It’s not that society says I need a car so i buy one. It’s society designs cities around the assumption that most people have a car, so it strongly influences the benefit balance of having one.

I live in a city that is completely designed for cars – the new neighbourhoods are built without bus systems at all for the first number of years, and are usually sprawling with long winding streets that are easy to scan in a car, but take forever to get out of by foot. I choose to live in the inner city where everything is much smaller, and I can get through daily life without a car, but it still makes a lot of things easier.

There also is no bus system to the mountains (beyond the two big towns), and I happen to like that way, as I dread the Rockies becoming the Alps.
There are benefits to both ways.

In Denver, you can get from a limited number of places to a limited number of places. Few bus stops were safe to wait at on off hours, and the reliability of the schedule was marginal at best. Too often, you could get from where you were to within several or more miles of your destination. There aren’t cabs available, and their cost would negate the money saved on taking the bus. There is a lot more sprawl, and fewer people per area, and as a result, a much poorer quality transit system. The poorer the quality and less comprehensive the system, the fewer people will use it.

Where I live now, well, a 15-minute drive can cost you over two hours by bus, although because it is such a small town, you can get close to your destination by bus and don’t have to drive at one end or the other. If I were broke, I would make it work. I’m not broke, and I’m not in good health and if I want to do what I came to do, I’d better drive or I’ll be too exhausted to do it.

“But I must say I’m a little less sympathetic to the argument that “our culture tells us that we need these things.” If your culture told you to jump off a bridge, would you do that too?”

Yes, possibly, if that were the socially acceptable — or even expected — response to a situation. (Look at harakiri.)

I get where you’re coming from, but I think you discount the influence a culture has on its citizens. It is easy to say that we shouldn’t follow the crowd, but it takes a lot of energy to go against the norm. Not only do we have everyone/thing around us saying we should do X (e.g., own a car), but if you’ve grown up doing X, you’ll likely continue to do it into adulthood. The groove of inertia is a difficult one to overcome.

Let me flip your argument around: If our culture told us to get rid of our cars (and created the infrastructure for everyone to do so), would we all do it? Probably not, at least not in the short term. I suspect it would take at least a couple generations for a no-car culture to really set in.

Of course that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t push people to think about the concept.

-getting broken into (ie, leaving absolutely nothing in your car that isn’t attached, because it might have some street value; this includes wiping off the ring left by the GPS suction cup, which can entice thieves into thinking you’ve stored your GPS in the glove box [even if you haven't])

-dealing with repairs caused by someone doing something stupid on our too-narrow, one-way street (eg, backing up and ripping off my side-view mirror [that was before the mirrors that fold in] or an errant baseball or football)

-one more thing to keep clean

My mom recently commented about how she worried about me being cold during my travels, to work, the grocery store, etc. It takes me less than 5 minutes to get to the subway or bus (I realize I’m lucky, but I always choose where I live based on proximity to transportation), and once there, only a minute or two to step into a warm vehicle driven by someone else. On the other hand, my parents need to stand out in the cold for 20-30 minutes sweeping the snow off the car, then deal with traffic, find parking, etc.

I don’t begrudge anyone their cars. I actually love driving (as long as it’s a stick shift), but I love living car free even more, especially since I don’t need a gym membership because I walk everywhere.

What I think *is* relevant is that more of Europe was built in times when nobody had cars. Since 1900, the population of the UK has less than doubled. The population of the US has quadrupled. A lot of that growth has been in places like Texas and California, but the populations of Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, and New Jersey have all more than tripled.

Also, zoning policies and transportation budgets of recent generations have been designed around the “American dream” of detached houses with big yards and white picket fences. But I must say I’m a little less sympathetic to the argument that “our culture tells us that we need these things.” If your culture told you to jump off a bridge, would you do that too?

For example, I lived in midtown (right in the center of Atlanta). To travel <2 miles to work I would have had to walk one mile to a bus stop, take the bus 1/2 a mile in the wrong direction, catch a train, ride for three stops (passing where I wanted to go) and then take another train 2 stops to get off .8 of mile from where I needed to go. I should also add that to get to the major university where I worked, I would have to walk through an underground tunnel (think creepy movie with druggies hanging around and a very real risk of being assaulted). This was the only exit within miles of the university – and the university was definitely there before the Marta line. This is a school with 20,000 students and thousands of faculty members and research scientists not to mention an enormous staff.

There are huge pockets of City of Atlanta that are not serviced. Additionally, very few (only 3) of the surrounding counties that feed into Atlanta have bus or train service (less than 1/2) that connect with Marta.

If you're interested in the topic check out the Wikipedia page – its a very political and racial issue.

We have lived in Arequipa, Peru (one car, two kids), London (no cars, no kids), Florence (one motorcycle, one kid), Manhattan (no cars, two kids), and Philadephia (one car, two kids). We now live in metro Atlanta, where we started originally (two cars, no kids), and have two cars and two kids.

Our county and city have ZERO public transportation. There are NO taxis. We have NO bike lanes – we have many places where there are no sidewalks! My husband, a professor, while home more than most has a different schedule every semester, which makes it impossibly to have only one car – we’d LOVE to do so. I cannot walk even to the grocery store – no sidewalks and it is 3 miles away.

We would gladly have one or no cars if we lived in the APPROPRIATE situation for it. I get weary of the “judgement” tone people have for this topic.

My favorite ever was when we were in London hearing how “Americans” jump in the car just to “go round to the corner shop.” The “corner shop” can be further away than Londoners, Manhattanites and other large city dwellers travel in a given week!

However, the difference in mileage isn’t that much. Automatics are now much more efficient than when I was a kid.

One thing not raised when suggesting saving money by getting rid of a car is that it limits your opportunities to make money in a side gig. Either your time is tied up in transportation, and therefore not available for a side gig, or the lack of transportation greatly diminishes the opportunities for second jobs.

Cheaper to purchase, higher milage.

For an even more affordable option, look into “car sharing” alternatives. (I can’t post a link in this forum, but type those words into Wikipedia and you’ll get the right article.) For a small annual fee, which usually goes to cover the organizers’ expenses (e.g., maintenance, insurance, purchasing new cars when necessary) you can gain access to a car on a daily or hourly basis whenever you need one, and pretty much your only cost beyond that is gas.

Provided you plan a little ahead to reserve a car during busy periods like long holiday weekends, you won’t have many problems getting a car if you live in an area with an established network; availability may be a bit less predictable in young networks that haven’t yet grown to full capacity. We have a pretty good network here in Montreal, but thus far, it’s primarily in the urban core. I’d join in a second if the network extended out to the ‘burbs where I live.

To figure out what option works best for you, do what Trent does all the time: run the numbers. For example, let’s say a local rental costs you $50 per day (yes, it’s frequently that bad in Montreal) and Communauto (our shared car group) costs $200 per year (that’s a ballpark figure for their several different plans). If you use the car more than 4 times per year, you’re saving money; less than that and you should stick with rentals. They also offer a $500 one-time membership fee; if you use their cars more than 10 times, that’s clearly a huge savings.

Then 2 years later we ended up on just one salary. Not having car payments and having to pay expenses on just one car helped us tremendously to keep our house while my husband goes back to school full-time. Had we chosen a house further away, this would not have been possible.

David, I live in Southern California. There is an extensive bus network throughout LA and Orange County, as well as some trains and a limited but growing light rail and subway system. There are also sidewalks and, in some places, bike lanes. So yes, going without a car here would be possible, if not necessarily convenient. And yes, technically speaking, it would generally save money – you’d save on purchase and maintenance, fuel, and insurance, while only paying for transit passes and likely getting a lot of good walking exercise.

HOWEVER, it would cost heavily in time. Getting to or from work takes an hour and 20 minutes instead of 40, and still requires a 10-minute car ride to the light rail station (or, I suppose that could be substituted with an additional 40 minutes of walking and bus). Going to the grocery store would require more time and would have to be done more frequently because I can’t carry all my groceries at once. Costco would be out of the question. Furthermore, even if I lived within walking distance of work and shopping (i.e. paying much more for a cramped downtown apartment vs. my cheaper, larger house), my work requires attending meetings all over, and as a consultant, time literally is money. Even a couple hours a month lost to having to find alternative transportation would pay for a car.

So, is having a car a luxury? Yes, in the strictest definition of the word. But a car is a tool that saves time and thereby makes money. Sorry if my points are scattered…it’s late and I’m tired.

Glad you liked it :)

You might also like his other blog mnmlist(dot)com though it is not updated as often. Leo is my minimalist idol!