If you’ve never traveled beyond the USA, I think you’d have a hard time imagining a society not built around automobiles. Steadily investing in a long-term goal, Europe is now networked by high-speed trains. It’s not right or wrong. It’s just a vision for European society that its people embrace. When American politicians threaten that if we pursue this or that government-funded policy, we’ll “descend to a European level of socialistic misery,” they just show how little they know. And when those messages resonate with the electorate in a positive way, it demonstrates — sadly — how narrow-minded and fearful their political base really is.
America is not Europe. We do things differently. And the USA does not need to take care of its working people, or invest in its infrastructure, or respect diversity like Europe does. (Doing so would decimate the wealth of our billionaire population.) But using Europe as an example of failure is wrong. Yes, countries like Greece and Spain are struggling. But other European nations, who embrace these same ideals with more prudence — such as Germany or the Scandinavian states — enjoy a financial prosperity that any nation on earth would envy.
With this short clip, you can take a little train ride with me in France. Then…tell me what you think.
If you can’t see the video below, watch it on YouTube.
Its funny that you posted this today. Yesterday I was at the train museum in Sacramento California. Kind of uplifting to see how the first rails were put in this country coast to coast. It provided so many jobs and opportunity for people, not to mention getting around the country on the train. It made me wonder why in California there is such a fight about the high speed rail. If you have ever been on the California highways lately from North to South nothing but traffic. This would bring so many jobs to california from Engineering to construction to manufacturing. I am so disappointed in how in this day and age politics is so divided we cannot think of the future like our fore fathers did. We could have so much great infrastructure keeping our money here.
As much as I love traveling in Europe and being able to get around easily using public transportation, I’m disappointed that you have blamed our lack of infrastructure on “billionaires.” Does Europe not have rich people? The problem is rooted in our culture and started long ago. In addition, far too much of my taxes goes to support global military actions and our gargantuan government – money that could have been spent on infrastructure. I’m afraid I don’t see much changing with our current two party system.
Stick to travel and don’t make this a political blog. We all know you are from Washington State. Enough said.
Ignore those comments, Rick…you ROCK!!!
We in the United States can’t fund fantastic infrastructure projects, we got a global empire to think about.
US Navy marketing slogan: “A global force for good”. Enough said.
Also, anyone who has been to Europe and has seen the infrastructure that most of the European cities and countries have and the States lack, could not argue with this entry. Has anyone been to D.C. lately?
Ironically, much of the original infrastructure for Europe’s rail system was paid for through the Marshall Plan post WWII, yet we balk at spending money here on similar projects. I would dearly love to see better public transportation throughout this country. High speed regional rail and all metropolitan areas having local rail and bus systems equal to those in Europe would create so many opportunities in the U.S.
I like the fast trains in Europe but comparing Europe to North America is kind of a false comparison as the distances that would have to be covered in N. America are much much greater and therefore the cost to build would be much higher. Also because of the distance it would be hard to compete with the travel time of flying.
High speed rail may work passenger and time wise between the big east coast cites but is still brutally expensive to build, I have read that the Washington to Boston line will cost around $120 BILLION dollars.
With the American debt situation I doubt you will see much high speed rail soon.
It’s sad that some of those commenting above seem to think it is their place to instruct you about what your can and can’t write about. Apparently they don’t understand the essential quality of freedom of expression. It’s tragic in a country where our freedoms have given us so much, that there is so much ignorance and so much disrespect towards those exercising their rights.
Your observations make clear, yet again, how far in the weeds our country is with respect to infrastructure, education and other social services. Meanwhile, some in our society make Europe the boogeyman of their demagoguery. The numbers make clear that they are wrong, but they won’t let facts get in their way.
Press on!
Rick, I have to agree with you about trying to get a train-oriented travel system in America being very frustrating because of so many Congressmen being against it for various reason. It would add jobs to build it, and jobs to maintain and run it as well, all resulting in more payroll taxes. Many Americans that have never traveled to Europe don’t realize what they are missing! It would help America in so many ways! Thanks for the update! Happy travels, Buddy!
Not at all sure I believe that remark about the Marshall Plan. It might have helped REPAIR the rail system, but railways date back to the 19th century. The high speed lines, on the other hand, are much more recent than the Marshall Plan.
It is truly sad that almost all the transportation funding in the US goes to air and road travel, when rail travel is greener than either and safer than driving. I recently took Amtrak trains from New York to Chicago, Chicago to San Francisco, SF to Portland, Portland to Seattle and Montreal to New York. I had a great time, but it was clear the system needs upgrading (rails and rolling stock). Then I read an article in the NYT about how more people take the train in the NE corridor than fly, but funding is likely to be cut.
High speed rail sounds great until you get into the real details. Here’s what’s happened since the voters approved high speed rail between LA & SF:
The system approved by voters in 2008 is supposed to link San Francisco and Los Angeles with electric trains traveling more than 200 mph, whisking travelers between the two cities in two hours, 40 minutes.
Passengers aren’t supposed to have to change trains, and the state is barred from paying operating subsidies to the rail line. Those and many other provisions are written into state law.
Earlier this year, after construction costs ballooned to an estimated $98 billion, Brown slashed $30 billion from the project’s budget. To save money, the project was reconfigured into what is called a “blended” rail system, in which the bullet train would share tracks with commuter rail systems on the San Francisco Peninsula and in the Los Angeles basin.
In an apparent attempt to attract support, the governor’s measure included about $2 billion for transit improvements for San Francisco’s Muni system, BART, Caltrain and Los Angeles’ Metrolink service.
The lawsuit contends that the latest version of the project is so fundamentally different from what voters authorized that it should not be allowed to proceed.
The bullet train is supposed to be electric-powered, but as the project is now devised, it doesn’t provide for electrification, the lawsuit claims.
State spending isn’t supposed to begin until after the project obtains its environmental permits. But the project hasn’t gotten its permits and instead faces multiple environmental lawsuits, the complaint says.
Meanwhile, the shared-tracks plan will slow the bullet train to the extent that it won’t be able to meet its travel time requirement, the suit says, and passengers probably will have to change trains twice between San Francisco and Los Angeles.
@Mike – that’s a sad saga, but it has nothing to do with whether high speed rail is a good idea. It seems to have everything to do with cutting government funding. The Europeans are willing to spend money on infrastructure, apparently Americans are content not only not to improve their infrastructure, but actually to let it decay – I was listening only yesterday to a piece on the sorry state of the water pipes.
Let the Europeans spend their money on high-speed rail. The Americans will be the first to send a manned mission to Mars. Think bigger, Rick!
I agree with Kathy. This is the problem we throw the baby out with the bath water. We are going to end up being the weakest country in the world because we just can’t work together and get along. Americans tend to only think as individuals not as a whole. Everyone wants this great economy and jobs, but doesn’t want any kind of investment, rich or poor.
Judy, your comment lamenting the fact that Americans think individually about issues, sums up the divide and and direction currently facing the US. You cannot ignore the fact that America was founded on rugged individualism. It is rooted in our history and is the reason why the US has been an economic powerhouse. you cannot compare the US and Europe. First of all, most European countries are so small that they are not comparable to the states here so you cannot cookie cutter the way Europe does things with the US. Secondly, my husband is European, all his family still lives in Europe and THEY ARE TAXED TO DEATH. Infrastructure updates is all fine and dandy but having the sleekest and fastest railways while your country is on the precipice of economic bankruptcy is shortsighted and STUPID.
High speed rail won’t happen in the US, and lack of allocated funds are only a small portion of the reason why. The big reasons are politics, different land usage laws in too many jurisdictions, lawsuits, and the simple fact that in most of the country, long distance rail is not economically competitive with flying. In much of Europe, the state still owns large tracts of the land and heavily regulates it’s use. If a government wants to extend or build a new rail line, they simply rezone the land then appropriate the funds. There may be some lawsuits from various interested parties, but nothing like the scale the US witnesses. Compare, for example, the relatively straight-forward idea of linking the DC Metro to Dulles airport. Seems like a no-brainer of a good idea, right? Well, it was originally proposed in the 1960s, but the project only cleared it’s last legal barrier in 2009, and won’t be finished until 2016. Now, imagine trying to get clearance to build a true high speed long distance line, which needs to be relatively straight and flat to work, through large stretches of the most densely populated areas of the US, the only areas where it would economically viable. I don’t have confidence…
BTW, I live in Europe and infinitely prefer riding the rails to driving long distances. Too bad the system will never work in the US.
One more bit of perspective, before the left and the right in the US bash each other over the head even further… guess which country has the most extensive, heavily used and most profitable freight rail system in the world? Hint, it’s not in Europe…
The vast majority of European High Speed trains do not run solely on their own rails. They operate blended. This allowed for lower cost construction and better connections with existing rail lines. Board your TGV or ICE (or any other European line) in a major station in the central city. You could arrive on the SBahn or UBahn or RER (as examples)and simply change tracks and board your high speed train. Merging the California High Speed line with Metrolink/CalTrain in Los Angeles and San Francisco will allow the same ease of transfer and eventually move more people to the convenience of rail travel. Looking at this as a negative change is short sightedness in the extreme. Yes funds are tight now – but not building now will cripple the California economy in just a few short years when the highways become impassible and the air corridors max out.
Thanks Rick for showing how it should be done.
Tom, I cannot comment on U.S. right-of-way and ownership of land issues; but I live in Marseille and for years now there have been protracted discussions (basically NIMBY-ism) about where to place the TGV line from Marseille to Nice. It is getting bogged down due to various issues, for example vineyards in the way etc. I hope (and think) it will get done but creating high-speed lines is not a straightforward question in Europe either.
I agree that high-speed rail is a great way to travel though; ever since the extension between Lyon and Marseille in 2002 I have not taken the plane once to Paris – because it just takes longer door-to-door.
No doubt that the ‘idea’ is good, it’s just that once the politicians get involved, the project becomes just a shadow of what was originally intended, which is what my previous post illustrates. In fact, it has been speculated that only reason that the CA legislature approved the overall funding for high speed rail, was to get the ‘free’ money from the Fed’s that they can spend as they like, and have no intention of completing the project, given the exorbitant cost.
Calling people shortsighted and STUPID, is exactly what I am talking about. I rest my case!
Does the phrase “shovel-ready jobs” strike a familiar chord with anyone? And poof, the money was gone! Talk about shortsighted and STUPID.
Political discussion? Money talk? I don’t care about any of that…what I want to know about the train is this:
You say it’s quiet. But is it REALLY quiet? Recently, I flew from Phoenix to Virginia Beach on a plane that was so noisy (high-pitched tones, fans, etc.) that it nearly drove me crazy. So, Steve, any high-pitched, mind-numbing, ongoing, droning tones on that particular train?
Just curious :)
Rick is in dreamland, where rich guys (like Rick) think they know how everyone should live. Each country in Europe is near size to one of our states – a much lower scale of issues to solve to the satisfaction of rich guys.
Europe is diverse – what country do you visit — Ireland – really accepting of religion, France – look at their immigration policy (you would scream if we had the same), England – no problems at all (a joke), Germany – migrant labor (surely not – but check out the part-time population of Slavics and others), Swiss – now there’s and open country for you Rick – it would suit your money but you would have to post elsewhere.
Make your money with solid capitalism – then turn your back as others try to mimic the success. But it is ok for you and your liberal agenda to downgrade the U.S.
Hypocrisy is an agenda in itself.
Below is what you said on the subject in 2009, from Travel as a Political Act:
“Europe (led by France and Germany) is investing hundreds of billions of euros to build a transportation and communication infrastructure for the future. Travelers not only see this, they benefit from it.
“Among the original members of the European Union, Portugal, Greece, and Ireland were the net receivers. Back then, I remember no freeways in any of those countries. Now they’re rolling out freeways in all of them. And every time you drive on a slick new thoroughfare, you see a European flag reminding locals where the funding came from.”
How did that turn out? Not well. European countries are different; no single monetary policy fits all of them. In the absence of the Euro, Greece and the other countries could solve its problems by devaluing its currency. It would be painful, but far less so than today’s alternatives. For all of your travels you didn’t see this in 2009 and don’t understand the situation today.
Germany, like the United States, is not in great shape either. They have financial problems and are on the brink of recession. Germany knew that Greece lied about their financial condition in order to join the European Union, so they bear a lot of responsibility for the situation.
Americans complain that we are piling up debt for our children. Germany and Greece don’t have enough children to inherit their debt. It will not be nice to see what happens when the financial markets catch on.
Many European countries are like canoes nearing the waterfall. The U.S. is right behind. Instead of turning around or heading towards the shore, the American left wants to speed up.
The article oozes disdain for Americans. We don’t “care for our working people,” or “respect diversity” like Europeans and are overly protective towards “our billionaire population.” Those you disagree with are a “narrow-minded and fearful” political base.
Well the only billionaires I know of are George Soros, Warren Buffet, and Bill Gates. They are all liberals of some stripe. A few years ago, you linked to a petition sponsored by Move On (a Soros organization) protesting cuts to public broadcasting. Last year you claimed that budget cuts caused riots in Britain. You frequently try to scare us about global warming.
It is Europe that bans Piglet dolls in government offices. It Is Europe where cartoonists fear for their lives. It is Europe where the Dutch had to remove a sign saying “Thou shalt not kill” where Theo van Gogh was murdered. It was Rick Steves who worries that displaying the American flag might stoke terrorism. It was Rick Steves who denied his fellow citizens their right to display the flag. “Narrow-minded and fearful” are we? Europe needs more diversity of opinion.
There are many reasons why cars make sense in America. We have more wide-open spaces. Our cities and towns don’t use medieval design.
Americans appreciate the freedom that auto travel provides. We can drive where we want, when we want. Europe is more used to the top-down, regimented approach that dependency on public transit creates. That explains why much of the left hates automobiles.
Joe and Les, you both make excellent points. Quite frankly, I’m surprised your comments are still posted, since comments criticizing Rick have been deleted in the past. I for one, do not understand how liberal elites who made their money via capitalism, then turn around and criticize the very system, and America’s values, once they become elites. I agree that Rick is the one who stokes the fires of fear.
Rick’s travel blog seems to elicit the most passionate responses when he opines on something that is applicable back home. Well done Rick. Good travel is not simply an amusement ride, but should cause us to question the conventions that prevail where we live.
Thanks, Mr Rick, for a great article, and for speaking your mind fearlessly. What you have penned is all too apparent to any first time traveller to Western Europe.
Looking at the vitriolic responses, it seems that it is ok to move around with a gun in USA, but not ok for a blogger to speak his mind.
Only God can help an America where train travel is equated with collectivism and communism.
Having briefly reviewed the above comments, and as a long time European traveler who loves the train system there, I have two points to add. First, I agree with others that high speed rail would only make sense in select parts of the US, Boston to Washington being the best example. The US is just too big overall compared to Europe. Second, according to the Tax Foundation.org website for 2009 data, the top 1% of US tax payers had 16.9% of Adjusted Gross Income and paid 36.7% of Federal Income Taxes. So how much is their “fair share” of taxes to pay??
Rick,
I agree with you wholeheartedly. I have traveled a fair amount. Our infrastructure is terrible compared to Europe’s. In fact, the infrastructure in the US is on the level of an economically disadvantaged nation’s.
In the US there is a professional society of engineers called the American Society of Civil Engineers. Every three to four years the ASCE issues a “report card” on American infrastructure (schools, roads, water systems, transit and so on). Each area of infrastructure is rated with a letter grade and the entire system of infrastructure is given a cumulative letter grade. The cumulative grade was D the last two times. That’s how bad our infrastructure is. A skeptic might replay that it is in the ASCE’s self interest to issue low letter grades, but their report cards are peer reviewed by thousands of engineers.
It’s short sighted and troubling that American conservatives who advocate against taxes don’t see how infrastructure reflects the power and health of a nation. In European history, the biggest advocates of infrastructure were the Romans, a conservative, power-oriented society. Their roads, aqueducts and sewers are still standing today. American conservatives claim to want a strong nation and will spare no expense to equip the military with any weapon, but their attitude toward infrastructure and taxation to support it are helping to strangle the US.
– The combination of redinag this post yesterday and watching an unnecessary 10 minutes of Jersey Shore before bed led to one of the craziest dreams I’ve ever had!! In the spirit of keeping it professional I will not post the details here ;) Attitude is everything and I’m glad to hear you kept yours positive to save an amazing trip!August 19, 2011 11:11 am