>>2463527You are beyond help in so many ways.
>This is flat-out untrue, every bit of it. An electric train with several cars can carry hundreds of passengers, which equates to hundreds of automobiles off the road, since almost everyone drives single-passenger most of the time these days.Automobiles and roads are cheaper to build and maintain (even with fuel costs) than rail.
>You seriously believe that one electric train runs less efficiently than two hundred gasoline-powered cars? Christ.You have fallen for the propaganda koolaid, hence why you are beyond help. By the way, per passenger, cars and roads are about 5-10 times cheaper to run and maintain than rail (eg, 200 passengers in an electric train costs has ten times the amount in infrastructure funding necessary to build and maintain it than building a highway of equal length and 200-2,000 people driving single passenger vehicles on it for the same length of time).
>Also, cars and weather beat the absolute shit out of roads, which require constant, extensive, and expensive maintenance, far more and more often than a pair of rails.The weather beats the shit out of everything, roads are still cheaper to fix than rail damage and cars and road are cheaper to repair and replace than planes or rail.
Furthermore, if you actually believe that because something is "electric" it's ecologically or environmentally or cost sustainable you are a complete idiot. The cheapest and most efficient fuel sources on the planet are nuclear and carbon.
Source image is from a UK study of road vs rail cost, construction and maintenance costs.
