[mattdmoreno]

Originally Posted by Restless One

Seems to me the cure is worse than the disease. Unless you have a rail system that stops ever quarter mile or so, roadside attractions, stores, yes even gas stations, lose customers, and with that jobs.

And don't even give that "you can order online" bullcrap. If that's your argument, stop bitching about retail being a part of every new construction, because good retail will attract those that have to drive to get there.

This idea that rail can fix everything, and "single passenger cars" are evil is pure fiction. People will always want to stop and see the grandeur of the country, and rail doesn't allow for that. It will never have the versatility of cars.

Not to mention, manufacturing centers can't fit DT anymore. They are actually preferring the suburbs, due to many factors. The region is going to grow, and it will be "car centric". That is a fact.

Yeah, rail can move more people, as long as they all want to go to the same place, at the same time.

Better putting our efforts into more efficient personal autos, and making mass transit more convenient, than a one or the other approach.

The issue isn't replacing the car, its reducing car-dependency. The freedom of the car that you express is bittersweet as an increasing number of Americans cannot afford their car payments, but do not have a choice in transportation as urban development forces it as the only viable option. Rail is just one tool in the belt to reduce this dependency, especially in higher density corridors. On top of that, transit-orientated economic centers tend to be more successful than car-orientated strip malls (of course there are exceptions that are few and far between). On top of that, these visitors that you mention won't have a choice as to transportation options. San Antonio's airport is known as one of the worst in the country as a result of a lack of transportation options. Nobody can stop to look at grandeur at all if they can't even get there.