- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: NO to BR train won't work so says expert
Posted on 2/1/16 at 9:45 am to LNCHBOX
Posted on 2/1/16 at 9:45 am to LNCHBOX
quote:
Uh, Chicago's crime rate isn't great, and they seem to have good mass transit. I hope I just missed your point.
Huge difference in the size and population between BR and Chicago. I've been to plenty of northern cities. People live on top of each other. Everyone is crammed into the city. It makes sense that public transportation works when you have that density. Before public transportation works in BR, you'll have to have a system that services Ascension and Livingston also. That is going to be tough to make feasible.
Posted on 2/1/16 at 9:51 am to doubleb
It would be operated by local government, so no, it wouldn't work
Posted on 2/1/16 at 9:52 am to doubleb
Yea. There should be a speed rail around the country not just limited to 2 metro areas. They have these all over Europe, Why not in the states?
Posted on 2/1/16 at 9:58 am to Boudreaux35
quote:
Huge difference in the size and population between BR and Chicago. I've been to plenty of northern cities. People live on top of each other. Everyone is crammed into the city. It makes sense that public transportation works when you have that density. Before public transportation works in BR, you'll have to have a system that services Ascension and Livingston also. That is going to be tough to make feasible.
Ascension and Livingston are way too far away from downtown to be serviced by anything that would be feasible.
My point about you comment was that crime has nothing to do with why mass transit won't work here. Everything is too spread out for it to make sense.
Posted on 2/1/16 at 9:59 am to ellishughtiger
quote:
They have these all over Europe, Why not in the states?
Because our country is a lot bigger than Europe, and the population is much more spread out.
Posted on 2/1/16 at 10:00 am to LNCHBOX
Not to mention, IIRC, almost all the lines in Europe lose money as well.
Posted on 2/1/16 at 10:01 am to LNCHBOX
quote:quote:Because our country is a lot bigger than Europe, and the population is much more spread out.
They have these all over Europe, Why not in the states?
And most of our cities did most of their developing after the invention of cars. Especially once you get away from the east coast.
Posted on 2/1/16 at 10:03 am to doubleb
"Expert"
Cato Institute. No thanks.
Posted on 2/1/16 at 10:05 am to doubleb
quote:
trains simply cannot compete against the convenience of taking your car where you want to go when you want to go there.
Wow, just a whole lot of stupid right there. People love the "convenience" of sitting in traffic for 2+ hours every day instead of whizzing by it all on a train.
This post was edited on 2/1/16 at 10:06 am
Posted on 2/1/16 at 10:05 am to LSUBoo
quote:
Add to this the fact that self-driving cars are likely to become a reality before this project is completed, and the market for such trains will be insignificant.
Whatever happened to the flying cars I was promised in the 80's? All I get are crappy self driving cars?!
Posted on 2/1/16 at 10:06 am to CAD703X
quote:No, but it might tip the swamp over.....
wouldn't it sink in the swamp?
Posted on 2/1/16 at 10:07 am to SUB
quote:
Wow, just a whole lot of stupid right there. People love the "convenience" of sitting in traffic for 2+ hours every day instead of whizzing by it all on a train.
Trains won't work here It's really not that complicated to get. Our area is much too large with a population density that is much too small. It doesn't take a Rhodes Scholar to figure out.
Posted on 2/1/16 at 10:09 am to SUB
quote:
Wow, just a whole lot of stupid right there.
so you thought you'd outdo him?
quote:
People love the "convenience" of sitting in traffic for 2+ hours every day instead of whizzing by it all on a train.
no people love the convenience of going and coming on their own schedule and having the freedom of stopping anytime/anywhere they want on a whim, instead of being stuck on a train and its schedule.
Posted on 2/1/16 at 10:13 am to torrey225
quote:
Cato Institute. No thanks.
Shooting the messenger what a novel approach.
Can you rebut what he is saying, or you just dismiss his point of view because he's not following the party line?
Posted on 2/1/16 at 10:15 am to SUB
quote:
Wow, just a whole lot of stupid right there. People love the "convenience" of sitting in traffic for 2+ hours every day instead of whizzing by it all on a train.
Put up your 44 dollars per trip and hop aboard, oh wait you want me to put up money so you can ride for 13 bucks a trip!!!!!
You guys are something else.
Posted on 2/1/16 at 10:16 am to LSU-MNCBABY
Amtrak is fairly nice, wouldn't mind riding something like that to br/houston/laffy
Posted on 2/1/16 at 10:22 am to doubleb
quote:
self-driving cars are likely to become a reality before this project is completed
Uber on steroids
Posted on 2/1/16 at 10:30 am to doubleb
yeah but louisianians love to piss away taxpayer dollars.
Posted on 2/1/16 at 10:34 am to doubleb
Trains like these only really work when they connect areas that are walking friendly, or if each city has an efficient public transportation system.
The guy is right about the convenience of your own vehicle. I wouldn't want to take a train down to NO, only to have to pay for cabs everywhere.
The guy is right about the convenience of your own vehicle. I wouldn't want to take a train down to NO, only to have to pay for cabs everywhere.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News