I live in a rural town, that has two universities near by, thus a thriving downtown area surrounded by forest and trails. There is some density.

In my pipe dream, they would ban vehicles downtown, and we'd have a trolly that goes from the strip mall (Walmart) down the route, through downtown, and to the end where there are three more strip malls. Make the whole area walkable and bikeable. Have a park and ride at either end.

Them my son could ride his bike to school, I wouldn't need to get in a car to go to the grocery store that is a half mile from my house, instead crossing a 50mph road, it would be walksble, and my kid could go to the park on his own.

There are so many places to go within two miles of my mostly old folk trailer park, but all of it currently is inaccessible without a car or crossing basically highways.

New England is an interesting place, we have high (well maybe more) medium density, and rural areas mixed together everywhere. We could do better.

Highspeed rail would be great. Im 2 hours drive from my states largest city, where tons of cool events happen, and I never ever go, because it's a bitch to drive. There is no direct public transport, so I lose out. Even if the train ran twice a day it would be worth it.

England, the UK, have rural areas with trains. Why can't we?

I guess it depends what you call waste. Its providing a service, realistically around here park and ride is pretty popular where people to to edge of the city, park in a carpark with solar cover and ride a bus to town.

traffic still sucks because of other morons who don't use it and drove but it would be worse if everyone drove

my town has the worst god damn trains, i swear to fuck they're not even trying

Anyway:

trains need a specific ecosystem and population density to thrive

Which is totally not just some unverified just-so story people fucking say because it sounds nice, in spite of all evidence.

It sounds like your city does not prioritize trains at all

train was PACKED and spent 10m at every stop

add more wagons or increase frequency for example

then they hit a car

intersections with car traffic are always a problem and they should be minimized

train was every 10. Some days every 30, some days 2 in a row

i can bet the tracks share the same space with regular roads and signaling does not prioritize public transit, which usually leads to this sort of inconsistent schedule

that didn’t make it any easier

that's usually the excuse used to cut funding to public transit instead of the other way around: "see it doesnt work, why waste money on it". They never mention how it's been underfunded for decades, how cars are always prioritized, and the success cases seen all around the world where it works properly

does the train increase commerce in an area?

stations are usually prime real state for commerce and housing due to all the foot traffic it brings. Just look at stations in Japan, they are basically big shopping malls, without all the unnecessary parking, and high towers all around for housing