ColoradoJ said 02/29, 03:32 PM
After living abroad for six months it was shocking to come back to a place where I can't get anywhere by train. With rising gas prices, emission concerns, car accidents, traffic jams, crumbling roads and many other vehicle related problems we face daily, why haven't more U.S. cities invested in mass transit systems? Even cities that do have mass transit systems often still require a vehicle to get to the closest train or bus station. Yes, most Americans are more independent than many other countries with mass transit systems, but the benefits of having mass transit certainly out way any minor inconveniencies using mass transit may create.
Wheatbread said 02/29, 08:06 PM
Minor inconveniences like...shortage on money? I don't know where you lived abroad, but America is just too big to lay out mass transit systems thoroughly. Pulling troops out of Iraq and putting money in making mass transit systems doesn't make sense, because there are other issues to use those money on. Why break, or make matters worse on something that runs fine at the moment? When I lived in New York, I preferred to ride on cars, even though the traffic was terrible, because public train system was worse off, of sanitary issues and being too crowded, just made me avoid it until I moved here to Georgia.
Bus is out of the question here, since it also runs on gas.
ColoradoJ said 03/01, 08:27 PM
First of all, I didn't say anything about Iraq. Second, things do not "run fine at the moment". We have rising gas prices, heavy pollution, heavy traffic and crumbling roads. That is not running fine. Sanitary issues can be resolved easily, look at Japan's rail system. Hybrid buses can run with little to no gas, which Denver's RTD bus system utilizes. Also even if buses aren't hybrid, they still use less gas and pollute less than if the 50 people riding that bus each drove their own individual cars. Our country wasn't too big to build an interstate highway system, so why is it to big for rail?
Wheatbread said 03/03, 12:59 AM
About Iraq, I never thought there would be another source of funding that could back up to lay train tracks throughout America. Also, consider Greyhound? Amtrak? We have it, no one thinks much of them because last time i checked, only thing good about using those was the cheap price and the feel of new experience, getting on a transportation system that person never used before. It does get tiring after awhile - we have cheaper substitutes that can cut down on time significantly (planes, ooh). I see where you're getting at, because I also used subways a lot. but Denver and Japan are much smaller-scale than America. Are we going to call a train system completely covered and have a single line of train run through states in middle like Wyoming, Idaho, ect? I ask you to look at our rail system, trash everywhere, trains older than train tracks. I see people throw away trash any way they like, and that doesn't help keep the system clean. I think the government can do much better spending on something else, like invest even more in efficient fuels, way to keep oil prices lower, instead of pouring money in something that a selected few (mostly crowded cities) will barely take advantage of
ColoradoJ said 03/03, 11:54 AM
The reason hardly anyone uses Amtrak is that it is in not very fast for the price, it's cheaper and quicker to drive. If we invested in things like bullet trains though, and if we kept our public areas clean like the Japanese, I think a lot more people would use mass transit. I never said anything about government funding either. When I say "the U.S. needs..." that does not automatically mean "the U.S. government should provide...". I think it would actually be better if the systems were privitized, like the Japanese systems. By the way, their train system does not just run in cities, it runs all the way across the country, through mountains, plains and over oceans. You could also look at Europe. Though individual countries may be small, the continent as whole is almost as big as the U.S. and they have connecting train systems throughout the continent.
Our government cannot afford it; and the last thing we need is more government management.
Igor | 02/29/08
Report Offensive Commentthe area I live in has a decent public transit system. I cant complain.
yngster | 03/01/08
Report Offensive CommentWhile most of Wheatbread's arguments were sound, the Iraq mention was a complete non sequitur.
Copacetic | 03/03/08
Report Offensive Commentyeah i have a problem saying stuff out of my head then expect others to understand without giving any reasons... :/
Wheatbread | 03/03/08
Report Offensive CommentIt's sad that our nation pioneered the idea of using trains for nationwide transit, but then completely abandoned the idea once Mr. Ford's invention came along.
Wilder K. Whyte | 03/04/08
Report Offensive CommentPlease keep it clean. Bad words will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.
IDF tanks and infantry launch a ground offensive in the Palestinian enclave
(Uriel Sinai / Getty)
Caltech physics professor Kenneth G. Libbrecht has turned his passion for the study of ice crystals into an art form. In his books and website, Snowcrystals.com, he breaks down some of the basics behind these miniature miracles of nature
(Kenneth G. Libbrecht)
America is the perfect candidate to lay out a mass train system, the rails that travel through other states could be managed by the federal government, and the trains running locally could be run by the local or state governments with all working with a shared cooperation. A lifted monorail, for example, would work well in the Phoenix metro area (where I live) because you could run it on each side of every major street with intersections acting as transfer stations, all on lifter platforms above surface traffic.
base89 | 02/29/08
Report Offensive Comment