Yeah, very made that argument in the past, but you have to start somewhere
for Midwest passenger rail, the cities are big enough they ought to have transit, but also it’s appropriate for the federal govern invest in infrastructure to jumpstart their revival
for smaller cities on long distance routes, their may not be scheduled air service and distances are too great for some to drive. There should be an option. A useful option
and yes, the long distance routes are a “money saver”. If we ever want to have useful long distance service m, we need to keep the right of way alive. A huge part of the ridiculous cost of rail improvements is the land, and no one will pay for 1,000 miles of right of way
The track is privately owned by freight companies, and they do have a long term trend of shutting things down. More importantly they only allow passenger service because they have to, and they have no incentive to keep their track in adequate shape for useful and comfortable passenger service. They are also fine with not going to populated areas where passenger rail might be useful
They typically don’t have hotels in range of the train station, and since Amtrak is once a day service an overnight stay will happen. Stations are often in the run down part of town, so while you can walk and find things, there isn’t much (it looks unsafe, but I generally think it is safe)
Also many of those “lesser” cities are tiny - sure you can walk the downtown, but there isn’t much there. In my travels on Amtrak my impression is the majority of people are not going for the downtown - there are plenty of stores closer to home. You are going to visit family, or some attraction not close to the station.
Most of those cities have such terrible transit you need to drive there anyway. At least if you fly the airport has rental cars.
Yeah, very made that argument in the past, but you have to start somewhere
The majority if the routes are privately owned and not going anywhere.
The track is privately owned by freight companies, and they do have a long term trend of shutting things down. More importantly they only allow passenger service because they have to, and they have no incentive to keep their track in adequate shape for useful and comfortable passenger service. They are also fine with not going to populated areas where passenger rail might be useful
Yeah that’s why amtrak needs to be given the money and mandate for high speed rail.
To be fair, I don’t know the two cities in question, but many “lesser” cities have highly walkable downtowns with train stations.
They typically don’t have hotels in range of the train station, and since Amtrak is once a day service an overnight stay will happen. Stations are often in the run down part of town, so while you can walk and find things, there isn’t much (it looks unsafe, but I generally think it is safe)
Also many of those “lesser” cities are tiny - sure you can walk the downtown, but there isn’t much there. In my travels on Amtrak my impression is the majority of people are not going for the downtown - there are plenty of stores closer to home. You are going to visit family, or some attraction not close to the station.