Why don't americans have trams?

Why don't americans have trams?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/mbEfzuCLoAQ
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAX_Light_Rail
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tram#Major_tram_systems
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amsterdam_Metropolitan_Area
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portland_metropolitan_area
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

TRAM: tarmac trains

This video explains it really well youtu.be/mbEfzuCLoAQ

Tl;dr: trains are better for transporting goods, since it's cheaper and fast to use a plane for passenger use, due to the distance between major cities.

and what the fuck does it have to do with trams?

Depending on what city/state you're in, people do use them. I know an old priest who used to be a trolly driver in Philadelphia before busses took over.

Shit, I misread tram for trains.

We do, but they are pretty rare outside of major metropolitan areas. The bay area has BART and MUNI for example. They aren't japan or europe level, but they are usable and mostly convenient

no room for fat scooters or sharting

yes that's why.

we do though

Trains/trams, same shit different sized asshole. There's a tram system in New Orleans and it's fun riding the streetcar, but it's always under construction. Always some part of the route is just not passable and we end up getting out of the car, switching to a bus, and going to the other end of the construction. Hell, when the trains are down, the buses tend to be a lot faster and more comfortable.

Why do people fap about trains and trams? They're outdated pieces of shit.

>portland streetcars
>line length: 11.6 km
>annual ridership: 4.6 million

>not including the light rail system
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAX_Light_Rail
You've reached a level of retardation that most human beings could never imagine.

Portland has a larger tram system than Paris.

>Paris Métro
>Annual ridership: 1.527 billion
>Number of stations: 303

>Portland MAX Light Rail
>Annual ridership: 37.75 million
>Number of stations: 97

pathetic

>Portland line length: 108.2 km
>Paris line length: 104.9
>Toronto line length: 83 km
>Amsterdam: 80.5 km
>Munich: 79 km

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tram#Major_tram_systems

Portland is the smallest city and has the best tram system

The rest of the world is truly pathetic

meant to reply to

Portland doesn't have a real metro like those cities so the light rail attempts to make up for it, hence track length

Portland doesn't need a real metro because it only has 600,000 people. It wouldn't make sense to build a subway system in such a small city.

geographically about the same size as Amsterdam and same population size across metro area (over 2 million), which proper train system would serve

>Sitting near poor people

>geographically about the same size as Amsterdam
No, the Portland area is several times larger than Amsterdam and less densely populated. It would be way too expensive to build.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amsterdam_Metropolitan_Area
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portland_metropolitan_area

what u mena they have plenty they president is married to one?!?

>several times larger

even more reason for trains you silly shart

Is Portland that hipster SJW city

>not using trolleybuses, the direct upgrade to trams
lmaoing right now

>even more reason for trains you silly shart
Yes, but it would be several times more expensive to build than amsterdam's system. Also we don't need a rapid transit system because we have freeways.

yes

If you're poor yourself you don't have much of a choice do you.

Not OP. Yea, but that gets played up a lot. Its basically a normal city unless you seek out the weird bits. The traffic fucking sucks though

It's the same for Melbourne

Why wasting money on transport for poor people? Just build more gutters. At least they serve a purpose.

Germany has highways too and an extensive railroad system on top of that. What a stupid argument.

>skoda
U wot mang

because a poor person that can actually move can have a job and pay taxes instead to resort to gibs me dat to live

Does Australia even have trams outside lelbourne?

Well, this thread is not surprising. A bunch of sharts defending the cancerous concrete vains of freedumb that strangle their shitty cities.

Gold Coast has light rail.

Sydney is trying to build a light rail system as well.

In most European cities public transport is used by literally everyone regardless of their social status. But then again Americans always had a problem with selfishness, shitty social mobility and doing anything to separate themselves from the less fortunate.

*veins

Did you even read the first half of my argument? Anyway people aren't just going to magically start using the rapid transit system if we build it. Everyone already owns a car and because we have a more elaborate highways system than any european country no one needs to use the rapid transit system. I'm not saying that Europeans don't have a highway system and they absolutely need to use the subway to get around.

>tfw 0,84USD for a train ticket to the countryside where my mother is from
>the same journey by car (50km) would cost me almost 4 USD
>It's ~15 minutes quicker to get there

Because I'd rather ride my horse

>What a stupid argument.
Not really, we already have a freeway system and it works well. It would be unnecessary and expensive to build a rapid transit system. If any argument is stupid it's yours.

If your railroad system is efficient and capable, it pays for itself after a few years because people use it. But if your system is for some reason more expensive, slower and less used than cars, like the actual American railroad system, of course you'll lose money

...

We don't really have an incentive to make it cheaper and faster because everyone already has a car. People would have to really want a good railroad system and be willing to give up their cars for that to happen, but that's unlikely. Our country is also too large and sparsely populated to build a railroad system outside of a few areas like the northeast, california, texas and florida. I'm pretty sure railroad systems are being built in florida and california right now, so that's a good thing I guess.

Because we live in America where the train system is awful.

Because America is bigger than your entire continent

Lots of people have cars to get around because our public transportation is so underdeveloped and unreliable. It's so bad that some jobs require a "reliable method of transportation" to get to work, which is usually code for having your own car.

Public transportation also gets a bad rap because it's disproportionately used by the poor and those who can't drive for whatever reason. It's sort of a bad cycle.