I was incredibly lucky the smallish town (40k pop) I went to college in had some remarkably good transportation I had never seen before. There was a bus that cost $.50 per ride circa 2010 and went to about a dozen locations within 20 miles, two different shopping centers (their main attractions being Walmarts but still), the university, the community college, several neighborhoods, and downtown locations, among a few others. Second there was a rental car option through the university where anyone with a drivers license and and a debit or credit card could use it (eg you didn’t have to be 25 or have a credit card). You could reserve time slots in advance online, and it was only $5 and hour or so. There were multiple cars.<p>The bus eventually went up to $1 per ride but I still think about these two options and wish my town had something like it. With a few small improvements I don’t see why we can’t reasonably subsidize these relatively cheap options in most towns/small cities. The rental car one would be harder, but even the bus would suffice. It notably didn’t stop at any grocery stores, only Walmarts so that’s another thing to improve. But I’d give up my car in a second for that bus back home.<p>I’m not even sure if this is still their active website <a href="http://0060325.netsolhost.com/about.htm" rel="nofollow">http://0060325.netsolhost.com/about.htm</a> but it gives you a picture of what I’m talking about. There’s either another service or a replacement that is $2.00 instead of $1.00 that goes by DCT from what I can tell. I don’t live there anymore so hard to know the current setup. I’m really underselling how good that bus was/is.
I think the biggest problem is attitude; in the US, transit is largely viewed as a welfare program for poor people who are not (yet) able to afford cars. To put it in HN terms, Americans see it like a deprecated API; something you're obligated to support somewhat, but only until your users migrate off of it.<p>If you look at the Honolulu transit project (Formerly HART, now called Skyline), I think it shows everything wrong with US transit projects:<p>1. It goes nowhere useful, only going to a bunch of random places on the west side of Oahu where no one really goes.<p>2. It was pitched as an economic uplift project, not a transit project. "If we build a train in these largely-ignored areas, it will help the people there!"<p>3. It took years and years to build, full of cost overruns, because it was also pitched mainly as a job creation project. You can't sell a transit project based on that alone, so instead they're pitched as welfare or job-creation programs, which creates the wrong set of incentives. After all, if the project takes longer, that's more jobs!
The article mentions how global cities outside the US are building out urban rail systems.<p>Here's some more detail about China, which has the two largest transit systems in the world: Shanghai and Beijing.<p>In 1993, Shanghai had one line running 2.7 miles with 4 stations. Less than 30 years later, the system had 15 lines, 500 miles of track, and 500 stations. [1]<p>And in that same time frame, the Beijing subway system was expanded, from 2 lines in 2002 to 27 lines and 500 miles of track, with 13 million riders per day in 2022. [2]<p>Also in that time, 30 other cities in China got subway systems as well.[3]<p>In 1993, China's per-capita GDP was $537. By comparison, per-capita GDP in the US was 50 times larger (about $23k). Since then, the gap has narrowed. US per-capita GDP is now 5x of China (66k vs 12k).<p>China demonstrates that, even with small GDP, if you prioritize the needs of the people over entrenched commercial interests, it can be done.<p>[1] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_Shanghai_Metro" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_Shanghai_Metro</a>
[2] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beijing_Subway" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beijing_Subway</a>
[3] <a href="https://qz.com/1010911/a-beautiful-data-animation-shows-the-unprecedented-speed-of-development-of-chinas-rail-system" rel="nofollow">https://qz.com/1010911/a-beautiful-data-animation-shows-the-...</a>
The heart of the problem is that cars became popular for the majority of the people due to freedom and convenience, causing most of the infrastructure to focus on them. The existing public transit saw worse service and problems such as crime or cleanliness. New projects become more difficult and costly to build, and were hijacked for political causes. Willingness to fund even the existing projects fell.<p>Nobody wants to ride public transit that is unreliable/late, has limited service times/areas, prone to strikes, dirty or unsafe, etc. It's easier and/or better to own a car or Uber in most areas. It's not really going to improve since we're stuck in a catch-22.
This seems like a plug for a book than anything with a definitive answer. The pull quote near the end of the article implies that the rest of the world has simply caught up and is pressing forward while the US has simply stopped.<p>I was in Florence not long ago and they are building out a very impressive light-rail network [1]. Twenty years ago a similarly ambitious network was planned in Cincinnati, OH and it was voted down 2-1 [2].<p>[1] <a href="https://en.comune.fi.it/administration/tramway/system.html" rel="nofollow">https://en.comune.fi.it/administration/tramway/system.html</a><p>[2] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MetroMoves" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MetroMoves</a>
America is HUGE... And all of the big cities seem unable to herd their own cats. People often forget that the USA is really 50 small countries wearing a trench coat. Just look the maps linked below. The EU has all its people piled up close where as the US has HUGE tracts of low population areas. That's why you'll never see a high speed coast to coast rail system here. logistically it's just not possible (at least not on the west coast). I live in one of the unpopulated areas and by car it takes over an hour of continuous travel at 70 MPH (115 KPH) to get to a smallish big city. There's just too much empty space.<p><a href="https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/2021/geo/population-distribution-2020.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/2021/geo/popul...</a><p><a href="https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/figures/fragmentation-pressure-and-population-density" rel="nofollow">https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/figures/fragmentatio...</a><p>I could see local areas like California or New York getting some high speed rail but even then, how many people would use it and where would they be going?
I lived in New York City until 2020. According to the 2010 census, the majority of households in New York City do not own a car. I got around fine via buses, subway and railroads. If need be I could take a taxi. The subway runs all night, all over the city, as do buses. The city even improved its transit - the subway now goes to the Javits Center. The Long Island Railroad now goes to Grand Central Station.<p>I was in San Francisco once and the latest Caltrain going from Sunnyvale to San Francisco was before 11:30PM, and the latest Caltrain going from San Francisco to Sunnyvale was three minutes after midnight. In New York PATH trains, LIRR trains, Metro North trains, New Jersey transit trains all leave well past that.
My question is, who is constructing these rail systems in each of the countries? My understanding was that Chinese companies had built a lot of the biggest subway systems in various cities from Kiev to Singapore.<p>For political reasons that would be untenable in the US. Therefore we have to pay full price to build a thing we’re not good at building and don’t have the ramped up supply chains to support. If there’s only one company left that builds a component you need, guess what? You pay whatever they ask.
>These are the statistics underlying the reality that in San Francisco; Washington, D.C.; Boston; Atlanta; and many other major cities in the U.S., not a single mile of rail transit is currently under construction.<p>Here are some of the current U.S. cities with rail projects under construction:<p>Los Angeles, California - Extensions to the existing light rail network<p>Denver, Colorado - Commuter rail lines<p>San Diego, California - New light rail extensions<p>Seattle, Washington - Ongoing Commuter rail lines<p>Minneapolis, Minnesota - Southwest Light Rail Transit (SWLRT) project
Politics. You have a leadership and public hostile to public transport, simple as that.<p>I have lived in some cities where things are not like this. Where public transportation is amazing and getting better by the year.<p>It’s a shame every time I read people ignorant how a modern city can function with a pedestrian/bicycle/tram/bus/train. Where it’s quiet and calm.<p>But how do you convince people who have only seen the insides of cars that public transportation can be superior?
Has the author of this article ever driven across the US? It takes days and days. The US is huge; it makes absolutely no sense to build mass transit connecting that many places where people live when it's so uneconomical. The US isn't China; the government can't just <i>decree</i> that something happen.
This seems to come up once a month or so on HN. Here is a non-ideological take, which I suppose means <i>everyone</i> will hate it because it doesn't echo their pet theory:<p>The US's basic problem with large building projects <i>nowadays</i> is federalism. There are so many different jurisdictions that opponents can always find some court or legislative body that they can exploit to slow down or stop the project.<p>Everything else flows from that.<p>Lawsuits? Too many courts.<p>Legislative opposition? Too many governmental units. Even if the public <i>as a whole</i> supports it, some jurisdictions will not.<p>Administrative permit hearings, which go on endlessly? Too many governmental units.<p>Yes, things used to work better in the US, but things change and all systems decay.
The new York metro has pretty much become a prop location for tiktokers. They might as well make it an official partnership at this point and get some of their fare revenue back
My answer without reading the article.<p>It’s hard in the US because of politics, corruption, favors, contracts for the purpose to burn money, transit other than cars is only for poor people (a US thing), poor people aren’t a priority, reputation for working on transit for people won’t get you reelected by your rich donors and constituents.<p>It’s kind of a shame because whenever Americans get back from Europe they rave about being able to take the train everywhere.
Context: this is a copy I posted r/boulder some years ago to people's wish for ( long promised) rail to Denver.<p>I commuted to Denver daily from Boulder, CO for three years and never drove during that time.<p>My shortlist of why I only want bus service to Boulder County ( for reference I typically pick up the bus at Table Mesa).<p>I only moved to Boulder in 2009 so I know I haven't carried as much tax burden as some people who "dream of light rail to Denver" but I'm very very happy with the FlatIron Flyers.<p>1. Buses can adapt to weather conditions<p>- Frequently coworkers training up from the tech center were 10x more likely to have issues with trains when the weather was icy, during the three years that I compiled this list of why I prefer buses.<p>2.Buses can adapt to other buses on the same route failing<p>- the RTD train infrastructure has very few places that light rail can pass one another so it doesn't matter if your train is working if the one ahead of your fails<p>3. Buses do not have routes altered/closed for maintenance<p>- when I would take the light rail to the company's Parker office or visiting friends it was surprising to have to get off and catch a bus around a section of rail under repair.<p>- I acknowledge that sometimes specific stops can be closed or moved but rarely is a whole section down and require alternate solutions (i.e. deboarding the train to board a bus to deboard on the other side of maintenance and board a new train)<p>4. Buses have express options.<p>- see the comment above regarding the few places that RTD rails can pass other trains<p>- note when the W line opened the express bus routes were removed, I think that was also true with another line but I can't remember. My favorite part of this is the coworkers I know who used that route started driving because the train was significantly longer commute times.<p>5. Buses typically have storage for up to six bikes per vehicle and don't block entries of others<p>- as an avid bike-the-final-mile commuter having storage for bikes that don't hinder other passengers boarding or exiting is nice (if you want to complain that it sometimes means staying at a few stops longer go ahead)<p>6. Buses Can turn over quicker at end of the line<p>- waiting for the E Line to swap directions at union station was comically slow when compared to catching the FF2 that just dropped off people and pulled around to pick up.<p>7. Buses can reroute around accidents that happen.<p>- E line and other northbound rail had to stop because of a car accident on the I-25 on the other side of a jersey wall where someone died. But the law says all traffic must be stopped from crossing an area of a certain diameter from the accident scene. So the next train had to stop. No place for passengers to deboard in the middle of the railway and blocked trains behind it.<p>- See comment above where other trains would be impacted as well<p>8. IMO, The payment and boarding method is a better User experience on the bus.<p>- this was more true before the mobile app could hold an annual pass<p>9. I'm sure I could come up with more reasons.<p>- oh, I'd rather take the AB to the airport than the A-train (sheesh that is a long train ride for such a short distance)<p>- oh, someone just mentioned the "rich people lane" yes, the bus uses the HOV lane! How great.<p>10. Air circulation is better inter city buses<p>When my office opens I'll return to bike/bus commuting. It is a bummer that during covid the express buses have stopped but understandable. The few times that I have bused in during 2020 the added time of FF1 was noticeable. Typically bike/express-bus takes me 50minutes house door to office door
When you treat everything as a product that must be profited off, maximizing gain and minimizing the expense, that's what you get.<p>Public transit does not need to turn a profit, it's a public service. It must provide a service. It is already paid off.<p>"... but muh capitalism brought me the iPhone!"<p>Yeah, what about being able to walk your fucking neighborhood though?