Highspeed rail is B$it

[Jibartik]

You're both cherry-picking and comparing apples to oranges there: fruity

No I gogled "most traveled high speed rail in japan" and that is kyoto to tokyo

Then I checked ticket price of kyoto to tokyo

and then I did "flight from Kyoto to toyko.

I picked the top result from both of those searches.

So dont assume! you know the saying: Fruity [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

But honestly, otherwise, this is a rare thread where I mostly agree with you Jib: I live in California, and the whole the high-speed rail scheme was a scam from the beginning.

Yeah, Id love to be a type 2 civilization but we're just not there yet.

The only reasons we have goverment paid roads is because the ultra wealthy democrats that left the south after the civil war to head west during the agriboom wanted free roads because it was too costly for them to make them connect their farms and the stores themselves.

That's when the democrat party became the BIG goverment party (that it wasn't when it tried to succeed from the union during the civil war.)

Because the american system works this way, we can get those trains if like we had no GAS - and we "had to come up wth a way to get workers to work" but while we have a cheeper alternative, we wont be able to get it in the USA full stop. Especially after California proved that no amount of wealth and progressives can push that ball forward.

[nostalgiaquest]

Originally Posted by Jibartik [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

No I gogled "most traveled high speed rail in japan" and that is kyoto to tokyo

Then I checked ticket price of kyoto to tokyo

and then I did "flight from Kyoto to toyko.

I picked the top result from both of those searches.

So dont assume! you know the saying: Fruity [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

And now for another episode of Jib has no idea what he's talking about, starrrring Jib!

Tokyo station to Kyoto Station on bullet train takes about 2.5 hours.

Flight takes 1.5 hours.

Narita Airport, which is Tokyo's major airport, is actually an hour away by...wait for it... express train! from Tokyo station. Or you can pay roughly 250 dollars each way for a Taxi. Look at a map, Narita is notoriously a pain in the ass to get to.

Kyoto has no airport. The nearest one is Osaka, which is a 30 minutes away by train.

Let' say you only spend a half hour at the airport, cuz you got it down to a science!

Flight still adds up to at least 3.5 hours, and involves two trains (or taxis) and the flight. Versus a direct 2.5 hour train.

2.5 is less than 3.5 right? Less transfers is more better right?

Originally Posted by Jibartik [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Besides, you cant say taking a 5 hour train in the morning from London to Paris for business and then another 5 hour train ride on the way home beats taking a 1 hour flight for less, is better without being wrong.

You're right, I can't. Because the train from London to Paris is 2 hours and 15 minutes on the Eurostar. Not 5 you disingenuous shithead. The flight is 1.5 hours. Getting from downtown London to Heathrow takes about an hour. Getting from Charles de Gualle to downtown Paris takes 30-45. Again, look at the airport locations on a map compared to the city.

downtown to downtown, 2.25 is less than 3, and involves no taxis or transfers.

Originally Posted by Jibartik [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Top ten carreers taht require travel:

Travel nurse.
Archaeologist. ...
Athletic scout. ...
Management consultant. ...
Event coordinator. ...
Flight attendant. ...
Travel agent. ...
Geoscientist.

Now: explain to me how taking a train from london to paris - is going to fufill any those jobs?

I dunno, what's the Archaeologist doing in Paris? I need more narrative here!

And you want me to explain why a flight attendant should take a train? CMON MAN.

Originally Posted by Jibartik [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

you said, trains are better if you have to check a bag.

So your argument for trains, literally is: You can walk your bag so large you have to check it from the train station to your hotel - arguign that is somehow better than a 10-25 dollar uber ride? FOR BUISNESSS!?!?!?!?!

Like you're going to lug a bag SO BIG you cant even comprehend how you can bring it on carryon, for your job, and you're gonna drag that shit through the train station and street - because you dont want to pay for an uber?

Originally Posted by Jibartik [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Brought to you by the generation that changed the definition of literately to mean kind of.

Once again, you are delusional, and you're making up what you want to hear. I said trains "might" be the better option if you have a checked bag. For LITERALLY none of the reasons you state above. If you have a checked bag, it adds both cost and and time to your plane experience. That's it.

Are you one of those cunts that brings on a massive roller bag as a carryon that has to go sideways in the overhead and takes up half the space because they're too cunty and cheap to check it like a decent human. Kinda sounds like it.

Also, if you think Uber's in Europe cost 10-25 euro, you don't have a fuckin clue. Just yesterday I took an Uber from downtown Zurich to the Airport for a flight home after a week long business trip to oversee commissioning of critical cooling infrastructure on a data center. It was over 50 euro for a 15 kilometer taxi ride.

Originally Posted by Jibartik [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Train stations and transfers is a HUGE issue in europe, and they are currently COMPLETELY trying to redo the entire system, becuase the current one works so poorly.

Are they? Maybe you're right, though I haven't heard or experienced anything about this. Got a source?

Most high speed rail doesn't involve any transferring. Paris, London, Amsterdam trains, and these are the only ones i've taken so far, all start/leave from central locations in the downtown area and easily navigated, whereas the airports are at least 30 minutes way. Also, you don't think airports aren't currently working poorly as well? Heathrow is a clusterfuck on the best of days, and CDG is one of my least favorite places in the whole world.

Originally Posted by Jibartik [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I woke up at 6 1-3 days a week for 4 years, flew 500 miles, a car picked me up, and at the end of the dropped me back off at the airport, and I flew 500 miles back and had dinner at home.

The idea that you think that id rather do that on a train for 10 hours a trip because I can check a bag is laughable. Those flights were 35 minuets, and door to door 1 hour and 10. I had it down to a science (wake up get dressed go to work).

Most commercial airlines fly at about 500-550 miles per hour. Since this is a short flight, you probably had a smaller plane that flew even slower. But either way, your math doesn't check out.

And what you lived 10-15 minutes from the airport? and worked 10-15 minutes from the destination airport? And you were able to get through airport security in 2 minutes? And the airline company was nice enough to leave the gate open for you until the very last second? I'd like to know which airports these were!

Everything you say is disingenuous garbage. Stop lying.

Goedemorgen btw!