Living Car Free - Cars "R" luxury items....well, duh!

Bikeforums.net is a forum about nothing but bikes. Our community can help you find information about hard-to-find and localized information like bicycle tours, specialties like where in your area to have your recumbent bike serviced, or what are the best bicycle tires and seats for the activities you use your bike for.




markhr
07-01-08, 06:04 PM
I know I'm preaching to the choir but it's kind of funny in a Nelson from The Simpsons kind of way.

"It concluded that a car was not required by any social group, nor were cigarettes..."

http://op-for.com/simpsons_nelson_haha2.jpg



Other than that this is a serious survey on a serious subject, i.e., how people can afford to live if their wages =/= the cost of living

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7481927.stm

UK life costs 'at least £13,400'

A single person in Britain needs to earn at least £13,400 a year for a minimum standard of living, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF) has claimed.

A couple with two children need to spend £370 a week excluding rent or mortgage payments, and a pensioner couple need £201, the charity says.

Film tickets, a bottle of wine and a bird feeder were on the list of goods people need to participate in society.

The figures from the JRF are higher than some government estimates.

See how much it costs people to live for a week
According to the report, which took two years to put together, the spending power needed to pay for a basic but socially acceptable standard of living was higher than the official government calculated poverty line.

Staying alive

The report combined academic study with a consensus from 39 different groups of people to come up with a series of benchmarks for an acceptable cost of living in Britain.

The definition of a minimum standard of living was not merely the amount of money needed for survival, and included "more than just food, clothes and shelter", the report explained.

"It is about having what you need in order to have the opportunities and choices necessary to participate in society," it said.

For a single person of working age that included walking boots, a pay-as-you-go mobile phone and a bicycle.

For a pensioner couple, an occasional carvery meal and a bird feeder were on the list, and a single mother needed £210 a week for items including nappies for the baby and a Christmas tree.

Families should get the chance to have a one-week self-catering holiday in the UK, while childcare also took a big chunk of the family budget, the report said.

Needs not wants

The study excluded "aspirational" items, and the JRF said it was aimed at starting a discussion about what was an acceptable standard of living.

"This research is designed to encourage debate and to start building a public consensus about what level of income no one should have to live below," said the JRF's director Julia Unwin.

"Of course, everyone has their own views about what items in a family budget are essential. But this is the best effort to date to enable ordinary people to discuss and agree what all households should be able to afford," she added.

Experts ensured that the lists would provide an adequate diet and enough warmth to remain healthy.

According to the calculations, a single person working full-time would need to earn £6.88 an hour to reach the weekly minimum standard - which is more than the current statutory minimum wage of £5.52.

A single person on Income Support would get less than half this amount.

An out-of-work family would get in state benefits two-thirds of what the JRF regarded as the minimum requirement, but pensioners on Pension Credit reached an acceptable level of income, the charity said.

Poverty levels

Jonathan Bradshaw, professor of social policy at the University of York and co-author of the report, said that this was the first time the question of how much income was enough had been addressed.

Official measures of poverty have been based on relative income data.

The official poverty line is a household with an income of 60% of the UK's median household, with the poverty line adjusted for family size.

The government has used this measure as the base for its pledge to halve child poverty by 2010, and to have eradicated it a decade later.

The JRF's report took in the views of people from a variety of social groups, in rural and urban areas, before coming up with an average for a cross-section of society.

It concluded that a car was not required by any social group, nor were cigarettes, but some alcohol consumed at home was acceptable.

The JRF accepted that it could not be shown that everyone living below its minimum income standard would be in "hardship".

Committed government

A spokesman for the Department for Work and Pensions said: "This government is committed to a fairer, more inclusive society, providing opportunity for all. We have lifted 600,000 children and nearly a million pensioners out of poverty.

"We have increased winter fuel payments to £400 for someone aged over 80 and £250 for 60 years plus.

"We welcome the important contribution of this study."


black_box
07-01-08, 06:38 PM
"It concluded that a car was not required by any social group, nor were cigarettes..."

blasphemy!! oh, the study was done in the UK :) Thats a very interesting study, I could see some use of the material in the education of teens... how to live within their means and balance a budget. Its easy to forget how much money you're blowing through when you pay with a debit/credit card. 5.52 pounds is $11 USD... minimum wage in illinois just got bumped to $7.75.

markhr
07-01-08, 06:55 PM
Yeah, the serious point they were trying to make is that, for most minimum wage people and families, they'll struggle on current wages.

The UK does have the advantage of smaller distances and more widespread public transport though so there's no real need for a car.

My knowledge of the States is very limited but the distances seemed to be much larger and the population densities much lower. That is, a car may be a necessity especially in the small amount of the midwest I saw.


maddyfish
07-01-08, 07:56 PM
My handicapped buddy is already talking about the government should pay for his gasoline in order to make the roads "handicapped accessible"

markhr
07-01-08, 08:21 PM
My handicapped buddy is already talking about the government should pay for his gasoline in order to make the roads "handicapped accessible"

Couldn't he trade his car for an electric vehicle?

...and, no, I don't mean a crap hybrid or fuel cell POS.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=electric+vehicle

Always take wiki-let's make up crap-pedia with a massive pinch of salt
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_electric_vehicle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_vehicle

maddyfish
07-01-08, 08:27 PM
Couldn't he trade his car for an electric vehicle?

...and, no, I don't mean a crap hybrid or fuel cell POS.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=electric+vehicle

Always take wiki-let's make up crap-pedia with a massive pinch of salt
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_electric_vehicle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_vehicle

SUre. But he'd expect the government to pay for it as well as pay for its electricity. There will be rumblings from the lazy,government-must-support-me people that it is a right to have a car, and that the government should pay for it and all related expenses. SOund crazy? Government provided medical care sounded crazy a few years ago.

markhr
07-01-08, 08:41 PM
SUre. But he'd expect the government to pay for it as well as pay for its electricity. There will be rumblings from the lazy,government-must-support-me people that it is a right to have a car, and that the government should pay for it and all related expenses. SOund crazy? Government provided medical care sounded crazy a few years ago.

Fair enough. We have similar entitlement problems over here but there's also broader social/health care government schemes (Heavily abused and suffering from massive fraud and large defecits...now there's a suprise :rolleyes: )

You could always try and get him onto a bike/recumbent trike/handcycle/suitable hpv

adgrant
07-01-08, 09:05 PM
Fair enough. We have similar entitlement problems over here but there's also broader social/health care government schemes (Heavily abused and suffering from massive fraud and large defecits...now there's a suprise :rolleyes: )

You could always try and get him onto a bike/recumbent trike/handcycle/suitable hpv

Actually, you have much worse entitlement problems in the UK than the US which is a much more hostile environment for those who are unable or chose not to support themselves. The idea that someone would be entitled to a bird feeder, movie tickets, a bottle of wine and a holiday seems quite amusing from a US perspective.

Its possible to have a family and a job in the US and still be homeless and have no medical insurance.

Sianelle
07-01-08, 09:07 PM
In a test done here in NZ a hybrid car was run against a 1960s Morris Minor and it was found that they both had an identical level of fuel economy. As an until recently long time Series II Morris Minor owner I was delighted :D

I can completely agree with this 'car and cigarettes not being essential' theory. I gave up smoking awhile ago and to my great surprise my household budget started to balance and I even had some money I could put into savings each week. The same went for selling my car, - though it did break my heart to see Morrie being taken away on that transporter on a journey to its new home with that nice collector chap.
I do very nicely with my bicycles or my electric utility tricycle. If I really do have to go further afield I can use the Intercity bus service which is nice because I can curl up and read a book instead of having to worry about driving in traffic. In an absolute emergency there is always the local taxi service, - or if it really is that serious I call the relevant emergency services.
I've been thinking about getting a folding bicycle to take on the buses, - or the train for that matter, - so I can get about once I arrive at my destination. Up until now I've usually walked, but sometimes I've had to walk a bit further than I would have liked.

Dahon.Steve
07-01-08, 09:08 PM
I wonder how many of those in the UK earning just above the poverty level are driving motorcars. It's incredible how many people in the US are living right on the edge but still have to drive.

wahoonc
07-02-08, 03:48 AM
I wonder how many of those in the UK earning just above the poverty level are driving motorcars. It's incredible how many people in the US are living right on the edge but still have to drive.

Steve...I would think that would be below edge. I know of one guy that is so over extended that he is less than half a pay day away from total collapse, and he makes decent money. He just bought into the "so much a month" plan, to "keep up appearances":rolleyes: Then you have the people that put a very high percentage of their take home pay into a car...stupid IMHO but I guess it would give them a place to seek shelter if all else fails.

Aaron:)

maddyfish
07-02-08, 08:48 AM
Fair enough. We have similar entitlement problems over here but there's also broader social/health care government schemes (Heavily abused and suffering from massive fraud and large defecits...now there's a suprise :rolleyes: )

You could always try and get him onto a bike/recumbent trike/handcycle/suitable hpv

He has an electric bike and a gas motor clip on bike.

maddyfish
07-02-08, 08:50 AM
I wonder how many of those in the UK earning just above the poverty level are driving motorcars. It's incredible how many people in the US are living right on the edge but still have to drive.

This is more due to poverty level being set artificially high. A person who owns a car, rents an apartment, and has a 19" color TV, is not living in poverty.

markhr
07-02-08, 09:43 AM
...and has a 19" color TV, is not living in poverty.

...but if it's a crappy 18.5" tv then they're in trouble :D

Sorry, :p just had to get that one in there.

mconlonx
07-02-08, 01:00 PM
This is only a study--from what I can make of it, the UK gov't does not currently subsidize bird feeders for pensioners.

If the same study was done in the US--based on minimum needed to be a useful part of society rather than minimum needed just to survive--you can bet that it certainly WOULD include a TV and definitely a car in the equation. Plus a bunch of the stuff like health care/insurance that is already dubsidized by the UK gov't. It would be interesting, for sure, and probably quite shocking how many people would be living under that standard of living threshold.

Scummer
07-02-08, 01:22 PM
I've been thinking about getting a folding bicycle to take on the buses, - or the train for that matter, - so I can get about once I arrive at my destination. Up until now I've usually walked, but sometimes I've had to walk a bit further than I would have liked.

For the bus or train and a little to far to walk I have this little gem:
http://www.xootr.com/xootr/roma.shtml

Yes, it is a little pricy, but it's made from T-6061 aluminium, less than 10lbs and it's a nice ride.

mike
07-02-08, 04:40 PM
[QUOTE=markhr;6982551]I know I'm preaching to the choir but it's kind of funny in a Nelson from The Simpsons kind of way.

"It concluded that a car was not required by any social group, nor were cigarettes..."

Well, I don't know about England, but in the USA, an automobile is still a requirment for nearly all social group acceptance. The exception might be with 13 year olds who are too far away from driving age to have that prejudice among their peers

I wish it were different, but here car-free people are considered eccentric to a large degree, and it isn't often considered a good thing.

Here, men without cars have a much more difficult time socializing romantally with women than men with cars. Women here put a very high value on automobile ownership. It is a very unique woman in the USA who will date and continue to date a man who does not own an automobile. They exist, but they are definately in the minority.

Cigarettes, of course, are the complete opposite in the USA. Again, the exception would be a small groups of 13 year olds who marvel at the magic of blowing smoke. Otherwise, smoking cigarettes in the USA is likely to keep you OUT of many social groups. I know that smokers are often kept off of invitation lists by hosts and social event organizers for both formal and informal events. Many people here refuse to even consider dating a smoker even one time. Non-smokers will often avoid smokers at social events if smoking is being done at the event. I find it ironic that Europe has pioneered some of the strictest and most progressive anti-smoking laws in the world, but Europeans are more tolerant of smoking than Americans.

markhr
07-03-08, 05:25 AM
[quote=markhr;6982551]I know I'm preaching to the choir but it's kind of funny in a Nelson from The Simpsons kind of way.

"It concluded that a car was not required by any social group, nor were cigarettes..."

Well, I don't know about England, but in the USA, an automobile is still a requirment for nearly all social group acceptance. The exception might be with 13 year olds who are too far away from driving age to have that prejudice among their peers

I wish it were different, but here car-free people are considered eccentric to a large degree, and it isn't often considered a good thing.

Here, men without cars have a much more difficult time socializing romantally with women than men with cars. Women here put a very high value on automobile ownership. It is a very unique woman in the USA who will date and continue to date a man who does not own an automobile. They exist, but they are definately in the minority.

Cigarettes, of course, are the complete opposite in the USA. Again, the exception would be a small groups of 13 year olds who marvel at the magic of blowing smoke. Otherwise, smoking cigarettes in the USA is likely to keep you OUT of many social groups. I know that smokers are often kept off of invitation lists by hosts and social event organizers for both formal and informal events. Many people here refuse to even consider dating a smoker even one time. Non-smokers will often avoid smokers at social events if smoking is being done at the event. I find it ironic that Europe has pioneered some of the strictest and most progressive anti-smoking laws in the world, but Europeans are more tolerant of smoking than Americans.

So, to get laid, she/he/it is more concerned about the size of your car? BS dude, not having cars didn't stop people having consensual relationships before.

It comes down to the old entitlement chestnut, i.e., well if he/she/it has one then I WANT one too.

No-one in an urban area needs a car, especially in towns and cities. There's nothing to stop couples/friends/acquaintances from either walking, bicycling or using public transport and taxis to go out, have fun, get home safely and get laid.

I don't agree with Europeans being smoke tolerant. The most virulent anti-smokers I've met were all Europeans who'd spent years putting up with ~15% of the population dictating the air quality. It was usually the American tourists who were too timid to say anything about obnoxious/aggressive smokers, at least while I was working in pubs/bars before the smoking ban.

google search for "smoking ban" OR "ban smoking" OR "no smoking" OR "no smokers" OR "smoke free" (http://news.google.com/news?num=100&hl=en&um=1&tab=wn&q=%22smoking+ban%22+OR+%22ban+smoking%22+OR+%22no+smoking%22+OR+%22no+smokers%22+OR+%22smoke+free%22 )