July 27, 2006
Seattle Weekly Writer Finds "Carlessness" A Solid Bust
At the Seattle Weekly's blog Daily Weekly, staff writer Philip Dawdy reports on his failed experiment living without a car. Dawdy writes:
I am here to tell you...the liberal paradigm is, in this respect, an abysmal failure. Or at least it was for me...After two weeks of being back in the driver's seat, I am happy to report that I am visiting friends I haven't seen in ages, getting shopping done that I'd put off, and popping around the outer reaches of Seattle to do interviews in person....like it or not, I am tied to cars. The Ron Sims/Greg Nickels/urban planning wonk wet dream of getting Seattleites out of their cars and onto the buses is unworkable, in my opinion. At least in 2006.
Myself, I sometimes find buses useful going to and from my Seattle home/office. But I could not see using cross-Lake Washington light rail unless there were super-speedy, prompt and reliable links to get me to and from that line - the cost of which would almost certainly be prohibitive. Make sure to read Dawdy's full post. Bottom line: It's careless to be carless.
Posted by Matt Rosenberg at July 27, 2006
04:37 PM | Email This
1. As Michael Savage says, "Liberalism is a mental illness".
It's time to stop trying to understand the Liberal mentality and their hatred of cars, tax cuts, the rich (anyone who actually pays taxes), white men, and President Bush. You can't understand irrational emotionally-driven positions with no basis in reason or fact.
Imagine if Liberals were held to the same factual standards before taken seriously by the MSM and governments? We'd probably never hear from them again.
2. I tried being carless once in college. It didn't work and I lived in DOWN TOWN portland. I made it for about 2 months. It was a total pain getting groceries.
I lived the same year without a phone---and was extremely happy and saved a couple hundred bucks.
3. We once went an entire year without television. Frankly, it was just fine. But it never would've worked to not have the cars! (and heck, I'm originally from Southern California---cars are in my blood, and I get cranky at the thought of riding a bus!)
4. The reality is that we live in a geography where cars are necessary. It would be possible to get by without a car, but extremely difficult and in some cases possibly even dangerous.
Liberal Utopian schemes will always fail because they are built on foundations of sand. One cannot ignore reality and expect a positive outcome.
Kudos to Philip Dawdy for suffering through this experiment and then having the courage to report his findings.
Now, let's all put an end to the financial disaster that is the Sounder Train.
5. It's amazing how many people have accepted the liberal paradigm of mass transit as the solution to all evils that plague society. But they fail to realize that the automobile is nothing short of a magical device. Walk out the front door or into the garage and here's this miracle of modern technology, 99+% reliable, with incredible comfort (these days, even with entry-level cars) including high-back adjustable seats, 8-speaker stereo, climate control, and the privacy to talk about business or talk to yourself. It takes you from destination to destination directly, without waiting at bus stops or doing transfers or being dropped off in the rain half a mile from where you need to be. It's available instantly for a midday errand, and even lets you transport a case of Pepsi to restock the office fridge.
Except in the most urban of urban settings (e.g., NYC, London), mass transit has been a colossal failure. People choose to live where they want to live and if that means the low-crime, good-school suburbs, then they'll have a car. And if you have a car, you might as well drive it since you'll pay the depreciation and insurance costs anyway.
But where the mass transit advocates really miss the boat is on the question of efficiency. On a well-designed road network, I can travel 30 miles in 30 minutes. I can leave the house at 6:30 and be to work by 7:00. Under the best-case mass-transit scenarios, this time extends to an hour or longer--a 5-minute walk to the bus stop, 3-minute wait for the bus, 6 or 7 stops before hitting the freeway, getting to where I can transfer, waiting for the next bus for 5 minutes, going several more stops, getting off the bus and walking 5 minutes to my office. Then, when it's time to leave the office to catch my bus home, my client calls to ask me about our project status. Now I have to wait 20 minutes for the next bus. THERE IS A BUSINESS COST AND, ULTIMATELY, A SOCIETAL COST TO INEFFICIENCY. I wish I had 10 bucks for every meeting that went without a decision because my government client had to leave to catch his carpool. Maybe the fact that government people are the only ones left who work straight 8 to 5 hours is an explanation for why politicians seem so enamored with mass transit.
Sorry for the rambling. But I just watched $390 million go down the tubes where I live for a Sounder-like train that nobody will ride. Could've been used to widen the Interstate that will have to be widened in a few years anyway, even with the train.
6. There is no way I could ever give up my car. It is truly needed where I live. There are no busses/trains in the foothills and if you think that I am going to bike 13 miles down a winding mountain type 2 way road with 50 mph speedlimits you are crazy. Not to mention where would I put my wife and 4 boys?
7. I live in downtown Seattle and don't own a car - my wife, a lifelong New Yorker until recently, has never learned to drive. We manage fine on transit and shank's pony (aka feet) 90% of the time. The other 10% of the time we rent a car - 3 or 4 times a month.
Even in the summer when rates are close to $40/day, this works out much cheaper than even parking a car downtown for a month, to say nothing of insurance, car payments, maintenance, etc. Do I feel good that I'm conserving resources and not burning (as much) foreign oil? Sure, but mainly it's a rational, free-market economic choice.
Just one alternate data point...
8. Conservativationist,
Interesting!
I have read that for some people, what you are doing makes great economic sense. Factor in the insurance/maintenance (and in your case, parking) costs and many could go without a car. Do you have children? I would think that could rule out some folks, just based on convenience.
Where I live, totally impractical. Once, I rode the bus from work to home. The 25 minute drive was 2 hours by bus, plus a 30 minute wait for the connection. Yes, there is express service, but not at that time of day. Sheesh.
9.
Consrvationist: Impressive. We are all noting that you have no children. How nice. So easy to take care of business for the two of you. No worry about the Seattle Public Schools as, assuming by your comments, you two have no intention of producing. Cool. Well, my man, if you indeed planned on reproducing: 1) you will be going to the grocery store daily and hauling home prodidgous amounts of "stuff" which, genius, cant do, w/o car. 2) Gosh, you just might want a school district that actually teaches your children anything at all. 3) Gosh, you might actually promote the species, instead of arrogant self indulgence. 4) Gosh, self indulgence w/o children in downtown Seattle really means you and your NY bride plan on self extinguishment. 5) By the way, yes, indeed, you will save the environment as you will not contribute to, well much of anything. 6) Thanks, pal.....two less Nickels tunnel victims.......
10. Why doesn't anybody talk about alternative motorized personal transportation devices, aka motorcycles and scooters?
I gave up commuting in my gas guzzling Dodge Durango and started riding a motorcycle. I'm getting 50mpg and saving around $200 a month on fuel costs. I get to take advantage of the under-utilized transit lanes which cuts my commute time by 75%. I'm contributing to the longevity of our roads by abandoning my super heavy SUV and the wear and tear caused by driving it on a daily basis. I can go shopping and pick up a days worth of groceries, I can visit friends, and travel to my appointments at my leisure. I could go on and on with the benefits of riding a motorcycle. Sure, come autumn and winter, riding in the cold weather and rain will have its drawbacks, but that's why God created rain gear and heated hand grips.
The mayor and city council should realize people like to drive their own vehicles. We have a working mass transit system and a dedicated rider base, we don't need to reinvent the wheel; the people who use mass transit are already on the bus.
Viva la motorcycle!
11. Bacon Fat: Somewhat clear you are a fairly young person. Those of us chronologically enhanced, all of us have had multiple friends dead from motorcycle accidents. Such is life. Its hell when a motorcycle and a truck collide. A result of the CAFE (for the acronym deprived-corporate average fuel efficiency standards) rules from the early 80s passed by a Democratic Congress, passenger cars are now downsized, resulting in families being driven into, GASP!!, SUVs, in order to be able to accomodate people and stuff, and have enough steel to actually survive an accident. Shock!!! A Democratic Congress created SUVS..Oh Horrors.......So, my fine feathered, crash helmeted, single, daredevil friend, go for it. The rest of the world, the majority of us, slog through the universe being, in the eyes of WSDOT and Democrats, criminals, and subject to reprogramming, as we are so unbelievably stupid as to actually want to transport our families safely........Doug MacDonald, head honcho WSDOT-call your office.
12. Monk: I guess I don't know the background here, but I think much of your post is irrlevant to the discussion at hand. Although I do use a car on a daily basis, if I lived in an urban area like that I think I would have to give serious consideration to doing without one due to the expenses involved.
If I think about this, I do think that where I am (just a bit out of downtown Redmond) it would be difficult, but certainly possible to do without a car. Bike commuting would definitely be possible for me, and although there would be limitations, I think most services could be reached relatively easily by bike as well (but that does leave the issue of carrying capacity, and some areas of the city would have a lot of hills to deal with as well.)
13. Hank, I'm a 40 year-old, father of two. At what age does "chronologically enhanced" start at anyway?
I count myself lucky to have not lost ANY friends due to motorcycle accidents. I don't know your "friends", their riding habits or the circumstances of their demise, but I am sorry for your loss/es.
My earlier comment when considered in context with the original post by Matt Rosenburg, should be taken as an alternative to giving up your car and still having the flexibility of personal mobility.
Motorcycles obviously aren't for everybody. For those that are inclined to ride and ride safely, it can only benefit us all. Plus, the more bikes on the road(see Japan/Korea), the fewer cars, and the less likely you'll end up in an SUV vs. motorcycle sumo match.
Cheers!
14. Hank @9: Jesus, Hank, do you realize what a jerk you made of yourself? Conservationist writes a perfectly respectful post pointing out that, while he has no ideologically driven desire to push his lifestyle on anyone else, carlessness can be an entirely rational choice in some circumstances. You respond with a rant indicating that your own ideology can't respect his choices, and suggesting that he should adjust his life to conform with your values. Good job showing that, for all that we might complain about liberal social engineering, there are a few conservatives who would like to do a little social engineering of their own.
Conservationist @8: Thanks for the post.
15. Contrary to popular opinion, most motorcyclists die from old age. I know this is surprising and goes against everything your mother told you but the industry grows and grows. Growth doesn't happen because of dead customers, it happens because of alive ones. It's fun, exciting and saves on gas money. It's not for everyone but for some lifestyles, motorcycles are a perfect fit.
16. I tried living without a car for six months last year, riding the bus to and from work and walking to the grocery store, etc. I gave it up after being threatened by a pit bull at the bus stop and having police with drawn guns rush onto my bus to arrest a couple of robbery suspects. It just wasn't worth it.
17. I moved to an area where the bus stop is within walking distance just so I would not have to use my car. Well, after the bus kept arriving too late for me to make it to work on time, I now drive to a park and ride. So, yes, I will never be able to do without my car as hard as I tried. P.S I tried an earlier bus but it arrived too early. How's that for irony????
18. So, the bottom line is that with all the fine talk of mass transit being the solution, people have tried the experient (count me in) and found it lacking.
And so, now, we are trying to convince politicians with blinders and frequent attendees at cocktail parties, that what they so carefully planned out over cocktails just ain't going to work.
19. David Wright: You are absolutely correct-many of us do want to do some social engineering of our own. For instance: 1) transportation policy that reflects the needs of the majority of motorists, not catering lavishly to all the loud minorities-bicyclists, walkers, bus riders, car poolers, light rail riders(very rare specie), the squirrel population around I90. 2) school systems that are about educating rather than indoctrinating children, and school systems that are not just about providing lifetime tenure and wonderful retirement/benefit packages for the adults. 3) safe vehicles. Nobody is criticizing motorcylists-they can do what they want, can have everyone's respect, as long as they dont splatter themselves on some random car/truck/SUV grill. Motorcycles just are not practical for the vast majority-it does rain half the time around here, you know. Yes, indeed, social engineering for the vast majority-for a change.......
20. The point of mass transit isn't so that you can go completely carless; it's to provide an alternative to hopping in your big SUV and driving solo 20 miles , getting 10 miles to the gallon. Mass transit (especially rail transit) contributes to denser (more efficient) development. As gas prices continue to rise, we have no choice but to be more efficient in getting from point to point. Is it realistic in most American cities to be carless? Probably not, since they are a production of the shortsighted policies in the 50s and 60s to build roads everywhere at the expense of city trolleys and billions of government tax dollars. A more realistic option is probably to have a one-car household, where you can use the car to shuttle the kids around in your neighborhood, run errands, etc. while one parent could use transit (or some kind of alternative transportation) to get back and forth to work and ease the congestion on the highways a little bit. But you road warriors always like to complian that if transit can't meet all of your needs, it's not worth building. How myopic.
21. The point of mass transit isn't so that you can go completely carless; it's to provide an alternative to hopping in your big SUV and driving solo 20 miles , getting 10 miles to the gallon. Mass transit (especially rail transit) contributes to denser (more efficient) development. As gas prices continue to rise, we have no choice but to be more efficient in getting from point to point. Is it realistic in most American cities to be carless? Probably not, since they are a production of the shortsighted policies in the 50s and 60s to build roads everywhere at the expense of city trolleys and billions of government tax dollars. A more realistic option is probably to have a one-car household, where you can use the car to shuttle the kids around in your neighborhood, run errands, etc. while one parent could use transit (or some kind of alternative transportation) to get back and forth to work and ease the congestion on the highways a little bit. But you road warriors always like to complian that if transit can't meet all of your needs, it's not worth building. How myopic.
22. Jason--you did not mention if you take the bus everyday and let a spouse run all the errands and take care of the kids/pets. I can drive to work in 15 minutes and it takes 45 minutes to use the bus (this includes walking to and from the bus stop.) And this is without having to do transfers. I'm too cheap to pay for downtown parking on a regular basis, so I take the bus because a stop is relatively close.
I had to go a month without a car once and that was not pleasant between carting the kids around and trying to get groceries, etc, it was a real pain in the rear. Not to mention it took so long to get from point A to point B.
As for motorcycles, more power to anyone who wants to ride them. I only know of two people who had them and both were in accidents caused by inattentive drivers. One escaped serious injury by laying the bike down to slide under the truck. The other wasn't so lucky. A van trying to merge on an interstate wasn't paying attention and ran over the biker, dragging him under the van for about 1/2 mile before stopping due to rate of speed. The biker could not get over because it was rush hour. The biker has a permanent brain injury and the van driver was cited for reckless driving. The biker was wearing a top of the line helmet which is why he survived, but he has to spend the rest of his life with a disability that prevents him from holding down a job or living on his own.
23. Sheesh Burdabee, take it easy. I commute every day on my bike, including all winter. It is very cheap transportation. I have also used the bus back when I worked downtown and the bus stop was literally a hundred yards from my front door. Now I and my wife work in situations that no amount of mass transit could cope with. And we are typical. That is the problem with mass transit, it works for about 10% of the people, but that is its' limit. Unfortunately our elected representatives are convinced that number could be 50% if we just spend enough money. Sigh. Hammering square blocks into round holes never works no matter how many you do....
24. Jason your idea of a one car family will only work if you live in an area where there is mass transit. As i posted before I live out in the hills, because of the safe neighborhood (i live in a gated community in the woods) and the good schools. You also forget that some jobs require a car. My wife is an in home care giver for the elderly and one of her job requirements is a reliable car (we chose a car that gets 34 mpg on avg). She regularly has to drive her clients to the doctor and the store. And as for gas prices, perhaps if you liberals stopped blocking the building of new refineries (its been more than 20 years since one has been built) and quit crying about the supposed damage to the carribou and let us drill in ANWAR we could be oil independent in 10 years time and have reasonable gas prices. Another thing that might help is if the state and feds stopped asking for more fuel taxes.
25. If it is such a wonderful thing to be carless, why does the state punish people by taking their driver's license away?
26. Personally I am waiting for the time, in the near future, when I can pickup a $60,000 luxury SUV for cents on the dollar. Let some other poor soul sell the gas guzzler for $20K. The money I save will buy lots of $3/gal gas and a massive SUV will protect my family. Motorcycles are fun but steel always has the right-of-way.
27. Rhetorical Question:
If we all took the bus (or rail) to usher in the "liberal utopia", imagine the loss of tax revenue associated with cars - how would they make up for that?
28. motercycle insurance
motercycle insurance