# How to save thousands – and live longer, too



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

Article from the Globe and Mail about the massive savings you can have by not owning a car:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/glob...housands-and-live-longer-too/article29809465/

The comment section (as usual) is hilarious. I think it's a bit unfortunately is that many people would never even consider it. It kind of reminds me of when I decided to go microwave free (just b/c my new place has a small kitchen). I didn't think I could do it. After a week... meh... I don't miss it (I just drink my coffee faster!). Anyway, all my life whenever I got close to buying a car I would do that math and change my mind. I love renting cars I just can't seem to pull the trigger and drop 20K+ (or whatever) on a car.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

I could never do it, besides I enjoy driving and the freedom to do things when I want. 
I did find their $10,729 a year to own a car funny (as in way to high) ... off the top of my head I'm less than half of that.


----------



## DollaWine (Aug 4, 2015)

As usual... nobody entertains the thought of buying used... Who says you have to lease/finance? Who says cars cost 10k/year? Not mine.

:stupid:


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

I wouldn't want to live without a car. Sure it can be done but it really depends on your lifestyle or what you're willing to sacrifice. I like the freedom of being able to go anywhere I want at a moment's notice. Also, public transit sucks here. I'd be biking home from work in the rain/snow at 7:30 pm in wintertime.

For what it's worth, I spent $3670 last year to insure and drive an Infiniti G35. That includes all maintenance, gas, etc. I used to spend under $3000/yr when I had a more basic car.

The car-less person in the article spent basically the same. LOL



> Over the past 12 months, I spent just $2,643 on car rentals and car-sharing. Even after adding in the cost of public transit and fuel for car rentals (gas is included in the price of car-sharing) my all-in transportation costs were still comfortably under $4,000.


If I was going to go car-less, I'd have to spend well under $2000 in order to justify it.


----------



## RCB (Jan 11, 2014)

Only someone living in a very large city would write that article. Public transportation for the rest of us sucks. Throw in 6-8 months of winter weather annually and public transportation sucks even more. Ride a bike? In the snow?

I didn't have my own car (other than briefly at 20) until I was mid 30s. Hauling a toddler around in a crappy sleigh in a snowstorm sucks. Doing so when you are sick is worse.

Using public transportation in this city usually means a minimum of one hour, door to door. My 18 yr old just received my old car because the city decided to end Sunday bus service at 7 pm. She works for 10 pm, and we're moving out of the city. It will cost her $1,800 a year for new driver insurance, and her gas. It will also allow her to better manage her time while in university and working. It would cost her about half that to stand in the rain or snow waiting for a bus.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

RCB said:


> Only someone living in a very large city would write that article. Public transportation for the rest of us sucks. Throw in 6-8 months of winter weather annually and public transportation sucks even more. Ride a bike? In the snow?


There was another thread here, where someone expressed disbelief that my 15 minute drive would be an hour longer, I believe I quoted 1:11, on the bus.
The big city tunnel vision is really bizarre, it's like they can't comprehend the reality for most Canadians.
They even skipped over the part where I mentioned the buses don't start early enough for me to even get into work on time.

FWIW, I live in London, 15th largest city with a population of 366k according to the 2011 census.
Big city people don't realize how bad transit sucks for the rest of us, I guess that's why they think the Feds and the province should pay to improve theirs (heaven forbid the city actually charges 1% property tax)


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

Some of this article makes a lot of sense..owning the family car. If you have other available transportation to get to work, you can save thousands per
year, on maintenance, gas and depreciation, although if you know lo mileage used cars well enough, and can bargain, you can get a 6-10 yr old car for a 3 thousand, as my friend just did.

Car payments and insurance, eat up a lot of the monthly budget. If your car is paid off because you keep it much longer, then there is more savings to br
realized, EXCEPT when it comes to major repairs due to salt rust, suspension, wear and tear items and engine or drive train mechanical.

At nearly $100 an hour for labour alone, that most major garages charge plus the cost of the parts and taxes, that little noise in the front end can lead to hundreds of dollars coming out of your pocket.

Fine, if you use it as a daily driver for work, but if it is sitting around on your driveway most days, then you are paying a LOT for the convenience of owning a car.

For me, being disabled these days requiring wheel chair transportation, its a lot cheaper to take para-taxi or even the bus on nice days (but not in the winter), than to invest in a $30,000 or more wheel chair accommodating van, that would sit around most of the time. It just does not make any sense.

My para-taxi fares are well under $700 a year, subsidized partly, and I don't have to scrape the ice off in the winter or worry about road conditions.
That's left up to the driver I hire.


----------



## hboy43 (May 10, 2009)

I did not have an ownership interest in a car until about age 34. I always say that 18 year interval of not driving paid for my first house: my net worth by age 28 was about the value of the house, and by 34, I had paid off the loan.

For most of the years since we have run one small vehicle, when most people of our economic means would run 2. This low level of car ownership has to account for at least a half million dollars of my pile today.

I suspect if everyone actually did a proper analysis of their car economics, many hundreds of thousands of cars in Canada would be abandoned. Many other hundreds of thousands of cars would also not be abandoned even though the economics would be favorable to the idea simply because the average person would refuse to take public transit even if it were cheaper and faster, as it has an image of lower class, and who wants to be seen as lower class?

Everyone makes their own value judgements about these things. Hopefully a few even do some honest calculations about the real financial consequences too.

Hboy43


----------



## brad (May 22, 2009)

I lived in a small town for a year without a car; it wasn't easy but I managed. 

We got rid of our car a couple of years ago; we're saving money but not boatloads. I tend to keep cars for 9-10 years, which reduces the annual cost of ownership (the original purchase price spread out over 9-10 years plus annual costs like insurance, maintenance and repairs, registration, fuel, etc.). I calculated (using 9 years of records in Quicken) that my annual cost of ownership was a little over $5,000. As long as I spend less than that each year, we come out ahead. Last year was a bit unusual because we had a lot of long-distance car trips; we spent less than $5,000 on car-shares and rentals for the year, but not much less. This year should be more representative of a "typical" year so we'll see where we come out in December.

For me the main advantage isn't the economic savings but rather the convenience. It's actually more convenient for us to not own a car than to have one, since we don't have a garage or parking area. No more shoveling out the car in winter, having to remember to change it to the other side of the street on street-cleaning days, or figuring out where to keep it when we take an overseas vacation. No more trips to the garage, no more buying snow tires, etc.


----------



## gardner (Feb 13, 2014)

In Victoria or Vancouver -- where it snows for 1/2 day a year -- you can get by with a scooter. It will take you basically everywhere you need to go and runs on pennies a day. Insurance is reasonable and cost and maintenance is low. Just don't try it with one of those stupid electric ones -- they do not have enough power to move with traffic and, IMO, are as dangerous as hell -- worse than a bicycle.


----------



## nobleea (Oct 11, 2013)

When people are closeminded and are 100% sure that ditching the car will save them money, a post like this would probably better be described as being 'cheap' rather than 'frugal'. Cheap looks for the lowest cost, regardless of value. Frugal looks for the best value. Cheap would not take in to account the value of your time. When you're retired, or when you're single and have no dependents, then maybe your time isn't worth as much.

As has been noted, more realistic costs of car ownership are much lower than the original article. We're probably running around $4500 a year including fuel, insurance, repairs and maintenance, and depreciation (per vehicle).

With proper planning, many families could probably make the change from 2 to 1 cars.


----------



## brad (May 22, 2009)

nobleea said:


> When people are closeminded and are 100% sure that ditching the car will save them money, a post like this would probably better be described as being 'cheap' rather than 'frugal'. Cheap looks for the lowest cost, regardless of value. Frugal looks for the best value. Cheap would not take in to account the value of your time. When you're retired, or when you're single and have no dependents, then maybe your time isn't worth as much.


I agree with your basic point, but are you being closeminded in terms of assuming that not having a car equates to spending more time?

I ran a lot of experiments before we decided to get rid of our car. We timed how long it took to get downtown from our house by car (including finding parking and dealing with traffic) versus by public transit or bike. In our case it took as long or longer to go by car, except on Sunday mornings when there was very little traffic. I kept track of how much time I spent each year taking the car to the shop for maintenance and repairs (about 4-5 hours per year, given that the garage we used was a 20-minute drive away), which is equivalent to the amount of time I spend picking up my car-share or car rental cars now whenever I need a car.

I also don't have to spend time shoveling out my car after snowstorms, which varies by year. Overall, I'm pretty sure not owning a car is saving me time, or at least isn't taking any more time.

When I lived in the Boston area, it wasn't unusual to have to spend 15-20 minutes driving around looking for a parking space downtown. And with traffic jams, taking the subway was almost always faster than driving; I lived in the Boston area for 10 years and only drove in the city about 6-7 times during that entire period.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

nobleea said:


> With proper planning, many families could probably make the change from 2 to 1 cars.


Never understood the reasoning behind two car families.
How did families manage in the 50s and 60s when there was only 1 family car?
Soimehow they managed, and were not deeply in debt like today's modern families. 

And smart phones, why does everybody in the family need cellphones? Just to play on social media?


----------



## brad (May 22, 2009)

carverman said:


> Never understood the reasoning behind two car families.
> How did families manage in the 50s and 60s when there was only 1 family car?


Back then, it was a lot more common to have single-income families. Nowadays, it's mostly two-income families. With both people working at jobs that may require a car to get to the workplace.


----------



## Spudd (Oct 11, 2011)

We were car-free for almost 5 years. We lived in Toronto when we went car-free, and it made a lot of sense there. The subway is super convenient, and there was a car-sharing service in the neighbourhood so if we needed a car on short notice, it was easy to get one. We did traditional car rentals for weekend trips. 

Then we moved to a small town. We lived here car-free for 5 months but eventually decided it was worth it to get one. The buses here run once an hour, and some services aren't available in town but only in neighbouring towns (e.g. my family doctor is in the next town over, as is the walk-in clinic). It's not very fun having to rent a car to go to the walk-in clinic when you're sick. Also we wanted to be able to go hiking, but the hiking trails are all a 10-15 minute drive out of town, so it wasn't practical to do without a car. We bought used, though, and we only have 1 car for the 2 of us. We still walk most places we're going, we only use the car if it's really called for (i.e. we're in a big rush, or going somewhere it would take over an hour to walk to). 

I don't really know what our annual cost is but I'd be amazed if it was 10k. The car itself was 18k, amortized over 10 years would be 1.8k/year. Insurance is $50/month. (In Toronto it was $250/mo, so the economics of not having a car in Toronto really add up.) So far it's only needed 1 service in 6 months, which cost about $100, but of course as it ages the service will start to be pricier. And then gas, of course, but we'd have to pay gas on a rental car too so that's a wash.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

hboy43 said:


> ... I suspect if everyone actually did a proper analysis of their car economics, many hundreds of thousands of cars in Canada would be abandoned. Many other hundreds of thousands of cars would also not be abandoned even though the economics would be favorable to the idea simply because the average person would refuse to take public transit even if it were cheaper and faster, as it has an image of lower class, and who wants to be seen as lower class?


YMMV won't it?
A job half an hour away that pays triple anything local where public transport is a bus through town once a week makes the calculations rather simple, IMO.


Cheers


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

Spudd said:


> I don't really know what our annual cost is but I'd be amazed if it was 10k. The car itself was 18k, amortized over 10 years would be 1.8k/year. Insurance is $50/month. (In Toronto it was $250/mo, so the economics of not having a car in Toronto really add up.) So far it's only needed 1 service in 6 months, which cost about $100, but of course as it ages the service will start to be pricier. And then gas, of course, but we'd have to pay gas on a rental car too so that's a wash.


I think the way the math works is something like:

Start price (20K; for easy math; 10 year life span)

- loss of 2,000 in value
- loss of 1,000 in opportunity costs of the 20K if invested
- Insurance 1,200 a year 
- gas is based on a 20K per year but as you say it's a wash so we'll ignore that
- Maintanence over 10 year period - I dunno, average of $750 a year maybe? that includes service, oil changes, rapairs? that's just a ballpark

so yeah, $5000 a year or so to own a car - not a ton of cash but still almost a fully funded TFSA.


----------



## nobleea (Oct 11, 2013)

brad said:


> I agree with your basic point, but are you being closeminded in terms of assuming that not having a car equates to more time?
> 
> I ran a lot of experiments before we decided to get rid of our car. We timed how long it took to get downtown from our house by car (including finding parking and dealing with traffic) versus by public transit or bike. In our case it took as long or longer to go by car, except on Sunday mornings when there was very little traffic. I kept track of how much time I spent each year taking the car to the shop for maintenance and repairs (about 4-5 hours per year, given that the garage we used was a 20-minute drive away), which is equivalent to the amount of time I spend picking up my car-share or car rental cars now whenever I need a car.
> 
> ...


Those are cities where it would absolutely make sense. In our city for example, employment nodes are very spread out around the city - few people actually work downtown. I work in an industrial park and my wife works in a school in a residential area. Parking is readily available and free. Because employment is so spread out, traffic isn't as bad as it would be if everyone was driving to the same place. We garage our cars and our driveway is only 6' by 25'. We still have to shovel the walkway, car or not and that takes far longer than shoveling the driveway. We rarely get really big dumps of snow, usually a couple inches or less of light champagne powder.

I'm sure it's pretty similar in Regina, Saskatoon, Winnipeg. Calgary has more focused employment nodes and a bit better transit serving downtown.

Add in a toddler or two with car seats and the hassle increases when you don't have a car. 

I could probably bike to work - it would take about 25-30 mins (my drive take 9ish), but there is no shower at work and I do deal with customers often. The closest bus stop to my work is a 10 min walk. And then over an hour to get home.

I have an open mind and would love to do a proper comparison, but in 90% of Edmonton, there is no comparison.


----------



## brad (May 22, 2009)

nobleea said:


> I have an open mind and would love to do a proper comparison, but in 90% of Edmonton, there is no comparison.


Yep, and that just reinforces the point that it all depends on where you live, where your job is, whether you have kids, etc.

For some people giving up the car makes perfect sense: it did for us: I work at home, and my girlfriend was already taking public transit to work because she works downtown and parking is either unavailable or very expensive. We hate driving in the city and mostly used the car for weekend trips and for hauling stuff we couldn't carry on our bikes. But I lived for 10 years in rural Vermont where living without a car would be really difficult (not impossible, as I knew a few people who didn't have cars), but not much fun. And lots of Canadian cities don't have good public transit options.


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

Biking obviously doesn't work for some places which is really unfortunate. Our country is getting fatter and fatter for a reason and lack of basic exercise is one reason.

You should petition your work place to get a shower at work.


----------



## nobleea (Oct 11, 2013)

none said:


> You should petition your work place to get a shower at work.


I'm actually the one that designed and built the place where I work. We did go back and forth over a shower, though we decided against as our neighbours were going to put one in (same company). But they were behind us by a couple months and pulled it out. By then it was too late for us to add one.

People are getting fatter, for sure. I wouldn't say it's because they all drive to work. It's just a sedentary lifestyle in general. It's very possible to drive everywhere and be extremely fit.


----------



## brad (May 22, 2009)

none said:


> I think the way the math works is something like:
> 
> Start price (20K; for easy math; 10 year life span)
> 
> ...


I'm not sure I would include depreciation in this. If you buy a car with the intention of keeping it for 10 years, depreciation isn't really a factor. Instead, take the $20K and spread it evenly over 10 years, which gives you $2,000/year for the cost of the car. Same numerical result, different way of arriving at it.

I'm also not sure about the investment opportunity cost: you still have to get around, so you're still going to be spending money on car-shares, car rentals, and public transit. To do a fair comparison you'd have to subtract the annual costs of getting around without a car from the $20K, right?

I calculated (not estimated), using actual numbers, that our car cost us $5,000/year. But we still spent about $4,500 last year on transportation even though we don't own a car:

$2,460 on car-share and car rentals
$924 on public transit
$830 on fuel (this is misleading because fuel is included in car-share rates...this is the amount I spent out of pocket, but which was later mostly reimbursed except for cases where we rented a car)
$82 for driver's license
$227 on bike stuff (maintenance, repairs, equipment)

Last year was unusual for us as we had a lot of travel (we actually drove more than we did in any year in which we owned our own car); this year will probably be more representative of a "normal" year. We've spent $700 so far this year on transportation-related costs.


----------



## nobleea (Oct 11, 2013)

The lost opportunity costs should be dropping over time in order for the comparison to be fair.

Lost opportunity costs on 20K in the first year, 18K in the second year, 16K in the third year, etc.

20K is a bit steep, I would say 10-12K is more realistic for people here. Plus, the car won't be worthless at the end of 10 years. It will have residual value, even if it's only 2-3K.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

Count me as a fan in not including depreciation costs. When it comes to it, car depreciation is just an accounting exercise, not a real cost. It is the same with residual value, after all, if it gets totaled after year 2, do you expect to get the blue book value from insurance? But, this only applies to purchasing a car outright without financing. To capture this, I would agree that you could use opportunity loss, i.e. cost of car purchase at some invested return. However, if you are talking about a lease, or financing then it makes sense to include it in the annual cost of car ownership.

Again, as everyone points out, YMMV. Recently I was working in one area of the city and it would take about 1 hr 40 min by bus, or about 40 min by car. However, I just moved buildings and now it is fairly even between the two modes of transport (around 40 min). So it is a no-brainer when it comes to the later situation to buy a transit pass.

When it comes to annual cost, $10k seems a little high... $1500 for parking pass, $1000 for maintenance, $2400 for gas, $1200 for insurance... so about $6.2K in total. If I assume that I just stick with public transit and get rid of the car, I would still spend about $1300 for transit pass, so I would only save about $4900. A far cry from the $10K quoted from the article. Not insignificant, but not as bad as the article portrays.


----------



## RCB (Jan 11, 2014)

carverman said:


> Never understood the reasoning behind two car families.
> How did families manage in the 50s and 60s when there was only 1 family car?
> Soimehow they managed, and were not deeply in debt like today's modern families.
> ?


Managed, yes. PITA? Yes.

I grew up a 20 minute drive outside of my city in the 60/70s, one car family. If my mother had need of the car during the day, for medical/dental appointments for we kids, it was REALLY a PITA. My father left for work at 7 am, so she would have to get us all up for 6 am, we'd all drive my father to work, drive back home, then drive back into town for the appointment. Then we'd drive back home, then drive back un to get my father at the end of the work day, and drive back home AGAIN. That's a lot of driving and inconvenience.


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

Again, it's person specific. it's like doing your own house repairs, maintenance etc - generally it can be a massive costs savings but it's not realistic for those that don't have the time nor expertise to do it.


----------



## 319905 (Mar 7, 2016)

Fwiw ... then there's the personal safety of having a vehicle ... sure, my buddy could have cabbed it, but living fairly close to our local pool hall, he walks back and forth. Well, two young idiots in hoodies sucker-punched him one evening ... he's 65, lucky not to be badly hurt as in don't fall down or they'll kick the crap out of you. So, there is a personal safety side to having your own ride. Reminds me, another buddy was swarmed a few years ago taking the bus ... he too is lucky he wasn't badly hurt ... just a few broken ribs.


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

Jesus, where the hell do you live?


----------



## 319905 (Mar 7, 2016)

none said:


> Jesus, where the hell do you live?


Dunno about Jesus, and where the hell :hopelessness: he lives, but I'm in Ottawa ...


----------



## smihaila (Apr 6, 2009)

none said:


> Article from the Globe and Mail about the massive savings you can have by not owning a car:
> 
> http://www.theglobeandmail.com/glob...housands-and-live-longer-too/article29809465/
> 
> The comment section (as usual) is hilarious. I think it's a bit unfortunately is that many people would never even consider it.


The situation is a bit hypocritical IMHO. With very few exceptions - of pedestrian-friendly cities i.e. Montreal, Vancouver etc, the whole transportation infrastructure seems to be highly car-centric here in North-America. Montreal was excellent, but in the United States of ... Ontario - even in towns and hamlets that like to pat themselves on the back saying that they are "smart cities" (example: Waterloo, ON - a well-oiled propaganda machine manages that city) - it was painful for me and my family to continue living a pedestrian life. I had to sacrifice a lot - being very hard to move from point A to point B. GRT was a pain and couldn't even attend the church on the Sundays. Oh, and did I mention the lack of sidewalks on one side of the road (in an attempt to be cheap and "economical" the cities skimping on those).

It's all a damn hypocrisy - the greedy banksters asking the governments to "De-regulate" (after lots was spent on buses, trains etc), just to promote the use of the damn personal car (to make more money). And it's no wonder that people complain about cost of bus transportation / tickets going up in the sky, in an unsustainable way.


----------



## hboy43 (May 10, 2009)

rikk2 said:


> Fwiw ... then there's the personal safety of having a vehicle ...


I almost fell out of my chair when I read the above. The most risky thing the average person does in a day is get into a car. The only reason it isn't the most risky thing I do is because I run a chainsaw.

Hboy43


----------



## Robillard (Apr 11, 2009)

Even though I'm technically paid a "transportation allowance" as part of my salary, I choose not to own or rent a car. I get by much more cheaply by using Uber to get around. I have also challenged myself to see how long into the Arabian summer I can I keep riding my bicycle before the heat and humidity make it too unbearable. I signed up for the office gym just to use the showers. I figure if I ride my bicycle to or from work at least 15 times in a month, the gym membership will pay for itself in Uber rides avoided.

When I used to live in Vancouver, I never owned a car. I could get everywhere I needed to go by walking, riding a bicycle or taking public transit. From my perspective, the cost of extra time to get places was less than the cost of a car and its depreciation. Also, I had no parking space. By not owning or renting a car, I didn't have to put up with finding a place to keep/park it at home or at work, and I didn't need to wash it or fill it up at the gas station. Not owning a car probably kept me from packing on some pounds. On the downside, my driving skills probably deteriorated.


----------



## 319905 (Mar 7, 2016)

hboy43 said:


> I almost fell out of my chair when I read the above. The most risky thing the average person does in a day is get into a car. The only reason it isn't the most risky thing I do is because I run a chainsaw. Hboy43


Well, I guess if you're not the average 65 year old person and you're walking down a city street at 1:30 - 2:00 am carrying a chainsaw, you'll probably be ok. I'd be careful reading CMF though, almost fell out of your chair ... ouch. Just saying, for us old guys who want to be out and about on the streets at night, walking, or busing, is not the better option. Enjoy the day


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

I admit it, we are three car family and we do find its worth it. If I could it would be a 2.5 car family. 

I drive to work everyday. It saves me about 25 minutes than the bus, and I can also use the time to make my phone calls. That saves me about 1.5 hours every day. I also use my car during work hours for my work, and occasionally it allows me to quickly run to my kids events during the day and be back quickly. That extra time I save gives me more time with my kids, and well worth it. I even take the time to call them on my commute home to pre catch up. The evenings are busy two with often both kids in two different locations. 

My spouse drives in the day to and does his errands, he does a lot during the day too with his car. He could probably do with .5 of a vehicle but he won't give it up.

Our third car is for the nanny. She picks up our kids from school, and takes them to their immediate after school activities and play dates. in the day she also runs errands for me. 

We could do with two cars, but definitely not one.


----------



## NorthKC (Apr 1, 2013)

Could I get by without a car in the city? Sure, but running errands without a vehicle would take a good portion of my day.

1. It takes me 5-7min to drive to work, 45-50min to walk to work, and 1hr 5min to take bus to work (and that's if I want to get there on time).
2. The transit system here is very weird. Certain buses will not stop at bus stops to pick you up as it is an express bus going downtown but acts as the collector on the way back up. If I want to catch said bus, I need to catch it at the terminal which would add another 10min of walking...in the opposite direction of where I have to go. It's actually faster to walk to where I need to go compared to catching the bus for this reason.
3. The nearest grocery store is a 1 hr walk and a 2hr bus ride, one way.
4. I've biked to work a few times but it's not always feasible as I sometimes have to go out to a client to do some fieldwork. Somehow, I don't think showing up sweaty at a client with my computer, monitor, scanner, etc. would look very professional. Oh, and for most of my clients, there's no transit to where I have to go.
5. I often have events (such as sports) to go to on the other side of the city after work, often within 30min which is just not possible if I had no car. So, I'd be missing out on a lot of things.

As you can see, a car is pretty much a necessity for my job and for my social life, at least in the city where I'm living now. However, I do take advantage of any gorgeous day to leave my car at home and when I don't need it to go somewhere fast. In my old city, the transit system was excellent and ran from 6am-11pm 6 days a week and almost all of the buses ran every half hour from the terminal. For the first two years of working there, I didn't need a car as I could get anywhere in the city within 30min. 

In the future, if I'm still living in the city where I am now, I will always have a car simply due to my location. However, if I'm living somewhere else where there is an excellent transit system, I'd gladly give up my car.


----------



## mcoursd2006 (May 22, 2012)

We own two cars as a family of five, but I could see how we could become a one-car family fairly easily. I work 20 km away from home, but I've been cycling to work for the past two years. Started out a few times a week, and with the intention of stopping when the cold/snow came, but the whole thing evolved and I just kept going. There are a few weather-related conditions that might stop me from riding--big snow storm, ice, extreme wind, but that might be a few days a week, and during days like that my stay-at-home wife would just stay home while I take the car. So far this year the percentage of days I've driven is 16%.

Going from two cars to one would save some money on insurance, but not much else. And at this point since both cars are paid for selling either doesn't get us much back. Plus, our oldest son will be learning to drive in two years. So for the time being we're holding on to both.


----------

