undefined | Better HN

0 pointsjdminhbg5y ago0 comments

The American train system is also drastically more expensive than the Swiss train system.

0 comments

You must be jokin‘. Switzerland paid 11.2 billion in 2016. that would be 600 billions compared in US. But US invested 25.9 in 2016.

Switzerland moved all trucks to the rails to get more capacity on the streets (successfully). So this investments paid out. Fewer traffic = fewer stressed people = more productivity = fewer lost hours

jdminhbgOP5y ago

They invested more, which is not the same as it costing more.

toomuchtodo5y ago

Cheaper to just move to Switzerland.

vhiremath45y ago

^ Ok I LOL'd at this entire thread

PTOB5y ago

This is true. The USA has over 10x the population and 238x the land area. A national train system = dollar amounts that the human mind can't really grasp.

jeffbee5y ago

That is not the reason because if it were, there would be Switzerland-sized bits of the US with Swiss-esque rail service, and there are not. For example, LA County is more populous and five times as dense as Switzerland, but has essentially no rail service of which to boast. It's just a land use choice we are making: we can either have compact urban forms easily served by rail, or distributed forms that are impossible to serve.

_-___________-_5y ago

I’m not sure that it’s the sprawl either. Many European cities with large suburban areas around them and nearby smaller towns that have effectively become part of them (e.g. Milano) have frequent local/regional rail service out to all the suburbs and associated towns.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse