Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Living Car Free
Reload this Page >

Define "car" "carfree" and "carlight"

Notices
Living Car Free Do you live car free or car light? Do you prefer to use alternative transportation (bicycles, walking, other human-powered or public transportation) for everyday activities whenever possible? Discuss your lifestyle here.

Define "car" "carfree" and "carlight"

Old 08-26-11, 09:43 AM
  #26  
Sophomoric Member
Thread Starter
 
Roody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dancing in Lansing
Posts: 24,221
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 711 Post(s)
Liked 13 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by bragi
This has become silly. It's obvious that most of us define car free as not owning a motor vehicle. If you're car lite, you own a car, but use it for only a small minority of trips. I consider myself car lite: I own a car, but my SO is the only one who uses it. I use a bike or walk for at least 90% of my trips. Since I live in a car-centered culture, it's clear that living completely without cars is a pipe dream. This is much easier to define than some people think.
Silly yes. But somebody hijacked an interesting thread (on time spent LCF) with this silly argument.

The purpose of stipulating a working definition is to end the silly arguments so that we can concentrate on more interesting topics.
__________________

"Think Outside the Cage"
Roody is offline  
Old 08-26-11, 09:49 AM
  #27  
Sophomoric Member
Thread Starter
 
Roody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dancing in Lansing
Posts: 24,221
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 711 Post(s)
Liked 13 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by Robert Foster
My working definition would be, car free is not owning a car or having a driver's license.

car light would be owning a car and or having a driver's license but a car is not your primary mode of transportation.

Seems simple and clean.
WTF does posession of a driver's license have to do with it. I have not owned a car for all but 2 months out of the past 10 years, and I haven't driven at all for more than a year. But I still have a DL, and I plan to keep it as long as I'm able to drive--even if I never do drive. It's good ID, and who knows when I wil need a DL for an emergency, or to get a job?

BTW, I don't want to say the name of the person whose quibbles about definitions inspired me to start this thread, but his initials are Robert F.
__________________

"Think Outside the Cage"
Roody is offline  
Old 08-26-11, 11:22 AM
  #28  
cycleobsidian
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Southwestern Ontario
Posts: 441
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Robert Foster
My working definition would be, car free is not owning a car or having a driver's license.

car light would be owning a car and or having a driver's license but a car is not your primary mode of transportation.

Seems simple and clean.
It might seem simple and clean to you, but it isn't accurate at all. Most people have driver's licenses but not all who do, drive.

My youngest daughter has a driver's license and lives in another city. She lives on her own and has no access to a car. She gets from point A to B via public transit. She keeps up her license in case that one day, maybe even in the distant future, she may own a car.

In the meantime she uses her license as photo ID.

According to your definition, she isn't car-free?
cycleobsidian is offline  
Old 08-26-11, 05:00 PM
  #29  
Banned.
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Southern california
Posts: 3,498

Bikes: Lapierre CF Sensium 400. Jamis Ventura Sport. Trek 800. Giant Cypress.

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by Roody
WTF does posession of a driver's license have to do with it. I have not owned a car for all but 2 months out of the past 10 years, and I haven't driven at all for more than a year. But I still have a DL, and I plan to keep it as long as I'm able to drive--even if I never do drive. It's good ID, and who knows when I wil need a DL for an emergency, or to get a job?

BTW, I don't want to say the name of the person whose quibbles about definitions inspired me to start this thread, but his initials are Robert F.
well I was thinking the simple ownership thing wouldn't work because a person with Drivers License could still drive a borrowed car and not own it. They could lease a car and not own it. They could rent a car and not own it. But dude it doesn't matter because you all define car free differently. State of mind for some. A direction for others. Part time for others. It has no definition and it is even stated in the title of the forum. If you only use is a absolute. That was why I found the USE definition agreeable, I didn't post it by the way. If you use a car you are not car free you are something else. If you rent a car you use a car. If you lease a car you use a car. I can let a taxi slide as a form of public transportation. But I didn't put the Definition on the forum title some of you must have.

I Quote: "Forum: Living Car Free
Did you give up your car for good? Is your bike and public transportation the only way you travel from point A to point B? If your only mode of transportation is your bike, discuss your car-free lifestyle here.


I ask what only means to you? I ask what was the intent when to forum title was posted. Don't shoot the messenger. Shoot whoever put the definition in the forum title.
Robert Foster is offline  
Old 08-26-11, 05:09 PM
  #30  
Senior Member
 
Paul01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tampa Bay, Fl
Posts: 531

Bikes: Vitus 979, KHS Montana Comp

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
We're car lite. We bought our car, a 2000 VW Golf new in 2000. We recently turned 70,000 miles on the odometer and half of that was on long vacation trips or to visit the family .

We bike or walk mostly. For instance, the super market is an eight mile round trip and we bike mostly depending on weather. Ditto the bank and the other errands.
Paul01 is offline  
Old 08-26-11, 06:04 PM
  #31  
In the right lane
 
gerv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Des Moines
Posts: 9,565

Bikes: 1974 Huffy 3 speed

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 44 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by Paul01
We're car lite. We bought our car, a 2000 VW Golf new in 2000. We recently turned 70,000 miles on the odometer and half of that was on long vacation trips or to visit the family .

We bike or walk mostly. For instance, the super market is an eight mile round trip and we bike mostly depending on weather. Ditto the bank and the other errands.
I'd have to say that being car light in Tampa trumps being carfree in many cities. Last time I visited Tampa, it seemed to be overrun with cars. Everything seemed miles apart. So I'd imagine a 4 miles trip to the grocery store isn't that unusual.

Many of the carfree people on this forum have much shorter trips for food.
gerv is offline  
Old 08-26-11, 09:56 PM
  #32  
Banned.
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Southern california
Posts: 3,498

Bikes: Lapierre CF Sensium 400. Jamis Ventura Sport. Trek 800. Giant Cypress.

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by Roody
WTF does posession of a driver's license have to do with it. I have not owned a car for all but 2 months out of the past 10 years, and I haven't driven at all for more than a year. But I still have a DL, and I plan to keep it as long as I'm able to drive--even if I never do drive. It's good ID, and who knows when I wil need a DL for an emergency, or to get a job?

BTW, I don't want to say the name of the person whose quibbles about definitions inspired me to start this thread, but his initials are Robert F.
Tell you what. If you don't like definitions I won't pay attention to them. I can easily ignore the definition on the Forum header can you?
Robert Foster is offline  
Old 08-26-11, 11:48 PM
  #33  
bragi
 
bragi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: seattle, WA
Posts: 2,911

Bikes: LHT

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by Robert Foster
Tell you what. If you don't like definitions I won't pay attention to them. I can easily ignore the definition on the Forum header can you?
Robert, just accept the car-ownership definition of car free; it's the most sensible, easily defined, and widely accepted one out there.

Also, please cut people some slack. Unless you're willing to live like the Unabomber, it's simply not possible to totally escape internal combustion engines in this culture. Anyone who gives up owning a car is automatically going to use feet, bikes and public transportation for virtually all of their travel. However, if they "cheat," it shouldn't be something that you pounce on. I'm now car lite, and use my car maybe 12-18 days a year. When I was car-free, I drove a car three times in five years, once to drive a friend to the hospital, and twice to ferry around family that were in town to visit. I suppose I could have been more dogmatic, and let my friend take his chances with his appendix, or forced my 70-year old parents to figure out the bus system, but I chose to be a bit more pragmatic in those cases. I didn't drive a car for 1,862 days out of 1,865, mostly because I didn't actually own one. That's not even close to totally car-free by your definition, but that's about as good as anyone can hope for, IMO.

I suspect that you're trying to justify your own lifestyle, which, as far as I can tell, is very suburban, only somewhat car-lite, and focused primarily on purely recreational cycling. There's nothing wrong with any of that, of course, but judging others based on your own narrow perspective is a bit unfair.

Last edited by bragi; 08-26-11 at 11:59 PM.
bragi is offline  
Old 08-27-11, 06:50 AM
  #34  
Membership Not Required
 
wahoonc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: On the road-USA
Posts: 16,855

Bikes: Giant Excursion, Raleigh Sports, Raleigh R.S.W. Compact, Motobecane? and about 20 more! OMG

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 15 Times in 14 Posts
Originally Posted by bragi
Robert, just accept the car-ownership definition of car free; it's the most sensible, easily defined, and widely accepted one out there.

Also, please cut people some slack. Unless you're willing to live like the Unabomber, it's simply not possible to totally escape internal combustion engines in this culture. Anyone who gives up owning a car is automatically going to use feet, bikes and public transportation for virtually all of their travel. However, if they "cheat," it shouldn't be something that you pounce on. I'm now car lite, and use my car maybe 12-18 days a year. When I was car-free, I drove a car three times in five years, once to drive a friend to the hospital, and twice to ferry around family that were in town to visit. I suppose I could have been more dogmatic, and let my friend take his chances with his appendix, or forced my 70-year old parents to figure out the bus system, but I chose to be a bit more pragmatic in those cases. I didn't drive a car for 1,862 days out of 1,865, mostly because I didn't actually own one. That's not even close to totally car-free by your definition, but that's about as good as anyone can hope for, IMO.

I suspect that you're trying to justify your own lifestyle, which, as far as I can tell, is very suburban, only somewhat car-lite, and focused primarily on purely recreational cycling. There's nothing wrong with any of that, of course, but judging others based on your own narrow perspective is a bit unfair.
But the UnaBomber used ICE via the USPS to deliver his packages so I don't think he lived completely car free...

Aaron
__________________
Webshots is bailing out, if you find any of my posts with corrupt picture files and want to see them corrected please let me know. :(

ISO: A late 1980's Giant Iguana MTB frameset (or complete bike) 23" Red with yellow graphics.

"Cycling should be a way of life, not a hobby.
RIDE, YOU FOOL, RIDE!"
_Nicodemus

"Steel: nearly a thousand years of metallurgical development
Aluminum: barely a hundred
Which one would you rather have under your butt at 30mph?"
_krazygluon
wahoonc is offline  
Old 08-27-11, 10:00 AM
  #35  
Sophomoric Member
Thread Starter
 
Roody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dancing in Lansing
Posts: 24,221
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 711 Post(s)
Liked 13 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by Robert Foster
,,,,But dude it doesn't matter because you all define car free differently......
The whole point of this thread is so we can find a commonly accepted definition of the words. You are much too literal-minded to understand this, evidently. But the main thrust is that if we all agree on a working definition, we don't have to split hairs constantly. Maybe we'll all have to give a little, make some concessions.

Personally, it makes sens to define a car as a motor vehicle that is owned, leased or primarilyused by an individual/household/family. From this the definition of carfree follows naturally--the absence of a car as defined. I strongly suggest we continue to use this definition, and end the quibbling now.

The definition of carlight is trickier. For many people on this forum, carlight means that there is a car in the household, but the carlight individual doesn't make use of the car. For others, carlight means they own a car but they rearely use it, and most of their travel is done by non-car means.Personally, I could live with either definition or some combination of the two.

Originally Posted by Robert Foster
....I ask what was the intent when to forum title was posted. Don't shoot the messenger. Shoot whoever put the definition in the forum title....
The title and description of the subforum were rashly and impulsively determined by a moderator (Koffee Brown) who was soon thereafter fired and banned for, among other things, making rash and impulsive decisions. I personally don't care for either the title or the description. I imagine (but I don't know for sure) that the admins would agree to change one or both if there was a groundswell of support for an alternative.

But more to the point, I don't feel we're "stuck" with this definition when it comes to settling on a working definition of the terms we use every day. As long as we follow forum guidelines, we can define terms any way we want to, as long as participants know and accept any non-standard definitions.
__________________

"Think Outside the Cage"
Roody is offline  
Old 08-27-11, 10:05 AM
  #36  
Sophomoric Member
Thread Starter
 
Roody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dancing in Lansing
Posts: 24,221
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 711 Post(s)
Liked 13 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by wahoonc
But the UnaBomber used ICE via the USPS to deliver his packages so I don't think he lived completely car free...

Aaron
If Ted Kaczynski is the poster child or patron saint of the carfree lifestyle, we are all in deep doo-doo!

I guess our new motto would be "What Would Ted Do?" I'll have some yellow wristbands printed up.

And maybe we could get Tom S. to post Ted's Manifesto as the new description of the subforum?

__________________

"Think Outside the Cage"

Last edited by Roody; 08-27-11 at 10:11 AM.
Roody is offline  
Old 08-27-11, 10:32 AM
  #37  
Banned.
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Southern california
Posts: 3,498

Bikes: Lapierre CF Sensium 400. Jamis Ventura Sport. Trek 800. Giant Cypress.

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by bragi
Robert, just accept the car-ownership definition of car free; it's the most sensible, easily defined, and widely accepted one out there.

Also, please cut people some slack. Unless you're willing to live like the Unabomber, it's simply not possible to totally escape internal combustion engines in this culture. Anyone who gives up owning a car is automatically going to use feet, bikes and public transportation for virtually all of their travel. However, if they "cheat," it shouldn't be something that you pounce on. I'm now car lite, and use my car maybe 12-18 days a year. When I was car-free, I drove a car three times in five years, once to drive a friend to the hospital, and twice to ferry around family that were in town to visit. I suppose I could have been more dogmatic, and let my friend take his chances with his appendix, or forced my 70-year old parents to figure out the bus system, but I chose to be a bit more pragmatic in those cases. I didn't drive a car for 1,862 days out of 1,865, mostly because I didn't actually own one. That's not even close to totally car-free by your definition, but that's about as good as anyone can hope for, IMO.

I suspect that you're trying to justify your own lifestyle, which, as far as I can tell, is very suburban, only somewhat car-lite, and focused primarily on purely recreational cycling. There's nothing wrong with any of that, of course, but judging others based on your own narrow perspective is a bit unfair.
I am not trying to justify anything I know I am not now nor likely to be in the future car free even if my only vehicle is in my wife’s name. I have no problem with car light because it is easy to define. I have no problem with someone calling themselves car free even if cars influence their everyday life. Like I may have mentioned I have stayed with families in Africa that are "car free" in that they have no access to cars and have never driven one because they couldn’t even rent one.


What I question is the definition posted on the forum and the way it is applied. I maybe wonder why someone that has shared a forum with people that have claimed to never use a car and thus are car free would consider the definition posted as a introduction to the forum and want to claim the same status rather than something else like car light or not car dependant. Someone decided to use words like only in the forum introduction and “only” use a bike or public transit must mean something different to some here.


When I first came to this forum there were posters that claimed they were car free and even some that moved from one place to another using their bicycle and a trailer. I thought that was interesting and so I started shopping using one of my bicycles and buying a trailer. I now go to the doctor’s office and even church by bike weather permitting. Still didn’t call myself car free. Then a poster that had posted for a while as car free mentioned that their SO had a car and it was used from time to time when the bike wasn’t practical. I simply don’t see why someone would claim to be car free when they use a car that is borrowed, rented, leased, co-owned or given to them.


Is car free a definition or a club? Is saying someone is car free so important that the word “only” has to be redefined? And it has nothing to do with cutting people slack. I don’t judge a person anyone on how they get from point A to point B. I just see it as disingenuous when someone might ask how someone gets to the doctor’s office or go to visit a sick relative in the hospital and they get the answer, sometimes you have to rent a car. That doesn’t “sound” car free to me, it sounds car light. I also realize it will decrease the number of people claiming car free status if they can’t drive a car.

I am also waiting to see what definition is agreed upon by consensus and if someone suggests the introduction of the forum is too restrictive. If it is simply a concept why not admit it?

Last edited by Robert Foster; 08-27-11 at 10:40 AM.
Robert Foster is offline  
Old 08-27-11, 10:50 AM
  #38  
Senior Member
 
Paul01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tampa Bay, Fl
Posts: 531

Bikes: Vitus 979, KHS Montana Comp

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
How about car lite is using a car as little as possible?

We certainly used the car much more in New Jersey when the weather was awful but we lived much closer to shopping.

Here in Florida, the bike is much more viable year around transportation even if the distance to the market is greater.

And even here, if we need to buy a lot, or a 40 pound bag of dog food, or a lot of heavy to transport wine, we take the car.

Car lite, no?
Paul01 is offline  
Old 08-27-11, 10:51 AM
  #39  
Sophomoric Member
Thread Starter
 
Roody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dancing in Lansing
Posts: 24,221
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 711 Post(s)
Liked 13 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by Robert Foster
I am not trying to justify anything I know I am not now nor likely to be in the future car free even if my only vehicle is in my wife’s name. I have no problem with car light because it is easy to define. I have no problem with someone calling themselves car free even if cars influence their everyday life. Like I may have mentioned I have stayed with families in Africa that are "car free" in that they have no access to cars and have never driven one because they couldn’t even rent one.

What I question is the definition posted on the forum and the way it is applied. I maybe wonder why someone that has shared a forum with people that have claimed to never use a car and thus are car free would consider the definition posted as a introduction to the forum and want to claim the same status rather than something else like car light or not car dependant. Someone decided to use words like only in the forum introduction and “only” use public transit must mean something different to some here.

When I first came to this forum there were posters that claimed they were car free and even some that moved from one place to another using their bicycle and a trailer. I thought that was interesting and so I started shopping using one of my bicycles and buying a trailer. I now go to the doctor’s office and even church by bike weather permitting. Still didn’t call myself car free. Then a poster that had posted for a while as car free mentioned that their SO had a car and it was used from time to time when the bike wasn’t practical. I simply don’t see why someone would claim to be car free when they use a car that is borrowed, rented, leased, co-owned or given to them.

Is car free a definition or a club? Is saying someone is car free so important that the word “only” has to be redefined? And it has nothing to do with cutting people slack. I don’t judge a person anyone on how they get from point A to point B. I just see it as disingenuous when someone might ask how someone gets to the doctor’s office or go to visit a sick relative in the hospital and they get the answer, sometimes you have to rent a car. That doesn’t “sound” car free to me, it sounds car light. I also realize it will decrease the number of people claiming car free status if they can’t drive a car.

I am also waiting to see what definition is agreed upon by consensus and if someone suggests the introduction of the forum is too restrictive. If it is simply a concept why not admit it?
Your tenacity and purism are usually an asset to the forum, but on this point I think your inflexibility is very frustrating. Are you a Republican Congressman in real life? I wish you could get that we're only talking about a working definition--this is not the Nicene Creed of Carfree Living.

But face the facts--we ALL depend on cars to some degree, and we all acknowledge this fact.

By your overly strict definition, there are probably a dozen cardree people in the entire developed world. They all live together on an Aleutian island, and they're waiting for the Mothership to come and fetch them. At that point, they'll still be carfree, but not spaceshipfree.

__________________

"Think Outside the Cage"
Roody is offline  
Old 08-27-11, 12:33 PM
  #40  
Banned.
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Southern california
Posts: 3,498

Bikes: Lapierre CF Sensium 400. Jamis Ventura Sport. Trek 800. Giant Cypress.

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by Roody
Your tenacity and purism are usually an asset to the forum, but on this point I think your inflexibility is very frustrating. Are you a Republican Congressman in real life? I wish you could get that we're only talking about a working definition--this is not the Nicene Creed of Carfree Living.

But face the facts--we ALL depend on cars to some degree, and we all acknowledge this fact.

By your overly strict definition, there are probably a dozen cardree people in the entire developed world. They all live together on an Aleutian island, and they're waiting for the Mothership to come and fetch them. At that point, they'll still be carfree, but not spaceshipfree.

Are there are no people posting in this forum that simply do not use a car even if it is a rental? It does seem like you agree the definition posted for the forum is too restrictive. Come to an agreement on what car free is or how often someone can use a car and be car free and I won't seem to be so literal. I have just noticed a rather cavalier attitude when using the term. Just as an aside, if you do agree on the idea that car free excludes ownership in the household will some have to change their perceived status?
Robert Foster is offline  
Old 08-27-11, 12:37 PM
  #41  
Senior Member
 
Newspaperguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 2,206
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by Paul01
How about car lite is using a car as little as possible?

We certainly used the car much more in New Jersey when the weather was awful but we lived much closer to shopping.

Here in Florida, the bike is much more viable year around transportation even if the distance to the market is greater.

And even here, if we need to buy a lot, or a 40 pound bag of dog food, or a lot of heavy to transport wine, we take the car.

Car lite, no?
You're certainly car-light. I'd suggest changing the last word in your first sentence from "possible" to "practical." Otherwise, a hardliner will say it is always possible to do without a car, even if it's not at all practical.
Newspaperguy is offline  
Old 08-27-11, 01:42 PM
  #42  
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,788
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
With respect, Roody:

Why does it matter? I've been coming to this subforum for a long time, been without a car a LOT longer (I also maintain the DL, 'just in case'), and I wind up driving a family member's car probably 2-3x/year. The fact that I have family in the household who own cars, and contribute car use to care for the household, would lead me to call myself 'car-lite'. But let's just keep it simple.

We ride our bikes so much, they have replaced cars as 'centric' to the needs of our lives. THAT, to me, is the core of this subforum. Whether you or someone else is 'further along' the line in the quest for total car-independence is irrelevant, we share the desire to do something other than drive everywhere. We all have had experiences and challenges that others of a like mind could benefit from, that's why we have this outlet.

It's a different way of life, that's all; no need to profile ourselves.
DX-MAN is offline  
Old 08-27-11, 02:58 PM
  #43  
Banned.
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Southern california
Posts: 3,498

Bikes: Lapierre CF Sensium 400. Jamis Ventura Sport. Trek 800. Giant Cypress.

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by DX-MAN
With respect, Roody:

Why does it matter? I've been coming to this subforum for a long time, been without a car a LOT longer (I also maintain the DL, 'just in case'), and I wind up driving a family member's car probably 2-3x/year. The fact that I have family in the household who own cars, and contribute car use to care for the household, would lead me to call myself 'car-lite'. But let's just keep it simple.

We ride our bikes so much, they have replaced cars as 'centric' to the needs of our lives. THAT, to me, is the core of this subforum. Whether you or someone else is 'further along' the line in the quest for total car-independence is irrelevant, we share the desire to do something other than drive everywhere. We all have had experiences and challenges that others of a like mind could benefit from, that's why we have this outlet.

It's a different way of life, that's all; no need to profile ourselves.
That seems both refreshing and honest. No longer car centric? I think I like it. It is personal and to the point.
Robert Foster is offline  
Old 08-27-11, 04:24 PM
  #44  
Sophomoric Member
Thread Starter
 
Roody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dancing in Lansing
Posts: 24,221
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 711 Post(s)
Liked 13 Times in 13 Posts
AN;13140948]With respect, Roody:

Why does it matter? [/QUOTE]
I wanted to convey the idea that this is not a thread about substantive issues. It's really a "housekeeping" thread. If we agree on definitions for commonly used term, we don't have to waste time arguing about the definitions every time the word is used in a sentence. That's all.

Originally Posted by DX-MAN
I've been coming to this subforum for a long time, been without a car a LOT longer (I also maintain the DL, 'just in case'), and I wind up driving a family member's car probably 2-3x/year. The fact that I have family in the household who own cars, and contribute car use to care for the household, would lead me to call myself 'car-lite'. But let's just keep it simple.

We ride our bikes so much, they have replaced cars as 'centric' to the needs of our lives. THAT, to me, is the core of this subforum. Whether you or someone else is 'further along' the line in the quest for total car-independence is irrelevant, we share the desire to do something other than drive everywhere. We all have had experiences and challenges that others of a like mind could benefit from, that's why we have this outlet.

It's a different way of life, that's all; no need to profile ourselves.
Like you, I have no interest in profiling or categorizing people. We do need to categorize ideas if we want to have meaningful discussions. I think that's basically what a definitions is--a way of classifying ideas so that they can be understood by others just as we intend them to be understood.

You've got me worried that I said certain people are better than others because of their transportation status. That's the last thing I would ever want to say on this forum.
__________________

"Think Outside the Cage"
Roody is offline  
Old 08-28-11, 12:39 AM
  #45  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 953
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked 71 Times in 22 Posts
Most of the driving I do is actually at work. I drive about 30 miles a week in my own car, and about 300 miles a week in a company vehicle. Recently, I have been afforded the opportunity to ride at work some of the time instead of driving. This should cut my work driving about in half.

I know one person who is car light because he drives a company car home. He drives much, much more than me, though he rarely drives his own vehicle. By the definitions I've read, he is car-lite. Yet, he's not. He doesn't ride a bike, walk for transportation, or take public transportation anywhere. Most everywhere he goes is either in his own car or the company car. It seems like this should be taken into account in the various definitions people are opining here...

Last edited by hopperja; 08-28-11 at 12:44 AM.
hopperja is offline  
Old 08-28-11, 08:31 AM
  #46  
Banned.
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,325
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by bragi
Robert, just accept the car-ownership definition of car free; it's the most sensible, easily defined, and widely accepted one out there.
Sorry, but someone who always (or even spends the majority of their trips) using a "car" to make their trips isn't "car free" even if they don't own a car. I suggest one looks at some of the available data (ACS and NHTS as examples) of significant numbers of people in cities like New York, Boston, and Chicago who don't own a car, yet use cabs, car services, etc... for all (or most) of their trips... Hardly car free...

Taxi's and car services are essentially cars with drivers... Unlike public transportation, these vehicles do not require the sharing of the vehicle. Hence the only difference between using a privately owned car and one of these is the requirement that one pays for a chauffeur instead of the car itself...

Originally Posted by bragi
Anyone who gives up owning a car is automatically going to use feet, bikes and public transportation for virtually all of their travel.
Completely wrong. See previous references for actual data to demonstrate how and why this statement is false.
myrridin is offline  
Old 08-28-11, 09:26 AM
  #47  
Sophomoric Member
Thread Starter
 
Roody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dancing in Lansing
Posts: 24,221
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 711 Post(s)
Liked 13 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by hopperja
Most of the driving I do is actually at work. I drive about 30 miles a week in my own car, and about 300 miles a week in a company vehicle. Recently, I have been afforded the opportunity to ride at work some of the time instead of driving. This should cut my work driving about in half.

I know one person who is car light because he drives a company car home. He drives much, much more than me, though he rarely drives his own vehicle. By the definitions I've read, he is car-lite. Yet, he's not. He doesn't ride a bike, walk for transportation, or take public transportation anywhere. Most everywhere he goes is either in his own car or the company car. It seems like this should be taken into account in the various definitions people are opining here...
I agree that there are probably some people who don't own cars but who drive a lot for personal reasons. I imagine this would be far less than one percent of the population, although I'm only guessing. I'm not convinced that we need to "worry" about them when we establish a working definition.

Remember, we don't need to write a dictionary type definition of these terms, or a description that could be used for legal purposes. All we need is working definitions that are commonly accepted (by us) for terms that are useful to us when we discuss these matters. And sometimes a working definition is more useful when it isn't overly precise.
__________________

"Think Outside the Cage"

Last edited by Roody; 08-28-11 at 09:32 AM.
Roody is offline  
Old 08-28-11, 09:28 AM
  #48  
Sophomoric Member
Thread Starter
 
Roody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dancing in Lansing
Posts: 24,221
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 711 Post(s)
Liked 13 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by myrridin
Sorry, but someone who always (or even spends the majority of their trips) using a "car" to make their trips isn't "car free" even if they don't own a car. I suggest one looks at some of the available data (ACS and NHTS as examples) of significant numbers of people in cities like New York, Boston, and Chicago who don't own a car, yet use cabs, car services, etc... for all (or most) of their trips... Hardly car free...

Taxi's and car services are essentially cars with drivers... Unlike public transportation, these vehicles do not require the sharing of the vehicle. Hence the only difference between using a privately owned car and one of these is the requirement that one pays for a chauffeur instead of the car itself...



Completely wrong. See previous references for actual data to demonstrate how and why this statement is false.
Ah, another set of smokey figures that myrridin expects us to accept on his say-so. Or can you provide a link? I'd like to know what is meant by "significant numbers."
__________________

"Think Outside the Cage"

Last edited by Roody; 08-28-11 at 09:35 AM.
Roody is offline  
Old 08-28-11, 01:22 PM
  #49  
Banned.
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,325
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Roody
Ah, another set of smokey figures that myrridin expects us to accept on his say-so. Or can you provide a link? I'd like to know what is meant by "significant numbers."
Roody, I have provided you with links to both the ACS and the NHTS many times, but apparently you are too lazy or ignorant to look at the data... Of course it could simply be that you don't like being proven wrong when real data disagrees with your imaginary world...

ACS - American Community Survey
NHTS - National Household Travel Survey
myrridin is offline  
Old 08-28-11, 02:26 PM
  #50  
cycleobsidian
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Southwestern Ontario
Posts: 441
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by myrridin
Roody, I have provided you with links to both the ACS and the NHTS many times,
ACS - American Community Survey
NHTS - National Household Travel Survey
Thanks Myrridin for the link. Unfortunately it is quite a quagmire.

On Page 11 https://www.census.gov/acs/www/Downlo...4_Salvo_01.pdf

Using ACS data, I could only find that in the Bronx, 57 percent of people use public transportation (including taxi cabs.) The data did not get more specific than that.

When searching for Boston, the tables only showed "excluding taxi cabs."
https://factfinder.census.gov/servlet...-redoLog=false

And as far as the National Household Travel Survey, they specifically wrote that they excluded taxi data in the Distribution of Workers by Commute Mode.

https://nhts.ornl.gov/2009/pub/stt.pdf p. 52

I questioned the data that many people hop in a taxi, because taxis are expensive! That's sure why I don't use them.
cycleobsidian is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.