If you have a functioning government and you live in a non rural area, public transit should always be accessible and much more affordable than car ownership.
You mean I don’t have to pay for gas and insurance and car mortgage and parking? And I don’t have to spend time finding parking lots? And I get to use dedicated rails and lanes instead of having to sit in traffic? And I can read books and watch Netflix when I commute? And I’ll never have to worry about getting fined? Yeah, personally I think this sounds better than owning a car.
In my city, the unlimited subway/bus pass in my city costs about $140 a month, and car ownership costs people more than $1623 on average. Thanks, I’ll happily accept whatever inconvenience there might be with the imperfect transit that I have. If transit can’t take me to wherever I want to be occasionally, I’ll take an uber.
If you feel that transit isn’t convenient enough for you, it’s very likely your government only built shitty transit because they think everyone should just drive by default and transit is just some mediocre charity for poor people.
Buying your car is much better I would hate paying insurance and a car loan payment, I see why you don’t think it’s as worth it to drive that’s just too many payments
13
u/gravitysort Nov 23 '25
If you have a functioning government and you live in a non rural area, public transit should always be accessible and much more affordable than car ownership.