Not Just Bikes / r/fuckcars / Urbanists / New Urbanism / Car-Free / Anti-Car - People and grifters who hate personal transport, freedom, cars, roads, suburbs, and are obsessed with city planning and urban design

"The rails" ah yes, and who installed those rails? Who built the bridges and blasted the tunnels and dumped and graded all that fill and ballast? That's right, private companies. If they don't want to run passenger service AT ALL, they don't have to. If it's such a great business venture, pull a Van Horne and finance your own railway, urboids.

That's why they're always focused on "muh nationalization". The reality is nationalizing wouldn't magically bring passenger rail back to life, which is a weird assumption because nationalizing was a failure in Britain. That time when it started to rise in 1980 was during the Thatcher administration and beginning to privatize the rail again.

But the transport visionaries don't know any of this, and don't care to learn it..... their idea of how the world works must be how it does..... their ideas are just too good and their motives too pure to be wrong.

Every urbanist thinks they know history; the problem is that the history is so distorted it might as well be "and this is how the Jews were responsible for every major war for the last five hundred years"-type history.


People do adjust their driving to normal weather conditions but that all goes out the window with something unusual (it's normally dry in LA).

See also: Texans v. ice.

I swear the dumb old hippies that think they didn't sell out are so feebleminded. Or maybe they don't have long to live with the consequences and they want to go out on a high horse.

Hippies sold out years ago. Besides voting Democrat consistently despite Obama and friends still being warmongers, I knew one self-described "old hippie woman" from Austin who ended up moving to the suburbs because the same policies she voted for years ended up pricing her out of the city (and proceeded to ruin Hays County). On the other hand, when I think of old hippie women I think of that woman in Houston who was known to cover the window of her small house with a peace flag and seemed to vanish one day when it later turned out she fell between the walls of her house, a horrific fate I wouldn't wish on any of them.
 
Every urbanist thinks they know history; the problem is that the history is so distorted it might as well be "and this is how the Jews were responsible for every major war for the last five hundred years"-type history.
I see it more as a case of thinking history moves in a predictable straight line.... and that the "problems" with cities today are because they deviated from that line, instead of the reality that the needs of a city evolve over time, and what's needed today won't be the case tomorrow.... cities in the 19th Century were built with the future a 19th Century person had in mind... not a 21st.

To them? It looked like they were doing the right and obvious thing by investing in rail and roads..... so they wouldn't have to be up to their armpits in flies and manure anymore.

Today's kids bleating about how the "future" is bike lanes and total car bans are going to be awfully shocked in 50 years when the ACTUAL future gets here and looks nothing like what they were so eager to build for.
 
Today's kids bleating about how the "future" is bike lanes and total car bans are going to be awfully shocked in 50 years when the ACTUAL future gets here and looks nothing like what they were so eager to build for.
I can't wait for flying cars because they'll mean that everybody would want to build podium towers like this:
1728157661669.png
because with minor modifications you could fly your car straight into the garage or even straight into your apartment.

Urbanist's dream neighborhoods would be torn down because they don't support modern modes of transportation:
1728157839917.png
(Aboveground garage and surface parking would be more attractive than underground/no parking in a world with flying cars)

Urbanists should love flying cars because they'd allow every street to be turned into a plaza because "where we're going we don't need roads", but we all know that they don't actually want that, they just hate private transportation.
 
Hippies were always scum. They never changed. Rich kids looking for a good time, no more no less. I'm just surprised anyone took them seriously at all.
This is what my parents always told me. When crust punks were a thing my mother said she's seen this before! My mom was very much an artsy person and my father was a part of the music scene at the time. Yet both of them hated hippies and my mom had the added condemnation, "they're gross."
Edit: I watched some doc about SF back when all of these music groups were burgeoning. It talked about the downfall of the movement and how it was inundated by shitty outcasts and losers. I'm sorry, I don't remember where and on what I watched it. You can put a slant on anything so I asked my parents about it and they confirmed. It was very disappointing for them.
I'm sorry for going off topic but I just feel like so much of these movements, such a fuck cars, are the same sort of things that attract losers who take advantage of good intentions.
 
Last edited:
Jason has a BIG video coming:
He released a new video within the last 24 hours. "I Spent Over 12 Hours on an Amtrak Train (on purpose)" with being in NYC "on important Nebula business". I didn't watch it or archive it but here are the timestamps:
Chapters
0:00 Intro
1:24 Leaving New York
3:04 On the train
4:03 The views
4:38 Freight trains & delays
5:37 The train is so much more comfortable
7:09 The border crossing
8:17 The Canadian side
9:24 Should you take this train?
10:20 Comparisons to Europe & Japan
11:20 We need more high-speed rail
12:02 VIA Rail is bad ... and getting worse
12:58 VIA Rail is expensive!
14:11 The new VIA Rail baggage policy 🤦‍♂️
15:49 Better train service is important!
17:14 Concluding thoughts

Hopefully @quaawaa has had a look at this and tears it apart
 
He released a new video within the last 24 hours. "I Spent Over 12 Hours on an Amtrak Train (on purpose)" with being in NYC "on important Nebula business". I didn't watch it or archive it but here are the timestamps:


Hopefully @quaawaa has had a look at this and tears it apart
Archive:


I love how he adds two hours for "airport nonsense" to the flight time and says that driving will take more than the predicted time due to the border crossing but leaves out that he has to go through security before boarding and customs after crossing the border:
I could fly in just under two hours, plus the typical two or more extra hours of airport nonsense. The drive could be done in 8 hours, though it would probably take longer with traffic and the border crossing. So of course, I chose to take Amtrak, because I’m a train-loving masochist. This train was scheduled to take 12½ hours. And to their credit, we arrived pretty close to that time, pulling into Toronto Union station in just under 13 hours.

Of course, his plans to explore Moynihan Train Hall were derailed because he had to go through security:
I was going to explore the station and waiting area, but then I found that travelers to Canada needed to check-in early to have their passports checked
and then we needed to wait in this ridiculous long line. If you’re travelling to Canada from here, make sure you print a paper ticket because apparently they need to stamp it. About 20 minutes before departure they let all the Canadian-bound passengers board first, because Canadians are better than Americans.
1728307320533.png
I thought train travel was super convenient and you could just walk on the train with no security?!? Did urbanists lie to me?

He rode in business class and makes a lame joke about subscribing to his Nebula channel so he can afford business class travel:
Business class, of course, because if I’m going to spend 12½ hours on a train I want a comfortable seat. If you’d like to ensure that I travel business class on every train I take, then you can support this channel on Nebula. But seriously, this train costs $134 for coach and $195 for business class, so I figured it was probably worth paying the extra $4.80 per hour for more comfort. To put that into perspective though, if you book early enough, you can get a flight for as low as $80, plus the cost of getting to and from the airport of course.
Not everyone can afford an extra $61 per person, so what will the poors do? Suffer in a tiny cramped seat for 13 hours? Nope, they'll just suffer in a tiny cramped seat on a plane for two hours instead that is also cheaper or drive for eight hours which is cheaper if you're traveling with other people (like Jason is).

Also, it's not like it's free to get to Penn Station. Most New Yorkers don't stay in a hotel literally across the street like Jason did.

Look at how empty the train is:
1728307833453.png1728307804577.png

When we weren’t slowed due to freight trains, our top speed was around 125 kilometres per hour.
He copes about the low speed (77 mph) by attacking cars and planes:
I find that long train journeys aren’t really a problem though, because it’s so comfortable to sit on a train. When you’re in a car you’re strapped down and can’t move. You can’t even get up to take a piss. I hate sitting in a car for long periods of time, especially if I’m driving, because you kinda have to pay attention to the road the whole time or everybody dies a fiery death. And on an airplane it’s loud, the air is dry, the seats are cramped, and the food tastes terrible at altitude. So after about 5 or 6 hours on an airplane I am tapped out and wanting to get off. But because trains are so much more comfortable, I can last a lot longer. On a train you can look out the window, Get up to walk around and stretch your legs, Go to the bar car, Or write a script for a YouTube video.
Not everyone can waste 10 hours because they don't like how food tastes at altitude (as if one needs meal service on a two hour flight). Also notice that he brought up that you can drink on a train. Not helping to dispel the "urbanists are alcoholics" stereotype, even though one can also drink on a plane or as a passenger in a car.

1728308368499.png
The chicken banh mi wasn't amazing but it was way better than airplane food.

Dude that literally looks like coach food on a plane, but you're in business class. For comparison, this is what business class food on a plane looks like:
1728308494229.png

Amtrak doesn't have jannies on the train so the bathroom became disgusting:
1728308631578.png
Also, Amtrak doesn’t employ a janitor, so the toilets were not looking so great after ten hours.

He spent more than 45 minutes going through customs after crossing the Canadian border, a time he attributed to cars and planes in the intro but left out of his train time:
When we arrived at the station we had to pack up all of our luggage and go into the station for passport control. Which I wasn’t allowed to film. But to be honest, it was pretty uneventful. Though it is interesting that this is the last time I’ll ever enter Canada on a Canadian passport, so I guess that’s a thing …
Then we walked outside in the rain. And were herded into a small waiting room. But after about 45 minutes they let us all back onto the train.

He has a new country to hate:
The announcements became bilingual. The WiFi stopped working. And we left Niagara Falls station right on … 15 minutes late! The quality of the track was noticeably worse on the Canadian side. The train was rocking quite a bit more than it was in New York, even though we were travelling at a third of the speed.
(He shows a screenshot showing that they're now moving at 49 kph or 30 mph. Remember, the "slow" American train was moving at 77 mph (125 kph).

He admits that the train sucks but says that the US and Canada should spend billions to improve it:
As I watched the sun set on the car-infested wasteland that is Canadian suburbia, I started to think. Would I recommend this trip to other people? Maybe. It depends on how much you love trains. Because if you’re not fond of train journeys that are longer than they need to be, then you’d probably be better off flying. You really need to be OK sitting on a train that you know should be so much faster if the US and Canada would just put even a fraction of the hundreds of billions that they spend on road projects into making passenger rail service better.

Some sperging about muh climate change:
1728309334467.png
I like how when the electric train goes faster it emits less CO2 per km traveled despite using more energy...

Rather than driving from Toronto to London, he spent $510 to take the train instead:
The round-trip fare for our family of four to Fake London was $510.
Since he has his family with him, that means his NYC-Toronto trip actually cost $780 for a total trip cost of $1290. It would have been way cheaper to drive.

He then spends a lot of time bitching about VIA rail charging for more than two bags and then goes on a rant about how much he loves trains and how cars are evil. Overall a very boring video.
 
Last edited:
Not everyone can waste 10 hours because they don't like how food tastes at altitude (as one needs meal service on a two hour flight). Also notice that he brought up that you can drink on a train. Not helping to dispel the "urbanists are alcoholics" stereotype, even though one can also drink on a plane or as a passenger in a car.

Food doesn't "taste terrible on altitude", it's because airplane food is all reheated; there's no way to cook on an airplane beyond reheating.

Jason said:
I find that long train journeys aren’t really a problem though, because it’s so comfortable to sit on a train. When you’re in a car you’re strapped down and can’t move. You can’t even get up to take a piss. I hate sitting in a car for long periods of time, especially if I’m driving, because you kinda have to pay attention to the road the whole time or everybody dies a fiery death. And on an airplane it’s loud, the air is dry, the seats are cramped, and the food tastes terrible at altitude. So after about 5 or 6 hours on an airplane I am tapped out and wanting to get off. But because trains are so much more comfortable, I can last a lot longer. On a train you can look out the window, Get up to walk around and stretch your legs, Go to the bar car, Or write a script for a YouTube video.

This reads like someone who has never driven a car before. The thing about driving is you can stop whenever you want. Taking a leak can be as simple as pulling off on a side road and aiming at a fence post (or finding a clean restroom). The only exception is if you need to urinate constantly, and that's something you need to talk to a doctor about.

Also, the food is better and/or cheaper. The sandwich he bought looks like the type sold in the coolers at 7-Eleven or Circle K; either way you can do better.
 
Long-distance trains can (but don't always) have an actual kitchen with actual stoves where they can cook food. You rise to diner-level there (think: Denny's).

But of course a car can go anywhere, eat anything. But you usually stop traveling while eating, which is a train advantage.

The number of people who don't realize just how much from even very expensive restaurants comes out of a Sysco truck through a microwave is insanely high.
 
Long-distance trains can (but don't always) have an actual kitchen with actual stoves where they can cook food. You rise to diner-level there (think: Denny's).

But of course a car can go anywhere, eat anything. But you usually stop traveling while eating, which is a train advantage.

The number of people who don't realize just how much from even very expensive restaurants comes out of a Sysco truck through a microwave is insanely high.

If a train takes 2.5 times longer than a car ride, then the time penalty of stopping and eating a meal isn't significant, and that's assuming you sit down to a real meal.
 
If a train takes 2.5 times longer than a car ride, then the time penalty of stopping and eating a meal isn't significant, and that's assuming you sit down to a real meal.
Yep - ironically, the best trains for eating are the worst trains for riding (unless you like riding the train, which can be fun!).

I always had nice experiences when the train between two relatively close areas was actually the long-distance train, so a four hour train ride became train + dinner, whereas the two hour drive at the same Friday night was four+ hours in traffic and fast food.

Still, driving hath its advantages and the fact that the car I was driving at the time wasn't guaranteed to make it four hours, let alone two, may have affected it.
 
I like how when the electric train goes faster it emits less CO2 per km traveled despite using more energy...
Hmm. Lets look at the source that Jason graciously includes in his description.

Table from direct sources excel file https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/greenhouse-gas-reporting-conversion-factors-2022
Type​
Unit​
Total kg CO2e per unit​
National rail​
The distance travelled by individual passengers a transport mode passenger.km​
0,03549​
International rail​
The distance travelled by individual passengers a transport mode passenger.km​
0,00446​
Light rail and tram​
The distance travelled by individual passengers a transport mode passenger.km​
0,02861​
London Underground​
The distance travelled by individual passengers a transport mode passenger.km​
0,02781​

It appears that Jason used the London Underground as a stand-in as the only fully electric option beside International rail (Eurorail). Rounded down for whatever reason as well. Despite the apples and oranges comparison with the quite different routes lengths and amount of stops, Eurorail is also affected by the fact that it partly operates outside of the UK. France notably having quite a bit more carbon neutral energy in their energy mix.

5.66. The international rail factor is based on a passenger-km weighted average of the conversion factors for the following Eurostar routes: London-Brussels, London-Paris, London-Marne Le Vallee (Disney), London-Avignon, London-Amsterdam and the ski train from London to Bourg St Maurice. The conversion factors were provided by Eurostar for the 2021 update, together with information on the basis of the electricity figures used in their calculation.
5.67. The methodology used to calculate the Eurostar conversion factors currently uses 3 key pieces of information:
a) Total electricity use by Eurostar trains on the UK and France/Belgium track sections;
b) Total passenger numbers (and therefore calculated passenger km) on all Eurostar services;
c) Conversion factors for electricity (in kgCO2 per kWh) for the UK and France/Belgium journey sections. These are based on the UK grid average electricity from the GHG Conversion factors and the France/Belgium grid averages from the last freely available version of the IEA CO2 Emissions from Fuel Combustion highlights dataset (from 2013).

1728314921340.png
 
Despite the apples and oranges comparison with the quite different routes lengths and amount of stops, Eurorail is also affected by the fact that it partly operates outside of the UK.
Whenever you see a table like that, where it's lists and lists of large, generic categories and then one specific thing, you immediately know it's completely bullshit.

Thank you for the research on HOW it is bullshit, but I knew it was garbage just by the graph style.
 
It appears that Jason used the London Underground as a stand-in as the only fully electric option beside International rail (Eurorail).
it's also worth noting that most of the national rail network outside London and the south-east (nearly all of Wales and Scotland), other than the most major lines, runs on diesel
in terms of emissions per unit, there appears to be little difference between that and purely electric traction
 
  • Like
Reactions: Markass the Worst
I dont have any experience with long distance rail but it does seem like a shittier variant of taking a bus, lots of stops, mediocre leg room, 14+ hour journey, etc. Its fucking hilarious how much he copes when the total time idle on an airport always has higher chances of comfort since most idle time takes place on terminals that are almost always decently kept. PL, but even total shitshows like the Mexico City airport still have comfortable enough amenities that shit over the cramped space on rail or bus. Even budget airlines with shit legroom are more often net positives as long as you take the due dilligence to prep for the bullshit, which admittedly is more of a mixed point, but i think even the most budget airlines cost less than an amtrak ride
 
He admits that the train sucks but says that the US and Canada should spend billions to improve it:
Given that $5B is a freeway rebuilding, ROW-expanding megaproject versus a new track, two stations, and a few bridges for the same cost, how would redirecting a "fraction" of the budget achieve anything meaningful? These same people cried over the congestion pricing being delayed indefinitely yet if they actually looked at the MTA budget 60% goes to administration costs. There's got to be enormous dead weight in there. You could probably redirect billions to operations and construction without asking for another cent in taxpayer moneys.
 
(He shows a screenshot showing that they're now moving at 49 kph or 30 mph. Remember, the "slow" American train was moving at 77 mph (125 kph).
As a train autist, Jason was riding on CSX track for his trip in the Amtrak Maple Leaf Train.

1000003204.jpg
CSX Line in Blue.

1000003205.png
Amtrak Maple Leaf Route

He complains about corporate ownership of rail lines making things slow in Canada but why is Amtrak faster in the US?

Personally, I don't know but it's more than muh corporate freight railroads.
 
I don't have any experience with long distance rail but it does seem like a shittier variant of taking a bus, lots of stops, mediocre leg room, 14+ hour journey, etc.
Two things to remember about long distance rail: no niggers (even in the USA or Europe, as it is expensive and slow) and that you can get up and walk around while the train is moving.

Both of those make people who don't care about time think that trains are the best thing ever.

And they're right.

Except for Zeppelins.
 
He complains about corporate ownership of rail lines making things slow in Canada but why is Amtrak faster in the US?

Personally, I don't know but it's more than muh corporate freight railroads.

Train speeds have nothing to do with if it's government owned or not, it has to do with maintenance (better track quality = higher speeds) and straighter, more even tracks (more mountains = slower speeds) with also lower speed in populated areas.

A train autist like Jason should know this, so like Marohn he's deliberately bullshitting or retarded.
 
A train autist like Jason should know this, so like Marohn he's deliberately bullshitting or retarded.
Jason is not a train autist. He's a public transit enthusiast. You'll never find him building a model railroad or obsessing over locomotive specs like actual train autists do.

If you asked him what rolling stock Amsterdam uses for its metro system, you'd get a blank face.
 
Back