Robert Foster

All I am trying to say is people need to look at their life and see what challenges they will have and if it is worth it to give something up to be car free. I am not talking hypothetical car free where you have someone else drive your stuff to places you want to go or like some government people that ride a bike and have a limousine follow them around town. I am talking about living a life where you can participate in the arts, sports, travel, hunting, camping and exploration of the country we live in.

So often I hear people talk about being car free as if nothing else in their life has to change because they can do everything any of their car light or vehicle only friends can. That simply isn’t the truth and the whole truth. I do admire those in these forums that have families and have managed to incorporate a car free life style into their life. But to be honest if their children aspire to participate in many of the after school activates their friend’s do the car free parents have to either limit what the activities are or relent and allow their children to become the burden of non car free parents so they can participate in those activities. It simply isn’t as easy as the Nike saying, “just do it.”

folder fanatic

I would like to add that I am now about to become a member of the "car light" group now as my circumstances in my life is changing even as I write this. I was completely & proudly "car free" as an adult for probably more years than most people here are now. But life is not static and nether is my changes in my own responsibilities or my own mortality. Just remember that being car free is a true ideal, but something which in a modern North American society seems not to promote or accept such a good and socially responsible lifestyle as a completely carless one.

Robert Foster

We are converging on car light from two different extremes. At one point I had six vehicles for three people when my son was still living at home. Two trucks three cars and a off road jeep. I may have put on as many as 50,000 miles a year. This year I will have 6000 miles on my bike and 2300 on my car. With my wife’s health I don’t see myself being car free in the near future but I will settle for car light and a lower carbon footprint than most of the people I know.

Newspaperguy

Leaving the hockey gear at the arena isn't feasible. Arenas are used by many groups and there simply is not storage space there players to leave their gear between sessions. The drummer using another group's drums might work at low level but once the drummer and the band start improving, the quality of the gear will improve too. When a band travels from one gig to the next, the members bring all their equipment with them. As for the skier renting skis, that's great for the occasional skier. For someone moving up in the sport, it will involve buying skis of a better quality than can be rented. The locker issue is the same as at the arena.

This is where the decision must be made. Does the person wish to be car free or to pursue hockey or skiing or drumming?

In these examples, and in others, there are no simple solutions. There are only intelligent choices to be made — and those choices are not made easily.

Newspaperguy

I think you and I are in complete agreement here.

Titmawz

If there is a will, there is a way.

Robert Foster

Or use the right tool for the job? And then there is the you can't have your cake and eat it too.

wahoonc

Yes it does make a difference. Things locked up in public places, ie; gym lockers can disappear. Sports equipment like skis can be personalized and the rental equipment if even available is not going to be the same quality or even the same size as what a person uses.

I have problems with the bike sharing programs, most of the bikes won't stretch out far enough for me to ride comfortably, nor will they compact down far enough for my 5'-1" bride to be able to ride. So we transport our crap...

Aaron

zeppinger

[QUOTE=Robert Foster;11669196]I have no problem with bike share programs and your example of having to use a BMX bike for transportation is silly. The whole argument sounds very whiny to me to be honest. I used to play hockey and the gear is a lot, but not that bad. It fits in a huge duffel bag so can be easily carried. I am also a musician and transport my bass guitar at least once a week on my bike. I use the basses at the local bar when I don't feel like bring my own. Not that big a deal.

Tell me, do you ever use your hockey equipment at home? Then why take it there? For the average recreation hockey player, which makes up the vast majority of players, there is little need to even own all your own pads. The idea that it takes a 4,000 pound vehicle to transport 30 pounds of hockey/ski gear from one place to another is a bit over the top.

I think you misunderstood part of my post. I was not saying that owning these things was a luxury. I was saying that not having to own them is a luxury. I have been living in South Korea for almost two years now and, while I hate to admit it, the quality of life over here is better than the US. I have come to understand that a lot of the reason for this is that the individual does not have to own things like this. Most Korean apartments are about 300 square feet so there is certainly no room for a drum set. Instead there are studios you go to and pay by the hour to practice. There is no need to own a car because mass transit is far faster and cheaper. Rental equipment, such as skis and bicycles are much higher quality than anything I have found in the States. In short, you can live here very cheaply but without sacrificing your quality of life.

The very first lesson that most of us learned when we decided to be car-free was to leave unnecessary things either at home, such as your laptop, or at your destination, such as an extra U-lock. I don't see why this same logic can't apply to just about anything else.

Robert Foster

[QUOTE=zeppinger;11670456]I disagree totally. Unless somehow I am missing your point.
The bicycle analogy is the same, if you believe one size fits all in sports equipment then one bike size would fit all and it wouldn’t matter whose bike your rode home. Are you saying in one breath you don't have to sacrifice anything and then on the other that you want to use someone else’s equipment? All it proves is that you place car free above Art, Sports and recreation in your life.

I am saying if Art, Music, Sports, recreation is important enough for you to want to do the best you can you are willing to get the best equipment you can. It is an attitude of doing the best you can rather than doing the minimum because that is good enough to get by. If those same things don’t cause you to want to be the best you can then they were never important to you in the first place.
You just live in a different world from some of us who want to give people watching our best effort even if they are only friends and family and even more if we are getting paid to perform.
Do you leave your laptop somewhere other than home so someone else can use it if they need to? That costs a lot less than a set of Gretsch drums.

All that being said Korea may not be a place people would say you need a car to live there. But I do have to ask, do they even play Hockey in Korea?

gerv 

[QUOTE=zeppinger;11670456]Interesting point. When different cultures assess their quality of living, they look at so many different factors. For the French, the quality of food is much more important than in the US. In other countries, the integration with the family may be an important factor. For an American, the ability to be mobile seems to be huge.

I don't think you can say the Korean way of life is an improvement. It's just different... although evidently there are many takeaway ideas.


I think that's principle #1 of transportational cycling. Anything that you don't absolutely need is a burden. For a great many of us, that sentiment carries over the other aspects of our lives.

Robert Foster

[QUOTE=gerv;11672069]I understand different cultures value different things. I also appreciate your explaining that everything outside of what you need to live car free is a burden. I just see some of those things as adding value to our culture.
What I am saying is that for our culture music, art, sports are all part of the rights of passage for most of our children. They are also things we use to improve our society and keep our sanity. However good rental equipment may or may not be in Korea it isn’t matched to user like personal equipment is and therefore is of a lesser grade when used to perform. Even in the cycling we understand this. You can rent a MTB for single track but it is very unlikely you wouldn’t notice it wasn’t as good as the private equipment others were using at the same track. And 99 times out of 100 your performance would show it.
Cycling really isn’t that different from most music, art and sports. If we buy the best bike we can afford, maintain it the best we can. Adjust it so it fits us as close as we can make it. We are not going to be happy with just any old “rental” bike rather than our own.
To dismiss these concerns some may have about becoming car free is like telling someone once they join your club they will be better riders without having to work at it. It is more than “oh just give up your passion you will not miss it.” It is a decision about what you are willing to give up and how important those other things are to your mental well being. If the lesson car free people learn is only keep the stuff they can leave at one place or another then the second lesson has to be what did you or were you willing to give up to do just that?
I feel my concerns were legitimate and not whining. I feel the dismissal of those concerns is disingenuous by intimating you will never miss those activities that don’t lend themselves to total car free living. I doubt anyone would suggest that BB King should leave Lucile for someone else to play or that Phil Collins should leave his Gretsch full kit for the next band. We may not play as well as either of those two men but we value the music we do play more than some seem to realize.

There now I feel better.

zeppinger

Most of us are not pro hokey players, pro MTB riders, or pro anything. For me, I am not losing anything by renting equipment because my "performance" has little to do with my enjoyment of actually riding a bike, playing hockey, ect...

I am not saying that everyone should rent everything. All I am saying is that it seems relatively easy to make up excuses to own a private automobile, which is the topic of this thread. "It snows in my town, I play the drums, I don't like renting this or that even though I only use it once a month...." I totally agree with you that its important to have these cultural artifacts in our society but I think even more people would play drums or hockey if they were cheaper to enter such as with quality rental equipment. I remember fighting a lot with my mother when I took up roller hockey because all the damn pads were so expensive! Why does an entry level drummer have to buy an entire kit before they can even decide if they like playing them?

To Gerv: I also see what your saying and I am sure that my assessment of the quality of life in Korea has a lot to do with the fact that I find my mobility here to very good, despite not owning a vehicle. However, what matters even more to me and other Koreans is that you can have a high quality of life at a low price. For example, (sorry this is off topic) a minimum salary here is almost the same as in the US but the cost of living is much cheaper. A lot of the little luxuries are very inexpensive such as taxis, eating out, bath houses, theaters, ect... Hell, Seoul is the second most densely populated city in the world, only fractionally less so than Tokyo, yet I live in the center of the city for less than $350 a month for my own private apartment. Try that in an major US city. The fact that I dont have to own a car further decreases my need for a high income. The income tax is 3.5% and there is no sales tax. Health care is excellent and universal for all citizens. Last time I went to the doctor I waited in line for 0 minutes. The doctors visit cost me $6 and $4 for the prescription.

While the US is trying to increase peoples incomes so they can live above the bare minimum, Korea has simply made the cost of living cheaper.

gerv 

Yeah... I see. that does sound a lot better than either foie gras or a big Chev... hard to argue with that one.

Robert Foster

It may seem like it is too easy to make excuses but you make it sound effortless to simply drop everything and become car free as if none of the things like music, art and sports are a consideration. Not so for many people. There is more to life than going to work and going home. I don't know why things have to be so expensive any more than I know why with all the low cost benefits and the attempt Korea seems to have made to lower the cost of living they have 15 percent living below poverty line and the US has 12 percent. As reported in the CIA fact Book.
That however is not the point, the point is in places like the US people will have to make some decisions on what they are willing to give up to be car free. Telling them that nothing will change is inviting failure. They cannot expect that nothing will change and that they will be able to do all the things they used to do and that their former friends can still do. You haven’t indicated they can still do them only that they aren’t worth doing if you can’t o them and be car free. What you have indicated is it is not fair that what they want to do cost so much and that they can’t rent anything they need to continue the activities I have mentioned. If it were easy to do more people would do it. It isn’t so they don’t.

Newspaperguy

You make some good points, zeppinger. For as seldom as I go downhill skiing, there's no need for me to own skis. In fact, it would be a waste of my money. And there's no need for me to own drums because I'm not a drummer. The same is true for other things that require a lot of specific gear. But I have some friends who are high-end skiers. For them, it's cheaper to own a good pair of skis than to rent skis every time they go to the slopes. I know someone else who's a drummer in a couple of bands. He owns his own drums. But the students in the high school band rent instruments rather than buying them. Others have taken up drumming through a church which has a drum kit set up for music in all its services.

I have a bicycle. It suits my needs well and I like it. Some think it's a cheap bike while others cannot understand why I paid so much for it. I bought it because it was the best I could find to meet my specific cycling needs. It was the right solution for me. The same could be said for the young hockey player or drummer who hauls his gear in a cheap car. It's a solution that works for him or her in that particular situation. But it's not the solution that's best for me, simply because my needs are not the same. And in the end, that's how I understand car-free and car-light living. Each of us here has unique challenges and while we can learn much from each other, our transportation solutions will not all be the same because our needs and our circumstances are not all the same.

bragi

I agree that being car-free in a more rural area may be extremely impractical if not impossible. However, most people in the western world live in urban areas, and in urban areas having a car is pretty much optional. In some cities, car-free is actually easier. For example, last summer I visited San Francisco, and we got around really easily just by walking, using public transit and using rented bicycles. On my last day there, I agreed to drive a friend's car back up to Seattle, and picked the car up that evening. I quickly discovered that while San Francisco is an absolutely delightful town to walk around, it's an absolutely hellish place to drive a car. (OK, it's not the driving per se, it's the parking.) I can fully understand why many people don't even use cars there unless they're leaving the city.

Bleep

I know a city where you do need a car. Jacksonville, Florida! No bike lanes, not the greatest drivers and the distance to go to MOST places is a stretch

bragi

Hostile drivers are a definite obstacle, I agree. I'm not a big fan of bike lanes, though. Seattle has put in a lot of bike lanes recently, and I think they're counterproductive. They tend to be in the "door zone," which is obviously dangerous, and their installation has meant that streets that used to be two lanes in each direction are now one lane in each direction, with a bike lane at the edge. In my experience, this means that the car traffic now has no gaps; it's a long, slow procession of pissed-off motorists traveling in a single lane. This makes it hard to cross arterial streets, and to merge into traffic. Some streets that used to be pretty much ideal for cycling prior to bike lanes have now become dangerous for cyclists and pedestrians alike. I'm also worried that motorists will start to think that bicyclists should restrict themselves to streets that have bike lanes.

As for distances, I think anything within ten miles is very reasonable on a bike, it's not much slower than driving, especially if you factor in parking time. More than ten miles, for most people, it becomes an issue of how committed you are. For me personally, if it's ten miles or less, one way, I just ride automatically; it's probably easier than driving. If it's 10-15 miles, I think about how much time I have. If it's more than 15 miles, I'll usually take the bus or drive.

DirtRoadRunner

I could easily go car free in my daily life. Work is 3 miles away, there is a grocery store less than a mile away, and anythine else I'd ever need is in a 6 mile radius.

However, I won't go car free, for one simple reason: Most of my hobbies are outdoor hobbies which take me 100+ miles out of the city for camping, hiking, canoeing, hunting, etc. Public transporation options are absolutely zero (not even a Greyhound) for many of the backwood places I frequent. I literally could not get there without a car unless I had enough time for a 100-200 mile bike ride each way, which is unfeasable for me as that would eat up all of my weekend, leaving no time for the actual activity.

Car free would work great for me if I wanted to stay in a very small geographic area nearly 100% of the time. But, I don't. Keeping my car actually has little finaical burden - It has been paid off for years, requries little maintence, gets decent fuel mileage, and is cheap to insure. If I had a $500/month car payment, it would make financial sense to get rid of it and just rent cars. But I typically buy a cheap, fuel efficient used car and drive it for years....my last car cost $2500 and I drove it for 5.5 reliable years (70,000 miles)...heck of a lot cheaper than renting a car.

Currently, I ride to work and around town often and save around 30 miles of driving a week. But I'm keeping my car for weekend excursions which it is neccessary for. I'm not willing to give up my hobbies to go car free.

bamboopiper

All the time. It reminds me of that old joke. "No one in NYC drives, there's too much traffic." Seems to me like a car would hinder your ability to get around, not to mention trying to find parking when you get there.

Also, I haven't seen a lot of "I can't afford a car" in this thread. Sure, I live in a pretty rural area of a town not bigger than 10,000. It's 10 miles and up part of a mountain if I want to go places, but I don't have the luxury of saying, "I'll just hop in my car and go." I can't afford a car. I can't afford to buy one, I can't afford the operating costs of maintaining one and I certainly can't afford the high fees associated with insurance anymore. Hell, I couldn't afford them back when I last had a car in 2002. I'm sure they're even more now.

I work at home and grow a lot of my own food so I have to go to the store less. I too, have outdoor hobbies, and I ride my bike to those hobbies. Sometimes it takes me a day or two to ride along the way, but since I was going camping/fishing along the way, this just adds a different locale to it. I also like visiting the library, art galleries and beach. When I take my work to sell it, it would sure be easier with a car, but I have to make do with what I got.

Newspaperguy

For me, the cost of a car is an annoyance, but nothing more. My car is paid for so it's not costing me anything in payments I have to make. It's got low kilometres so I don't foresee needing to replace it in the near future. It's running reliably and I keep on top of the maintenance so I don't foresee big expenses there. And because I don't drive much (I've had some tanks of gas last me three months) I don't have to deal with as much wear and maintenance as those who drive a lot more.

That doesn't mean my car costs are nonexistent. I know I'm paying for licensing, insurance and registration, for fuel, for maintenance and other costs that don't come to mind right now. And I know if I had taken the money I spent to buy my car and put it into a good investment, I'd be earning a bit of money instead of losing some through depreciation.

The point is that despite the costs, it's not unaffordable for me. I simply don't like driving all that much and I have much more fun using the bike as my primary transportation, reserving the car for work-related trips and out-of-town travel.

zeppinger

Damn, there sure are a lot of people who own cars on this here Living Car-Free forum.

I don't think of being car-free as having to sacrifice, being difficult, or anything else. Being car-free, like many things in life is a trade off. I trade the "freedom" of being able to blindly hop in a car at any given time, for the freedom to call a taxi, bike, take a bus, take the subway, carpool, or any combination of those things. I gain the financial freedom to take 3-4 months off a year for travling. Roody chooses to work only 4 days a week. We all make choices and its obvious that its a trade off. Based on some of the post on this threat of "car-free people" would think its almost impossible to live a full and happy life without owning an automobile!

You can go on all day about the benefits of owning a car. Are we not all well aware of them as a society already? However, I see little point in a bunch of car owner whining about how hard it would be for them to go free for one reason or another on a thread that was clearly aimed at a discussion against such narrow thinking.

Newspaperguy

Two things would be needed for me to make the jump to fully car-free living. One would be switching to a job where I no longer need a car. The other would be a workable inter-community transit. Neither of those are going to happen for some time. So I'm doing the best I can until then. I've gone about as car-light as I can go at this point. And when you think about it, there are a lot of us here who are doing what I'm doing. We see a lot we can learn from car-free living, but we're not there yet.

Roody

I agree that carfree interurban transportation is a big need. In the 1920's a grid of interurban light rail lines crisscrossed North America. There was less demand for these trains as "everybody" came to have a car, and they were rather abruptly abandoned in the 1930s. Until more people either become carfree, or decide it's worthwhile to use quick cheap trains to get to the next town, I guess these interurbans will never come back.