this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2023
308 points (97.8% liked)
Technology
59596 readers
5292 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The US is really only bigger than Europe if you count Alaska. I doubt there would be high-speed rail to Alaska anytime soon.
The majority of Europe can fit into just the central area of the US. Aircraft scale better with distance and is the core reason aircraft have succeeded so well in the US despite the push for more trains for decades. It's also why you do see some trains being built in CA, FL, and the NE, as the cities there are closer together, making the idea viable.
You do know that the Nordic countries are part of Europe, right? They stretch way up north past the edge of the image. They also happen to have some of the most advanced rail systems in the world.
As a Scandinavian: LOL
Sure, it may not be perfect, but it tells you a lot about the state of rail in the rest of the world. It's really only places like Japan and maybe China that leads the way.
Most of Europe and large parts of Asia has good railways compared to USA. It's not that the developed world has good railway systems, it's just that USA has a completely broken public transport system. But planes and trucks go brrr
France and Switzerland. First has trains as fast as airplanes, seconds has good network.
Sure, and they are about the same size as just CA, a place I specifically mentioned is viable for rail in the US.
Sweden:
Area of USA: 9,833,520 km^2
Area of Europe: 10,180,000 km^2
Did you seriously just compare the landmass of the United States with the entire fucking CONTINENT of Europe?
Yes...yes you did.
If that's the comparison you want then the Area of North America is 24,474,000 sq km.
The better comparison would be the US and the European Union. The EU is 4,422,773 km2.
Now sit down short stack. You aren't tall enough for this ride.
You did see that n2burns was replying to a comment that was a size comparison of the United States with the "entire fucking CONTINENT of Europe", right?
You are highly regarded.
Unlikely. The upside of being socially inept though is that I have more time and headspace for important things...like knowing the difference between a Country and a Continent.
Let's go for Russia then. Compare sizes.
I don't think Europeans understand what space is. They are all crammed in together like tuna.
Most of Europe is comparable to California in terms of density and terrain. A few sprawling megacities, a lot of smaller towns on the way to and from them, and a couple of mountain towns that are a bitch and a half to get to.
And California and The East Coast actually have solid public transportation. More buses than trains but... yeah.
But what Europe largely lacks are "the flyover states". Like, I love to reference https://www.amtrak.com/plan-your-trip.html because it really highlights this. The East coast is pretty dense and you can more or less get anywhere within a day or two of train+buses. Which is very reminiscent of (the) Europe(an Union). That is true to a lesser degree in California.
But... fuck Wyoming. Also, there are almost no major routes going in because the vast majority of that state is nothingness and empty land. Which is when you use an airplane and then a rental car. Same as if you are going to a remote part of Norway or Sweden
Just adding on a rant here. People who are obsessed with public transportation to eliminate all need for cars are, at best, ignorant. They watched a youtube channel about some rich guy living in Amsterdam and think that is the entire world. That ignores anyone who lives in a small town where bus service is the only option and there just isn't enough traffic to justify any form of a commute so that they can make a living.
It is still privileged as fuck, but I strongly encourage anyone with the ability to do so to ACTUALLY go on a trip to the UK or Europe or Japan and then navigate via public transportation. Staying in a city and life will be amazing (which is true of most US cities as well). Going to a few touristy hot spots around the city may be a hassle, but is doable. But look in to doing a day trip or even going cross country. It is still a LOT more doable than in the US, but you start to have much tighter connections and start to get worried about a delay.
And then you realize that "cross country" is a lot closer to "one state over".
I would LOVE to have more public transportation options and very much enjoy not renting a car on a holiday (or only getting it for one or two days on an extended one). But even if we had full on Civ3 endgame levels of rail coverage, simple demand would still mean people need cars. Because having a train track go right to your front door doesn't mean that you have a train waiting for you to take you anywhere you want to go the moment you want to (... that is a car, by the way). You are still at the mercy of there being a sufficient number of people who want to make the same trip that it justifies running a car on that route at a frequent enough rate that you don't have to sleep in a bus station after sharing a bowl of soup with your grade school crush,
Nice rant. I was born and raised in a "third world country" with better transportation than the US despite much lower density. In fact it would rank just under Oregon, so 39 stated are more dense than my country.
California does not have good public transportation, neither does a lot of the East Coast, for that matter. I have lived on both coasts and the Midwest, and visited over 35 states. Public transportation is mostly crap with a few exceptions in the core of a few Metro areas, and the NE.
Public transportation advocates want more than to add buses and trains, you are misrepresenting what we ask for.
I have, on numerous occasions, had to throw water on European's plans to visit all of the big sites in the US in one visit. Wanting to see the Grand Canyon, the Everglades and DC in the same visit is not terribly practical. My advice has been to pick a region and see everything there. Pick a different region of the US on your next visit.
What was throwing them off was a day-trip can drive across several European countries, but will only get you through a few states in the US.
On the other hand, I have, on numerous occasions, had to throw water on American's plans to visit big sites in Europe in one visit. "Let's do Amsterdam and Copenhagen and then Paris, Rome, and Barcelona." In one week. Yeah, not gonna happen.