this post was submitted on 13 Feb 2026
158 points (94.9% liked)

Fuck Cars

14905 readers
1098 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

This is the question posed on CityNerd video titled "Walkable Cities But They Keep Getting More Affordable"

If you ditched your car, could you afford to leave the suburbs for a great urban neighborhood?

Ray Delahanty answers the question in the 26 biggest US cities.

The analysis assumes the all-in cost of owning and operating a car is $1,000 per month, including purchase, insurance, fuel, and maintenance.

In the city, transportation costs might total about $250 per month for transit passes, biking, ride-hailing, and other small expenses.

This results in an effective $750 per month increase in the housing budget for city center residents who do not own a car.

The results of the video are quite interesting, as you can get more m² in walkable areas in most cities

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

There's places in the world where your suburban cul-de-sac can actually be located in a walkable city and the grocery store is very close despite living in a suburb where most people have cars.

Even suburbs can be a lot better than they are in the US.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

You could argue this is where I am now, in the us, in an inner suburb of a major city

  • I can walk to shops, restaurants, trains, and do most weekends
  • I could walk to a grocery but I usually drive so I can carry, especially when my kids are home from college
  • I’m part time work from home
  • I’m on the edge where single family zoning starts.
  • but no one I know lives in the city anymore
  • but my job is no longer downtown nor walkable

I would really miss all the suburban niceties like a deck, grill, basement, garage and driveway, my own spot of land, a house.

I don’t drive very much anymore but it’s an EV. However a lot of that is between online shopping and part time work from home I’ve really cut back on routine drives, so my percentage of longer trips to car usage is higher

EDIT: on the other hand a lot of it is attitude. Especially with discussions over why some people never clear snow from their sidewalks, it’s very clear that even here many people don’t see walking as an option for anything. There’s no reason to clear the sidewalks in winter because the idea that people may want to walk is just so alien

[–] moakley@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

Technically I'm in a city. It's just suburban and car-centric. If they wanted to make it more walkable and add public transport, I'd love that, as long as my kids still have their space to ride bikes, and my wife still has her car.

Even then it's fairly walkable. I walk my daughter to school when the weather and time allow for it. I could walk to a grocery store; I just couldn't transport my groceries home.

But that wasn't the question.