There are several regions in the USA where high speed rail is viable, especially in areas with high aviation congestion. You don’t need to build out the whole country, but there are a lot of places where a system is economically viable.
Yeah, and there are several regions in the USA served by commuter rail.
The point I’m making entirely is that the series of rail systems that have been connected in Europe were created for a purpose other than “this is the right choice for the environment and people”.
I don’t disagree we’d be better served with more focus on rail.
Most of the rail in the USA wasn’t built to be the right choice for the environment and the people, but private enterprise using rail to make land valuable.
On the flip side for Europe, passenger rail is not a continental planned set of routes, but a set of national routes that follow national politics.
Europe is roughly the same size as the USA, geographically.
It has twice the population, roughly.
Population densities in Europe are much higher than the USA, saving for in cities.
Train isn’t as economically viable here because of the spread out populace.
Give us a couple hundred years of warring with each other without faster more direct means of travel and we too would have a robust rail system.
This is Chinas rail system superimposed over the US. China is bigger than the US.
I’m not sure what you’re trying to say, but neat picture.
There are several regions in the USA where high speed rail is viable, especially in areas with high aviation congestion. You don’t need to build out the whole country, but there are a lot of places where a system is economically viable.
Yeah, and there are several regions in the USA served by commuter rail.
The point I’m making entirely is that the series of rail systems that have been connected in Europe were created for a purpose other than “this is the right choice for the environment and people”.
I don’t disagree we’d be better served with more focus on rail.
Most of the rail in the USA wasn’t built to be the right choice for the environment and the people, but private enterprise using rail to make land valuable.
On the flip side for Europe, passenger rail is not a continental planned set of routes, but a set of national routes that follow national politics.
Doing only what is economically viable is precisely the problem.
It was only done in Europe to the extent it was because it was necessary for sovereignty.
It wasn’t done altruistically for the people, it was done to move armies from one side of the country to another quickly.
The USA didn’t have a couple centuries of war fought between its states to build the rail system that Europe now thumbs its nose at the USA about.
In 1800 France had roughly 27 million people. In a state about the size of Texas.
In 2026 Texas has 32 million people.
1800s France had nearly the population density of modern day Texas.
Germany 24 million or so, Austria/Hunagry another 23 million
Mind you Belgium and The Netherlands combined for nearly 6 million, which was larger than the population of the USA in 1800.
This is how Europe supported its railroads.