The freight railroads aren't good at what they do. It would be much easier to run passenger services (and improve their own operations) if they ran trains that actually fit within their own passing loops, but they desperately want to reduce the number of people they have to pay to run their trains. Both would also benefit from better maintained infrastructure with upgrades such as electrification and more double tracking, but the railroads don't want to spend any more money than absolutely necessary to keep their (mostly) running.
For the EU the biggest issue is all of the national operators being insane in different ways that makes it harder and more expensive than it should be to cross borders by rail a lot of the time.
Just because buses and trains don't make sense for trans continental journeys, doesn't mean they can't be used for shorter journeys. There's a bunch of areas in North America where is does make sense and could eliminate many flights.
If you don't like Microsoft's contributions to Linux, you can fork it and remove them. If you don't like Microsoft's contributions to Windows, you have to use something else.
The government said it was misleading to equate the figures directly with changes in the number of bus routes – with up to 1,400 of the 3,000 services deregistered by the commissioner over the past two years now operated under local transport authorities – but it acknowledged many services were lost.
You can have all the fun you want playing with your stick. The post is calling out a system that forces people to drive to get around and creates infrastructure like that shown in the image. Driving would be a lot nicer if the roads weren't full of people who would prefer to use other modes.
Have other viable modes of transport available so people have a choice, and given that other modes are much more space efficient than cars you can have less congestion with less road.
At rush hour, you will see full trains and streets full of cars with only one person in each. Cars don't fill up when it gets busy, but trains do.
There's breaking distance for 20mph traffic, and trains actually do run at 90 second intervals.
You can change trains if the one you're on doesn't match your route, or combine it with other modes. But that isn't what this comparison is about, it's about the space they take up.
And you still need insurance, fuel etc on top of that, and your £500 banger isn't going to be very reliable.
You can get a decent bike for £50 or a bus ticket for £2. The problem is in a lot of the country it isn't safe to cycle and the buses are shit, so we need to fix those things to have transport that works for everyone (and doesn't create microplastics).
You just described how bad the public transport where you live is, not why it can't be better. We 100% can and should be building better public transport & active transport, as well as building places with better land use for these.