Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Shitty-kitty 1 hour ago
The U.S had the greatest rail network and then we built the Interstate Highway system and abandoned rail.

Truth is that nobody funds multiple competing transportation network. Japan chose rail, we chose highways.

3 comments

Although Japan also has extensive highways, and they're privatized in a similar way to JR (NEXCO East, West, Central) and are nearly all tolled - if you're driving alone, it's often the same price in tolls alone as a ticket on the Shinkansen (but the equation quickly flips when you more people in the car)
Germany has both the Autobahn and rail.
The German rail network is chronically underfunded and Germany is completely incapable of building new lines. Per capita spending on rail pales in comparison to e.g. Switzerland and Austria.
Germany is roughly the size of Montana, with the population of almost CA and TX combined.
Given the reputation of the phrase "getting deutsche bahn'ed", I think they chose the Autobahn.
japan is a small island the US is one of the most extensive and biggest distance from population centers country on earth

I tihnk that helps explain the feasiability of train on each country more than inherent choices

It’s not just about size. Much of the U.S. would be cheaper to build rail networks because there is a lot of open, relatively flat land without dense building on it. Japan is very mountainous and has a lot of dense development, and it has to be more resilient in case of earthquakes.
Civil planning on that scale isn’t about feasibility but about what direction you want to shape the county in.

A sparse railway system would leave parts of the country less populated by design as it’s simply harder to get to them. People would bunch up into cities and towns because they had to.

We had a railway powered country until it was torn down
The US has several areas of high population density that have laughably bad rail networks.