美国应该为自己的铁路系统感到羞愧 [美国媒体]

-------------译者：bnge-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------



“After a half century of neglect, America now has a railroad system that the Bolivians would be ashamed of,” wrote James Howard Kunstler, the piercing writer who introduced me to urbanism, in 2006. “There isn’t another project we could do that would have a greater impact on our oil consumption than fixing our rail system and restoring passenger service.”
 
 “经过了半个世纪的忽视，美国现有的铁路系统连玻利维亚人都会羞耻。”James Howard Kunstler，一位介绍城市化的尖锐作家，2006年写到："修缮我们的铁路系统，恢复客运服务，是对我们油耗最有影响的工程。"

Ten years later, little has changed. A new ranking of high-speed rail networks by nation from GoEuro, a travel search engine, puts the U.S. at 19th out of the 20 countries assessed. Bolivia isn’t on the list, but the U.S. does rank below Turkey and Uzbekistan.

十年过去了，变化几乎没有发生。在旅游搜索引擎GoEuro的国家高速铁路网的最新排名中，美国在进行评估的20个国家中排名19位。玻利维亚并不在名单上，但美国的排名确实低于土耳其和乌兹别克斯坦。

 -------------译者：bnge-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------



GoEuro ranked all countries with high-speed rail lines (as defined by its slightly complex criteria) and made some arbitrary choices as to which factors matter most. It put the biggest emphasis on population coverage, as it should, but its second most important factor was record speed, which is silly.
 
 GoEuro对所有拥有高速铁路的国家进行排名（它对高速铁路的定义标准略显复杂），同时对于哪个因素更重要做出了武断的选择。它将铁路覆盖人口放在第一位，这是应该的，但第二重要的因素却是速度纪录，这就显得很蠢。

America would benefit more from 10 train lines that can go 150 miles per hour than one that can go 250. Operating speed, which is the third most valued factor in this ranking, is more useful.
 
美国从10条150英里每小时的铁路获得的收益远高于1条250英里每小时的铁路，因此评分中排在第三位的运行速度才更加有用。


-------------译者：bnge-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

K Klein on Mar 26, 2:41 PM said:
Mr. Kunstler says "Bulgaria" not Bolivia, but the point is still valid.
 
Kunstler说的是保加利亚不是玻利维亚，但观点依然是对的。

on Mar 27, 1:21 AM said:
@K Klein: Mr Kunstler predicted the end of the suburbs ten years ago because gasoline would be so expensive due to lack of supply.
 
So, why is anyone concerned because he is speaking about trains? Anyone you know prefer trains over planes for long trips? Or trains over cars for shorter trips? Seriously, who takes idiots like this seriously?
 
@K Klein: Kunstler十年前还预测了郊区将会消失，因为供应不足会导致汽油价格过高。
所以我们为什么要关心他对铁路的言论？你认识的人谁长途旅行选择火车而不是飞机？或是短途旅行选火车而不是开车？说真的，为什么要把这个傻瓜当真？
 
ap3 on Mar 26, 2:52 PM said:
Meanwhile the US has the finest heavy freight rail system on earth, which extends to Canada and Mexico as well. $80B of the $140B is concentrated in North America, and our railroads can ship freight in more environmentally friendly fashion than China, EU, Latin America for cheaper, and faster.
Outside of the NE, and arguably a Chicago to NE connector, and arguably a SoCal to SF connector, there is little justification for high speed rail in the US, we don't have the population density.

同时美国有地球上最好的重载货运系统，还延伸到了加拿大和墨西哥。1400亿美元中的800亿美元集中在北美，我们的铁路货运方式与中国、欧洲和拉美相比，更加环境友好、更便宜、更快。
在内布拉斯加州之外，除了一条连接芝加哥和内布拉斯加的铁路，以及一条连接南加州和旧金山的铁路，在美国其他地方需要高速铁路的理由很少，我们没有那么高的人口密度。

-------------译者：bnge-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

emjayay on Mar 26, 9:15 PM said:
@ap3: True. But we have European level density and more along the East coast from Boston to DC, with NYC and Baltimore and Philadelphia in between, and less so but major metropolitan areas continuing on to Atlanta. That plus NYC-Chicago and the San Diego-LA-SF-Sacramento route would be a good start on a usable system. The piecemeal bits and pieces proposed a few years ago were a political solution that mostly didn't work. To make it work you have to go big all at once. In Europe you have choices of several levels of trains between pretty much all cities, and even the slow local ones are usually nice and not that slow.
Introduction of budget airlines flying around Europe was an anti-environmental decision.
 
 @ap3：你说的对。但是我们和欧洲人口密度差不多，在东海岸从波士顿到华盛顿特区沿线人口密度比欧洲还高，中间包括了纽约、巴尔迪摩和费城，之后延伸到亚特兰大主要都市圈的人口密度要稍少一点。如果要建设一个可用的系统，这条线路加上纽约到芝加哥的铁路以及圣地亚哥-洛杉矶-旧金山-萨克拉门托路线是一个好的开始。前几年提出的零零碎碎的铁路建设是一种政治方案，大部分不起作用，要想有用就必须一次性建一个大的。在欧洲，几乎所有城市间的火车都可以有不同级别的选择，甚至慢速的本地火车也很好且并不慢。
在欧洲采用廉价航空是一个破坏环境的决定。

VernD on Mar 26, 9:50 PM said:
@ap3: Theres "justification" for 200kph trains in plenty of places. My favorite would be MSP to Eau Claire to Madison to Ohare to Chicago in five hours, instead of the 8? for "Empire Builder".

 @ap3：很多地方都有需要200千米每小时的火车的“理由”。我最希望的是能有从MSP（译注：明尼苏达州圣保罗一座火车站）到欧克莱尔到麦迪逊到奥黑尔到芝加哥全程五小时的火车，而不是现在8个小时的 "Empire Builder"（译注：美国一趟火车的名字）。

-------------译者：bnge-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

Philippe Desaulniers on Mar 26, 5:12 PM said:
While Amtrak is certainly not terrific, I use it several times a month to get from Washington to New York, and it absolutely can be trusted to get me there safely and reliably. It is rarely not on time, and offers a much more comfortable ride compared to flying.
 
虽然Amtrak并不完美，但我每个月都坐它从华盛顿到纽约，它绝对值得信赖，让我安全可靠到达 ，很少会晚点，旅程比飞机更舒适。

erin111 on Mar 26, 11:25 PM said:
@Philippe Desaulniers: Do you realize that if you had European train system it would take you less then 2 (two) hours to travel from DC to NYC. Amtrak gets you there in around 3.5-4 hours!!! You are satisfied because you are ignorant. That is why there is a saying, that ignorance is a blessing!

@Philippe Desaulniers：你有没有意识到，如果有欧洲的火车系统，你只要2个小时就能从华盛顿特区到纽约，Amtrak要花3.5-4小时！！！你满意是因为你无知，所以有句谚语叫无知是福。

-------------译者：bnge-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

seaguypnp on Mar 26, 8:44 PM said:
The passenger rail system in the USA is pathetic.
 
美国的客运火车系统简直可怜。

DAVID 9 on Mar 26, 9:04 PM said:
HOW CAN WE OVERCOME THIS. THE BOLIVIANS ARE ASHAMED OF US.
 
我们怎么克服这个难题？玻利维亚人都为我们羞耻。
 
Rafe Husain on Mar 26, 9:18 PM said:
Well Obama mid a big mistake. He should have declared war on some idiot middle east country and then told the more idiot republicans we need High speed rail to move troops. The idiot republicans have no problems in swallowing trillion dollar illegal wars but spending on america is not something for Republicans.

奥巴马犯了个大错误，他应该对中东某个傻国家宣战，然后告诉那些更傻的共和党人，我们需要高速铁路来运送军队。为了一场非法战争，这些共和党蠢货可以花几万亿美元，却不愿意为了美国花钱。

-------------译者：bnge-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

Tpl on Mar 26, 9:33 PM said:
I'd love to see expanded rail service. For one thing, why are their no express trains? You get a ticket on a train, and they stop at every podunk town along the route.
 
我很乐意见到火车服务提升，一个原因就是为什么我们没有直达列车？ 买票上车，然后沿途每个平凡无奇的小镇都要停车。

John Fairplay on Mar 26, 9:37 PM said:
Pretty silly thing to criticize. Passenger train travel was so unpopular in previous decades, they had to have government take it over in it's typical role as the provider of last resort for things no one wants. There is no place in the United States where train travel both makes sense, and where the right-of-way for high-speed infrastructure can be purchased and built for any kind of reasonable cost. In some places where there is high density, the right-of-way simply isn't available at any price. Airplanes are the transportation choice that makes the most sense in America.

这事评论我都觉得蠢，过去几十年火车旅行非常不受欢迎，不得不让政府接管，因为不得已成为没人想要的东西的提供商，就是政府的典型角色。在美国没有一处是火车旅行合理，同时高铁所需土地购买和基础设施建设花费也合理的。在一些人口密度高的地方，出价再高也买不到铁路通过所需土地，飞机是美国最合理的交通方式选择。

-------------译者：bnge-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

 erin111 on Mar 26, 11:19 PM said:
@John Fairplay: It is not that rail travel became less popular... it was killed on purpose by oil lobby!!! Big Oil twisted the arm of federal government to give federal subsidies to Airways and highways, and leave railways without those subsidies. The same way as FedEx and UPS tried to kill USPS, by manipulating the laws, and taking parcel delivery business (only parcels because they bring profit, not letters!!!) from federal service.
 
@John Fairplay：并不是火车旅行越来越不受欢迎，它是被石油公司游说蓄意谋杀的！大型石油公司扭曲了联邦政府的手，为航空和高速公路提供补助，而铁路却没有补助。美国邮政总局就是这么被联邦快递和UPS杀死的，通过操纵法律，从联邦那里抢来了包裹快递业务（他们只要包裹因为包裹业务赚钱，送信不赚钱！）。
 
Jake Holman on Mar 26, 9:44 PM said:
No problem. Herr Trumpzster will make the Chinese build a high-speed railway system here--and pay for it!
 
没问题，Herr Trumpzster会让中国人在这儿建一套高铁系统——并且付钱！（译注：Herr Trumpzster是总统候选人特朗普的外号之一，Trumpzster与垃圾箱dumpster谐音，Herr是德语的“先生”，讽刺他的反移民言论像Herr Hitler希特勒，连起来就是“垃圾箱先生”） 

busseja on Mar 26, 9:48 PM said:
If these things were economical they would be built but they are not. Our country hasn't been built around rail for a long time.

如果这种事是经济的那他们早就修铁路了，但他们并没有，我们的祖国已经很久没有建设过铁路了。

-------------译者：bnge-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

erin111 on Mar 26, 11:12 PM said:
@busseja: BTW, highways and the airports maintenance is paid from federal budget, railway tracks and stations are NOT, tickets must cover the cost of their maintenance. That is why rail is "less" Economical. Take back the federal money from Airways and highways, and we will see how they perform! This is clearly a purposeful discrimination so that oil lobby could make more money. Trains are the most efficient way of transportation. That is why Europe build such an excellent railways!
 
 @busseja：顺便提一下，高速公路和机场的维护费用是由联邦预算支出的，铁路和火车站则并不是，火车票中必须包含维护费支出，这就是铁路“不经济”的原因。把联邦给航空和高速的钱收回来，然后我们再看看它们的表现！这明显是带有目的性的歧视，就是为了让石油公司挣更多的钱，火车才是最有限率的交通方式，所以欧洲才建立了优秀的铁路体系。

Joe the real Schmoe on Mar 26, 10:10 PM said:
No one wants to travel at 150mph when we can fly at 500mph and then rent a car at the other end and go wherever and whenever we WANT to go, not just where the stupid trains or bus service goes. Inner city trains make sense as the population density can get enough usage from them. Ask the French etc, if their city to city routes actually make money. Answer is NO, and it is slower than renting a car and driving. And NO, we do not want to take a damned expensive slow ass taxi to get where we want to go either. Railroads as transportation are obsolete. All they do is slow down transportation.

如果我们可以以500英里每小时的速度飞行，那么没有人愿意以150英里每小时的速度旅行。到了目的地还可以租一辆车随时随地可以去我们想去的地方，而不是只能去那些愚蠢的火车或巴士可以到达的地方。城间的火车是有意义的，足够的人口密度可以让火车充分使用，但如果问一下法国等国家，他们的城间火车能不能赚钱？答案是否定的，而且比租车开还要慢，不，我们也不希望坐该死的昂贵XX出租车去我们想去的地方。铁路运输已经过时，它能做的只有减缓交通速度。

-------------译者：bnge-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

erin111 on Mar 26, 11:01 PM said:
If you travel by train in Europe (even East Europe), and come back to the US, you have an impression of traveling in time... back to the past, at least 30 years back! American train system is so antiquated that it reminds more the 3rd world then industrialized world. Well... all the industry moved from US to Asia, so we are not industrialized anymore... is this a reason why our trains are so crappy?
 
如果你在欧洲旅行过（即使是东欧），再回到美国，你会感觉做了一次时间旅行...回到了过去，至少回了30年！美国的铁路系统如此陈旧，让我觉得像在第三世界而不是工业化国家。既然工业都已经从美国迁移到了亚洲，那我们也不能再被称为工业化国家了，这是我们铁路如此蹩脚的原因吗？

Hart Fischer on Mar 27, 3:10 AM said:
Trains are a 19th century technology. We are one of the few countries that recognizes that passenger trains are vey economically inefficient, because trains waste individuals time. People stopped taking passenger trains inth 1960s, because driving and flying is much more time efficient. I have extensively travelled on Europe s so called advanced train system. And I only do it because as a foreigner I don t have a car in Europe, and therefore the train is cheap for a single traveler. My brother in Europe says he is not wealthy enough to take the train, because he has to pay for tickets for the entire family. It is only for ideological reasons that the author believes in having everybody else pay for and use an advanced train system. I know that that is how the Europeans feel, but wherever they go, they use their car for the most part. Trains are for European elitist idealists. Cars and planes are for the rest of us economically rational Americans.

火车是19世纪的技术，我们是少数几个意识到客运列车是经济效率非常低的国家，因为火车浪费的是个人的时间。从1960年开始人们就不坐客运列车了，因为开车或者坐飞机更加节省时间。我在欧洲多次乘坐所谓的高级铁路系统，这么做的唯一原因是作为外国人我在欧洲没有车，因此一个人旅行火车会更便宜。我欧洲的哥们说他连坐火车的钱都没有，因为要为全家人买火车票。作者相信人们愿意花钱使用先进的火车系统，原因只是意识形态，我知道欧洲人也是这么想的，但他们平时出门用的最多的是汽车。火车是给欧洲的精英理想主义者的，汽车和飞机是给我们剩下的经济上理性的美国人的。