>

Nah,  its just we make less than 50 years ago and the lure of cheap travel/commuting is a rail system and should have been in place by now.
This is a friendly reminder to read our rules.
Remember, /r/Showerthoughts is for showerthoughts, not "thoughts had in the shower!"
(For an explanation of what a "showerthought" is, please read this page.)
Rule-breaking posts may result in bans. >

Trains are really cool and efficient. No traffic, no driving, fewer emissions, and cheaper too!
I wish we had more trains here. The autistic kids had the right idea obsessing over trains tbh. >

Trains themselves are alright, but what’s even cooler are huge train networks that help facilitate massive economic growth. >

Someone's been playing Victoria 3. >

Never heard of it, just find interesting the extreme value that trains provide for nation building >

Well I didn't say it was you lol. But yeah train networks and their impact on economic development are a feature of the game. >

Sounds cool may have to check it out >

I'm still waiting for flying cars. We were supposed to have them eight years ago. >

Have you seen how people drive cars that move in a two dimensional axis?  Add another dimension and watch chaos unfold. >

Just a few days ago wasn't there almost a collision between two planes? >

Yea but it was Texas, where their entire power grid collapses because it's cold and they prefer embezzlement to investing in infrastructure. >

AAAHHHH ... that makes sense. 
I feel like "but it was Texas" could be a new meme. its an explanation all in itself. >

The state apparatus version of "Florida man" >

I love our local passenger trains, I think they are going to build an offshoot 1/4 mile from my house, it should be pretty cool. >

Well it’s not just about the environment in terms of reducing emissions
Trains are more efficient so they end up increasing walking space which means the urban environment look more pleasant.
There’s videos about this comparing European cities vs average North American suburbs >

To say nothing of the economic benefits!  Not everybody can afford to own, fuel, and maintain a personal car, but train tickets are dirt cheap (and easy as balls to subsidize.)  Trains provide transportation for those who might not have it otherwise, they make it easier to travel for work and give people a much larger geographical patch in which they can look for employment.  
Edit: They make it easier to transport goods, which can help reduce raw material costs, while this would be minuscule at the retail level, the overall savings could add up significantly; if those savings are too presumptuous, there's also the undeniable economic savings to the average [checksnotes] human to be gained from reducing carbon emissions.  
Trains are the rare win/win/win: They're good for the environment, they're good for businesses, and they're good for workers.  Don't even get me started on national security, I'll talk your ear off, the civil war proved that trains are mandatory for a strong national defense itellyouwhat.  
Now if only so many Americans didn't believe in austerity politics.  /sigh >

Great. Now get me a ride to the train. The nearest city to me is 50 miles away. The nearest passenger train is... well, more than that. >

You can thank your government for that ! Thats not a thing in the rest of the world. You're the only country to take out tracks for trams in cities to make more room for cars. How stupid ! >

The vast majority of the States doesn't have the population density to make trains practical. We build out instead of building up. Thank local zoning for that. >

Is the east coast megalopolis dense enough ? Or what about California HSR. Or that other project in Florida. You have the Acela ""high speed"" line ( that averages 70mph by the way, which is just pitiful for a high speed clasification ) for over 50 million people. There are countries, with less than 50 million people, that have better rail, and those countries, bigger than the north east corridor, and with less population, still have good rail. Just start there, improve the Acela line, finish California HSR and I think you would have a great start. Nobody's saying that starting tomorrow every city has to have a station, clearly you cant do that. But you gotta start somewhere... . And also connect these systems between them. You dont have to have service every 10 minutes from Chattenoga to Earth, Texas, but something frpm New York to the west coast, that would be fantastic. And if you say thats not possible, Id like to draw your attention to the Trans-siberian, that is fully electrified, much longer than coast-to-coast service would be, and was built many years ago, by the Soviet Union. So peoe saying it cant be done admit not being able to do spmething the soviet union did decades ago. >

Umm, isn’t a plane kind of a flying train? Just got the one carriage mind you. >

It's more of a flying bus. And a Bus is not a "train on the road" It lacks any of the reasons trains are more efficient, though then Buses are still a lot efficient than cars. >

“Airbus” makes a lot more sense now >

I’m still waiting for a train. Idk what you guys are on about >

Flying cars are called "helicopters". They're even more dangerous, noisy, and expensive than cars, and no middle class person will ever be able to afford one.
But yes. TRAINS. >

It also doesn't help that more cars actually means less freedom. 
Before you could walk, bike, bus, train, car. Today (at least in many places in the US) you can take the car or go fuck yourself. >

I wish i got to experience flying pre 2000s todays security is stressful and adds so much time to the overall journey imagine how quick short haul flights were pre 9/11 >

I would be willing to bet if all the rail lines in Ontario Canada didn't get ripped up (and instead replaced/upgraded for passenger trains), the province would look vastly different today and a lot less people would choose to live in Toronto. >

I live in canada and if i want to get on a passenger train i need to drive 2 hours then stand on the tracks at 3 in the morning and pay $900 for a ticket >

Our quality of life has peaked, the next few decades we will see many basic things we take for granted become luxuries. >

might be right.   eventually it's going to be right.
i remember my parents telling me that in the early 1970s.
heck that was before we even had center a/c in our house. >

TBF we already have hover trains, we just want all the hover trains connected from africa to south America.
We also still want self driving drone-cars. >

Huh? I don't think that's the case at all, regarding the kids in 2020s part. >

I really wish we go back to trains and bikes, I refuse to learn to drive or buy a car >

I don’t understand this obsession with trains. I prefer the privacy and convince of my own car
Eating less meat would do much more for the environment than switching to trains >

Or here's a great idea - more trains AND eat less meat >

But trains suck >

So does eating less meat imo, but we need to do what we need to do >

We can barely drive cars when they are stuck on the ground and have to follow clearly painted lines >

I love trains too. They are and have always been my favourite mode of transport. Not just environment-wise, but theyre genuinely more enjoyable than anything else i ever tried. >

r/fuckcars for anybody who’s just now hopping on the trainwagon >

Trains increase freedom because they increase accessibility, not everyone can afford a card so making it essential to participate in society is ridiculous.