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

Fuck Cars

14905 readers
1626 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

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] chilicheeselies@lemmy.world 10 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

1000 a month for owning and operating a car seems like a lot. Maybe i am out of touch because we own our car outright, but its not nearly that expensive for us. Even with a parking spot rental.

I live in an awesome urban neighborhood, and still wouldnt want to be without the car. I dont use it when it doesnt make sense, but ive lived both with and without, and with is worlds better. Grocery shopping (especially at places like Costco) is much easier. Errands that would be an all day affair without the car become a few hours affair. Friends and family across the city are much easier to see. Things like that.

Dont get me wrong, i love a walkable neighborhood with a walkable downtown. Its why i dont live in a suburb abomination. When it makes more sense to use PT I use it. But life is better with the car overall. Its not a zero sun game. We can have both. And bike lanes. And pedestiran plazas. Etc.

[–] olafurp@lemmy.world 4 points 11 hours ago

I mean it's not crazy IMO, running cost is probably 500 but depreciation is a major factor. A rule of thumb is around 10-15% of the value of the car each year so if you can sell yours now for 35000 depreciation is in the range of 300-400 a month. Older cars have a lower depreciation but higher maintenance. Then also not applicable in your case is financing cost which varies a lot.

In your case I'd look at how much just paying for a taxi for Costco and full day rental for day trips would cost compared to owning a car.

[–] snowdriftissue@lemmy.world 5 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (1 children)

Maybe i am out of touch because we own our car outright, but its not nearly that expensive for us. Even with a parking spot rental.

Try adding in the cost of depreciation and it makes a lot more sense. I owned a used car for 10 years and didn't commute using it for most of that time, so it didn't even rack up that many miles. It still cost me over $500/month on average over that time period including depreciation, maintenance, gas, registration, and insurance. I'm sure it would be a lot more if I drove as much as the average american. Though I think the average is probably somewhat skewed towards the most expensive cars.

Needless to say I am now happily car free. $500/month can buy me a very nice ebike, as well as more taxis or hourly car rentals than I need.

[–] chilicheeselies@lemmy.world 2 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Between parking, gas, insurance, and maintenance 500 is more within the realm of reason.

Yeha if you were hardly using it then why have the extra expense? In my family its used daily (mostly for work commute to a poorly connected by PT workplace). More than worth it for the conveniance and lifestyle it enables

[–] snowdriftissue@lemmy.world 3 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

Yes I think I probably should have sold it as soon as I stopped using it to commute. I was mostly just ignorant of all the alternatives to car ownership. Car ownership is not worth it in my opinion unless you truly need to use it several days out of the week every week. And people should be doing pretty much everything they can to avoid being in that situation.

[–] 5in1k@lemmy.zip 0 points 11 hours ago

If I had to live in an apartment again I would consider ending it. And no way does my truck cost me that much to run, I bought it for 5k ish 7 years ago. I only have a couple k into repairs in those 7 years. I'll take the average of actually only $100 more operation cost a month to not wait on the side of the road as busses pass me like I watched happen to a dude in 8F temps the other day.

[–] RBWells@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Well we do live in a city neighborhood and don't have to drive much.

Car insurance on two cars not used daily $400/month here, gas immaterial. But the cost of the cars (paid off) was so much money, if spread over a 15 year life (mine will go longer maybe, but that's unusual) would add another $125 each, so $650 plus gas and maintenance (less maintenance cost because cars were bought pretty new).

My daily commuter is a good electric bike, $2,000 plus electricity (I could charge it at work tho) and maintenance. I don't know how long they last, so can't estimate a per month but insurance for a year costs less than one car costs for a month.

Transit pass here about $50 a month. But buses are terribly infrequent.

[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 19 points 1 day ago (6 children)

A grand a month for a car? Only if you can afford to blow money. I bought my car used 6 years ago for $4,000. Between repairs and maintenance, tires, oil, repairs, etc I've spent about another $4,500. Plus $1,000 a year fuel (Prius). And $800 a year on insurance. So my all in cost is like $280 a month and dropping the longer I keep it. Plus what I can get from selling it.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

YMMV but if you look around online you’ll see much higher overall costs are more typical and more importantly most people greatly underestimate them

[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 1 day ago

Depends on what you're able to learn and do yourself and what you buy. I bought a Gen 2 Prius with 160,000 miles on it with a hybrid battery issue. I could buy a nicer one for less money right now than I could back then. It's currently at 284,000 miles and not showing a hint of slowing down. One of my tpms transmitters went out recently, so that will cost me $100 for 4 new ones next time I replace my tires. I don't like seeing the yellow light for it on my dash. Lol

[–] Soup@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (9 children)

I spend under $70/mo on my metro pass, and they’re normally “expensive”* at $104/mo. There are zero added costs, ever, except for if I didn’t also own a car I would need to use a carshare service probably once a month, but it’s hard to gauge since sometimes I use my car just to make sure it actually gets used. Without a car there are no parking fees, no gas, no maintenance, and not even any need to shovel snow or anything else that you likely don’t even realize you do simply to keep owning a vehicle.

$280/mo is a pretty bum deal to not even get other benefits like being driven around or never having to deal with the concept of rush hour.

[–] P00ptart@lemmy.world 3 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Plus you can travel as drunk as you want as long as you're not a problem.

[–] Soup@lemmy.world 2 points 10 hours ago

Also true! I don’t drink much, but it’s still a huge benefit, and it also means that I don’t need to think about the timing or anything when I do have a glass.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] LoafedBurrito@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Nope. Rent is 4 times my mortgage.

[–] Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Plus I prefer having complete ownership of my home. Not relying on neighbours to co-own the building with me or being reliant on a landlord to perform repairs and approve simple things like a window air conditioner. Sounds like hell to me.

[–] Ibuthyr@lemmy.wtf 5 points 14 hours ago

Weird that you're down voted. While I did enjoy the hassle free lifestyle of renting, in my own house I can take down a wall if I want to and no one gives a shit. It's really nice. Try installing some sort of blinds that require a screwed connection to the frame of the window. The landlord will bill you for that.

[–] RaoulDook@lemmy.world 23 points 1 day ago (6 children)

Nope I would have to triple or quadruple my costs for housing to move to an urban environment. Also then I would be surrounded by other people in close proximity a lot of the time. Currently I pay less than 1k/mo for mortgage, and there's only about 3 or less people per acre of land surrounding me. Costs for 1 car amount to roughly $800/mo including payment, insurance, and fuel.

[–] mohammed_alibi@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago

You may not need a car in the urban environment. Of course it would depend on the city. If it was Tokyo, a big yes for me. You'll get less space but being able to walk to get everything I need is going to be good for my health in the long term.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (1 children)

More dense urban areas certainly should be more affordable than suburban or rural areas, but they're often not. Or at least not as much as they could be.

One reason is I think many suburban and rural areas are being subsidized by urban areas, by using urban tax revenue to pay for suburban infrastructure.

But I think the biggest reason is that urban areas are often in much higher demand, because that's where most of the jobs and housing are located, but the supply of housing is simply insufficient to meet the demand, thus driving up housing prices. And other prices, too. There's a supply demand imbalance for a lot of things in many higher density urban areas. And part of that is by design. The "suppliers" of homes, that is landlords, don't want to oversupply the market with housing, relative to demand, because that will push down rents, and they want rents to be as high as possible, because rents are their source of revenue.

Until urban areas find ways to significantly increase the supply of housing relative to the demand, housing prices in those urban areas will remain higher than they could, or should be. Non-car transportation infrastructure also needs to be significantly improved in many urban areas, but that takes money. Money that many urban residents either don't want to pay, or can't pay because so much of their income is going to housing, and other costs of living. Edit: Plus, these infrastructure projects are often poorly managed by politicians, causing cost over runs and long delays.

Finally, there's a social/cultural element to this that almost no one talks about because it's seen as problematic or taboo. People don't necessarily want to be surrounded on all sides by people they don't consider to be a part of their cultural or ethnic group. I'm sorry, I know, reading that makes a lot of people's butt holes clinch, but it's true. I think people would be much more willing to live in more densely populated urban areas if the people in these areas were more like them (culturally, ethnically). You can choose not to believe that because it makes you uncomfortable, but, uncomfortable though it may be, I think it is nonetheless true.

Edit: I want to add that I think there is also a class element to this, in addition to the cultural/ethnic element. Many people move out to the suburbs because they don't want to be around people they see as being of a "lower class" than them. Edit, again: also, where there are higher rates of poverty in urban areas, there are often higher crime rates. Many urban areas are often very unequal, with wealthier areas that are better maintained with better schools, very near much poorer areas that are more poorly maintained with worse schools.

Final edit: so, for better urban areas we need: to stop using urban tax revenue to subsidize suburban infrastructure. We need to significantly increase the supply of housing relative to demand, even perhaps oversupplying housing to drive housing costs down as much as possible. We need better non-car infrastructure and better leadership to better manage the building and maintenance of that infrastructure. We need to reduce poverty and inequality in urban areas as much as possible. If we do those things across all urban areas, I think the ethnic and cultural issues will work themselves out.

[–] Steve@communick.news 12 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

$1k/month for a car isn't normal. That has to be substantially rounded up from the average. I just got a new EV. $450 payment, $110 insurance. Electricity costs me about $35 more. Even accounting for maintenance I couldn't fudge the number to $675mo. To reach $1k you'd need a rather expensive vehicle.

But I do agree with the principle here. It would be nice to live in a walkable area where I don't need a car.

[–] magiccupcake@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

Averages can mess this with this kind of statistics, where small group of people can bring up the average cost significantly.

Gas is also expensive, my wife spends about $130 a month a gas alone. They are also likely factoring in all costs too, including personal property taxes (which where I live gets much more costly if the vehicle is worth over 20k), and all maintenance. So things like tire changes, replacement batteries, oil changes, and everything else, averaged over the lifetime of the car.

You won't see most of these with an electric car at nearly the same cost. Electric cars see much lower operating costs, but only if you can afford it, and can charge it cheaply. Many people I know can't as they live in apartments and would have no way to charge an electric car.

For us personally, looking at buying a new electric over my wife's paid off car, increases in personal property taxes and insurance negate much if the financial savings of having a lower operating expenses. Combined with a high initial cost of the vehicles it doesn't save anything financially.

[–] akilou@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 day ago

Average cost of a new car is $50k. A 5-year loan at a very modest 3% interest is $898/month

Plug in the numbers yourself: https://www.bankrate.com/loans/loan-calculator/

[–] moakley@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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

Could I afford it? Yes. Would I do it? No.

I live on a suburban cul-de-sac where my kids can go outside and ride bikes with the neighbors. Also my wife is handicapped, so a car is kind of essential for her. When we lived in an apartment the long walk from the garage to our door was difficult for her.

Other than those things, I'd much prefer to live in a walkable city. Maybe when I retire, if we can find the right place.

[–] 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.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Ive watched this and many times its actually a collar burb that has the end of the transit system or far from the center to get the affordability. Im not complaining its basically what I have done but oh man it annoys me that the dense city center is not the most affordable area. Feel like we should be able to keep on building high rises till its the most affordable type of housing and do it mix with shops on at street level while we are at it with a few floors of office.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

My monthly cost of living, all-in, is $2000/month. It was a little more when I was raising my kid. And now, it's more than it would have been had we not had skyrocketing inflation for the past five years.

If that sounds low, it is. But, I'm old (60) and my mortgage, which is almost paid off, is, and has been for nearly 30 years, $800/mo.

I paid $6000 cash for my current car, nine years ago. Since then, it's been insurance, gas, oil changes, and one shop visit. Nothing like $1000/mo.

If you think I'm an outlier, I'm not. By definition, half of people pay less than the average.

If people didn't drive gas-fueled trucks and cars through the middle of cities, then the air would be cleaner, and the city would be quieter. But, people DO drive trucks and cars through cities, and the air is dirty, and the city is noisy.

No, I could not afford to live in a city with decent public transportation, and it has nothing to do with transportation. Nor, do I want to live in a big city, the way they are now, and are likely to be for the rest of my life.

You can hate me for being old and for any other reason you want to, but I sincerely hope you get to live as long as I have, and much longer than that.

And, yes, I agree, fuck cars.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›