6 ms·

1 car/household is still entirely feasible with children (and the norm for many lower-class in Europe). We live with 1 child and no car and it's been working f

by mrpopo 4y ago

1 car/household is still entirely feasible with children (and the norm for many lower-class in Europe). We live with 1 child and no car and it's been working fine thus far. You have to be careful about where you live and work though, but I'd say the added quality of life of living car-free (in a car-free city) is all worth it.

pjc50 4y ago
If you live within London transport zone 1, it's quite likely to be a zero-car household, simply because of the difficulty in keeping the car somewhere.
- rnk 4y ago
  That doesn't quite make sense, "it's difficult to avoid having a car because you can't store it"? Can you elaborate? I'm interested what life is like in these cities that charge drivers so as to reduce cars in the road.
  - em500 4y ago
    I think you misread GP: he's saying that in inner London it's difficult to have a car, not to avoid having one, mostly because parking space is very limited. What exactly are you interested in, about life such cities? I live in Amsterdam, haven't owned a car for over a decade (which doesn't mean that I never drive one), and haven't really missed it (even with a primary school aged child).
    - rnk 4y ago
      Sorry, just saw this. I do some sports that are 50 miles from the city, and there's no public transportation, not even any private transportation. Skiing is one such activity, but hiking and camping in the summer time. I do recognize that I'm using energy to do these things. I'd love to take a bus. Actually in my west coast city, during the summer they have bus service to a number of area hiking trails, within 10 miles of the city. But these other farther away activities are out of that reach.
  - pastage 4y ago
    Congestion charge makes car ownership easier in that area it is pretty cash anyways. The land is so valuable that you rather fit other things than cars there, e.g. apparments with even more people.
  - pjc50 4y ago
    It's expensive to have a car in central London because of the cost of parking. It has basically been unbundled from housing; garages sell for upwards of £100k, guaranteed parking spaces somewhat less, on-street parking is either banned, charged for, or very heavily competed over. As a resident you get a 90% discount on the congestion charge, so driving it will cost you £1.50 per day. I'm not quite sure whether that applies to parked cars as well.
    - Reason077 4y ago
      Car parking for residents is heavily subsidised by London councils, a policy which encourages car ownership. Residential parking permits are very cheap (often as little as £100 or so for a YEAR of parking), where as outsiders coming in to park will be charged a small fortune. [1] This system discourages schemes that could reduce car ownership, like car sharing, car rentals, etc, because residential parking permits must be linked to a particular plate number. [1] It's true that some newer housing developments have been approved on a "no parking" basis, which means if you live in that building you can't apply for a parking permit. But these developments are still the exception, not the rule.
- tomatocracy 4y ago
  Most councils bave residents only parking bays for this exact reason. I live in zone 1 and the permit costs somewhere between 150-200 GBP per year.
orobinson 4y ago
I live in London. We have three kids, no car and an electric cargo bike which they can all fit in. It's brilliant and all we need for getting around London. I've also used it for picking up furniture and building materials - such a versatile vehicle and much more enjoyable to use than a car.
- margorczynski 4y ago
  Aren't you wary that the bike doesn't offer almost any protection at all when an accident happens? Something that causes minor or no damage when inside a car can easily cause serious injury on even death when on a bike.
  - swexbe 4y ago
    The ”safer” your car is, the more dangerous it is for everyone else in traffic usually.
    - margorczynski 4y ago
      Yes. But that doesn't change the fact that given current reality the safety of moving in a car is higher than when using a bike. How it could and should be is a different matter.
      - garte 4y ago
        This thinking seems self-defeating to me and only serves to uphold the status quo or - sadly - make things worse.
        margorczynski 4y ago
        How is looking at reality and making choices that based on that analysis are best for the safety of you and your family self-defeating? You're putting activism into the mix and if you're willing to put more risk on yourself and/or your family to prove a point then it is your choice to do so.
pastage 4y ago
Cars are a poor mans choice in Europe you only have to have a car if you are really poor. Europe is more mixed economicaly so this isn't true everywhere. Sure if you are rich you are also more likely to make life choices that make car ownership "a must", when you can buy cars like toothpicks it does not really matter.
lrem 4y ago
I find it a bit funny you mention "lower-class" here. Of the seven first software engineers with kids I thought of, six have one car and one has none.
- mrpopo 4y ago
  From my limited knowledge and viewpoint, there is a generational divide, a regional divide, and a class divide. When everything is averaged though, the household income is still the strongest indicator of how many cars you own, and most national statistics prove it.
  - johannes1234321 4y ago
    True, class divide is a real factor: The upper class doesn't own cats (aside from "fun" cars for collecting) but leases them. Somewhat more serious: Especially here in Germany there is a strong incentive to give cars as a job benefit instead of a pay rises as there is less social insurance to be paid. Thus there is a strong motivation for anybody in a well paying job to get a car. This directly leads to that class divide.
    - wiredfool 4y ago
      Here, no one owns cats. The cats have servants.
danjoredd 4y ago
Growing up my family was mostly a one-car family. I was homeschooled so that made it a lot easier since nobody had to pick me up at school, and my mom was stay-at-home. I totally understand why a public schooled family where both parents work might need two cars though. It would be a pain to drop your kids off at school, drop your spouse off at work, THEN head on to work and then pick them all up at the end of the day when traffic is clogged. It depends pretty heavily on family situations and all

by mrpopo 4y ago

pjc50 4y ago

If you live within London transport zone 1, it's quite likely to be a zero-car household, simply because of the difficulty in keeping the car somewhere.

rnk 4y ago
That doesn't quite make sense, "it's difficult to avoid having a car because you can't store it"? Can you elaborate? I'm interested what life is like in these cities that charge drivers so as to reduce cars in the road.
- em500 4y ago
  I think you misread GP: he's saying that in inner London it's difficult to have a car, not to avoid having one, mostly because parking space is very limited. What exactly are you interested in, about life such cities? I live in Amsterdam, haven't owned a car for over a decade (which doesn't mean that I never drive one), and haven't really missed it (even with a primary school aged child).
  - rnk 4y ago
    Sorry, just saw this. I do some sports that are 50 miles from the city, and there's no public transportation, not even any private transportation. Skiing is one such activity, but hiking and camping in the summer time. I do recognize that I'm using energy to do these things. I'd love to take a bus. Actually in my west coast city, during the summer they have bus service to a number of area hiking trails, within 10 miles of the city. But these other farther away activities are out of that reach.
- pastage 4y ago
  Congestion charge makes car ownership easier in that area it is pretty cash anyways. The land is so valuable that you rather fit other things than cars there, e.g. apparments with even more people.
- pjc50 4y ago
  It's expensive to have a car in central London because of the cost of parking. It has basically been unbundled from housing; garages sell for upwards of £100k, guaranteed parking spaces somewhat less, on-street parking is either banned, charged for, or very heavily competed over. As a resident you get a 90% discount on the congestion charge, so driving it will cost you £1.50 per day. I'm not quite sure whether that applies to parked cars as well.
  - Reason077 4y ago
    Car parking for residents is heavily subsidised by London councils, a policy which encourages car ownership. Residential parking permits are very cheap (often as little as £100 or so for a YEAR of parking), where as outsiders coming in to park will be charged a small fortune. [1] This system discourages schemes that could reduce car ownership, like car sharing, car rentals, etc, because residential parking permits must be linked to a particular plate number. [1] It's true that some newer housing developments have been approved on a "no parking" basis, which means if you live in that building you can't apply for a parking permit. But these developments are still the exception, not the rule.
tomatocracy 4y ago
Most councils bave residents only parking bays for this exact reason. I live in zone 1 and the permit costs somewhere between 150-200 GBP per year.

orobinson 4y ago

I live in London. We have three kids, no car and an electric cargo bike which they can all fit in. It's brilliant and all we need for getting around London. I've also used it for picking up furniture and building materials - such a versatile vehicle and much more enjoyable to use than a car.

margorczynski 4y ago
Aren't you wary that the bike doesn't offer almost any protection at all when an accident happens? Something that causes minor or no damage when inside a car can easily cause serious injury on even death when on a bike.
- swexbe 4y ago
  The ”safer” your car is, the more dangerous it is for everyone else in traffic usually.
  - margorczynski 4y ago
    Yes. But that doesn't change the fact that given current reality the safety of moving in a car is higher than when using a bike. How it could and should be is a different matter.
    - garte 4y ago
      This thinking seems self-defeating to me and only serves to uphold the status quo or - sadly - make things worse.
      - margorczynski 4y ago
        How is looking at reality and making choices that based on that analysis are best for the safety of you and your family self-defeating? You're putting activism into the mix and if you're willing to put more risk on yourself and/or your family to prove a point then it is your choice to do so.

pastage 4y ago

Cars are a poor mans choice in Europe you only have to have a car if you are really poor. Europe is more mixed economicaly so this isn't true everywhere. Sure if you are rich you are also more likely to make life choices that make car ownership "a must", when you can buy cars like toothpicks it does not really matter.

lrem 4y ago

I find it a bit funny you mention "lower-class" here. Of the seven first software engineers with kids I thought of, six have one car and one has none.

mrpopo 4y ago
From my limited knowledge and viewpoint, there is a generational divide, a regional divide, and a class divide. When everything is averaged though, the household income is still the strongest indicator of how many cars you own, and most national statistics prove it.
- johannes1234321 4y ago
  True, class divide is a real factor: The upper class doesn't own cats (aside from "fun" cars for collecting) but leases them. Somewhat more serious: Especially here in Germany there is a strong incentive to give cars as a job benefit instead of a pay rises as there is less social insurance to be paid. Thus there is a strong motivation for anybody in a well paying job to get a car. This directly leads to that class divide.
  - wiredfool 4y ago
    Here, no one owns cats. The cats have servants.

danjoredd 4y ago

Growing up my family was mostly a one-car family. I was homeschooled so that made it a lot easier since nobody had to pick me up at school, and my mom was stay-at-home. I totally understand why a public schooled family where both parents work might need two cars though. It would be a pain to drop your kids off at school, drop your spouse off at work, THEN head on to work and then pick them all up at the end of the day when traffic is clogged. It depends pretty heavily on family situations and all