For real. All our cities are engineered around the need for people of quality to avoid black people. That's it. That's why we can never have European-style cities.
planes have more restrictions to entry - yes poor crude people can get a ticket and get on the plane
but crazy homeless people would never make it through as security is allowed to be tighter
and on the plane they are allowed to take more measures to stop a problem, and ban people from any further trips
and metal detectors, plus other security deters drugs (i know people get around it but it deters use of smokeable drugs during the trip)
these are all extreme examples but its just 1 person to ruin a bus ride too
>Regional trains can be restrictive too.
In spain you arrive to the train station, you get into the train. Sometimes there are x-ray controls, but its like 1 minute. Way faster than a plane.
12 months ago
Anonymous
That'd be northern Europe. In Spain you cannot go directly to the train, there are barriers and you generally have to validate your ticket. For AVE (high speed) you even have to go through metal detectors.
>Would you travel the northeast by train if you could?
I have traveled the Northeast by train—my parents live in MA, and last time I visited them I also took the train to NYC for a few days. Ticket was cheap, travel time was similar (I’m sure it added some time, but not an unreasonable amount), and who wants or needs a car in New York? No regrets, will do again.
Red pill me on traveling by train. Seems like an unbeknownst kino way to travel.
>don't gave to spend hours at a time in a cramped car. >more enjoyable scenery than taking the interstate system. >more affordable than flying for less established poorgays in their 20s but who still want to travel a lot.
Trains are only really used for shorter distances <6 hours.
Europe is crowded so there's always a few major cities a short distance away other than that it's a meme.
it can be a cool way to travel. went from the bay area to denver and spent almost all of the day time in the cafe car looking at the scenery and reading. it was slightly more expensive than a plane ticket but the seat was sleepable. the cafe itself serves terrible coffee and food but i brought some good coffee grounds and a dripper (bought tea in the cafe to get the hot water), mre heat pack and microwavable dinner pouch, and a wienertail in a thermos (in freezer previous night that was melted and cold by dinner.
In my humble opinion, trains are good for 4- hours trips. Airports tend to be distant to the city centre and the qeues, customs and immigration cause plane travels to be a hassle. Not to mention you should be at the airport at least 2 hours prior to your flight. So I prefer to avoid them. Buses sucks as you can't stretch your legs during the trip, get a drink at the bar, etc., like you could in a train.
For 4+ trips is better to get a plane though. Less tiresome. I do enjoy night trains though (as long as its in a private cabin). Can't really say it's worth it as you probably will have to book the prior night in a hostel/hotel since you tend to arrive at early morning or at least get a locker/go to the hotel to put your bags while you explore the city and then come back to check-in. But I do sleep like a baby in nigh trains so I still love them. But money-wise they tend to be expensive, sometimes even more expensive than flying.
Seems like the alternative is going through souless chud areas like this
this photo has been deboonked, it's on a highway and at the worst angle.
Uh, ok. Drive up the fricking road then? The whole middle part of the country looks like that dude.
It's literally the angle of you driving through
I've actually got a New England trip planned this summer. Taking Amtrak and local rail for everything beyond flying up there.
Taking any amtrak acela?
Nah, I'll be based out of Boston and heading up to Maine. AFAIK Acela terminates in Boston.
how many socio economic factors will be on said trains?
Depends on pricing
There is a good reason the US can't have nice stuff.
For real. All our cities are engineered around the need for people of quality to avoid black people. That's it. That's why we can never have European-style cities.
How are planes any different anons?
planes have more restrictions to entry - yes poor crude people can get a ticket and get on the plane
but crazy homeless people would never make it through as security is allowed to be tighter
and on the plane they are allowed to take more measures to stop a problem, and ban people from any further trips
and metal detectors, plus other security deters drugs (i know people get around it but it deters use of smokeable drugs during the trip)
these are all extreme examples but its just 1 person to ruin a bus ride too
Regional trains can be restrictive too. It's not just a subway. And you have more options for upgrade(1st class, 2nd class, compartments, quiet car)
>Regional trains can be restrictive too.
In spain you arrive to the train station, you get into the train. Sometimes there are x-ray controls, but its like 1 minute. Way faster than a plane.
That'd be northern Europe. In Spain you cannot go directly to the train, there are barriers and you generally have to validate your ticket. For AVE (high speed) you even have to go through metal detectors.
Nah I'd go to Spain instead. Looks much safer.
>Would you travel the northeast by train if you could?
I have traveled the Northeast by train—my parents live in MA, and last time I visited them I also took the train to NYC for a few days. Ticket was cheap, travel time was similar (I’m sure it added some time, but not an unreasonable amount), and who wants or needs a car in New York? No regrets, will do again.
madrid to barcelona 390miles, just under 2.5hours
new york to philadelphia 90miles, about 2hours
Suck Philly could literally be an easy commute
Red pill me on traveling by train. Seems like an unbeknownst kino way to travel.
>don't gave to spend hours at a time in a cramped car.
>more enjoyable scenery than taking the interstate system.
>more affordable than flying for less established poorgays in their 20s but who still want to travel a lot.
>more affordable than flying
It's often cheaper to fly than take the train. That's why more Europeans fly than take trains long distance each year.
Trains are only really used for shorter distances <6 hours.
Europe is crowded so there's always a few major cities a short distance away other than that it's a meme.
>unbeknownst
In America maybe
it can be a cool way to travel. went from the bay area to denver and spent almost all of the day time in the cafe car looking at the scenery and reading. it was slightly more expensive than a plane ticket but the seat was sleepable. the cafe itself serves terrible coffee and food but i brought some good coffee grounds and a dripper (bought tea in the cafe to get the hot water), mre heat pack and microwavable dinner pouch, and a wienertail in a thermos (in freezer previous night that was melted and cold by dinner.
>went from the bay area to denver
Sounds fine as a one time thing but Europeans would fly that distance
i would fly that route if i were to do it again, but an overnight train ride is a great way to see the landscape and its cheaper than a hostel+flight
No
In my humble opinion, trains are good for 4- hours trips. Airports tend to be distant to the city centre and the qeues, customs and immigration cause plane travels to be a hassle. Not to mention you should be at the airport at least 2 hours prior to your flight. So I prefer to avoid them. Buses sucks as you can't stretch your legs during the trip, get a drink at the bar, etc., like you could in a train.
For 4+ trips is better to get a plane though. Less tiresome. I do enjoy night trains though (as long as its in a private cabin). Can't really say it's worth it as you probably will have to book the prior night in a hostel/hotel since you tend to arrive at early morning or at least get a locker/go to the hotel to put your bags while you explore the city and then come back to check-in. But I do sleep like a baby in nigh trains so I still love them. But money-wise they tend to be expensive, sometimes even more expensive than flying.