zlacker

>>amathe+(OP)
> The fact that it takes six hours to get from Baltimore to Boston, when a faster train can cover the longer distance between Paris and Marseille in four, does not move us to protest the obvious failure of ambition.

By this logic, since planes can cover longer distances in shorter times than trains, should we quit trains in favor of planes?

>>joseph+C9
End-to-end the train travel between Stockholm and Malmo is almost exactly the same as the total time it would take to fly from Stockholm Arlanda to CPH and take the train across the bridge to Malmo.

However, people very often are taking the plane instead of the train, partially because it's cheaper, and partially because on paper it looks faster.

So... maybe?