Cars are a terrible use of money

[desura]

I used to be like that.

Traffic is stressful, but overall bicycling is more stressful. Because you also have to live in an urbanism area for cycling to work.

You can be really sloppy with your car. You can leave stuff there all the time. You can forget things.

 

[rh71]

Public transit + Zipcar + a good bicycle is much better financially.

I'm glad you qualified that with "financially" because out here in the suburbs you can't get to public transit unless you walk 15+ minutes first. Who wants to do that in the winter when nobody even shovels their sidewalks? No zipcar nearby either.

I have a bicycle that I ride to the local store which is 5 minutes. But only in good weather. I "wasted" over $50k on a car and I work from home full time. But I would do it again. I think next time I'm going to waste $95k. Vrooom vrooom.

 

[JBT]

I'll be working from home starting July. Really excited. We'll be going back to being a one car family once or next lease is up. Saves SOOO much money.

 

[purbeast0]

lol @ the possibility of not owning a car. i would be doing jack shit if i didn't have a car, and i live in the DMV area where i do take occasional public transportation.

 

[yinan]

lol @ the possibility of not owning a car. i would be doing jack shit if i didn't have a car, and i live in the DMV area where i do take occasional public transportation.

Public transportation in this area sucks. It would be so much more expensive, and time consuming to use. It is not designed well at all.

 

[tokie]

:hmm:

Did you not read the part where I said that the purchase price of the car was not included?

If you include that in the hourly cost then the $7.33 figure goes much higher.

From your own calculations, owning a car is cheaper. It's really lame that zipcar costs so much considering that privately owned cars have a utilization rate of less than 10% as you say. We need a more realistic calculation though. Zipcar also charges you $9/hr for every hr you are using their car but not driving. This is the real problem. You spend most of your time with your car parked somewhere as you do something so the true cost of zipcar is much more. The way you do your calculations, a privately owned car is essentially free while not moving. Also, a privately owned car has very large purchase and maintenance costs too of course.

As others have said, people in the first world have money to burn compared to people in the 3rd world so that is why we all own cars.

However, your point about the economic inefficiency of cars is true. When self driving cars come, I expect a revolution in car usage. A self driving car mostly solves the problem of carrying costs while parked which is the problem which makes zipcar so expensive. It will also drive down costs even more by allowing automatic, dynamically scheduled car sharing.

I think shared self-driving cars will solve a lot of the low utilization of private vehicles. Think of having a fleet of electric self-driving taxis like from Total Recall instead of a public transportation system.

However, they will not solve the peak traffic issues of rush hour when everyone uses their car.

 

[monkeydelmagico]

I walk to work most days. I could, if I chose to, walk to the grocery as well. Yet I have two cars. Usually have at least one motorcycle too.

Next I want at least 3500 sq ft of house on 10+ acres to live in alone

My money dammit I'll spend it however I want.

 

[Exterous]

I'm sorry that your yacht is so small

You only have one? That was my Denver yacht. I have others

 

[Red Squirrel]

So you go to the store to load up on groceries and spend $100-125, are you really wanting to haul 7-8 bags of stuff on a damm bus and take 2 hours to get it back home?, fuck no, your frozen items would be a half-thawed mess by the time you got home.

The whole point is that currently public transit is not efficient, but if it were made more efficient it would actually be a viable option to not have a car as it would not take more than like half an hour to get anywhere. Currently, no, I could not give up my car, but if public transit was redesigned to be more efficient such as having more routes, more frequent stops, etc then it would perhaps be viable.

 

[rh71]

The whole point is that currently public transit is not efficient, but if it were made more efficient it would actually be a viable option to not have a car as it would not take more than like half an hour to get anywhere. Currently, no, I could not give up my car, but if public transit was redesigned to be more efficient such as having more routes, more frequent stops, etc then it would perhaps be viable.

How do you make public transit more efficient? If you place more bus stops in suburbia so people don't have to walk 15+ minutes to get there first, that means more stops, and longer rides. Could you imagine if your job was also in suburbia and your bus made 50 stops including lights before you finally got to work? Not to mention needing to transfer along the way.

My wife takes the rail into NYC but has to drive to the station first and that's about 15 minutes, which doesn't save us on gas, nor a parking tag, nor car insurance. Then she sits on the train for 45 minutes each way. Driving directly there is also 1 hour albeit with stressful traffic. If it didn't cost so damn much to park in the city, that would be just the same to not use public transit. And the rail also costs $300/mo.

Is there an example where public transit is done right over a large area that is not a city or city-like population?

 

[purbeast0]

The whole point is that currently public transit is not efficient, but if it were made more efficient it would actually be a viable option to not have a car as it would not take more than like half an hour to get anywhere. Currently, no, I could not give up my car, but if public transit was redesigned to be more efficient such as having more routes, more frequent stops, etc then it would perhaps be viable.

how would having more stops make public transportation faster? it would make it slower, so this "get anywhere in 30 minutes" thing you just said goes right out the window with your other suggestion.

how would i get to the lakes to go fishing that are down windy roads that aren't even on google maps? what if i want to bring my inflatable boat with me and all of my gear? yeah, i'll just carry that with me on the bus. the bus operator will have to wait about 10 minutes when it picks me up and drops me off while i unload all of my gear too.

it's just a fact that public transportation as the only way of transportation is not a realistic scenario for the large majority of people.

 

[BUTCH1]

The whole point is that currently public transit is not efficient, but if it were made more efficient it would actually be a viable option to not have a car as it would not take more than like half an hour to get anywhere. Currently, no, I could not give up my car, but if public transit was redesigned to be more efficient such as having more routes, more frequent stops, etc then it would perhaps be viable.

Even if it got me home in 15 minutes I'm not hauling 7 bags of groceries on a bus. I also do my own home repairs, how am I going to ride a bus with lumber and other materials?, care to sit next to a bag of fertilizer?, didn't think so..

 

[JulesMaximus]

I used to be like that.

Traffic is stressful, but overall bicycling is more stressful. Because you also have to live in an urbanism area for cycling to work.

You can be really sloppy with your car. You can leave stuff there all the time. You can forget things.

I disagree. I commuted by bicycle for more than 2 years, 2-3 days a week. I found it to be an excellent way to unwind after a hard day. You are alone with your thoughts for 40 minutes or so, just pedaling along. I was in the best shape of my life then. I would come home, take a shower, eat dinner and be completely relaxed.

 

[K1052]

How do you make public transit more efficient? If you place more bus stops in suburbia so people don't have to walk 15+ minutes to get there first, that means more stops, and longer rides. Could you imagine if your job was also in suburbia and your bus made 50 stops including lights before you finally got to work? Not to mention needing to transfer along the way.

My wife takes the rail into NYC but has to drive to the station first and that's about 15 minutes, which doesn't save us on gas, nor a parking tag, nor car insurance. Then she sits on the train for 45 minutes each way. Driving directly there is also 1 hour albeit with stressful traffic. If it didn't cost so damn much to park in the city, that would be just the same to not use public transit. And the rail also costs $300/mo.

Is there an example where public transit is done right over a large area that is not a city or city-like population?

Many suburbs will never see useful public transportation because the density is too low and the areas were built with cars in mind. There are some places it would be workable but not the majority.

Commuter rail is kind of a different animal since without it it would take hours longer for everyone to get in and out of major cities if they all drove. That 1 hour would turn into 3 hours if the hundreds of thousands riding LIRR daily all decided to drive into Manhattan at the same time.