the same destinations and paths as the highway system.
Its funny to me that you suggest that trains need to cover what they highway system covers. When of course trains existed first and already covered many more places then highway system ever covered in most places. And with buses countries got the opportunity to cover things away from train-station and that was really not all that expensive even in rural areas.
Its just that in some countries, many of these trains were removed and the countries focused all their finances on new highway systems. And often demolished large part of productive cities to achieve it. For more so then trains ever did.
> Rail will likely encourage denser development and a higher cost of living due to a greater influence of rent-seeking entities.
No actually when you do it properly, then rail makes it so you can have a dense core around each station where you have everything you need locally while also having access to a city center in a short time.
While you subburb example misses that all subburbs are massively subsidized and make negative money. Its the poor people in the cities that are paying extra to finance these subburbs. Urban3 has done tons of analysis of this. The subburbs are the rent seekers, you just don't think of them that way because you see it as 'normal'.
There are plenty of examples, for example how in the 60s Sweden used subway trains to build massive amounts of housing alone those new lines.
> between the need/desire of a chunk of the population to keep their distance
You can have that, but you will find that once you properly account for the cost, people are much less willing to spend that money. That's why before extensive zoning codes, minimum lot sizes as requirements, parking minimum, free street parking, free highways people lived closer together. And of course the massive federal top down intensive given subburban development Post-WW2, along with the redlining of cities. All these are hidden cost on society that you simply hide and put on county, state and federal taxes.
Kind of funny, with the help of AI finding some historical price sheets and 'design' a computer. So like 70s to 80s and I was blown away, how large the RAM cost was. A huge part of the BOM. It totally change the way I think about computer design in this area and why some decisions were made.
On public transport this does not seem to be the case at all. Low floor buses, trams and trains are much, much more common in Europe. And bike lanes and better overall pedestrian infrastructure is much better.
So I really interested how you are getting to this 'wheelchair accessibility' is better in the US. I would love to see some data, and not just 'we have X more ramps', but actual people in wheelchair going into their experience.
Nonsense. The infrastructure in much of the US is already there. All you need is willingness to enforce it. All you need maybe is a bit of paint. Police could actually make some money.
Not to be obtuse, but for what definition of putting money, and what definition of gambling? I think it's reasonable to distinguish between, say, holding Berkshire Hathaway and day trading. And I'm not sure that you can lump the two together into a definition of gambling that doesn't end up being too broad to be useful.
I mean that was kind of obvious, but I wouldn't know how to bet against that. Defense wasn't going to get cut. Cutting social security and friends is incredibly unlikely. Debt interest is impossible to cut. DOGE believed in cutting outside of that, and that's practically impossible.
PS: After reading the article, is assertion is a bit stronger then that, but still very likely. Good bet.
Many more households could afford it then want to afford it. Its just a huge waste of money. Cars are assets that massively deprecate in value and are utilized a extreme minimum of time. They are a horrible investment of large amounts of money.
In the rare cases where you need a second car, you can rent one extremely easily.
> Even if you are poor in the US cars are remarkably accessible. You can finance a used car with no credit and a couple dozen dollars a month.
This partly true but also really ignores a lot of issue that it creates.
The amount of car debt in the US is crazy. Lots of people get cars at absolutely absurd interest rates because their credit is bad and the need a car. Stretching out payment over many, many years. Its extremely predatory.
And then because of the arms race where everybody needs an ever bigger car or get killed, people buy more and more expensive cars all the time.
And of course because of the lack of safety inspections, people driving these really badly maintained crap cars that cause issues for everybody.
And even worse, people are so afraid of being without a car that people rather give up their homes and live in their cars then the other way around. Letting people slip into homelessness because if they want any hope in the future they need a car.
People paying interest on car loans rather then investing in their 401k isn't a great deal for society.
So yeah, my parents could defiantly afford two cars, but very, very rarely did we have 2 cars. And the only in special circumstances where that second car would be shared with some other people as well. Its just bad business and not that useful.
I calculated this back when I commuted daily. I was spending €700 a month on my car. Public transport would have been only €450 a month.
Still went by car. Car was 35 minutes door to door in a climate controlled environment with a good seat and good stereo system. Public transport was two hours, multiple legs with various trains and busses, various payment systems, problems with missing connections, waiting outside in the cold, being packed with others.
Gladly paid that €250 a month for 31 hours of my time and having a peaceful commute.
Plus a weekend trip was typically around €30 for four people versus €150 for four people by public transport.
Are you taking into account depreciation of the car and interest? Are you taking into account the cost of your parking spot?
Also, you example is just that. It will depend on many things. In places that are properly designed often the difference is nowhere near as large and the difference in money is bigger.
Also, in places where there is lots of public transport, when you get a universal ticket, you can also use it for free for everything other then commuting. Its completely normal to do all your other activities by public transport as well. When I go out and I want to have a drink, a car is not an option (unless people are just pieces of garbage, witch the US system makes almost inevitable).
> having a peaceful commute
Except of course that all of US popular media is full of people who have horrible long commutes suffering from stress and road rage.
Sitting in a train is more peaceful then driving by a lot. I can literally read a book and drink coffee or as I often do simply have a nap.
That was including all associated cost for both forms of transport.
This was in The Netherlands, which has one of the best public transport in the EU so I expect it to be worse elsewhere.
If you already have a car, you typically do your other activities by car as well since you already paid for insurance and road tax and it is significantly cheaper to go by car as you only have gas, wear and depreciation to pay for.
The universal ticket does not exist in The Netherlands. Train only is €399 a month for standing. Bus is typically €100 per month per region.
My commutes by car were always peaceful. A lot more peaceful than standing in a train worrying if I would catch my bus connection because the train is behind schedule. That would add another 30 minutes to the trip. You could read a book standing but I would recommend against taking a nap or drinking coffee. I find taking public transport infinitely more stressful than taking a car. With a car you will always make it to your destination, often within reasonable time. With public transport you have no idea if you will make it. Sometimes you have to go home or find a hotel and try again the next day.
I'm wondering now if you have ever experienced European public transport or if you have just read about it on the internet.
> This was in The Netherlands, which has one of the best public transport in the EU so I expect it to be worse elsewhere.
First of all, you are still talking about a single point to point example.
In the Netherlands you have the happiest drivers exactly because the government invests so much money into public transport and bikes. That takes massive amount of cars of the road, making it more pleasant to drive for you.
And thankfully data pretty clearly shows that people tend to take what is better for that situation mostly based on time. So the fact that so many people choice public transport (or bikes) is a clear indication that it works for some people. And that helps you as a driver. If everybody thought like you, it would be worse for everybody.
If on a society we followed your logic and everybody would drive, then you would have the problem the US has, just 10x worse because in Europe, unlike in the US we don't have cities splatted over so much space with gigantic roads everywhere.
Netherland is the perfect example that proves that large investment in public transit and biking pays of for everybody. I would argue cars are still subsidized to much. And Neiterlands while doing many things well still needs a huge amount of improvement, specifically outside the cities and Randstad.
And a lot of Americans sit in their cars in start stop traffic for hours every day. With road rage and stress from road rage being a huge issue. You only need to look across most of American popular culture to see how deeply ingrained this is.
I would also not say that 'there is no concept of personal space'. Even in rush hour most of the time its not that bad in place I have been. You are sitting next to people, and rarely standing next to people. But its usually not a big issue.
Its often more comfortable then flying in a plane.
People always claim this and then talk about their car as a perfect save heaven. When in reality road rage incidents are also incredibly common. People taking out their guns or starting fights. And of course generally accidents kill a lot of people.
That said, if you only look at driving in a city like SF, this is likely less of an issue.
reply