America is too big for planes, too. If your transportation solution is flying, now everyone has to get around via endless highways or big, complicated regional airports, and you can only have so many of those. There’s a reason why rural areas in North America have completely different politics from urban areas, and why so much of it is driven by a sense of isolation and abandonment. Trains promise to help here because they are able to stop in small places that will never, ever have practical airports.

A good rail network provides a reliable, consistent, repeatable, and straightforward three hour connection from Nowheresberg to the nearest city. Slow, but good enough to feel like they exist in the same planet. Unfortunately, that promise is subtle, and it plays out over decades, so the reward system we’ve created for ourselves is incapable of supporting it. And thus, we have Amtrak and confederate flags

https://cosocial.ca/@dylanmccall/113233671160717813

  • dejected_warp_core@lemmy.worldEnglish
    1·
    1 month ago

    I see the argument that OP is quoting but I’m left wondering one thing: if most folks in the countryside could travel to a “big” city in three hours, what business would they conduct? Outside of tourism, that is.

    My understanding is this would be most useful to middle-men and business people, but the common man wouldn’t have much use for it.

    Edit: or is the (implied) application bigger than passenger rail?

    • ClockworkOtter@lemmy.worldEnglish
      8·
      1 month ago

      It’s nice to be able to go see a show, have some drinks after, stay the night in a hotel, then hop on the train the next day. Whether it’s with family or friends, a train journey can be a nice time to catch up, read, or watch the scenery go by.

      Being able to do this reliably does foster a sense of connection, like you are able and encouraged to also enjoy these activities. It might not be as quick as for those in the city, but it is achievable.

    • AA5B@lemmy.worldEnglish
      3·
      1 month ago

      Are you counting things like shopping, medical care, visiting friends and family, education , and events like concerts or sports as tourism?

      DO they need to have a reason? You can simply look at existing traffic to see where a train would offer better scale.

      • most sufficiently large cities have existing traffic to support rail in and out. Basically commuter rail
      • most sufficiently large city pairs less than 500 miles apart have existing traffic to support intercity rail. Amtrak.
      • the vast majority of transportation funding goes toward road and air, while rail has been undergfunded at least half a century
      • dejected_warp_core@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        1 month ago

        Thanks for the deeper think on this. I’m out my depth by not living in such an area - I knew I wasn’t going to cover all the bases on my own.

        Are you counting things like shopping, medical care, visiting friends and family, education , and events like concerts or sports as tourism?

        So, no, but after reading this it makes a lot more sense. Thank you.