chewybrian 

I did it for selfish reasons. Despite the prepaid incentives, I found a car still took too much of my budget. I saved the money for many years and bought a condo.

What was different about me is what made the choice seem reasonable. I had been cycling for several years, always focused on distance. I was training for rando rides. So, that time on the bike did not feel like 'exta' time to me. Further, the challenge was truly in line with the 'rando spirit'.

If someone asked me to take on that challenge five years earlier, when I was still big and out of shape, it would have seemed impossible (ride15 miles to work and 15 home every day; yeah. Right!).

Roody

At the risk of sounding like a groupthinker, I gotta say congrats on a wise decision. Good for your mind, good for your body, and good for your finances.

At the risk of sounding like a pipedreamer, I'm guessing that what made sense to you will make sense to many motorists, once they have an opportunity to understand the surprising realities.

Dave Cutter

It is simple. I have no desire to tell others how to live. Some others.... wish to have dictatorial control over others... by using government as a weapon.

The planet is fine! The planet will be fine for billions of years AFTER our species is gone. These desires for control and power are all fear based... and have NOTHING to do with the future. The average, typical person just isn't as fearful as many of those who wish to see tyrannical control over the public.

cooker

I don't call that 'selfish' in the sense the word was used earlier in the thread, in that you are not depriving or disadvantaging somebody else.

cooker

I don't believe that for a moment. You said you were very active in the environmental movement. I don't know specifically what issues you were working on - if you were trying to deprive your fellow citizens of access to DDT, or prevent them from drinking from the Love Canal or whatever, but you certainly were trying to change things, and presumably avert some kind of threat.

There is a misperception that I or some others are "telling people how to live''. That's not my aim, as I keep explaining.

Also, you didn't fully address the question, as you didn't comment on how you came to reduce your car use.

Dave Cutter

He mentioned me by NAME.

I am not sure I "justify or defend driving".... although automobiles (as an invention) has been a VERY big benefit to the human race. Many believe (including most people alive at the time) that modern cities were at the edge of collapse... when cars saved the cities... and the culture (maybe even the species).

I am car light... because I can be. My home is computer controlled and automated for the same reason. I am an old man that climbs hills on my bicycle... again because I can. I enjoy the challenge(s).

I've read enough and learned enough... to know beyond any shadow of a doubt that society cannot alter the future for the better. At BEST... mankind lives a gee-haw existence... cleaning up our messes and correcting our mistakes as we go.

cooker

Yes, and now we just have to decide if we've made enough of a mess with our cars that it has to be cleaned up. I think you know where I stand

Mobile 155

I may be like Dave in I decided to simplify my life and cut my expenses at the same time. I had been into cycling during the big cycling boom of the early to mid 70s and stayed interested till life and promotions got in the way in the late 80s.

After visiting some third world countries I learned that my carbon foot print was pretty large for the size of my family.

After some time looking into green coalitions and attending many meetings I realized more hot air was coming from these groups than a semi truck and trailer.

There is a tendancy by some in this country to assign guilt to success and comfort and in so doing make deals that allow others to Benifit at the expense of our suffering. Like putting restrictions on our industries and our fuel usage and not requiring China or India to submit to the same sacrifices. In other words it was all political BS and would never get us anywhere.

The logical solution was to rely on personal choices. Change things that I could change personally. So I now can say I am car light because I want to be. I can say I have a white reflective roof because I could have one installed. I can put more miles on my bike than my car because I want to.

The difference is I came to realize others may not care one whit about my carbon foot print or if I am car light or not. They are simply busy living their life and trying to get by.

And if there is one thing I have to agree with it is freedom to make your own choice. If that choice is a bicycle that is fine with me. If it is to take your kid to school in a stretch Hummer, that is fine with me. I am not going to try and convince anyone that the car is the root of their problems because I don't believe it is. There are plenty of other problems people should be worried about. All of them more important than where I live or how I get from point A to point B.

wphamilton

This discussion has gotten pretty wide-ranging but back to the original article, I didn't find it discouraging at all. 30-45% of them, depending on the county, said they were willing to use carpool, vanpool or transit if it saved them enough time and/or money. I think that's outstanding, a much greater percentage than I'd have expected.

Just because 45% of them say that they wouldn't change, doesn't mean that they won't. People aren't that reliable, and they sometimes conceal fears, or can't even imagine change. And most of us are followers, unwilling to put any personal stake in changes. Presented with real choices instead of hypothetical ones, and success by other people utilizing them, that 45% naysayer would change. The survey tells me that "viable changes in those parameters" could well be popular and successful.

Walter S

The world is a complex place. I have carved out a lifestyle that allows me to be car free. I am dedicated to that. I find personal satisfaction in it. It's clean and simple living.

But who am I, telling everybody that what works for me is what they need to do?

My lifestyle factors into most of my daily activities. I don't want it to also dominate my interpersonal relationships such as family, friends, co-workers because I'm always preaching to people and want them to be a crazy vegetarian bicycle freak like me.

edit: What if I told you that you should not be eating meat because you're damaging the environment?

Walter S

Still, if we have to wait for the environmentally sustaining solutions to be ones that "save people enough time/money", that may not be a rosy picture at all. We may find that paying the true cost of things like manufacturing and food production is going to cost more​ money and that's tough until and unless there are technological solutions.

cooker

This is where we seem to diverge. Mobile155, you feel the need to cut your carbon footprint. Presumably you think excess carbon is harmful. Yet you shrug off everybody else's (bad) choices. Changing your own behaviour is a good start, but if only a few semi-enlightened people do it, it's also going to have almost no impact.

I don't want dictate other people's behaviour, but I certainly don't want to subsidize harm. If we stop subsidizing harmful behaviour, many people will voluntarily choose less harmful behaviour, simply because it is cheaper. It's win/win. Less harm, while maintaining freedom of choice.

cooker

You'd be correct and I am guilty of it - I like meat. However I am cutting back considerably.

Walter S

Various people are influenced by my example regularly. I'm having a positive effect beyond my own actions. I let my enthusiasm shine. That's good enough for me to be comfortable. To do more is often counterproductive anyway.

Dave Cutter

Yes in my youth... when I knew better than everyone exactly what would work in the future.... because I had no history. But today... turns into tomorrow seemly overnight. And people saw the environmental movement.... as a power grab and an employment opportunity... instead of a noble cause.

I learned from that mistake. I matured, and I grew.

Now that same (once noble?) movement wants to take peoples prosperity, and liberty. What was once all good.... borders on evil. And some... like the OP... wonder why people don't care for restrictive power grabbing alterations to their lifestyles?!?!?

Dave Cutter

You don't want to clean anything up! You want to grab... restrict... OTHERS actions.

Mobile 155

Cooker,
I did what I did for personal reasons or convictions. I believe you have to walk the walk and if I expect others to leave me alone with that decision then I have to leave them alone with theirs.

It is for that reason I am not surprised that a percentage, any percentage aren't willing to give up personal automotive transportation.

We have already discussed that all other forms of transportation are subsidized so that is almost a break even. I don't know how many times I have seen a city bus heading through a town half full or less. It not only gets worse fuel mileage than the hypothetical mom in a Hummer but it travels to its own schedule. What if I lobbied to stop subsidizing those choices? I don't but if I did I would become an enemy to those who use the bus. That is not my place.

Like I said the Bicycle and car offer me and most people I know something they can't get anywhere else, freedom to be spontaneous. Transportation door to door. Transportation 24/7. The car adds time and distance to that freedom.

chewybrian 

Well, call it self interest, then. Financial concerns were my primary motivation, and environmental impacts were secondary.

I think it could, if cold logic ruled. But people are set in their ways and fearful and lazy, and it's a big wall to break through.

In the abstract, you can do a quick back-of-the-napkin budget, and see that the car is a back-breaker for a lot of folks. If you have $6,000 in 'discretionary' income each year, should you spend $5,000 on a car? Possibly not, but what does it matter if people are too afraid to even consider it? Giving up the car, for me, was a big sledgehammer that I could use to break out of the paycheck to paycheck lifestyle. I know it could be for others, but few will even think about it.

With a lot of lifestyle points already in my favor, I was still very tentative and fearful about giving up the car. I only gathered strength as I carried on, and accumulated the savings. I found it easier than I expected, but, again, I had some points in my favor that most others would not have starting out.

cooker

Again, if you were convinced it was a global good, as I thought you had implied, then just doing it for yourself without trying to get anyone else on board, seems like a wasted gesture.

cooker

But is the cause still a worthy one, even if you're disillusioned with the people?

Dave Cutter

Still?!?!? Present tense indicates that an action is present, now.

The job was done, people were informed, the laws were pasted, the institutions were created.... in the PAST. Hence the statement should be past tense (please do NOT take this as a grammar post) . The environmental movement has morphed and changed in the normal ways that all things do. Thanks in large part to Al Gore... environmentalism is now a religion (A particular system of faith, a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance). You can google that if it makes you happy.

I respect everyone's faith. But I already have a religion. And... thanks entirely to my faith... I understand how and why people are so fearful as to create... lets "say" golden claves. So I am not "disillusioned with the people" who were too fearful to evolve.

We're all just human.

Mobile 155

Cooker,
You assume I did it for a global good. I never said that. I could have done it for bragging rights with my tree hugger friends or something as simple as an admiration of a simpler life style.

I could care less if someone in a third world was upset because I had two homes and three cars. Ok a car, a jeep and a truck. But I might be upset at the taxes on two homes and the taxes on fuel, and the registration on three vehicles.

Selling one home and two cars did nothing for anyone living in the third world. Riding my bike does nothing for them as well. It does make me happy as did being debt free and owing my own property so I don't pay rent.

But then I would recycle, use reusable bags, cycle more and drive less even if I were the only one doing it. I have just learned that you can't throw yourself in front of the train of progress. Or to use another metaphor you can't put the Genie back in the bottle.

cooker

So why did you refer to your "carbon footprint" being so large? Why did you dabble in activism? What is your motivation for recycling? Anybody reading that might easily infer that you actually had some concerns beyond your pocket book or stress hormone levels.

Roody

By the time these deniers realize what's going on, my grandson will be struggling to survive in a world with hot and wacky weather, where many plants and animals are extinct, where crops won't grow, and where there are constant wars over water and farmland. You have a right to your pickup truck--but who will pay the price for your liberty?

Mobile 155

Roody, are you trying to say the replacing of cars and trucks will make food more abundant, decrease wars, stop world terror?

Some may not fear the future as much as others. As it has been said without the development of ICE the cities would be almost unlivable. Horse fertilizer would be several feet deep and the smell or urine would be stiffening.

Only countries that can produce enough food to feed their population could avoid mass death from famine. There are always those that predict the destruction of the planet and problems for their grand children.

Some of the great Greek philosophers even wrote about society being on the road to ruin. But we are still here and we live longer. Mankind has survived more extreme climate change throughout our history than we are seeing today. Both geology and anthropology confirm we have been here since the last ice age and we have adapted.

The future will come even if we fear it. We simply have to learn to adapt. If people have a fear maybe it should be directed to a massive caldera sitting in a place that could spell doom for most of the U.S. And Canada. It is over due according to geologists.

We might fear a major pandemic hitting a major city, picture Ebola in New York City. Those are things technology can't save us from. Personal transportation doesn't seem as destructive compared to what nature can do with no prompting from mankind.
JMHO