[Misc] What significant things CAN you do without?

[Uh_huh_him]

IF you live in a country with effective, reliable, safe, reasonably-priced, joined-up, public transport offerings, then this way of thinking has great merit.

If you live in the UK, anywhere other than the centre of a major city - and assuming you don't ever want to GO anywhere outside the centre of that city - then access to a car means reliability, infinite flexibility - freedom to go where you want, when you want.

Having my car parked outside, means that I can go anywhere I like, any time, at a fraction of the cost of public transport, sat in comfort in a heated seat, listening to my choice of entertainment, able to effortlessly carry whatever luggage / equipment I might need, and without having to experience the HORROR of close proximity with germ-ridden, anti-social and generally annoying people*

(* apart from my own annoying people...)

So - if anyone doesn't need a car, or want a car -good for them. But the appeal of having one, is very simple to understand.

Ok

I don't understand the appeal, once compared with the cost.

I would love to see the mental gymnastics you have to go through in your "fraction of the cost" argument.

 

[Beanstalk]

Ok

I don't understand the appeal, once compared with the cost.

I would love to see the mental gymnastics you have to go through in your "fraction of the cost" argument.

I'm on the no car bandwagon here but I do understand the can't do without argument if you're not in a place with sufficient public transport (spoiled as a Londoner). Lived in Wellington, New Zealand for a short time without being able to drive and it completely restricted the way in which I wanted to live my life. Last train at around 10pm, with no guarantee that a bus would ever turn up. Early dinners out in the city, leaving friends before the night got going or straight back home after work!

I don't see how, in the UK at least, you could argue that consistent use of public transport is more expensive than consistent driving. The average car insurance in this country is around £1000 a year now, petrol is high, and parking is difficult and often expensive. That's before you factor in the outlay of a car in the first place. About the only time it would be cheaper is on certain train routes that are over expensive (a return from London to Sheffield for example) and that is only when comparing the price of petrol really.

 

[Machiavelli]

It's encouraging the way cars have featured in this thread. I own a car, and very much align with the comments just made by HKFC and Beanstalk. I'm lucky enough to live in a city, at the same time close enough to the centre and not too far from its outskirts. This means that I use all forms of transport and try to limit car use, which is a lot easier now my son doesn't require ferrying hither and thither. There are other things where its really useful, however, I have to see my dad regularly because he's in poor health and the car enables that, and most years we'll use the car to go abroad (or, as with last year, up to Scotland and across to Wales), which means that we can avoid flying while still getting away from here for a break. The cost isn't quite as high for us as has been stated, especially if you've got NCB on your insurance.
Others have got different life commitments and requirements, and if the occasions for using a car are diminishing, all power to those that give them up.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Ok

I don't understand the appeal, once compared with the cost.

I would love to see the mental gymnastics you have to go through in your "fraction of the cost" argument.

There's no gymnastics involved. The sums are very easy.

We are a household of 4 - and the two youngest are old enough that any public transport fares would be adult ones.

On individual (longish) journeys, clearly the car is much, much cheaper - Stoke and back for two of us cost about £50 in fuel, Sheffield will cost about £70. Each would have cost around £200 on trains, without even factoring in how we'd get to the train in the first place.
My return journey to work costs about 80p - would be 2 x £2 bus fares. It would be about 20p if I bothered to keep the hybrid battery charged.

My ailing, elderly in-laws live a ten minute (£1) drive away, in a nearby village. To get there by public transport would cost £4 each way, using two separate buses, each of which run once an hour, and are run by two different bus companies, whose timetables are not in any way co-ordinated. It's genuinely quicker to walk (just over an hour). And that £8 return cost is EACH, of course. So £32 for the family to go and visit the grandparents 5 miles away.

My own mum, lives in a care home in East Sussex - again much easier, and much cheaper to drive there than to take the public options (1 bus and two trains and a 30 minute walk, each way).

In more general terms - the cost and time involved rises exponentially using public options, if you have the GALL to want to do multiple things on one occasion, in different places. Not to mention the places we like to go to (nice walk in the New Forest early on a Sunday morning?) that are quite literally not possible by public transport.

Of course, you do have to consider the overall cost of owning or running a car. Mine is a company car - the only cost to me is (Benefit in kind) tax of around £150/month, (so I have no other costs - of servicing, tyres, insurance, road tax, etc). So £5 per day, plus the fuel at around 18p/mile.

If I didn't have the company car, I'd run my own. It would cost a little more, and I'd no doubt have a much older car - but either way, it is unquestionably cheaper than doing what we do, and going where we go (including 25-30 return trips from Hampshire to Brighton per year) by public transport.

Of course, we could have no car, and save ourselves money - just so long as we never want to go anywhere or do anything.

 

[Bakero]

I'm also in the no-car club, having not owned one in about 15 years. I did have a motorbike during my Vietnam years but since being back in Europe, I've not needed one. My feet, a bicycle, bus and train do me fine.

I also forwent a TV for many years but a few months back splashed out on a 65-incher and I must say I love it.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

There's no gymnastics involved. The sums are very easy.

We are a household of 4 - and the two youngest are old enough that any public transport fares would be adult ones.

On individual (longish) journeys, clearly the car is much, much cheaper - Stoke and back for two of us cost about £50 in fuel, Sheffield will cost about £70. Each would have cost around £200 on trains, without even factoring in how we'd get to the train in the first place.
My return journey to work costs about 80p - would be 2 x £2 bus fares. It would be about 20p if I bothered to keep the hybrid battery charged.

My ailing, elderly in-laws live a ten minute (£1) drive away, in a nearby village. To get there by public transport would cost £4 each way, using two separate buses, each of which run once an hour, and are run by two different bus companies, whose timetables are not in any way co-ordinated. It's genuinely quicker to walk (just over an hour). And that £8 return cost is EACH, of course. So £32 for the family to go and visit the grandparents 5 miles away.

My own mum, lives in a care home in East Sussex - again much easier, and much cheaper to drive there than to take the public options (1 bus and two trains and a 30 minute walk, each way).

In more general terms - the cost and time involved rises exponentially using public options, if you have the GALL to want to do multiple things on one occasion, in different places. Not to mention the places we like to go to (nice walk in the New Forest early on a Sunday morning?) that are quite literally not possible by public transport.

Of course, you do have to consider the overall cost of owning or running a car. Mine is a company car - the only cost to me is (Benefit in kind) tax of around £150/month, (so I have no other costs - of servicing, tyres, insurance, road tax, etc). So £5 per day, plus the fuel at around 18p/mile.

If I didn't have the company car, I'd run my own. It would cost a little more, and I'd no doubt have a much older car - but either way, it is unquestionably cheaper than doing what we do, and going where we go (including 25-30 return trips from Hampshire to Brighton per year) by public transport.

Of course, we could have no car, and save ourselves money - just so long as we never want to go anywhere or do anything.

Thanks for sharing the gymnastics.

In summary
You pay £1800 to run a car.
You pay approximately £200 a year to drive to work.
Total = £2000
If you went by public transport it would cost you £960. (assuming 240 working days)


So you would need to spend £1040 on public transport journeys a year + £0.18p per mile + parking costs before you get to parity.
Easily done for sure, but not in the realms of a "fraction of the cost" even with the advantage of a company car.

 

[Taybha]

Mid Layer training tops, and probably Cadbury cream eggs

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Thanks for sharing the gymnastics.

In summary
You pay £1800 to run a car.
You pay approximately £200 a year to drive to work.
Total = £2000
If you went by public transport it would cost you £960. (assuming 240 working days)


So you would need to spend £1040 on public transport journeys a year + £0.18p per mile + parking costs before you get to parity.
Easily done for sure, but not in the realms of a "fraction of the cost" even with the advantage of a company car.

Seriously - you are clutching at straws. Just the 25+ return trips per year to Lancing / Brighton for Albion matches and to visit family, would easily exhaust that £1,040. And that's just one of so many things the family use our car for. 'A fraction' is very much true.

These type of discussions, around the relative costs and benefits, of car v public transport, always seem to completely ignore multiples of fares. Its no good arguing that a train fare from here to Brighton is no dearer than the equivalent car use - when that's based on ONE adult fare, and there are 2 or 3 people in the car!

I absolutely wish that public transport in the UK was better and cheaper than it is. It would improve life for non-car owners, AND for car owners. But it isn't. Its absolutely shit.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Seriously - you are clutching at straws. Just the 25+ return trips per year to Lancing / Brighton for Albion matches and to visit family, would easily exhaust that £1,040. And that's just one of so many things the family use our car for. 'A fraction' is very much true.

These type of discussions, around the relative costs and benefits, of car v public transport, always seem to completely ignore multiples of fares. Its no good arguing that a train fare from here to Brighton is no dearer than the equivalent car use - when that's based on ONE adult fare, and there are 2 or 3 people in the car!

I absolutely wish that public transport in the UK was better and cheaper than it is. It would improve life for non-car owners, AND for car owners. But it isn't. Its absolutely shit.

The discussion was about your assertion that running a car was a fraction of the cost of public transport.

Sure, in your case with subsidised ownership, multiple tenancy, with multiple long distance journeys each month, it's both more convenient and cheaper. but it isn't a "fraction of the cost" ( implying 1/3 or less)

The compelling argument for running a car, is convenience, not cost.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

The discussion was about your assertion that running a car was a fraction of the cost of public transport.

Sure, in your case with subsidised ownership, multiple tenancy, with multiple long distance journeys each month, it's both more convenient and cheaper. but it isn't a "fraction of the cost" ( implying 1/3 or less)

The compelling argument for running a car, is convenience, not cost.

I definitely agree that the MOST compelling argument is convenience (I'd absolutely still run a car, even if it were significantly more expensive), but in my case its undeniably very much cheaper, too.

Without it, we'd simply not do half the stuff we do now.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

I definitely agree that the MOST compelling argument is convenience (I'd absolutely still run a car, even if it were significantly more expensive), but in my case its undeniably very much cheaper, too.

Without it, we'd simply not do half the stuff we do now.

I'm sure that's the case.
In my case, is that it would expand my options considerably.
However without the subsidised costs, it simply isn't worthwhile.

 

[The Hermit Kingdom]

Car ownership is obviously case-by-case and geography to a degree, but also mindset. I know non-car families who’ve raised several kids, and incredibly those kids still managed to get to their judo club/football practice/school/music lessons etc without a car, and they always had enough food in their houses without the need to ever drive to a supermarket. My perspective comes to an extent from having a mum who walked 5 miles to school and back, but in the UK we are unnecessarily ‘reliant’ on cars where we don’t always need to be imho.

 

[FamilyGuy]

Facebook quite easily.

never have never will