Cars are expensive. The old, the unhealthy, the poor -- all of these people can benefit from infrastructure that allows people to get around without using a car. Because cars are expensive.
That’s why I’m happy about the move to electric cars. Remove the externalities and democratize access to transportation. Why should just rich people have access to cars?
For the wealthy, a car is expensive but mostly a convenient way to get around. For the poor, car maintenance costs can be ruinous. However, our society (excluding a few large cities) all but requires a car for day-to-day activities. Everyone drivers, but the poor bear the brunt of the cost, since they are more likely to live near noisy, polluted roads. Meanwhile, the wealthy can afford to live on quiet suburbs and cul-de-sacs. Cities and infrastructure designed for cars ("car dependency") disproportionately hurts the poor.
Cars are expensive AND the vast majority of the population use them because they have to.
> You’re going to bike to the restaurant in the rain or snow?
Yes, yes I am? Why would I not; I own clothes for being outside in bad weather. Those clothes and bike were cheaper than a car, so why would I not?
> You’re going to bike to work in the snow or when it’s really hot and you’ll show up there gross?
Also, yes? You know people used to have to walk to places of work before cars, right? And while cars allow us to not experience any of those mild annoyances in exchange for huge sums of money, most economically minded people would rather be a bit sweaty than pay an extra pile of money for a car.
Ironically, drives to eliminate cars typically disproportionately negatively impact poor people. Wealthy people value their time over money, and so tend to retain their cars even when faced with higher costs. Poorer people will give up their cars to save money in exchange for spending hundreds of additional hours per year walking and commuting on public transit. In an ideal world, yes, they'd move closer to their jobs. In the real world, they'll commute, have to make multiple transfers between different modes of transportation, and lose precious hours from their days. This is particularly of a great impact to lower-income folks since they can't claim back those hours by hiring out things like cooking, cleaning, and maintenance. Affordable, efficient point-to-point transportation is of great benefit to this class.
In much of the world, owning a car at all puts you above "poor people". While owning a car is sadly needed in some parts of the world to get to work or even the stores (US..), it's a massive financial burden for most people. If you care for poor people, thinking about how people can go about their daily lives without spending thousands of dollars each year on owning a car would be the way to go.
Yeah, cars certainly have utility but I always remind myself that the total cost is higher than we think and it’s especially harsh for people who aren’t very comfortable financially. I’ve been at the mechanic’s when someone is trying to figure out what they can do to keep their car running enough to avoid losing their job, or praying that a tire patch will hold.
The problem in the United States is that a lot of infrastructure was deliberately built to exclude poor people so there aren’t great options in many suburbs for improving transit or bike access short of building road connections through someone’s bank yard. This has a nasty ratchet as cars have been getting more expensive while those suburbs age and need maintenance far in excess of what the property taxes cover.
Car infrastructure is far, far too expensive. The U.S is already deep under water in its maintenance, and as this problem continues to be ignored, the lower the viability of cars will be.
It's actually pretty interesting to see people on the economic right being so staunchly in favor of this incredibly socialized waste of money - it's a testament to the marketing and lobbying efforts by the car industry for sure.
One step farther along the path to the root of the issue: Cars are incredibly expensive. That people in cities often choose to own cars and pay those prices reflects that they get more value from the car than the costs, often because alternative transport solutions are not cheaper, are way less time-efficient, and not nearly as convenient.
Fix that and many people will quickly pivot away from cars, reducing pull-through demand for oil, tires, brakes, lubricants, etc.
Cars do not, on their own, pull poor people out of poverty. In the US it’s quite the opposite. The need to own a car is a significant drag on many peoples finances
Only for the wealthy, and the car is the most expensive form of transportation that only the relatively wealthy have access to. For everyone else not wealthy enough to own a car the over investment in car infrastructure has made life worse and made them less free, as the under investment in transportation alternatives limits their access and ability to travel.
BBC's new season of race around the world featured Canada this year, and contestants were staggered at the lack of public transportation options, forced into illegally hitchhiking rides to finish the race. Such is the dearth of transportation options for people who do not own a car.
Sales of EVs will continue, old gasoline cars will still exist. Then there's biking, walking, public transit, and living closer to your day-to-day needs. If anything this will help the poor.
Here's a better thing to think about: why do we as a society in various countries require poor people to buy a car in order to participate in society? Maybe instead of doing that, we should treat cars as luxury objects and an after-thought and instead actually build correctly and in a equitable and afforable way?
reply