At 9:52 AM -0600 1/30/03, Harmon Seaver wrote: >On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 07:32:10AM -0800, Marshall Clow wrote: >> >[snip] >> > Exactly. Trains are great. I currently live 80 miles from both Milwaukee and >> >Madison. >> >> I recently had to travel from San Diego to San Francisco. >> I investigated three options (all times are door to door) >> 1) Flying - about 4 hours - $95 round trip. >> 2) Driving - about 8 hours - $60 round trip >> 3) Train - about 17 hours - $130 round trip. >> >> Help me out here - why would I take the train? > > Comfort, for one. Vastly greater comfort, no hassles with airport thugs, etc.
The car is better than the train for that. There were three of us in the car, and we could stop and eat whenever we wanted - with a much bigger choice of food than the train offers. (Mmm, Harris Ranch....) [ And since there were three of us, my share of the travel expenses was $20! ] Look again at the times - the train is less than 1/2 the speed of driving. I've taken that train a couple times, as "an adventure". These days, I have better things to do with my time. (Playing with my kids, for example) >Also, you didn't factor in the subsidies. Those prices would change greatly if >you took away the billions given to airlines recently, and the 100 years of >subsidies to trucks. Travel times for the trains would be much, much better by >now as well. Look at Japan and Europe -- trains work extremely well. That may be true, but I have to travel in the world as it is, not the world as it could be. -- -- Marshall Marshall Clow Idio Software <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Hey! Who messed with my anti-paranoia shot?
