Well, I'll upvote you for correcting me. Europe is a little bit larger than the US.
I always thought that was the big argument everyone made about why it's not feasible to build a high speed rail in the US. Maybe I'm remembering arguments about individual European countries vs the US, and not Europe as a whole. Europe is more densely populated vs the US seems to be the comparison.
If Canada becomes part of the US, then we'll be bigger! Kek!
Realistically there's so much viable land for rail travel in the US and Canada. The great plains make it easy for construction.
I was just in Europe last year, and being able to freely travel by train from country to country, with commuter rails for stops to different smaller cities, was really nice.
And they have significantly more boundaries and geography to work with!
Individual countries are still smaller than most US states and much more densely populated. When you have more cities closer together it's easier to justify criss-crossing the country with train tracks when in the USA if you don't live right next to a major train hub then the train is a waste of time.
Well, there are a lot of cities close together that don't have easy rail travel. Cincinnati to Chicago, for example, two once major rail hubs, have just one train per day late at night between the two of them. Meanwhile, Paris to Spain has 2-4 rail lines per day and they're more than twice the distance apart.
It seems the issue is a lack of investment in what we already have. There is capability for at least something and yet we don't bother.
Europe is actually larger than the US.
Love getting downvoted for facts lol
Well, I'll upvote you for correcting me. Europe is a little bit larger than the US.
I always thought that was the big argument everyone made about why it's not feasible to build a high speed rail in the US. Maybe I'm remembering arguments about individual European countries vs the US, and not Europe as a whole. Europe is more densely populated vs the US seems to be the comparison.
If Canada becomes part of the US, then we'll be bigger! Kek!
Realistically there's so much viable land for rail travel in the US and Canada. The great plains make it easy for construction.
I was just in Europe last year, and being able to freely travel by train from country to country, with commuter rails for stops to different smaller cities, was really nice.
And they have significantly more boundaries and geography to work with!
Individual countries are still smaller than most US states and much more densely populated. When you have more cities closer together it's easier to justify criss-crossing the country with train tracks when in the USA if you don't live right next to a major train hub then the train is a waste of time.
Well, there are a lot of cities close together that don't have easy rail travel. Cincinnati to Chicago, for example, two once major rail hubs, have just one train per day late at night between the two of them. Meanwhile, Paris to Spain has 2-4 rail lines per day and they're more than twice the distance apart.
It seems the issue is a lack of investment in what we already have. There is capability for at least something and yet we don't bother.