Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Or we could spend 80 billion so far on a train to nowhere

2456

Comments

  • trublue
    trublue Member Posts: 3,042
    Goduckies said:

    trublue said:

    Expanding Amtrak is “Building Back Better” . . . “Biggest bang for the buck we can expend(?).”

    OMG

    Insanity prevails . . .

    I am a fan of expanding Amtrak, it can be done fairly cheaply compared to building HSR... but the California HSR is just stupid
    Take a trip on Amtrak from Los Angeles to Portland (30 hours) and get back to me. Doesn’t matter whether it is coach or with a roomette.

    It can be expanded “fairly cheaply” . . . Surely you jest!!!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • WestlinnDuck
    WestlinnDuck Member Posts: 17,917 Standard Supporter
    Goduckies said:

    trublue said:

    Expanding Amtrak is “Building Back Better” . . . “Biggest bang for the buck we can expend(?).”

    OMG

    Insanity prevails . . .

    I am a fan of expanding Amtrak, it can be done fairly cheaply compared to building HSR... but the California HSR is just stupid
    Not a fan. People don't want to travel on trains except in limited situations. I can drive to Seattle (most times in around 3 hours). When I get there I don't have to rent a car and drive to my appointment directly. 20 miles a gallon, 360 mile round trip and $3 a gallon gas = $54 bucks. If I took a co-worker, still $54. Train would be $72 round trip for a refundable ticket. As it is now, stated trip time is 3.5 hours. To take the train, 30 minute drive to Union station in Portland. Then at least $12 parking. Need to get there at least a half hour early or more. Then when I get to Seattle, I have to rent a car. Say a half hour and $40. Then I need to drive to me destination. Then I need to drop off the rental car. Another half hour. Then back to Portland and another half hour to get home. We could spend billions of dollars and cut the travel time down to 2 hours. Basically, went I went to the Seattle area for a meeting we drove about 75% of the time. Occasionally, when I was going by myself, then I'd fly. Time was about the same with the travel to and from the airport and waiting and security.

    If trains were more efficient than air or automobile, then we would have a lot of train travel. Let the market work.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • SFGbob
    SFGbob Member Posts: 33,188
    edited April 2021
    trublue said:

    Goduckies said:

    trublue said:

    Expanding Amtrak is “Building Back Better” . . . “Biggest bang for the buck we can expend(?).”

    OMG

    Insanity prevails . . .

    I am a fan of expanding Amtrak, it can be done fairly cheaply compared to building HSR... but the California HSR is just stupid
    Take a trip on Amtrak from Los Angeles to Portland (30 hours) and get back to me. Doesn’t matter whether it is coach or with a roomette.

    It can be expanded “fairly cheaply” . . . Surely you jest!!!
    If time is not an issue and you don't mind unscheduled stops and sitting on a train for 30 hours when a flight would take you 2 it's great. Oh yeah, the fact that Amtrak actually loses money on every rail line they operate outside of the DC to Boston, NYC, Philly corridor is another bonus.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • trublue
    trublue Member Posts: 3,042
    edited April 2021
    Highly unionized employees . . . Had to bust up a poker game for a few minutes to have the Porter get sheets for my bed. He was irate cuz it was supposed to have been done by another employee in LA.

    Simply, the trip through hell.

    I can’t imagine taking coach for 30 hours.

    Only a slight upgrade from Greyhound.

    This was over 35 years ago . . .

    One and done.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • PurpleThrobber
    PurpleThrobber Member Posts: 48,558 Standard Supporter
    Try taking the train to Williston fucking North Dakota in January. That’s some special travel.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Fire_Marshall_Bill
    Fire_Marshall_Bill Member Posts: 26,146 Standard Supporter
    Trains work in Italy and Europe because those countries are small.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • WestlinnDuck
    WestlinnDuck Member Posts: 17,917 Standard Supporter
    trublue said:

    Highly unionized employees . . . Had to bust up a poker game for a few minutes to have the Porter get sheets for my bed. He was irate cuz it was supposed to have been done by another employee in LA.

    Simply, the trip through hell.

    I can’t imagine taking coach for 30 hours.

    Only a slight upgrade from Greyhound.

    This was over 35 years ago . . .

    One and done.

    When I was 17 our high school Spanish club went to Mexico for a month at a Spanish school for US students. Took Greyhound to Mexico. What a cluster phuck. First night bunch of drunk guys in the back that got dropped off in the middle of nowhere at about 3 AM. Our high school teacher after a week down in Saltillo got threatened by his wife with divorce if he didn't come home. After consultation with the parents, they decided to leave me in charge of six other teenagers. So, I led our intrepid squad after the four weeks, back to Portland from Saltillo, Mexico via bus. You think that sh*t would happen today. I hate Greyhound.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Pitchfork51
    Pitchfork51 Member Posts: 27,680
    I like trains

    That go from a dense city to another fairly close dense city
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • MelloDawg
    MelloDawg Member Posts: 6,917
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7I95rdKhWD0
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • MikeDamone
    MikeDamone Member Posts: 37,781
    European rail travel is good. Probably the only thing these cucks do well.

    Getting from Seattle to Spokane in 3 hours or less with multiple departure times. For $30. Also fast cheap trains to Leavenworth, Wenatchee, Yakima, ellensburg, etc.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter