Haven’t owned a car in over a decade and I 100% agree with you. Cars are a poverty trap which extract wealth from the people (not just car owners, but all tax payers) to the executives and shareholders.
This is true for the people who have to have the newest and shiniest car. Buy a reliable car and drive it until the wheels fall off and it’s literally the opposite of poverty trap.
The above said I do agree with the sentiment. I’ve seen very very expensive cars sitting outside of trailers and other hovels that I wouldn’t go anywhere near. I’d rather have a crappy car and a nice house.
I have a “nice” car now because I drive for a living and besides it being good for business to be driving something not falling apart, I spend enough time in it that I should have something comfortable.
What I mean is that the cost of ownership of a car is usually twice as much as people estimate it to be. It isn’t just the cost of the car, it’s fuel, maintenance, insurance, registration… While getting a beater car is significantly better since it’s cheaper, doesn’t depreciate as much, and cheaper to maintain than newer cars, people still underestimate the cost.
And what I mean by poverty trap, it isn’t just for car owners; taxpayers are the ones footing the bill for incredibly inefficient cities that require a lot of road maintenance, and the parking requirements and generally big sprawl that came from car centrism is much more expensive to maintain, which is why poorer neighborhoods are actually subsidising it for the wealthier neighborhoods. It’s literally a steal from the poor to aid the upper-middle and upper class scheme.
If it were up to me, public transit would be completely free and very well funded, once the infrastructure is put in place and people get used to free transit, privately owned cars would be banned from cities and towns over 1000 people, and businesses who need a car would need to request it, explaining the reasons they need it, and be allowed to operate one based on need.
Haven’t owned a car in over a decade and I 100% agree with you. Cars are a poverty trap which extract wealth from the people (not just car owners, but all tax payers) to the executives and shareholders.
This is true for the people who have to have the newest and shiniest car. Buy a reliable car and drive it until the wheels fall off and it’s literally the opposite of poverty trap.
The above said I do agree with the sentiment. I’ve seen very very expensive cars sitting outside of trailers and other hovels that I wouldn’t go anywhere near. I’d rather have a crappy car and a nice house.
I have a “nice” car now because I drive for a living and besides it being good for business to be driving something not falling apart, I spend enough time in it that I should have something comfortable.
What I mean is that the cost of ownership of a car is usually twice as much as people estimate it to be. It isn’t just the cost of the car, it’s fuel, maintenance, insurance, registration… While getting a beater car is significantly better since it’s cheaper, doesn’t depreciate as much, and cheaper to maintain than newer cars, people still underestimate the cost.
And what I mean by poverty trap, it isn’t just for car owners; taxpayers are the ones footing the bill for incredibly inefficient cities that require a lot of road maintenance, and the parking requirements and generally big sprawl that came from car centrism is much more expensive to maintain, which is why poorer neighborhoods are actually subsidising it for the wealthier neighborhoods. It’s literally a steal from the poor to aid the upper-middle and upper class scheme.
If it were up to me, public transit would be completely free and very well funded, once the infrastructure is put in place and people get used to free transit, privately owned cars would be banned from cities and towns over 1000 people, and businesses who need a car would need to request it, explaining the reasons they need it, and be allowed to operate one based on need.