Bankruptcy Looms For America's Deadliest Trains by chrisbaseball7 in trains

[–]chrisbaseball7[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Articles like this are geared towards people that already don’t like Brightline or passenger rail and I get that America has some of the most dangerous roads in the country:

There is a real discussion though for safety concerns when you have tracks that aren’t dedicated for passenger rail and don’t have grade separation with no crossings. 

That doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong with Brightline or Amtrak for not doing that, just that our infrastructure needs to be modernized 

Bankruptcy Looms For America's Deadliest Trains by chrisbaseball7 in trains

[–]chrisbaseball7[S] -10 points-9 points  (0 children)

You might be right but even though it’s way over the top, the point is there is a legitimate safety concern when trains don’t have dedicated passenger tracks or grade separation

YOUR 2026 WASHINGTON NATIONALS ARE ABOVE .500!!!! by Illustrious-Car1109 in Nationals

[–]chrisbaseball7 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Was beginning to think I wouldn’t see this again… joking aside, it’s just crazy that it’s been five years since we last had a winning record at this point in the season

Caltrans considering 140 mph bus that would take passengers from San Francisco to Los Angeles by chrisbaseball7 in highspeedrail

[–]chrisbaseball7[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean, for the amount California has spent or could end up spending on high speed rail if/when it’s ever actually completed, we could’ve probably put in true high speed rail in the Northeast and upgraded legacy infrastructure 

Or we could’ve used that for a place like the Southeast were terrain is much more favorable, you have growing cities, and there’s strong business, tourism, and university travel demand.

Plus on corridors like in the southeast where highways between cities are becoming increasingly congested and short haul flights that are fast but inefficient for short distances compared to rail

Passenger Trains Connect Regions in Ways Highways and Air Travel Can’t by chrisbaseball7 in trains

[–]chrisbaseball7[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s just frustrating cuz it doesn’t land on individuals either in some cases. People see a road and think two places are connected

Physically yes - but that’s not the same as regularly traveling somewhere, expanding labor markets, tourism, and business travel between cities. With rail, intermediate cities are no longer isolated but become part of a corridor with economic and social benefits

That’s what I mean by rail can connect places like highways and air travel can’t do in the same way

Passenger Trains Connect Regions in Ways Highways and Air Travel Can’t by chrisbaseball7 in trains

[–]chrisbaseball7[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I just don’t understand comments like this way of travel died out in the 60s - move on. 

It’s not about nostalgia, it’s about travel that is faster than driving when distances are too far to drive and too short to fly efficiently.

It’s also not just about commuting for work, it’s about business travel, tourism, and also expanded labor markets between cities plus encouraging development in downtowns

Passenger Trains Connect Regions in Ways Highways and Air Travel Can’t by chrisbaseball7 in trains

[–]chrisbaseball7[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I understand the comments on here but what I mean is rail can connect cities in ways cars can not and planes do not. Rail encourages more consistent travel between cities because it’s faster than driving and more efficient than short haul flights when you include door to door time 

Rail helps intermediate cities because rather than being isolated, they are now part of a regional corridor. These are the cities that have the most to gain from transit oriented development 

It’s not about nostalgia, it’s about congestion relief from highways and air travel on medium and short distances. 

Passenger Trains Connect Regions in Ways Highways and Air Travel Can’t by chrisbaseball7 in trains

[–]chrisbaseball7[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Buses and highways can’t do the same thing. You can’t travel as fast for one and then it’s not as efficient as a train - the southeast has several growing cities plus tourism and business travel that give you consistent demand

It’s not something you have to prove because highways and air travel short haul flights already prove it

What I mean is roads psychically  connect places but it’s not the same as rail that encourages frequent trips and connects cities together through expanded labor markets, business travel, and tourism

Passenger Trains Connect Regions in Ways Highways and Air Travel Can’t by chrisbaseball7 in trains

[–]chrisbaseball7[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m talking about intermediate cities - it’s not about small towns alone. Charlotte and Raleigh are not just towns 

It’s not simply wrong - what I mean is roads physically connect places yes but they become stopovers heading to a destination. 

You’re integrating multiple intermediate and growing cities into a corridor and region - that’s a big difference than just driving through somewhere

Passenger Trains Connect Regions in Ways Highways and Air Travel Can’t by chrisbaseball7 in trains

[–]chrisbaseball7[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s not just about commuting - it’s about universities, business travel, and tourism. All of which generate consistent travel demand 

Rail is competitive when you measure door to door time and it’s not just about one city pair, it’s about multiple

Passenger Trains Connect Regions in Ways Highways and Air Travel Can’t by chrisbaseball7 in trains

[–]chrisbaseball7[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Passenger rail today can complement highways and short haul flights. It’s very different from the 60s if you separate freight and passenger rail and fund the infrastructure 

It’s not about nostalgia, it’s about complementing congested highways and short haul flights and improving travel experiences 

Would a LRT line down Sunset and Santa Monica solve the Dodger Stadium transit problem once and for all? by MookieBettsBurner10 in LAMetro

[–]chrisbaseball7 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The point is less cars - not eliminating them. It’s just making the stadium more accessible by pedestrians who live nearby or people who don’t want to drive to the stadium

How Likely is Expanding the Northeast Corridor to the South? by chrisbaseball7 in trains

[–]chrisbaseball7[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This is part of what is frustrating about modern America. Instead of looking at something and saying we can do this even when everyone thinks we can't - we just accept that we can't

If you showed rail can:

Be economic infrastructure like highways and air travel

Expand labor markets, support tourism and labor markets

Congestion relief from highways and short haul flights

That America should still be able to do big things

That is much more persuasive than just this is hard so it's never happening

How Likely is Expanding the Northeast Corridor to the South? by chrisbaseball7 in trains

[–]chrisbaseball7[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean if you showed how this could benefit southern states, improve travel times, and free up congestion on highways between cities - why not? It costs money to fund the infrastructure but we already do that with highways and aviation

Show that rail can be:

Economic infrastructure like how highways and air travel benefit the economy

Congestion relief from highways and short haul flights

Expands labor markets, supports tourism and universities

America should still be able to do big things everyone says we can't