Perhaps the better question might be which train connections should have priority. Would a better one be Mexico City to the U.S. border? for example. These days many are turned off from airline travel. Can we ask which part of Mexico could benefit most from passenger train travel?
Andrés Greco - 6 years ago
Better access will fither degrade the experience. The tourists will still come. Without the train. Use the money for education or social services. Thanks
Betz - 6 years ago
Trains are expensive. It seems that those funds would be better spent on trains to the Mexico City airport, for example, and avoid damaging pristine sites in Mexico, such as Palenque.
Mike Snyder - 6 years ago
Unfortunately, off the beaten path is rapidly becoming extinct, and a lot of priceless charm and environmental protection disappear with it. Had you seen Quintana Roo when it was still a territory and Cancun didn't exist you would nod in agreement. One tiny tienda in Tulum had electricity - for a single light bulb and a small radio. The coast was untouched, it was breathtaking, inconvenient, quiet, friendly and safe. It is time to preserve what is left before it is too is destroyed to fuel tourism.
Aimee Lynch - 6 years ago
I love Palenque, but a big part of the charm is how off the beaten track it is. An easy commute from Cancun could change it a lot and even ruin it, so I hope it doesn't happen.
Jim Ficklin - 6 years ago
I’d rather see the time and effort spent on stopping all the gasoline pipeline taps. That would be beneficial for all of México.
Julie Hoover - 6 years ago
Appealing perhaps but not cost-effective. First class attractive buses, frequent service, and safe roads would achieve the same objectives and leave more transportation money to be spent on other worthy projects.
Karen Goodridge - 6 years ago
A train would be nice between the two locations but not at the cost of expropriation. Cuidado!
Perhaps the better question might be which train connections should have priority. Would a better one be Mexico City to the U.S. border? for example. These days many are turned off from airline travel. Can we ask which part of Mexico could benefit most from passenger train travel?
Better access will fither degrade the experience. The tourists will still come. Without the train. Use the money for education or social services. Thanks
Trains are expensive. It seems that those funds would be better spent on trains to the Mexico City airport, for example, and avoid damaging pristine sites in Mexico, such as Palenque.
Unfortunately, off the beaten path is rapidly becoming extinct, and a lot of priceless charm and environmental protection disappear with it. Had you seen Quintana Roo when it was still a territory and Cancun didn't exist you would nod in agreement. One tiny tienda in Tulum had electricity - for a single light bulb and a small radio. The coast was untouched, it was breathtaking, inconvenient, quiet, friendly and safe. It is time to preserve what is left before it is too is destroyed to fuel tourism.
I love Palenque, but a big part of the charm is how off the beaten track it is. An easy commute from Cancun could change it a lot and even ruin it, so I hope it doesn't happen.
I’d rather see the time and effort spent on stopping all the gasoline pipeline taps. That would be beneficial for all of México.
Appealing perhaps but not cost-effective. First class attractive buses, frequent service, and safe roads would achieve the same objectives and leave more transportation money to be spent on other worthy projects.
A train would be nice between the two locations but not at the cost of expropriation. Cuidado!