Why the US chose not to have a passenger train system like Europe

The podcast discusses why the U.S. does not have an extensive passenger train system like Europe, Japan, or India. The hosts interview Alan Zaremsky, a railroad engineering professor, who explains that the U.S. prioritizes freight transportation, which is highly profitable, over passenger rail. He clarifies that the U.S. has the best freight railroad system in the world, with more tracks than any other country, but these are almost exclusively used for goods. The reasons for this emphasis include the vast, spread-out geography of the U.S., making long-distance passenger travel less efficient than flying, and the inherent conflict between profitable freight operations and less profitable passenger services sharing the same tracks. Building new high-speed rail lines is also extremely expensive and faces political challenges, as exemplified by California's project. Zaremsky suggests that a "corridor approach," similar to the successful Northeast Corridor, is a more viable solution for expanding passenger rail in the U.S., acknowledging that passenger trains are rarely profitable and require taxpayer subsidies.