9
1979 (lemmy.world)
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by FlyingSquid@lemmy.world to c/fuckcars@lemmy.world

Today, from Amtrak's website:

all 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 3 points 3 months ago

This is why I feel the height was the seventies. Was it a great time necessarily but we were still making progress. I mean yeah technology progressed after but little else. Some political wins here and there but so much regression.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

On the other hand, everyone was inhaling lead fumes at the time. And buildings were full of asbestos.

[-] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 1 points 3 months ago

I get things like this when I mention the seventies. The fact is was regulated out in the 70's is what made it the height. the problem is things like that no longer happening in the 80's onward much with the villianification of regulation.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

Lead and asbestos weren't banned until long after the 70s. Asbestos was (sort of) banned in 1989, and leaded gasoline wasn't banned until 1996.

[-] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 1 points 3 months ago

This is a bit misleading. We still have lead water pipes but the start of getting rid of lead from paint and gasoline in the 70's and its crazy we still have not gotten rid of it in pipes with just recently during our more sane times of the last few decades some more regulation (if it stands in the next four years.) Asbestos is a bit of a special case as it did prevent fire deaths significantly and there was issues with replacing it with something as effective and issues with disturbing it possibly being more dangerous by requiring it to be replaced. but regulation again did start in the seventies with exposure to workers in manufacturer. Still much like lead pipes it is only in the past year during our brief blip of enlightened times that its been banned mostly. Again if it stays in place.

[-] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

The blue diagonal names makes this really hard to compare.

And it doesn't really show how fast/reliable service is. With freight having priority on all the rails, passenger gets fucked over, becoming slow, unpredictable, and spotty.

[-] Beacon@fedia.io 1 points 3 months ago

Without an "after" pic showing the map as it is now, this isn't informative for most people

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

I'll edit and put it in the body too. Good call.

[-] nexguy@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)
[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Important to note the key in the bottom left. The green lines aren't trains, they're generally bus routes that Amtrak coordinates with.

[-] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 3 months ago

So the grid is basically the same but most of the stations are gone.

[-] ccunning@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

The “after” pic isn’t showing all the stations.

[-] Blackout@fedia.io 0 points 3 months ago

The other difference is some routes get 2 trains a day and it probably cost $5k to go cross country

[-] knexcar@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

2 trains a day would be an improvement for many routes, a lot are 1 train a day or 3 trains a week.

[-] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

All the proof you need that north america is not "too big" to build a railway. There are already several railways from coast to coast.

[-] boltzbruh@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

Did they purposely avoid South Dakota?

[-] pyre@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

what... I know that you don't have much in the way of public transit but... you remove what little you have now?

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

Oh this is nothing. Read up on the streetcars. The country basically removed most of its mass transit light rail because the car companies weren't selling enough cars.

They didn't even do it in smart ways. This town just paved over the tracks. Now, 80 years later or whatever it is, the streets are caving in and they have to do all these expensive repairs.

[-] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

Not only that, but most cities will claim they aren't big enough to support a tram, despite nearly every city having trams 100 years ago

this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2024
9 points (90.9% liked)

Fuck Cars

10836 readers
54 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS