this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2025
959 points (98.1% liked)

Greentext

6548 readers
1082 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

But 500 km (or rather 310 miles since I'm in the USA) is at the upper end of the distance I'd drive. There isn't a distance for which a train is better than both flying and driving.

[–] thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago

With what I've heard about the train infrastructure in the US, that doesn't surprise me. Personally, I only ever use a car if I'm travelling into the mountains or transporting a lot of luggage. I never drive if I'm travelling between cities with little luggage, if only because it's much less of a hassle to just hop on a train and get where I'm going.

[–] porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 days ago

So in most Western European countries I think that limit is actually more like 1000km, or if it includes crossing France even more than that, or if you're not close to the airport too. Beyond about 7 hours of train, flying starts to be faster and more convenient, most people around here find, but you can get quite far with a train in that time. I appreciate the current situation in the US isn't the same and it would cost money to upgrade the network, but I think the rest of the world does show that it's actually worthwhile.