5 ms·

Cars can cost a lot but a lot of it is avoidable - especially if you are just replacing public transport. I estimate that a cheap used car has a total cost of o

Cars can cost a lot but a lot of it is avoidable - especially if you are just replacing public transport. I estimate that a cheap used car has a total cost of ownership of ~$3200/year or ~$266/month. Looking at places with public transport, a good average might be ~$130/month between the regular cost and a few special costs like going to the airport, etc. Saving $136/month is pretty good. On the other hand, public transport costs about 50% of owning a vehicle and has a lot of limitations including only covering a single city & one person. If not having a car means you have to buy groceries at more expensive/closer stores then the savings are not as much. If you spend more time each day on public transportation then the savings might not be worth it. If you do recreational activities that require a car then rentals/ride-shares will quickly cost more than you save. Even in places where public transportation is used extensively it seems to be driven by factors unrelated to cost: 1. Parking is limited or very expensive 2. Traffic congestion is very high The high cost of vehical ownership seems to be driven by consumer preferences. It's a trope that many low-income areas of the US are filled with expensive trucks. People have the option to buy luxury & new vehicles but public transport doesn't have that option. Essentially, comparing public transport to the typical vehicle in the US isn't fair since the vehicle is more functional - wether the average American needs that extra utility is a different question.

syops 5y ago
I lived in Germany for a while and used a car twice. Both times it was a rental. Was able to take public transportation to almost every place including national parks. The U.S. needs to make investments in public transportation. It would greatly benefit the environment, our health, and our pocketbooks. In 1995 there were 0 miles of high speed rail in China and today there are tens of thousands of miles of high speed rail. We could have made similar investments into our people and the environment but haven’t. Cars do have a utility and car sharing programs coupled with good public transportation can obviate the need for everyone to own one. Most cars spend most of their time not being used. We collectively are a nation of people who by and large spend our lives driving a car from to go from one building to another. We have people who drive somewhere for the purpose of going on a walk. We’d be much better off without such a car centric focus.
- rootusrootus 5y ago
  The US has four times as many people as Germany but 27 times as much land. Public transit to every national park would be expensive.
  - syops 5y ago
    If the U.S. could shift from a car centric culture then population density would go up. Of course having bus routes to every national park is not feasible in the U.S. but we can have a robust public transportation system beyond urban centers. There is a cost to not having a good public transportation system. Overall, I think we and the world would be better off if the U.S. transitioned from a car centric culture.
    - rootusrootus 5y ago
      > If the U.S. could shift from a car centric culture then population density would go up. That seems like a reversal of cause and effect, though.
      - syops 5y ago
        As I see it people in the U.S. can live in spread out cities because of cars. If cars were somehow to be made undesirable then we’d want to live in more compact spaces.
        rootusrootus 5y ago
        Urbanization in the US has consistently increased throughout the entire time the car has been in existence. > If cars were somehow to be made undesirable then we’d want to live in more compact spaces. Poor people, mostly. Wealthy people could continue to live where they want. Forcibly making car ownership more undesirable seems like an extremely regressive choice. I would rather see the trend towards mega-cities reverse. Not to rural, but to small & medium sized cities that are more livable, which are then connected by good transportation.
xur17 5y ago
I tend to agree. A few years ago someone totaled my car, and I decided to try living without it. At the time I calculated the cost of ownership, and for a 5 or 10 year old car, it really isn't all that expensive. Part of the problem is that external costs (road, parking, etc) are amortized over everyone whether or not they own a car.
actually_a_dog 5y ago
I think your costs for public transit might be a bit off. It cost me over $150/month just to commute via BART, from not too far into the East Bay, when I was doing that.
- aj7 5y ago
  And if you’re retired, how many Lyft rides does that buy you?
- KingMachiavelli 5y ago
  It looked like the Bay area's public transport is a bit more complicated & expensive. A NYC metro card is $127/month and from what I could fine most places in Europe were a bit below or a bit above. Currently I consider the Bay area cost to be an anomally but it could unfortuently be a indicator of much new public transport would cost in the US.
  - truffdog 5y ago
    NYC is so different from the rest of the US when it comes to transit, it seems like a bad baseline.
aj7 5y ago
As a senior with three cars, I’ve looked at this in depth. The inconvenience isn’t worth it until I’m a hazard to myself. So I’m certain it’s unfeasible to prime young workers without a mass transit situation.
krab 5y ago
Public transportation in Prague, Czech republic, costs $15/month subsidized or $60/month if you include the taxpayer money. Also, the quality is quite good - underground, tram, bus, waiting times between 2 - 10 minutes and a dense network. Similar for Berlin - 60 EUR/month, not sure about subsidies on top of that. The cars in Europe cost the same or more than in US, so financially the public transport within a city is a no-brainer here. Cars are used mostly for convenience or status.
truffdog 5y ago
That seems high, although I don't know how you are amortizing purchasing cost. It's worth noting that there is the middle class used car market and car repair market, and a lower class used car market and car repair market, and the lower class one is much cheaper and more grey market.

syops 5y ago

I lived in Germany for a while and used a car twice. Both times it was a rental. Was able to take public transportation to almost every place including national parks. The U.S. needs to make investments in public transportation. It would greatly benefit the environment, our health, and our pocketbooks. In 1995 there were 0 miles of high speed rail in China and today there are tens of thousands of miles of high speed rail. We could have made similar investments into our people and the environment but haven’t. Cars do have a utility and car sharing programs coupled with good public transportation can obviate the need for everyone to own one. Most cars spend most of their time not being used. We collectively are a nation of people who by and large spend our lives driving a car from to go from one building to another. We have people who drive somewhere for the purpose of going on a walk. We’d be much better off without such a car centric focus.

rootusrootus 5y ago
The US has four times as many people as Germany but 27 times as much land. Public transit to every national park would be expensive.
- syops 5y ago
  If the U.S. could shift from a car centric culture then population density would go up. Of course having bus routes to every national park is not feasible in the U.S. but we can have a robust public transportation system beyond urban centers. There is a cost to not having a good public transportation system. Overall, I think we and the world would be better off if the U.S. transitioned from a car centric culture.
  - rootusrootus 5y ago
    > If the U.S. could shift from a car centric culture then population density would go up. That seems like a reversal of cause and effect, though.
    - syops 5y ago
      As I see it people in the U.S. can live in spread out cities because of cars. If cars were somehow to be made undesirable then we’d want to live in more compact spaces.
      - rootusrootus 5y ago
        Urbanization in the US has consistently increased throughout the entire time the car has been in existence. > If cars were somehow to be made undesirable then we’d want to live in more compact spaces. Poor people, mostly. Wealthy people could continue to live where they want. Forcibly making car ownership more undesirable seems like an extremely regressive choice. I would rather see the trend towards mega-cities reverse. Not to rural, but to small & medium sized cities that are more livable, which are then connected by good transportation.

xur17 5y ago

I tend to agree. A few years ago someone totaled my car, and I decided to try living without it. At the time I calculated the cost of ownership, and for a 5 or 10 year old car, it really isn't all that expensive. Part of the problem is that external costs (road, parking, etc) are amortized over everyone whether or not they own a car.

actually_a_dog 5y ago

I think your costs for public transit might be a bit off. It cost me over $150/month just to commute via BART, from not too far into the East Bay, when I was doing that.

aj7 5y ago
And if you’re retired, how many Lyft rides does that buy you?
KingMachiavelli 5y ago
It looked like the Bay area's public transport is a bit more complicated & expensive. A NYC metro card is $127/month and from what I could fine most places in Europe were a bit below or a bit above. Currently I consider the Bay area cost to be an anomally but it could unfortuently be a indicator of much new public transport would cost in the US.
- truffdog 5y ago
  NYC is so different from the rest of the US when it comes to transit, it seems like a bad baseline.

aj7 5y ago

As a senior with three cars, I’ve looked at this in depth. The inconvenience isn’t worth it until I’m a hazard to myself. So I’m certain it’s unfeasible to prime young workers without a mass transit situation.

krab 5y ago

Public transportation in Prague, Czech republic, costs $15/month subsidized or $60/month if you include the taxpayer money. Also, the quality is quite good - underground, tram, bus, waiting times between 2 - 10 minutes and a dense network. Similar for Berlin - 60 EUR/month, not sure about subsidies on top of that. The cars in Europe cost the same or more than in US, so financially the public transport within a city is a no-brainer here. Cars are used mostly for convenience or status.

truffdog 5y ago

That seems high, although I don't know how you are amortizing purchasing cost. It's worth noting that there is the middle class used car market and car repair market, and a lower class used car market and car repair market, and the lower class one is much cheaper and more grey market.