|
Public transport - North America vs Europe - question
|
View this Thread in Original format
| ali92 |
I'm not sure if this even belongs here but I think I'd get more answers to the general question here as I bet the reasons for the way things are the way they are are at least partly political, so here goes:
Why is public transportation, namely rail, so lacking in North America so lacking compared to Europe? How did we fall so far behind over the last 50 or so years that now it will take another 50 or so to catch up? I doubt the automobile can be the only factor as cars are common in Europe too. Was it just cheap fuel? Do you believe that geography is the reason? Perhaps population density differences? It seems that outside the northeast US, there is virtually no functioning passenger rail system (& of course no true high-speed rail system anywhere in NA).
Did no-one simply found developments such as the TGV interesting & valuable enough to implement here?
Finally, do you think it will always be this way in North America? |
|
|
| Capitalizt |
| Trains suck. Cars rule. Seriously..Why would anyone want mass transit when they can drive? You need to wait for your transportation to arrive..rely on schedules to get around town and ride next to a bunch of smelly passengers..bleh. I do think the reason they are more popular in europe is because they tax the sh!t out of gasoline.. It costs 3-4X more per gallon there than it does in the USA. There is just no incentive for mass transit in America when cars and gas are very affordable for most people. |
|
|
| Krypton |
| Unless you'r in New York, Chicago, Washington DC, LA, and a few other cities, the public transit is horrid. |
|
|
| Arbiter |
| quote: | Originally posted by Capitalizt
Trains suck. Cars rule. Seriously..Why would anyone want mass transit when they can drive? |
Let's see:
I don't have to pay for a car.
I don't have to pay for gas.
I don't have to pay for parking.
I don't have to pay for insurance.
I can work while in transit, thereby making money during my commute.
All told, for me it's probably a difference of about $10,000 per year or more. If I just stashed all those savings away, then with modest interest I'd have half a million dollars in 20 years--and that's ignoring the fact that those costs will almost surely inflate significantly within those 20 years.
Seems like the economic incentives are pretty clear to me. |
|
|
| Lebezniatnikov |
| Not to mention you're saving the world by going green! :gsmile: |
|
|
| jerZ07002 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Arbiter
Let's see:
I don't have to pay for a car.
I don't have to pay for gas.
I don't have to pay for parking.
I don't have to pay for insurance.
I can work while in transit, thereby making money during my commute.
All told, for me it's probably a difference of about $10,000 per year or more. If I just stashed all those savings away, then with modest interest I'd have half a million dollars in 20 years--and that's ignoring the fact that those costs will almost surely inflate significantly within those 20 years.
Seems like the economic incentives are pretty clear to me. |
aside from the economic incentives, commuting by train is more reliable (i.e., if i leave at the same time every day i am likely arriving at work the same time every day). By car, there is a greater chance for different levels of congestion based on construction, traffic volumn, police activity, accidents, etc... Also, your stress level on a train is quite low compared to the stress level while sitting in traffic.
Every day it takes me 50 minutes by train to commute to the city, and by car it could vary from 25 minutes to 1.5 hours. To add to that, the parking costs alone dwarf the public transportation costs (30 a day for parking compared to 8 a day for the trains). |
|
|
| DJ Damerchi |
| east asia has some impressive public transport systems as well |
|
|
| yukii |
yeah it really ing sucks.
you take the bus in europe (relatively same price- cheap) but the buses are really clean & well air conditioned & the seats are comfortable & prlly not with the cloth material bc that just gets gross with dust.. its just FRESH and clean & everyone takes the bus..
trains.. even better..
HERE.. no ing train, no metro (unless like kryp said u live in DC or something) & buses are for bums :mad:
i don't get it. the US should do a 'makeover' with their public transportation.
i remember where i lived there was no swimming pool.. well, a real ty one. SO.. id take the military shuttle bus to parsburg.. then from there take the train (all day pass) to regensburg- theeen walk out from the platz walk across the street to the bus area & catch the bus- if you have the ticket from the train then u can use any bus u want as many times as u want.. so then the bus would take me to the regensburg schwimmbad and DONE. i mean.. it sounds long, it kinda was- but if you're with friends, it's fun. so i used to do that like every weekend in the summer.
i don't want to imagine doing the same thing HERE. :nervous: |
|
|
| jerZ07002 |
| quote: | Originally posted by yukii
yeah it really ing sucks.
you take the bus in europe (relatively same price- cheap) but the buses are really clean & well air conditioned & the seats are comfortable & prlly not with the cloth material bc that just gets gross with dust.. its just FRESH and clean & everyone takes the bus..
trains.. even better.. |
really? all the public transportation i took in europe was kind of grimmy. the tube has hard clothe sheets, no air conditioning, and it's really stuffy. the buses i've been on were equally unimpressive. Still, the reach of the public transportion is impressive.
the commuter trains were much nicer (e.g., the eurostar, etc...).
| quote: | Originally posted by yukii
HERE.. no ing train, no metro (unless like kryp said u live in DC or something) & buses are for bums :mad:
i don't get it. the US should do a 'makeover' with their public transportation. |
it's pure economics. you need density in order to make public transportation efficient. it doesn't make much sense to have an expansive public transportation system when most people don't live in densely populated areas. places like NJ, NY, DC, and Chicago can support such systems because of the population densities. We don't have great supraregional rail systems either because the population centers are widely dispersed, such that air travel is not only faster, but also more economical. if people changed their living habits so that most people lived close together in cities our public transportation system would be better.
europe has such a good public transportation system because most people live in the same places their ancestors lived prior to automobiles. Thus, in almost all parts of europe, even in rural areas, people live closely together. Consequently, people live in walking distance of public transportation stops.
I've always laughed a little at how US systems are designed so that people can drive their cars to the train stops to catch a train. To me, that seems a little counter productive. I get why they do it (i.e., in most areas of the country the residential density doesn't support particular areas for a train stop, those areas need to be created artificially with a parking lot), but it's still a little ironic to me. |
|
|
| DOOMBOT |
| Once there is enough demand to put it into place, one can only hope that it is left to the private companies to get it done. Otherwise it won't get done right or even get done at all. |
|
|
| yukii |
yeah, i agree with what you say about population and density- it makes sense.. it's just in europe in the smallest little town- there was a train station lol ..
as far as seeing crummy transportation in EU that's weird but i believe you bc i do remember the worst metro evar was in italy lol .. really ing hot and dirty and graffiti... but when i think of it, all the crummy transportation was always in the HUGE cities like Rome, Paris****** lol but if you're in a regular city.. not too big or anything i think it will be obviously cleaner and nicer like the ones i used to ride on..
i think even if the US only has good p.transportation in populated areas- they should still increase it bc i think it will help the US in the long run.. americans could travel about alot easier, there would prlly be an increase in traveling, & it's alot more green :tongue2
{sorry if my sentences are weird- im watching a documentary while typing :toothless } |
|
|
| jerZ07002 |
| quote: | Originally posted by yukii
yeah, i agree with what you say about population and density- it makes sense.. it's just in europe in the smallest little town- there was a train station lol ..
as far as seeing crummy transportation in EU that's weird but i believe you bc i do remember the worst metro evar was in italy lol .. really ing hot and dirty and graffiti... but when i think of it, all the crummy transportation was always in the HUGE cities like Rome, Paris****** lol but if you're in a regular city.. not too big or anything i think it will be obviously cleaner and nicer like the ones i used to ride on..
i think even if the US only has good p.transportation in populated areas- they should still increase it bc i think it will help the US in the long run.. americans could travel about alot easier, there would prlly be an increase in traveling, & it's alot more green :tongue2
{sorry if my sentences are weird- im watching a documentary while typing :toothless } |
while the stations pretty much suck, the trains for the NYC subway are the best subway trains i've ever been on, anywhere. The newest trains are clean, the air conditioning is cold, and the trains are designed for space maximization. They are certainly better than anything i've been on in any other US or european city. |
|
|
|
|
