* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_rail_usag...
For the US it is 0.3%.
Given that CH is land-locked, it's not surprising that freight modal share is 46%, because it has to get inland from a port in some way:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_rail_usag...
This is higher than the US, but give that 127M Americans (40%) live in counties that are on the coast, it's probably not too hard to get things to them:
* https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/population.html
* https://www.livescience.com/18997-population-coastal-areas-i...
Heck, Los Angeles county has a population (10M) larger than CH (8.5M), and would be the 10th largest state (between NC and MI):
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_and_territories...
So a good number of Americans can get goods pretty direct without long distance inland shipping.
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Panamax_ports#Pacific_...
And from any of those it's probably not that far to any major population centre.
Compare to Switzerland, which has precisely zero ports, and so of course needs rail (and trucks) to get things delivered.
Source (only in german): https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schweizerische_Rheinh%C3%A4fen
Note that ships are much more used in Europe.
US is cheaper than Switzerland for pretty much any product. If you are talking about train service, then the reason for that is because US (and Canada) prioritize freight traffic. Freight traffic is much more efficient in North America than in Europe [1] and unfortunately (or fortunately) is prioritized over passenger traffic.
Honestly, I think America made the better decision.
[1]https://www.freightwaves.com/news/why-is-europe-so-absurdly-...
"European railways had no incentive to take risks to re-engineer and spend billions of euros to increase clearances and rework tunnel heights for double-stacked railcars, because the European railway business model was about moving passengers and not freight – the opposite of how North America dealt with its railroad system. "