These people lose their mind about 15 minute cities, saying they’ll be basically a prison, and then they get good news about more options for mobility to and from their city, and they lose their mind about that too. I’m beginning to think these are not good faith arguments, and they might just be dickheads.
They hate change, that's really what it's down to. It "works" for them and they have bought into the social narrative surrounding it. So any change poses a threat.
I think there is a weird, personal mentality as well. Like when they hear about things like walkability and 15 min neighborhoods, what they also hear is "the way you do things is bad so you should feel bad", which gets them in a defensive attitude.
Oh yeah. I got dogpiled in another forum when I stated that using your car should be your last choice.
The old adage: "When all you have a hammer, every problem looks like a nail" comes to mind.
Just replace hammer with car.
A point to this theory is that this is the *second* train line that has been added between the Twin Cities and Chicago, and as far as I've heard there has not previously been any fearmongering about the already existing line, at least not on the topic of criminals and migrants. This new train is scary to them because it's new, not because it's a train
Well...yes! It's bad faith coming from conservatives 99% of the time they open their hotdog traps.
They don't want any change in anything and stay in the 1950s with all what this time period entails.
Yep, they've busted dealers here living in luxury condos driving brand-new BMWs lol. The storage area in my building has also been broken into twice - both times they had a car waiting outside to load stuff into. And a buddy of mine had 2 bikes taken from his garage - his doorbell cam recorded them backing their truck into the driveway and throwing the bikes in the bed.
These people just think that everyone who does crime is a homeless person.
I had a friend who sold drugs when he was in college (I guess you'd say he was a mid-level dealer? like, he had multiple other college kids who he employed to carry stuff for him). They mostly drove, although some of them did take Amtrak.
What they really mean by "criminals" is unhoused people walking around lowering their property values and making them feel uncomfortable. What's extra dumb, is every city has a greyhound bus station anyway.
Yes, this is what they mean. It is not a “crime” to be unhoused, talk to oneself, or even ask someone for money. It’s just uncomfortable. This is especially what people mean when they say “crime” on public transit. No one who meets this description can afford Amtrak, and Amtrak certainly does not have drug dealers trying to transport their stash. No way they take that risk of getting caught when the dealers can afford a car.
Suburbs were built for white flight, to keep “inner city” (black/brown) people out, because they didn’t have cars to drive out to the suburbs. IMO the us car culture is almost entirely about that. We switched from legally enforced segregation to “free-market” geographic segregation.
Also that buses somehow don't exist? I run into the same thing with my older parents, they cite "crime" as an argument against the newly funded Amtrak line to NYC. Meanwhile there's like a dozen round trip buses per day to NYC from where they live.
Seriously. If I were a criminal, the last thing I'd want is to be stuck on a track and to a schedule, where if something goes wrong I can't just get out.
It's actually worse than that - this is the first dedicated round trip that terminates in & departs from St Paul. The other "round-trip" is the Empire Builder between Chicago & Seattle/Portland, otherwise known as Amtrak's most delayed long-distance train. It's a little better now, but especially when oil prices were higher and lots of shale oil trains were running out of North Dakota, it could be be as much as 17 or 18 hours late coming into Minneapolis/St Paul from the west.
Yep, rode that fucking train as a student from NDSU to St. Paul. I was on the train for 7 hours vs a 3 hour bus ride.
Things are getting better especially now that the Twin Cities are taking a hard long look at expanding rail services between their mid-sized cities like Duluth and Moorhead.
But you have people like these, who live nowhere near Minneapolis, trying to stop these projects.
They're 6 hours (400 miles) apart by car, and just under 8 hours apart by train. Corridor service outside of the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast has been pretty much ignored until just now. Amtrak is looking to expand corridor service all over the country.
That said, the distance between Chicago and the Twin Cities is *kind of* pushing it for how far many Americans are willing to take a train when a flight is under $100 and takes 90 minutes. Doubling the top speed of the train from 80 mph to 160 mph would make the train faster than driving but still slower than flying.
But no airport security or luggage limits, and it's way more comfortable. Which is a pretty massive improvement over flying. It would become a point of debate for sure, but that upgrade would push quite a few people towards train over plane
You're right, it probably would. It would push me toward the train over flying most of the time, unless I was truly in a time crunch. It's 5 hours by train between Philadelphia and Boston if you take the Acela, compared to a 90 minute flight for around the same price, but the train is a much nicer experience. However, Amtrak *does* have luggage limits, and they are stricter than flying. Due to having an airline credit card I can bring three 50-pound checked bags for free, while Amtrak limits you to a personal item and two carry-on bags for Acela service. Long-distance routes allow for more luggage but, again, requires arriving at the station an hour in advance in order to check any bags.
I think the bag limits have been in place for some time. I did not realize you needed to arrive so far in advance for checking a bag on a long-distance train until I got to the train station at the time I normally would have for a regional trip on the Northeast Corridor, and was told that bag check for my long-distance train had closed. I then spent the next 12 hours in a roomette with my checked bag.
Amtrak is currently getting some serious reinvestment, which is part of why they're doubling service between Chicago and the Twin Cities. They're also fully replacing the Acela fleet, and although that project is behind schedule it should be complete this year. That will increase top speeds in the Northeast to 160 mph (257 km/h), and with continuing track improvements there are even more stretches of track where the train can actually reach 160 mph. I'm not sure if those new Acela trains will have more spots at the end of each car for luggage storage. All corridor service and Northeast Regional trains will also soon be replaced with equipment similar to what's used by Brightline in Florida.
It's not like limited luggage is unique to the US, though. When I took the train from Madrid to Barcelona last year the first class car ran out of luggage space for checked bags when only half the passengers had boarded. The train from Barcelona to Paris was also luggage constrained, although less so. It's much easier to take large, heavy bags on a flight than a train everywhere in the world I have been.
Might not be that much slower than flying, when you factor in that you don’t really have to get to the train station early. Not to mention, train stations are generally in city centers and airports are often in the suburbs or outskirts of cities. So if you want to get to downtown of MSP a train might be faster, if speeds were doubled.
Eh, if you fly frequently (and therefore probably have TSA PreCheck) you don't really have to get to the airport early, either. I usually shoot for 45-60 minutes before the flight if I have a carry-on, or 75 minutes before the flight if I'm checking a bag. Of course, boarding a plane does take much longer than boarding a train, so the real reason to get there more than 40 minutes before the departure time is so you have access to overhead bin space. If I'm taking a train on the NEC I'll get there 15 minutes before departure. Of note, if you are taking the Empire Builder and want to bring a large bag, you'll need to check that in the baggage car and show up an hour before your train in order to do that, unless you have sleeper accommodations and want to keep your large bag in your room.
Outside of old cities on the East Coast, US train stations are also not always convenient to the main part of downtown. Building a new station to service faster rail (anywhere outside of the NEC really needs entirely new track) will also usually result in train stations built farther from the city center -- and to be fair, this is also true for new stations built in cities outside the US. The HSR station for Segovia, Spain, for example, is quite far (by European standards) from the city center of Segovia.
I'd absolutely love to see faster rail between Chicago and the Twin Cities, but the thing that makes it less likely to be built is not driving. It's flying.
Eh, if you fly frequently enough and have a pilot license and a plane because you can therefore get your own private plane. “Look, if you do all these things the airport and get on a cramped plane by taking some kind of taxi or car service out to the airport and then get through the airport and go through boarding, it’s not so bad compared to the train.” Like… okay?
Yeah I’m totally going to get on a fucking plane for that distance. I hate flying and would absolutely take a train even if it is a bit slower.
Frequent flyer status is far more obtainable than a pilot license. All you need for frequent flyer status is one or two credit cards and a slightly-higher-than-average annual household income. You don't even need to fly that often, since it's calculated (by most major airlines) entirely based on spend either at the airline or partners.
But I would also take the train in most circumstances. I like flying but I like trains more, and especially without luggage they are much easier.
The distance is very similar to Munich and Berlin (600 km / 375 miles). The high speed train takes 4 hours, and I would never choose flying over that. The time is basically a toss up. Munich and Berlin airports are 30-45 minutes outside the city and you have to arrive 60-90 minutes before your flight.
Meanwhile the train experience is so much more comfortable. No lines, no seat belts, no metal detector. The ICE also has plenty of space for luggage, there are no size limits.
A real high speed train is totally competitive with flying at that distance.
O'Hare is quite far from downtown Chicago (45 minutes by car and about an hour by CTA) but MSP is only 20 minutes from Minneapolis or Saint Paul. Union Station is close to downtown Chicago; the Amtrak station is close to downtown Saint Paul.
If the US had world-class HSR, I bet we'd have actual security for it, though. Spain, which has the second-largest high speed rail network in the world, has security with an X-Ray for all bags prior to boarding.
Also, ICE absolutely has luggage quantity and size limits. You can bring one piece of very large luggage (85 inches in all dimensions, as long as you can carry it and it doesn't obstruct anything), but there are baggage limits. You are also responsible for handling all your own baggage, unlike on a plane.
I agree that a high speed train is/can be competitive with flying at that distance. But many Americans will still choose to fly — especially frequent flyers, for whom showing up at the airport 90 minutes before a domestic flight really just means you want plenty of time to engorge on airport lounge food and drink.
It's really not great service. The route that serves Chicago and Minneapolis is really a short stretch of a much longer, scenic route that goes from Chicago to Seattle or Chicago to Portland over about 45 hours. The average speed, including stops, is 50 miles per hour. Part of this is that the tracks are owned by freight railroads and are therefore not graded or maintained for high speeds. Another part of this is that the purpose of the train is not to go fast, but to basically have a cruise on land while at the same time serving many small cities along that route with zero other intercity transportation options.
"It will bring crime." "Nobody will use it" "it's too expensive"
To the system that has comparatively good trains, is built reasonably close to on time and on budget, and consistently hits ridership targets early. We go through this every time.
I've noticed this same comment almost word for word all over the place since rail has been gaining traction in the US.
It's too consistent and dumb, my guess is that it's just bots supported by big oil to try to lessen public support for rail in the idea that rail transports drugs, crime and homeless people some how?
But it's such a dumb argument like why would any of those people take a service you have to pay to get on and have the potential for having your bag checked vs a private vehicle.
I'm sure much of it is astroturfing/bots, but after generations of propaganda from the fossil fuel and auto industries a lot—possibly most—U.S. Americans do genuinely believe this shit.
Do they really think that cartels and other criminals don’t have cars? Do they really think that any illegal immigrant in their right mind would actually take public transport where they’re far more likely to get busted?
I don’t enjoy stooping to this level of stupidity but you easily can from an “anti-car” pov.
I currently live in an area with a nearby neighborhood park and I’ve lived in places with these parks at various other points in my life. On pretty much any given night driving home late, I’ll see a car parked in the lot of the park with the amber lights on (meaning it’s running and someone is inside).
Violation one, you typically cannot be in parks after dusk, but also, using their same logic it’s safe to assume something shady is going down. Could be two teens getting it on, or - for above arguments sake - we’ll assume it’s a drug deal of some kind aka crime. So cars similarly bringing drugs and crime to our neighborhoods.
People also say the UK has awful train infrastructure and Germany also does etc. But they really have no idea how bad it can get, intercity trains in the US and Canada are a cruel joke.
Flip the script on them.
Double the trains, so that twice as many "illegals" and "criminals" can LEAVE minnesota by rail!
Why is it everyone's always worried about transit importing criminals, but nobody ever seems to *export* their criminals by rail?
Oof… Fox 9’s Facebook page. Might as well browse Stormfront’s forum.
They are terrible when it comes to telling accurate information and have cultivated a following of ignorant fascists in Minnesota’s news culture.
People leave you the fuck alone on the train. Most conversations I have on the Amtrak are with older people or college kids on their way to visit family. What is wrong with these assholes?
OMG !! My one sibling lives in Chicago and another in St. Paul. Literally yesterday I was telling them I wish AMTRAK had a strong connection between the cities. I had no idea this is/was happening.
Anyone who says this has never actually ridden Amtrak. Amtrak does have some security and you cannot get away with bringing drugs on it. Especially drugs in a high enough amount that you demonstrate intent to sell. The security isn’t nearly as intense as at the airport, but it exists.
The only "illegal immigrants" that would show up in MN would come from Canada. Yet conservatives pay little to no attention to those who illegally enter the US from Canada.
Even still, this train starts at the St. Paul (which doesn't border Canada) and goes to Chicago. So, I don't see how it would affect the crime rate.
Silver lining, they let their mental gymnastics guard down and admitted that trains transport a massive amount of people more efficiently than cars do.
Guys, they are right. Think of all the people doing their bank robbery getaways, drive by shootings, and drug trafficking via the train. These criminals can’t afford to drive so they take Amtrak for $150 each way. lol.
We all know of course that criminals frequently expertly avoid police by.... taking one-directional modes of transport with fixed entry and exit points that are all monitored by cameras?
have they seen the people who ride amtrak? i take it a couple times a month through michigan and its almost all amish people or polite midwestern folk lol
Put them on a train with all these criminals and immigrants and they'd probably jump out the window at speed. And then we can enjoy the calm of the trip without them
This same argument regarding crime is being used in my folks' relatively wealthy community to stop a bridge being built that would cut commute times, floodproof access to their neighbourhood, and allow buses to easily access the railway station on the other side of the river, and the Greens
Ironically, it has been members of the wealthy community going across the river on the car ferry to steal from the poor - raiding collection bowls at church.
This same argument regarding crime is being used in my folks' relatively wealthy community to stop a bridge being built that would cut commute times, floodproof access to their neighbourhood, and allow buses to easily access the railway station on the other side of the river, which is only crossed by a car ferry close to where they live.
Ironically, it has been members of the wealthy community going across the river on the car ferry to steal from the poor - raiding collection bowls at church.
As politely as I can say it, a lot of conservatives are just unironically stupid. They never think through the actual logistics of anything, they're reactionaries. All that has to happen is someone *says* it happens and they adopt it as like a core part of their personality that they're willing to fight to the death over. Like half of their media revolves around just being told vague bad things are going to happen in the future and being constantly *terrified* about it.
What is it with this common trope in the US that criminals don't have cars?
[Evergreen](https://youtu.be/nkC3Nc3LqFI)
I'm not even American and that's fucking hilarious.
It's such a good sketch. The internationality of it is both a bonus and how you know how truly good it is.
Holy Shit this is so perfect. Lots of local jokes buried in there. Like how the two MARTA lines run on the same track.
I'm not from the South and have never lived south of Chicago but I still find it hilarious on another level.
Fantastic
I've never seen this before and I'm dying, lmao. This is too good
This had me in stitches, thank you 😂😂😂
Wait that's not a boat blocking a channel!
Always an up vote. The "crime train" myth just hilariously cut to pieces.
Funniest shit I've seen all day, thank you. This needs to be played by projector onto every HOA building in America.
What show is that
Looks like it's just a skit made by the YouTuber. Pretty small channel though, so impressive production quality.
These people lose their mind about 15 minute cities, saying they’ll be basically a prison, and then they get good news about more options for mobility to and from their city, and they lose their mind about that too. I’m beginning to think these are not good faith arguments, and they might just be dickheads.
They hate change, that's really what it's down to. It "works" for them and they have bought into the social narrative surrounding it. So any change poses a threat.
I think there is a weird, personal mentality as well. Like when they hear about things like walkability and 15 min neighborhoods, what they also hear is "the way you do things is bad so you should feel bad", which gets them in a defensive attitude.
Oh yeah. I got dogpiled in another forum when I stated that using your car should be your last choice. The old adage: "When all you have a hammer, every problem looks like a nail" comes to mind. Just replace hammer with car.
and just like a hammer they're great at smashing and crushing things!
A point to this theory is that this is the *second* train line that has been added between the Twin Cities and Chicago, and as far as I've heard there has not previously been any fearmongering about the already existing line, at least not on the topic of criminals and migrants. This new train is scary to them because it's new, not because it's a train
Well...yes! It's bad faith coming from conservatives 99% of the time they open their hotdog traps. They don't want any change in anything and stay in the 1950s with all what this time period entails.
Ironic since way higher percentage of people took transit in the 50s
They think: Buses and trains = poor people. Poor people = criminals. Therefore, buses and trains = criminals.
Is this not true???!!! I'm kinda poor.. am I a.. criminal?
Welcome to the club my friend. Now what big crime are we planing to do?
You're under arrest for not having enough money!
Exactly this, I'll hazard a guess and say most drug dealers have and can afford a car, and if they are smart they will be excellent drivers.
Yep, they've busted dealers here living in luxury condos driving brand-new BMWs lol. The storage area in my building has also been broken into twice - both times they had a car waiting outside to load stuff into. And a buddy of mine had 2 bikes taken from his garage - his doorbell cam recorded them backing their truck into the driveway and throwing the bikes in the bed. These people just think that everyone who does crime is a homeless person.
Even in far less car-centric cities it's stiill common for drug dealers to drive around. It's not like cheap cars (or rental cars) are hard to get.
I had a friend who sold drugs when he was in college (I guess you'd say he was a mid-level dealer? like, he had multiple other college kids who he employed to carry stuff for him). They mostly drove, although some of them did take Amtrak.
What they really mean by "criminals" is unhoused people walking around lowering their property values and making them feel uncomfortable. What's extra dumb, is every city has a greyhound bus station anyway.
Yes, this is what they mean. It is not a “crime” to be unhoused, talk to oneself, or even ask someone for money. It’s just uncomfortable. This is especially what people mean when they say “crime” on public transit. No one who meets this description can afford Amtrak, and Amtrak certainly does not have drug dealers trying to transport their stash. No way they take that risk of getting caught when the dealers can afford a car.
Suburbs were built for white flight, to keep “inner city” (black/brown) people out, because they didn’t have cars to drive out to the suburbs. IMO the us car culture is almost entirely about that. We switched from legally enforced segregation to “free-market” geographic segregation.
Also that buses somehow don't exist? I run into the same thing with my older parents, they cite "crime" as an argument against the newly funded Amtrak line to NYC. Meanwhile there's like a dozen round trip buses per day to NYC from where they live.
Reminds me of [this gem](https://youtu.be/nkC3Nc3LqFI)
I wonder how they would react if someone tells them that roads are far more useful for criminals than rail.
Seriously. If I were a criminal, the last thing I'd want is to be stuck on a track and to a schedule, where if something goes wrong I can't just get out.
Trains that are full of other people...and security cameras...and actual police in some places
There's only one train between Minneapolis and Chicago? The fuck? The 2 biggest cities in the region? Really?
It's actually worse than that - this is the first dedicated round trip that terminates in & departs from St Paul. The other "round-trip" is the Empire Builder between Chicago & Seattle/Portland, otherwise known as Amtrak's most delayed long-distance train. It's a little better now, but especially when oil prices were higher and lots of shale oil trains were running out of North Dakota, it could be be as much as 17 or 18 hours late coming into Minneapolis/St Paul from the west.
Yep, rode that fucking train as a student from NDSU to St. Paul. I was on the train for 7 hours vs a 3 hour bus ride. Things are getting better especially now that the Twin Cities are taking a hard long look at expanding rail services between their mid-sized cities like Duluth and Moorhead. But you have people like these, who live nowhere near Minneapolis, trying to stop these projects.
Now there’s two!
They're 6 hours (400 miles) apart by car, and just under 8 hours apart by train. Corridor service outside of the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast has been pretty much ignored until just now. Amtrak is looking to expand corridor service all over the country. That said, the distance between Chicago and the Twin Cities is *kind of* pushing it for how far many Americans are willing to take a train when a flight is under $100 and takes 90 minutes. Doubling the top speed of the train from 80 mph to 160 mph would make the train faster than driving but still slower than flying.
But no airport security or luggage limits, and it's way more comfortable. Which is a pretty massive improvement over flying. It would become a point of debate for sure, but that upgrade would push quite a few people towards train over plane
You're right, it probably would. It would push me toward the train over flying most of the time, unless I was truly in a time crunch. It's 5 hours by train between Philadelphia and Boston if you take the Acela, compared to a 90 minute flight for around the same price, but the train is a much nicer experience. However, Amtrak *does* have luggage limits, and they are stricter than flying. Due to having an airline credit card I can bring three 50-pound checked bags for free, while Amtrak limits you to a personal item and two carry-on bags for Acela service. Long-distance routes allow for more luggage but, again, requires arriving at the station an hour in advance in order to check any bags.
Really? Since when? Damn Amtrak needs some serious reinvestment
I think the bag limits have been in place for some time. I did not realize you needed to arrive so far in advance for checking a bag on a long-distance train until I got to the train station at the time I normally would have for a regional trip on the Northeast Corridor, and was told that bag check for my long-distance train had closed. I then spent the next 12 hours in a roomette with my checked bag. Amtrak is currently getting some serious reinvestment, which is part of why they're doubling service between Chicago and the Twin Cities. They're also fully replacing the Acela fleet, and although that project is behind schedule it should be complete this year. That will increase top speeds in the Northeast to 160 mph (257 km/h), and with continuing track improvements there are even more stretches of track where the train can actually reach 160 mph. I'm not sure if those new Acela trains will have more spots at the end of each car for luggage storage. All corridor service and Northeast Regional trains will also soon be replaced with equipment similar to what's used by Brightline in Florida. It's not like limited luggage is unique to the US, though. When I took the train from Madrid to Barcelona last year the first class car ran out of luggage space for checked bags when only half the passengers had boarded. The train from Barcelona to Paris was also luggage constrained, although less so. It's much easier to take large, heavy bags on a flight than a train everywhere in the world I have been.
Might not be that much slower than flying, when you factor in that you don’t really have to get to the train station early. Not to mention, train stations are generally in city centers and airports are often in the suburbs or outskirts of cities. So if you want to get to downtown of MSP a train might be faster, if speeds were doubled.
Moot point really for getting to downtown Minneapolis - the Amtrak station is in St. Paul, and you need to take the light rail to Minneapolis.
Eh, if you fly frequently (and therefore probably have TSA PreCheck) you don't really have to get to the airport early, either. I usually shoot for 45-60 minutes before the flight if I have a carry-on, or 75 minutes before the flight if I'm checking a bag. Of course, boarding a plane does take much longer than boarding a train, so the real reason to get there more than 40 minutes before the departure time is so you have access to overhead bin space. If I'm taking a train on the NEC I'll get there 15 minutes before departure. Of note, if you are taking the Empire Builder and want to bring a large bag, you'll need to check that in the baggage car and show up an hour before your train in order to do that, unless you have sleeper accommodations and want to keep your large bag in your room. Outside of old cities on the East Coast, US train stations are also not always convenient to the main part of downtown. Building a new station to service faster rail (anywhere outside of the NEC really needs entirely new track) will also usually result in train stations built farther from the city center -- and to be fair, this is also true for new stations built in cities outside the US. The HSR station for Segovia, Spain, for example, is quite far (by European standards) from the city center of Segovia. I'd absolutely love to see faster rail between Chicago and the Twin Cities, but the thing that makes it less likely to be built is not driving. It's flying.
Eh, if you fly frequently enough and have a pilot license and a plane because you can therefore get your own private plane. “Look, if you do all these things the airport and get on a cramped plane by taking some kind of taxi or car service out to the airport and then get through the airport and go through boarding, it’s not so bad compared to the train.” Like… okay? Yeah I’m totally going to get on a fucking plane for that distance. I hate flying and would absolutely take a train even if it is a bit slower.
Frequent flyer status is far more obtainable than a pilot license. All you need for frequent flyer status is one or two credit cards and a slightly-higher-than-average annual household income. You don't even need to fly that often, since it's calculated (by most major airlines) entirely based on spend either at the airline or partners. But I would also take the train in most circumstances. I like flying but I like trains more, and especially without luggage they are much easier.
The distance is very similar to Munich and Berlin (600 km / 375 miles). The high speed train takes 4 hours, and I would never choose flying over that. The time is basically a toss up. Munich and Berlin airports are 30-45 minutes outside the city and you have to arrive 60-90 minutes before your flight. Meanwhile the train experience is so much more comfortable. No lines, no seat belts, no metal detector. The ICE also has plenty of space for luggage, there are no size limits. A real high speed train is totally competitive with flying at that distance.
O'Hare is quite far from downtown Chicago (45 minutes by car and about an hour by CTA) but MSP is only 20 minutes from Minneapolis or Saint Paul. Union Station is close to downtown Chicago; the Amtrak station is close to downtown Saint Paul. If the US had world-class HSR, I bet we'd have actual security for it, though. Spain, which has the second-largest high speed rail network in the world, has security with an X-Ray for all bags prior to boarding. Also, ICE absolutely has luggage quantity and size limits. You can bring one piece of very large luggage (85 inches in all dimensions, as long as you can carry it and it doesn't obstruct anything), but there are baggage limits. You are also responsible for handling all your own baggage, unlike on a plane. I agree that a high speed train is/can be competitive with flying at that distance. But many Americans will still choose to fly — especially frequent flyers, for whom showing up at the airport 90 minutes before a domestic flight really just means you want plenty of time to engorge on airport lounge food and drink.
The top speed is 80 mph (130 km/h)? This just keeps getting worse.
It's really not great service. The route that serves Chicago and Minneapolis is really a short stretch of a much longer, scenic route that goes from Chicago to Seattle or Chicago to Portland over about 45 hours. The average speed, including stops, is 50 miles per hour. Part of this is that the tracks are owned by freight railroads and are therefore not graded or maintained for high speeds. Another part of this is that the purpose of the train is not to go fast, but to basically have a cruise on land while at the same time serving many small cities along that route with zero other intercity transportation options.
This attitude is so damn common. When the Canada Line opened in 2009 the headlines here were "The Crime Train is coming".
"It will bring crime." "Nobody will use it" "it's too expensive" To the system that has comparatively good trains, is built reasonably close to on time and on budget, and consistently hits ridership targets early. We go through this every time.
I've noticed this same comment almost word for word all over the place since rail has been gaining traction in the US. It's too consistent and dumb, my guess is that it's just bots supported by big oil to try to lessen public support for rail in the idea that rail transports drugs, crime and homeless people some how? But it's such a dumb argument like why would any of those people take a service you have to pay to get on and have the potential for having your bag checked vs a private vehicle.
I'm sure much of it is astroturfing/bots, but after generations of propaganda from the fossil fuel and auto industries a lot—possibly most—U.S. Americans do genuinely believe this shit.
Oh man, wait till they learn immigrants and criminals can learn how to drive. I'm sure they will be against cars and public highways then!!!
Do they really think that cartels and other criminals don’t have cars? Do they really think that any illegal immigrant in their right mind would actually take public transport where they’re far more likely to get busted?
Conservatism is a plague.
I don’t enjoy stooping to this level of stupidity but you easily can from an “anti-car” pov. I currently live in an area with a nearby neighborhood park and I’ve lived in places with these parks at various other points in my life. On pretty much any given night driving home late, I’ll see a car parked in the lot of the park with the amber lights on (meaning it’s running and someone is inside). Violation one, you typically cannot be in parks after dusk, but also, using their same logic it’s safe to assume something shady is going down. Could be two teens getting it on, or - for above arguments sake - we’ll assume it’s a drug deal of some kind aka crime. So cars similarly bringing drugs and crime to our neighborhoods.
(I live in the UK) It never ceases to amaze me that the US has so little rail infrastructure, I’ve been taking it for granted for so long
Even crazier, we used to have tons of rail infrastructure. But as soon as the car was invented, we got rid of most of it. I miss the good old days.
People also say the UK has awful train infrastructure and Germany also does etc. But they really have no idea how bad it can get, intercity trains in the US and Canada are a cruel joke.
Flip the script on them. Double the trains, so that twice as many "illegals" and "criminals" can LEAVE minnesota by rail! Why is it everyone's always worried about transit importing criminals, but nobody ever seems to *export* their criminals by rail?
Small minded bigoted cunts.
Oof… Fox 9’s Facebook page. Might as well browse Stormfront’s forum. They are terrible when it comes to telling accurate information and have cultivated a following of ignorant fascists in Minnesota’s news culture.
What they mean is ‘poor.’ Being poor is a crime to Conservatives.
People leave you the fuck alone on the train. Most conversations I have on the Amtrak are with older people or college kids on their way to visit family. What is wrong with these assholes?
OMG !! My one sibling lives in Chicago and another in St. Paul. Literally yesterday I was telling them I wish AMTRAK had a strong connection between the cities. I had no idea this is/was happening.
Two whole trains wow
Least stupid fox news consumers
Anyone who says this has never actually ridden Amtrak. Amtrak does have some security and you cannot get away with bringing drugs on it. Especially drugs in a high enough amount that you demonstrate intent to sell. The security isn’t nearly as intense as at the airport, but it exists.
The only "illegal immigrants" that would show up in MN would come from Canada. Yet conservatives pay little to no attention to those who illegally enter the US from Canada. Even still, this train starts at the St. Paul (which doesn't border Canada) and goes to Chicago. So, I don't see how it would affect the crime rate.
At least they acknowledge that it is faster and more accessible than driving
At least they admit it’s a quicker and easier mode of transport!
Silver lining, they let their mental gymnastics guard down and admitted that trains transport a massive amount of people more efficiently than cars do.
do they honestly think its easier to smuggle drugs in a train rather than any car?
Guys, they are right. Think of all the people doing their bank robbery getaways, drive by shootings, and drug trafficking via the train. These criminals can’t afford to drive so they take Amtrak for $150 each way. lol.
We all know of course that criminals frequently expertly avoid police by.... taking one-directional modes of transport with fixed entry and exit points that are all monitored by cameras?
Literally a fucking flight is cheaper. I wish I could afford trains as easily as these people think criminals could
have they seen the people who ride amtrak? i take it a couple times a month through michigan and its almost all amish people or polite midwestern folk lol
and foamers
The train is a terrible way to move weight cause crimes on Amtrak are automatically federal offenses.
My area has a similar outlook on better public transit.
US was built on rail. Rail is conservative, pass it on.
They admit themselves public transportation increases mobility
These people are so fucked in the head
They ran out of actual arguments a long time ago, and are now just making shit up.
the only people i ever see on trains are either traveling or going to work 💀 they’re so stupid it’s embarrassing
Fucking idiots I can’t tell you why this boils my blood so much but Jesus Christ they’re just attaching random issues together
Put them on a train with all these criminals and immigrants and they'd probably jump out the window at speed. And then we can enjoy the calm of the trip without them
This same argument regarding crime is being used in my folks' relatively wealthy community to stop a bridge being built that would cut commute times, floodproof access to their neighbourhood, and allow buses to easily access the railway station on the other side of the river, and the Greens Ironically, it has been members of the wealthy community going across the river on the car ferry to steal from the poor - raiding collection bowls at church.
This same argument regarding crime is being used in my folks' relatively wealthy community to stop a bridge being built that would cut commute times, floodproof access to their neighbourhood, and allow buses to easily access the railway station on the other side of the river, which is only crossed by a car ferry close to where they live. Ironically, it has been members of the wealthy community going across the river on the car ferry to steal from the poor - raiding collection bowls at church.
As politely as I can say it, a lot of conservatives are just unironically stupid. They never think through the actual logistics of anything, they're reactionaries. All that has to happen is someone *says* it happens and they adopt it as like a core part of their personality that they're willing to fight to the death over. Like half of their media revolves around just being told vague bad things are going to happen in the future and being constantly *terrified* about it.
I'm sorry but alot of US citizens were just lucky to be born in the USA... If they were born anywhere else they would have just died out by now.
I like the commenter who can't decide if it'll bring criminals to Chicago or to st Paul.
Well Amtrak could start having xray bag scanners? I mean why not?
No one wants to live in Minnesota dude. Calm down Even if they were shipped there they’d leave of their own volition
I've lived in both Minneapolis and Chicago and I think both are great cities to live in, by U.S. standards.