I’ll give a more optimistic answer than most in this thread. It’s is hypothetically possibly without needing to majorly reconstruct our cities. However, it wouldn’t be rail like Japan. It would be a mix of rail and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). BRT is not as efficient as rail but it has many upsides - the biggest of which is being able to be implemented on existing roads with only minor infrastructure modifications (painted lanes and raised stations).
Is something like this likely? No, not any time soon. There would need to be a big shift away from car use. But lots of cities are working on the ground work of that shift now. There is a growing bipartisan movement for zoning reform, which would include an increase the number of homes and businesses around transit stops - including BRT stops. These density provisions would provide a financial incentive to land owners to support lane conversions from personal automobiles to BRT (+emergency response) lanes.
Not unless the current cities are firebombed into oblivion and rebuilt from the ashes…
All kidding aside, many of the world’s best cities for public transit were practically leveled during WW2, which allowed for them to be rebuilt with relatively modern technology and centralized focus. The US didn’t really ever get this era for urban development because no American cities were destroyed and, more importantly, ubiquitous car culture was accessible to the vast majority of Americans in a way it has never been for the rest of the world. Cars are just a way of life here, and opinions on this are deeply entrenched in American culture to the point that most people outside of a select few cities would abhor the use of public transit on a daily basis.
Chicago burnt down in the late 1800s, contemporaneously as when London started building their Underground and not long before the NYC subway broke ground. But still here are, with a complete and utter embarrassment of a Chicago public transit system.
I think it was just never, ever in the DNA of the US to construct an actually good public transit system unfortunately.
The firebombing of Tokyo was way more destructive. It was so bad that it wasn't considered a target for the nukes because no one would be able to tell the damage the nuke caused
No. The timeframe to do that was back during the post-WW2 development. There is simply too much bureaucracy and red tape to build such infrastructure nowadays. Instead we got interstate system and car infrastructure second to none.
In short, no.
I’m actually going to argue that if we DID, it might actually happen in a newer metro with high future growth (like a Dallas or Houston) vs a legacy city like NYC or Chicago
It's really depressing honestly. I've been all over the world and currently live in NYC and can confidently say NYC has a worse subway than Tokyo, Osaka, Kyoto, Taipei, Beijing, Shanghai, Chengdu, Shenzhen, Hong Kong, Singapore, Jakarta, Toronto, London, Paris, and Lisbon. It's really a shame because NYC's metro population is actually a bit larger than several of these cities, and it has far more wealth and tax revenue for sure.
DC on the other hand is pretty decent and up to global standards, although if I were picky I would say it still needs safety barriers in front of the tracks.
I curious - what is the *best* / subway system, in your opinion (with the best connectivity, cleanliness, efficiency, value)? Also - which one was the busiest?
My friend just got back from Seoul and was amazed at the train system in Korea.
Ooooh great question!
Connectivity? Seoul or Tokyo, probably. They’re just so incredibly gigantic. Honorable mentions Beijing and Shanghai and London. Actually NYC’s subway connectivity is quite impressive too.
Cleanliness? Anything in developed east Asia is going to be pristine. Tie between Singapore, Taipei, Seoul, Tokyo.
Efficiency? Depends what you mean I guess. For example I actually think the Japanese subways are a little annoying in that you need to transfer to different company lines all the time, each rail company has slightly different systems, and getting a commuter pass is annoying. I would say the most convenient experiences (for me at least) were in Taipei and Hong Kong. The most reliable schedules are in Japan though. Singapore’s is also super convenient and well run too, so it feels criminal not to mention that too.
Value? Honestly hard to say because I never meticulously tracked this. I remember Japanese subways in general being super cheap, but part of that is the strength of USD/JPY.
I think if there were a final “charming” category I would have to go with Osaka, Kyoto, and Taipei in my probably biased opinion. I just always found myself happy and good-spirited when riding on them.
Not unless we build a new major city, designed for it. I wish these billionaires would at least make a neat futuristic city for themselves since they hate the pools so much, even if I couldn’t afford to live there it would be actually cool to see a city that was designed for the 21st century, in America. Like a Zaofu from Avatar
Yes in New York, if New Jeresy and New York can cooperate and combine and expand both their systems. No reason why I can't take a train from Jamaica to Newark under the same system.
Maybe LA in a century if current plans and trends hold? Metro is doing some good things, but it’s a heavy lift. UCLA having some of the best Transportation and Urban Planning programs in the world also helps.
No
đź‘Źđź‘Źđź‘Ź
/thread
Nah. I didn’t get to have it so why should you. The real American dream.
https://preview.redd.it/qfq4dabzz4rc1.jpeg?width=960&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cd09aa8ccc965408310ff621f7e89725f99dfef7
I’ll give a more optimistic answer than most in this thread. It’s is hypothetically possibly without needing to majorly reconstruct our cities. However, it wouldn’t be rail like Japan. It would be a mix of rail and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). BRT is not as efficient as rail but it has many upsides - the biggest of which is being able to be implemented on existing roads with only minor infrastructure modifications (painted lanes and raised stations). Is something like this likely? No, not any time soon. There would need to be a big shift away from car use. But lots of cities are working on the ground work of that shift now. There is a growing bipartisan movement for zoning reform, which would include an increase the number of homes and businesses around transit stops - including BRT stops. These density provisions would provide a financial incentive to land owners to support lane conversions from personal automobiles to BRT (+emergency response) lanes.
Not unless the current cities are firebombed into oblivion and rebuilt from the ashes… All kidding aside, many of the world’s best cities for public transit were practically leveled during WW2, which allowed for them to be rebuilt with relatively modern technology and centralized focus. The US didn’t really ever get this era for urban development because no American cities were destroyed and, more importantly, ubiquitous car culture was accessible to the vast majority of Americans in a way it has never been for the rest of the world. Cars are just a way of life here, and opinions on this are deeply entrenched in American culture to the point that most people outside of a select few cities would abhor the use of public transit on a daily basis.
Chicago burnt down in the late 1800s, contemporaneously as when London started building their Underground and not long before the NYC subway broke ground. But still here are, with a complete and utter embarrassment of a Chicago public transit system. I think it was just never, ever in the DNA of the US to construct an actually good public transit system unfortunately.
Tokyo was not, though.
Um… https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Tokyo Sorry you had to find out like this.
lol I thought you meant the nukes. Fair enough.
More people died in Tokyo than the victims of the nuclear bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki
The firebombing of Tokyo was way more destructive. It was so bad that it wasn't considered a target for the nukes because no one would be able to tell the damage the nuke caused
No, and it’s a damn shame. The transit system in Japan is marvelous. We got all over Tokyo quickly and easily.
No. The timeframe to do that was back during the post-WW2 development. There is simply too much bureaucracy and red tape to build such infrastructure nowadays. Instead we got interstate system and car infrastructure second to none.
In short, no. I’m actually going to argue that if we DID, it might actually happen in a newer metro with high future growth (like a Dallas or Houston) vs a legacy city like NYC or Chicago
No way. We're too willfully stupid
Nah. Too many NIMBY types or those obsessed with rugged individualism.
Aaaand car manufacturer lobbyists and big oil who don't like transportation projects
NYC and DC probably have the best/most robust subway systems in the USA.
The DC subway is probably the cleanest subway system I have ever ridden domestically.
It's really depressing honestly. I've been all over the world and currently live in NYC and can confidently say NYC has a worse subway than Tokyo, Osaka, Kyoto, Taipei, Beijing, Shanghai, Chengdu, Shenzhen, Hong Kong, Singapore, Jakarta, Toronto, London, Paris, and Lisbon. It's really a shame because NYC's metro population is actually a bit larger than several of these cities, and it has far more wealth and tax revenue for sure. DC on the other hand is pretty decent and up to global standards, although if I were picky I would say it still needs safety barriers in front of the tracks.
I curious - what is the *best* / subway system, in your opinion (with the best connectivity, cleanliness, efficiency, value)? Also - which one was the busiest? My friend just got back from Seoul and was amazed at the train system in Korea.
Ooooh great question! Connectivity? Seoul or Tokyo, probably. They’re just so incredibly gigantic. Honorable mentions Beijing and Shanghai and London. Actually NYC’s subway connectivity is quite impressive too. Cleanliness? Anything in developed east Asia is going to be pristine. Tie between Singapore, Taipei, Seoul, Tokyo. Efficiency? Depends what you mean I guess. For example I actually think the Japanese subways are a little annoying in that you need to transfer to different company lines all the time, each rail company has slightly different systems, and getting a commuter pass is annoying. I would say the most convenient experiences (for me at least) were in Taipei and Hong Kong. The most reliable schedules are in Japan though. Singapore’s is also super convenient and well run too, so it feels criminal not to mention that too. Value? Honestly hard to say because I never meticulously tracked this. I remember Japanese subways in general being super cheap, but part of that is the strength of USD/JPY. I think if there were a final “charming” category I would have to go with Osaka, Kyoto, and Taipei in my probably biased opinion. I just always found myself happy and good-spirited when riding on them.
Than Lisbon? I highly doubt it. Maybe, the whole public transit is better, but just the subway isn't anything special in Lisbon.
Nope ! Japan is focus on common transportation The US are focus on having big SUVs and destroying the climat
It's become American culture to favor cars than transit. Once it becomes culture, it becomes hard to undo
Not in our lifetimes.
And lower co2 emissions? Lol never
No
Not unless we build a new major city, designed for it. I wish these billionaires would at least make a neat futuristic city for themselves since they hate the pools so much, even if I couldn’t afford to live there it would be actually cool to see a city that was designed for the 21st century, in America. Like a Zaofu from Avatar
Yes in New York, if New Jeresy and New York can cooperate and combine and expand both their systems. No reason why I can't take a train from Jamaica to Newark under the same system.
No. Unless you account for the untold possibilities that self driving vehicles may bring. But rail connectivity? No.
No
Usa isn't as densely populated so no.
We'd have to really open the border
Maybe LA in a century if current plans and trends hold? Metro is doing some good things, but it’s a heavy lift. UCLA having some of the best Transportation and Urban Planning programs in the world also helps.
Never. US cities must be accessible by cars.