232
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2023
232 points (99.2% liked)
World News
32114 readers
685 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Sure, and that future likely involves a lot of trains.
I want super high speed rail instead of airplanes. I want regular high speed rail instead of highways. I want medium speed rail instead of roads. And so on. The technology is there, and we already have the land for most of it, we just need to stop building so many roads and actually build solid rail infrastructure.
Agreed.
I live in the Bay Area and because of my anxiety I can’t drive, but I can get to most places I need to be by BART/light rail.
it’s just one mode of transportation. In Japan also have a comprehensive bus system as well as small towns you can only get by car which rail trains use to service in the 1900s.
People will still have cars. We’ll still have roads and their big dick trucks. I don’t understand how this is a bad idea. LA to Vegas high speed would have been amazing. I lived in oak hills by the 15 seeing the traffic and how many people die on the pass due to car accidents was just horrifying.
I'd rather fly.
Sure, that should be an option too!
If you visit Europe or Japan, you'll find that trains and airplanes both exist, and both are popular and inexpensive. That's what I'd like to see happen elsewhere in the world as well, rely less on personal vehicles and more on mass transit, though preserve each as an option.
Por que no los dos?
No one is going to build a train stop near Ione, NV, one of the places I went to on a road trip.
I don't understand why it has to be a zero sum game.
edit: seems like the fuckcars cult has infested Lemmy. lmfao that sucks. It's cool though, because not even you cultists can bring me down. Oh and just to clarify: I definitely agree with where you guys are coming from, but you take it to an xtreme that I can't get on board with.
Sure, we can absolutely have both, we should just be preferring mass transit to personal transit for populated areas.
In my area, we have:
We've been having more traffic recently, so what's the state-wide transportation system's decision? Delay expansion of rail and expand the highway.
What we should instead be doing is:
Transit will never fully replace personal vehicles, but it can drastically reduce the need for driving within urban and suburban areas. Rail lines are a lot cheaper to maintain than roads, and trains can carry a lot more people than cars. In other words, if we can get people to use trains more than cars, we can reduce our spending on transportation infrastructure.
We should absolutely keep and improve our existing highway infrastructure, but we should also be phasing out a lot of our road infrastructure in densely populated areas in favor of mass transit options that move people more efficiently.
No, nothing has "infested" Lemmy. It's just that many people understand, that rails are much more efficient than roads and that individual traffic on large scale has no future. At least if you want our future to be survivable.
I agree with you! Fuckcars takes it to such an extreme I find it very very difficult to side with them. Cars have their uses