this post was submitted on 25 Nov 2024
597 points (97.2% liked)

solarpunk memes

2927 readers
798 users here now

For when you need a laugh!

The definition of a "meme" here is intentionally pretty loose. Images, screenshots, and the like are welcome!

But, keep it lighthearted and/or within our server's ideals.

Posts and comments that are hateful, trolling, inciting, and/or overly negative will be removed at the moderators' discretion.

Please follow all slrpnk.net rules and community guidelines

Have fun!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Resonosity 11 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

God damnit I hate cars bro

[–] veni_vedi_veni 1 points 8 hours ago

I feel you bro. Especially the endless stroads and parking lots. We lost a lot to make a suburbia we can't even take ownership of.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 19 hours ago

all rails lead to chicago.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 day ago (2 children)

thats what you get when you put car and oil billionaires in charge

[–] Donebrach 6 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (2 children)

that’s part of it, but also the continental US is massive and divided by two pretty impactful mountain ranges. Not defending our lack of train infrastructure but we came of age pretty much in line with the rise of the Jet era along with our culture of individualism and the massive expansion of public interstate hiways due to one specific president’s expierence as them being useful tools for self powered land based military vehicles so obviously that was prioritized over investing in new rail infrastructure in the interceding years.

Point being, there’s a lot of spinning plates involved with why we are where we are in regards our national rail network—would be nice to hop on an hourly train and zoop from Boston to LA in 6 hrs for like $50 but we also just elected Trump again for incomprehensible reasons so in all likelihood there will be a nuclear wasteland in between those two cities, which will need additional plates to be spun up to deal with.

[–] RunawayFixer 2 points 14 hours ago

The USA is a lot older than 70 years, so no the USA did not come of age in the jet era. It would be a lot more accurate to say that the modern USA came together in the age of trains, because it was trains that connected east + west together (+the bits in the middle). There used to be passenger trains between all major cities + many towns literally grew around the railways. That train infrastructure is still there, but now there are just very few passenger lines running on them.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 21 hours ago (3 children)

Isn't the USA about the same size as Europe? I think Europe might actually be bigger. We also have a bunch of mountain range dividing up our continent too.

(Not denying the rest of your comment, just pointing out)

[–] Donebrach 5 points 20 hours ago

this (mind you, single country made of disparate states) was only contentiously “settled” about 300 years ago—Europe has had a pretty consistent and coherent cultural thrust for thousands of years, regardless of various clan-based spats, and a consistent build up of infrastructure to match. The US is the product of stolen land, a whole lot of racism and slavery and then being thrust into the center of the world stage right at the point when means of conveyance drastically shifted from ships and trains to planes and cars. the end result is the completely horrific infrastructure of the modern US landscape.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Isn’t the USA about the same size as Europe?

if you include eastern, and western europe, they're comparable. The problem here is that most of the US population is centered on the coasts, and in the midwest, and a bit of the south, so most rail infrastructure would be useful there, everything between about illinois, and nevada is a wasteland of like, 12 people living there.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 15 hours ago

The problem here is that most of the US population is centered on the coasts, and in the midwest, and a bit of the south, so most rail infrastructure would be useful there

So that's why there are those four hyper-dense rail networks on the coasts, the midwest and the south and the US's only problem is that these aren't properly interconnected?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 21 hours ago (3 children)

The United States (9,826,630 km2 / 3,794,080 sq mi) is larger than the European Union (4,233,262 km2 / 1,634,472 sq mi)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 hours ago

Continental Europe is not that same thing as the EU. There are quite a few countries in continental Europe that are not part of the European Economic Union.

[–] nifty 4 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (1 children)

China, about 9.7M km2

Edit: is your size source right? I found somewhere that says China is 9.7M km2 vs US which is 9.3M km2

https://www.worldometers.info/geography/largest-countries-in-the-world/

[–] [email protected] 2 points 16 hours ago

Learn something every day. China ≈ Europe ≈ US as far as area.

[–] Tudsamfa 2 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Neither the post nor the comment limited themselves to the EU. Europe as a whole (10,014,000 km²) is in fact very slightly larger than the US. In this context you could argue that neither USA's Alaska nor all the barren tundra in Europe should really count, then the contiguous 48 could be bigger depending on how how much of Russia you leave out.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 16 hours ago

So roughly the same size. I then wondered about population and saw that Europe has over twice the population. Which surprised my immediate expectations. Then again, I live in a pretty densely part of the US, so I think it twisted my thinking. In my past, I spent most of a decade living in Europe. I also spent a couple of years after living in Europe working as a long haul trucker in the US. Reflecting on those memories, it shouldn't have surprised me.

Not that this has too much to do with the original point, that the US has a shitty train system. Which is true. But check out our military!! Ra-ra, or some shit.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 day ago (3 children)

There's an Amtrak station served by two trains a day within walking distance of my house. I've never once taken that train because according to Amtrak it can't be done. I've tried several times. I'm planning a trip across country, maybe to go visit someone. Hey let's try taking the train. Raleigh NC to Altoona PA...can't be done. Those stations aren't on the same route, and the trip planner on their website can't say "Take the Silver Star to Grand Central in New York then wait around 7 hours then take the Pennsylvanian to Altoona." Neither of these trains will spend much time at 70 miles per hour, both will end up sitting on sidings waiting for freight trains to go by, you've got to catch the train when it goes by at 6 AM or 10 PM, you're going to spend two days on a journey you can do by highway in 8 hours, and it actually costs a little more.

[–] glitchdx 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

at that point, might as well take greyhound.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 111 points 1 day ago (21 children)

It really is crazy how bad the US rail system is. The last time I was taking a trip of about 1000 miles, I looked into taking amtrak. Not only was it more expensive than driving or flying, but it would take significantly longer as well, at 3 days. I know the train themselves are moving faster, and it's due to stops, but that's like 15mh average speed. What year is it?!?

[–] Mirshe 57 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Actually, the trains aren't moving faster. I don't think there's a single significant span of passenger rail rated for more than 60mph in the US.

[–] spankmonkey 39 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Plus commuter trains get delayed frequently to make way for cargo trains.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That's because Amtrak only owns their own rails in the NEC (North East Corridor) Boston-NYC-Philly-DC. Everywhere else they are riding on privately owned freight railroad tracks, and the Amtrak trains are often shunted for freight to have priority.

[–] Pieisawesome 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Actually the law states that passenger rail has priority.

It’s just unenforced so freight ignores it

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] AngryCommieKender 14 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Which is illegal, but unenforced

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 day ago (1 children)

NY to DC is solid, it’s the one inter-metro train I’ve taken that’s faster than driving or flying (when accounting for security and travel to/from the airport).

Using it really makes you realize how much better the train system could be. Not even bullet trains, and they’re so much better than cars.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago

It really is crazy how bad the US rail system is.

It's also crazy to think that at some point in history, it used to be one of the best in the world. And then it got screwed by oil barons.

[–] CoCo_Goldstein 9 points 1 day ago

As far as I know, Amtrak doesn't own any of its own rails. It leases access from freight hauling railroads. Because of this relationship, the freight lines always prioritize their own trains over Amtrak. So Amtrak will always suffer until this changes.

load more comments (18 replies)
[–] x00z 79 points 1 day ago (2 children)

It's funny how you see American movies about the old times and there's always a train around, but in fact it was the people being around the train.

[–] AngryCommieKender 65 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Who Framed Roger Rabbit was a documentary. Not the toon town stuff. The part about the judge buying the trolley so he could shut it down to build a highway. We used to have a better rail system than anywhere else. Then the car and oil companies bought the tracks and paved over them in the 1920s to 1950s

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 day ago

A perfect example of this is the Boston T. It's half the size it was 100 years ago and is still considered the 3rd best transportation network in the country, with a full 50% of all daily commutes to Boston happening on the T.

[–] samus12345 13 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

"Who needs a car in LA? We got the best public transportation system in the world!"

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 36 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Actually, every American town founded before 1950 had a train line going through it. Aside from people living on homesteads, and maybe some small antebellum towns, everybody lived in close distance to a train station before they were shut down and torn up.

Worth noting that this map is for passenger rail only. The cargo rail network is much bigger. Basically, this map shows whereever Amtrak runs, where as before the introduction of massively subsidized interstates in the US in 1956, every cargo rail company also ran profitable passenger rail traffic on a massive network that became today's cargo lines.

The cargo companies dumped their traffic onto the federal government in the 70s and have also ran massive cost cutting programs since, tearing up hundreds of thousands of miles of rail.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_rail_transportation_in_the_United_States

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Dupree878 7 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Can you drive 120km/h in those areas if you don’t take the train?

I don’t take the train here even though I have one because it takes too long. A 3-4 hr car trip takes all day with the train having to makes its stops.

The closest large city is 50 miles (80km) away. I can be there in 45min to an hour depending on traffic. The train takes almost three hours.

Also, there is no public transportation to get to the train stop which is on the bad side of town and there’s no station to wait inside.

[–] Enekk 12 points 20 hours ago (4 children)

You know the difference? I don't have to actually drive when I take the train. I can do literally anything else, especially if wireless is available.

It's like people who say, "I don't need a dishwasher, I can wash them in half the time!". Yeah, sure, but I don't have to fucking wash them. Not to mention the environmental and health benefits which, incidentally, works for trains too.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 day ago

I can go to Paris (500 km) by train in about three hours. That train is musch faster thatn you'd be allowed to drive.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Hungary where you can basically go 140 legally 💀. Now i live in sweden and its 100 most places but the train connections are shit where i live.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 day ago

Veiny ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

load more comments
view more: next ›