
Why aren't younger Americans driving anymore? - mooreds
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/04/22/why-arent-younger-americans-driving-anymore/
======
hkmurakami
_> –It’s harder to get a license. From 1996 to 2006, every state enacted
graduated driving laws that make it more cumbersome for young people to get
licenses. “Young people must now take more behind-the-wheel training (which is
more expensive), fulfill additional requirements for permits, and once they
are allowed to drive, they are often restricted to driving in the daytime
without passengers.” The number of younger Americans without a driver’s
license has risen from 21 percent to 26 percent since 2001._

This is a great development, considering the recklessness of many young
drivers and their relatively high accident rates.

I always thought that the roads would be much safer if our legal drinking age
and legal driving ages were switched, so that we'd have years of experience
dealing with the effects of alcohol before we hit the roads, which would
hopefully decrease incidents of driving under the influence of alcohol.

~~~
nitrogen
In response to dead sibling comment by parasitius:

I agree with your sentiment but not your tone. There is a lot of anti-
suburban, anti-car elitism on HN that is apparently ignorant of the very real
need for personal transportation for the vast majority of people, even in many
major cities. I would support increased driver training requirements
(especially specific training and experience with loss of control on various
surfaces), but not without a way of ensuring that the transportation and
employment needs of _everyone_ , including youth, are still met.

Also, you're probably aware, but your account has been dead for a long time,
apparently due to excessively harsh and/or personal negative comments.

    
    
      ------
    

In response to the general subject of driving, it is my opinion that arbitrary
point-to-point human mobility is an essential feature of an ideal society. The
inability to move from place to place for employment, vacation, or recreation
is, again in my opinion, detrimental to society's mutual respect and
wellbeing, and leads to economic and cultural segregation.

~~~
nitrogen
_parasitius 18 minutes ago | link [dead]

I'm not sure what it means for my account to be dead, it seems I can comment
as normal? is there any way to make it undead, without making a whole new
account? I'd be willing to change my tone, I'm trying to become more positive
this year ^_^_

It means that your comments are only visible to people who turn on "showdead"
in their profile settings, and it's impossible to respond to you directly.

In theory you can try to contact one of the YC or HN site admins, or PG
himself, if you want your account restored. I don't know what's involved or
what sort of argument you should make. It might be easier to begin your new
tone and new resolve with a new account.

~~~
Zak
Glancing through his comment history, I didn't see a single thing that seemed
ban-worthy. It's more a slew of low-quality comments. I have the feeling it
was automatic based on number of comments and average score.

~~~
markdown
The fact that PG implemented hellbanning really lowers my opinion of him. It's
just so incredibly awful... I know of few individuals who would stoop so low
in the treatment of their peers.

It's just like in those all-american teen high-school shows where the bully
sticks an insulting label on someone and they go about their day not knowing
that there is something nasty stuck to the back of their shirts... meanwhile
everyone else quietly sniggers until some kind soul lets them know what's up.

~~~
youngerdryas
Well pg has my sympathies. The practical realities of keeping a site open to
all, which is essential, and reasonably easily managed is what you are
underestimating. I say this as someone whose over 10k account was hell banned.

~~~
markdown
Would the result have been different and would you have reacted differently if
it was a normal ban (ie. you were made known when attempting to log in that
you had been banned)?

~~~
youngerdryas
I figured it out fairly quickly but apparently some people do not, so it may
be of marginal value but I don't begrudge pg for trying it. If on the other
hand if he made it hard to create a new user account that would be very bad
for HN.

------
CurtMonash
From ages 16 through 36, I lived in Cambridge, MA and then Manhattan, and
didn't own a car. (I of course rented cars on business trips, and borrowed my
parents' when I visited them.)

What I missed most in not having wheels was convenience in shopping and so on.
Groceries aside, that's now largely obviated by e-commerce. And grocery
shopping alone is hardly a reason to have a car ...

Now easier rentals -- Zipcar! -- raise a whole other reason not to own one's
own car.

Further, there was an era when cars provided teenagers with private space, a
bit of a chance for sexual exploration, and so on. When both their parents
have jobs, however, that's less needed. That's reason #1 much of the "romance"
of cars is gone.

Reason #2 is that electronic items have supplanted cars as major aspirations.
Phones, computers, etc. are gateways to the world the way automobiles used to
be.

Reason #3 (small but still worth mentioning) that cars lost their romance is
their boring, aerodynamically-wise designs. Reason #4, related, is the
environmentalist pushback against cars.

~~~
userulluipeste
There is something that solutions like public transportation, taxis, or
Zipcar-like car-sharing lack - hygiene. Because those aren't personal, more
often than not, the hygiene is not in your control.

~~~
CurtMonash
So you step from your hygienically awesome home into your hygienically awesome
car, drive it, and get out. (I presume that this is the goal of having and
driving a car.)

How's the hygiene at your destination?

------
terhechte
I always think of driving a car as managing a steam engine machine during the
industrial revolution. There're levers, and pedals and cogwheels, and
everything needs to be pulled and turned in certain directions. Short, I hate
it and it is bad for the environment. Also, cars are expensive, need a lot of
care, consume space, and going anywhere always ends up searching frantically
for parking space. I rather outsource the whole transportation business to
public transport and then I can also code or read while I'm moving and not
have to administer this weird steam-engine-like machinery.

~~~
omegaham
Unfortunately, where I live, (smallish city in southwestern Arizona) a car is
a requirement. Grocery store? Nine miles. Hardware store? Four more miles.

Oh, and it's 120 degrees outside in the summer.

That being said, parking is abundant, gas is relatively cheap, and traffic is
very nice. So it's not too bad. I would never want to have a car in the city,
though.

~~~
terhechte
Yeah, I can see your point. My mom lives in a pretty rural area, too, and I
bought her a car. In the city, it's different, and I was kinda talking about
living in the city. I moved to a big city as fast as I could. (Not just the
car business, but I also like good theaters, good social events, easy
connection to airports, etc)

------
thrownaway2424
Because it's a miserable experience, and a waste of time, and living in an
actual city is a good way to rebel against your parents' pathological love of
exurbs.

~~~
cafard
Yes, a miserable experience, often a waste of time (though I see a lot of
traffic on HN about computer games...). I don't think that we boomers had a
pathological love of the exurbs as such. But in many cases we moved there for
perceived safety and for better public schools. In some cases I suppose
because custody of the car keys gave us some more years of control.

~~~
RyanMcGreal
Tragically, children are more likely to be killed in car accidents in American
suburbs than by violence in American inner cities.

~~~
cafard
The definition or at least perception of safety does not depend solely on the
frequency of sudden death. I have lived in, around (two blocks to about 5
miles), or in Washington, DC for third of a century, and do not regret it.
However, I have been held up at gunpoint, our car has been stolen, I know
neighbors and friends who have been burglarized more than once. Some people
would look at that and decide that the exurbs are just more restful.

Nor does city residence make you immune to death by auto. You could be run
over by a Metrobus (happened to two women on Pennsylvania Avenue a couple of
years ago), or be in a nice hot car that you decide to drive at 90 mph across
Key Bridge (young guy this spring).

Let me add that I can go a week without getting into a car, though if my wife
didn't do the grocery shopping (her commute more or less demands one--20
minutes with, 50+ without), things would be different. I just happen to think
that the young, urban (and commonly single) crowd should not imagine that they
are certainly always going to be living in Hoboken or the Mission and taking
public or employer-provided transportation, or that those who have made other
choices are somehow inferior.

------
CrazedGeek
I'm 19 and attending university. The local bus system has a bus that goes from
literally in front of my apartment to the heart of campus, and it's free for
students. I buy things from Amazon or a supermarket that's only about a mile
away. Almost all of my entertainment is digital in some fashion (usually
downloaded TV shows or movies). And I don't live in a huge city -- its
population is about 100k. I have a car that I use maybe once a week at best. I
just don't see the point in driving all that much.

~~~
badkangaroo
sounds great. I live in san francisco, every time there's a ballgame (today)
at AT&T park I have to contend on my bike with hundreds of suburban drivers
who think bikes are supposed to be on the sidewalk. Aside from that, I drive
my car about once every other month.

~~~
NuZZ
Do you guys have visually obvious bike lanes over there?

~~~
eruditely
That question is not applicable to SF. I don't know how else to explain.

~~~
NuZZ
A simple "No, SF has no bike lanes" would suffice, unless the idea of a bike
line is foreign to you.

------
pshin45
> _Technology is making it easier to go car-free_

This makes me wonder what the future of driving and personal transportation
will look like.

Regarding the sharing economy, pg recently Tweeted "Will ownership turn out to
be largely a hack people resorted to before they had the infrastructure to
manage sharing properly?"

I'm originally from New Jersey and I'm currently living in Seoul, Korea. Back
home in NJ, you literally couldn't get anywhere without a car. Besides getting
to NYC, public transportation (buses) was basically useless or nonexistant.
Now I live in Seoul which is super densely populated and has arguably the
best, most advanced public transportation infrastructure in the world. I've
never driven a car in Seoul simply because I've never had to - Subways and
buses are faster, cheaper, cognitively easier to use, and I never have to
worry about finding a parking spot.

There have been a lot of new startups entering or looking to enter this space
- Ridesharing services, parking spot finder apps, Google driverless car, etc.
- But which will become the dominant form of transportation in the next 5~10
years and why? I'm fascinated to see what people "in the know" and involved in
this space think.

~~~
prostoalex
For historians of the future the past 100 years will be this weird time period
where we stopped riding horses for transportation, but haven't yet invented
autonomous self-driving vehicles.

~~~
pshin45
Yeah there are so many of those "we're at a weird time period where..." that
we're in the midst of right now.

I think thankfully computer graphics has gotten good enough in our lifetime
that CGI animation in movies & TV will soon become perfectly indistinguishable
from real life. No more uncanny valley.

I think steroids will become a non-issue in sports in the near future, where
the line between what's "natural" enhancement and what's "artificial"
enhancement becomes impossible to enforce or legislate.

Plastic surgery has gotten better over the years but it's still pretty easy to
identify who's gotten it and who hasn't. I shudder to imagine a world where
anyone can become as beautiful as they want without others realizing that
they've had work done. The societal implications are beyond what my brain can
handle.

~~~
nitrogen
_Plastic surgery has gotten better over the years but it's still pretty easy
to identify who's gotten it and who hasn't. I shudder to imagine a world where
anyone can become as beautiful as they want without others realizing that
they've had work done. The societal implications are beyond what my brain can
handle._

Apart from false genetic signaling, I'm curious: What do you think will be the
most significant effect of widespread plastic surgery?

~~~
pshin45
I live in Seoul right now, which probably has the highest per capita rate of
plastic surgery (and plastic surgery advertisements) in the world, so I'm
already getting a taste/preview of the effects.

There's something to be said for "democratizing" looks and I have nothing
against people (adults) who choose to get plastic surgery as a way of leveling
the playing field in jobs, dating, etc.

But the way it's playing out in Korea is that young girls grow up not liking
the way they look, and many parents actually encourage their kids to get
surgery as soon as they're old enough, which morally rubs me the wrong way.
Also, despite how common it is in Korea it's still not that cheap, so the
people who get a lot of surgery tend to be wealthier which ironically causes
more inequality and look-ism.

I think "not having something" is a big part of what pushes the human race
forward. For example, if hacking was somehow made super easy in the future,
then anyone could do it and the intrinsic reward of making something great
would be greatly reduced. If everyone were rich, then no one would be
motivated to work. If everyone could eat delicious food all the time then it
would become less special. If anyone could become athletic enough to play in
the NFL or NBA, both leagues would become less interesting and less special.

I've always believed that, in general, being extremely good-looking from an
early age is more of a curse than a blessing and causes people to become
relatively self-satisfied and complacent, and less skilled in the long run. On
the other hand, people who are less good-looking who accept this fact early on
will bust their ass to get better in other respects, and will ultimately
contribute more to our society.

~~~
theorique
[joke]

 _I've always believed that, in general, being extremely good-looking from an
early age is more of a curse than a blessing_

And I thought of this: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHHEcmZtJvY>

------
bane
A few anecdotes:

1) A few weeks ago, a 15 year old girl in my neighborhood, learning to drive
on a slow side road _with her parent in the car_ , mistook the gas for the
break while practicing backing up and ran over three young children putting
them in critical condition.

2) A relative of mine was given a new big "safe" vehicle for her 16th
birthday. The photos from the event were full of incredible excited smiles.

Three months later, while leaving her part-time "earn your own gas money" job,
she met a "cute guy" friend of hers from school who wanted to bum a ride.
Foolishly she agreed, on the way to her vehicle, two of her "cute guy"'s
friends suddenly showed up asking if they too could bum a ride.

Peer pressure and hormones fully kicked in, they all loaded into the vehicle
and started on their way.

On a clear evening, doing about 40 on a paved road with no other traffic, she
veered off the road surface, over-corrected getting back on, cut sideways
across the road into a field and hit a tree straight on.

She was killed instantly, one of the boys is paralyzed from the neck down and
the other two spent a bit of time in critical condition in the hospital.

3) After that happened I thought back to when I was a 16 year old, with a used
beater car and what kind of stupid stupid driving I did back then. It was a
miracle I survived almost any time I got behind the wheel.

This was even considering that, growing up in a rural area, my parents taught
me to drive on the back roads when I was about 11 (in case of an emergency).
They had me practice regular driving up until I got my actual license. Even
after almost 5 years of sporadic driving lessons, including a minor fender
bender in my parent's driveway. Despite passing the driving exam on my first
shot with no practice and no studying, I still drove like a damn fool. (and in
my state at the time we had to have something like 20 hours of professionally
supervised behind the wheel instruction and 20 hours of classroom before being
allowed to take the test).

It wasn't until I hit about 20 that I started to drive like a person concerned
at all with preserving my lifespan.

Younger American's _shouldn't_ drive. We should get a learners at 18, be
required to have a fully licensed person over 25 (or better yet a parental
unit) in the car with us until 19, then no passengers at all till we get a
real license at 21. It's not just familiarity with alcohol or any of that,
young people are just simply not yet fully wired to deal with complex social
pressures, impulse control or any of the other kinds of "maturity issues"
needed to operate a 2 ton block of iron that can be coaxed to 100mph in under
30 seconds.

~~~
aceofspades19
Yeah that works until you live in an area without any useful public transit. I
live in BC and in my town you can't go anywhere without a car, and I have to
drive 40km to the next town for some of my university classes and there is NO
bus route at all to get to those classes. I'm only 21, how would you propose I
get to class if I didn't have my drivers license? The problem in North America
is that a lot of places do not have public transportation so you have to drive
and not everyone's parents can drive them _everywhere_ _all the time_.

Aside from that, all of your anecdotes could happen to anyone at any age if
they don't have any experience driving, hell your first anecdote could have
happened to a 40 year old if they didn't know how to drive. I disagree that
age makes that much of a difference in driving, inexperience is the problem
and you can't avoid that.

~~~
Derbasti
Please note that just about all of Europe requires you to be 18 ro get a
drivers license. And no, the US is not different. In many places, public
transportation in rural areas is just as bad as in the US. You know what
people do if they can't drive 40 miles to college every day? They move.

~~~
aceofspades19
Not everyone can afford to move, for me its cheaper to stay where I am and
drive to school then to move. If I were to move I would have to work more and
go into debt more, school is not cheap in North America. Even if I did move, I
still would not be able to see friends and family living in the city I'm in
without a lot of hassle.

------
brudgers
The cellphone means that young people don't have to "drive to the mall" to see
if their friends are hanging out there. They can just call and find out where
the party is...or just talk on the phone instead of face to face...or just use
Facebook, etc.

Their communications are more efficient.

------
EliRivers
I did find a report once that made a very strong case that it's not young
drivers that are the problem - it's inexperienced drivers. The correlation
between youth and inexperience is of course very strong, hence the (alleged)
misconception. Sadly I didn't make a note of it and can't find it now.

That said, as a general rule of thumb, teenagers do suffer from various other
pressures that might make them bad drivers too (although I certainly have seen
people in their thirties goaded into driving badly by other people in the
car).

------
alttab
Younger people buy their stuff online. Anytime someone wants to buy something
they no longer have to drive to get it. I wouldn't be surprised if this
impacts younger cohorts more as well.

~~~
Siecje
That, and people can work from home. How does Facebook cut down on driving?

~~~
IvyMike
The "go to the mall to hangout" itch is at least partially scratched by online
interactions with friends.

------
rdouble
TL;DR because they are too broke for gas, and don't have a job to drive to,
anyway. And Facebook.

------
guruz
We have the same development in Germany.

Having a car is not that much of a status symbol anymore as it used to be,
being ecological is "in" and saves a ton of money if you have good public
transport or like biking.

I'm 29 and never owned a car.. I use Carsharing from time to time.. if I need
a car I check <https://www.car2go.com/de/berlin/> and [https://de.drive-
now.com/php/metropolis/city_berlin?cit=6099...](https://de.drive-
now.com/php/metropolis/city_berlin?cit=6099&language=de_DE&L=0)

~~~
brazzy
Same here: 36, never owned a car. I could easily afford it, but what puts me
off is not the price or ecological considerations but simply the hassle of
owning a hugely expensive machine that (from what I see with others) is
breaking down or getting damaged and needs to be repaired all the damn time.

Of course it's only possible because I live in a city with excellent public
transportation (Munich).

------
losvedir
Oh, boy. Looking through these comments I can easily see cars being the "gun
debate" of 50 years from now.

On the one hand, you have the public safety and efficiency argument of the
pro-Google self-driving cars group. On the other hand, you have the freedom-
loving, it's my right to operate this dangerous but fun piece of machinery
group.

Before this realization, I probably would have been anti-person-driven-car and
pro-let-them-have-their-guns, but that seems inconsistent now. Hm.

------
redwood
One major thing missing here: we like to be spontaneous and unpredictable.
That means that a car can often be a ball and chain.

Want to go get a drink with friends in the park and who knows where you'll end
up? Have fun getting back to your car tomorrow morning.

~~~
kibwen
I agree with you in principle, but when I got my first car it was nothing but
an explosive enabler of my spontaneity. One of my fondest college memories is
suddenly deciding, at 3:00 PM on New Year's Eve, to drive 350 miles to my
girlfriend's house so that we could kiss at the stroke of midnight.

Of all the things that I'd consider a ball and chain, my car is hardly among
them.

~~~
sukuriant
Ditto. In fact, for spontaneous events, I am often THE CAR for my friends!
How's that for irony. Especially for the night-owl crowd and exploring person,
a car provides an enabler for spontenaity.

Other things made easier with a car:

    
    
        * getting to a mountain to hike
        * getting to the mountain for extreme sports
        * long distance travel on a whim
        * going /anywhere/ on a whim that's further than a walk away, especially when 
          time tables are involved (see: movies)
        * getting to a location where your fun activity is located.
          Example: owning a horse and getting to their stable.

------
codva
//It’s harder to get a license. From 1996 to 2006//

As the parent of two teenagers, it is my opinion that at least in VA, it is
still way too easy to get a license.

Although neither of mine had that desire to get a license as soon as possible,
like we did as kids. My son didn't get his until weeks before his 18th
birthday. My 17 year old daughter still just has a permit and doesn't seem to
be in any hurry either, which is fine with me.

------
as_if
If you live in a (bigger) city you simply don't need a car...

I can drive to the store by bike or even walk there if I want.

I work in a different city than I live and travel to my workplace by train in
30min.

The only things I need a car for are travels to are tiny town which doesn't
have good public transports or when I need to transport something thats to
heavy to carry.

~~~
BruceIV
I'm in the same boat - I'm in a city of a half million, and I own a car, but
it's a decade old, and I only use it 1) evenings and weekends when the bus
doesn't run as often, 2) when I want to move heavy and/or large items, or 3)
when I travel out of town. Between those I only put about 10-15,000 km on my
car in a year, and at least a third of that is cross-country road trips to
visit my family.

------
pogden
All of the reasons mentioned in the article play into this, but they missed a
big one: young Americans tend to prefer access over ownership, and there just
aren't any good ways to use a car. Zipcar is expensive, especially if you stay
at your destination for any period of time.

------
signalsignal
Two main reasons:

1) Youth income is low given low employment and a stagnant economy which some
would call a recession.

2) High gas prices means less cars and more public transit.

------
joezydeco
Does anyone have a corresponding graph of passenger air-miles flown for the
same period? I'm curious about the impact of lower-cost airlines and if "road-
trip" vacations have been substituted by airline trips.

------
to3m
One take on the phenomenon:
[http://statesofmotion.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/wasted-
youth.ht...](http://statesofmotion.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/wasted-youth.html)
\- the author is clearly a car nut, though! Personally i suspect the car has
just had its time in the limelight, as a fashionable item at the bleeding edge
of culture and engineering, and is destined to turn into a commodity good,
like the fridge freezer. Assuming it's not there already. Just takes a new
generation for attitudes to change, as with everything...

~~~
frooxie
I've used the car/fridge comparison before, but when I think about it, I'm
actually excited to get a new fridge (my current one is too small), and I'm
not sure I'll ever want a car. I suppose cars have their uses, but they're
expensive, dangerous, boring and smell bad. And I'm nearly 40.

------
sk5t
If I had to guess...

    
    
      - spending money spent on smartphones and online goods
      - time spent online, playing computer or console games
      - less necessity to travel to have fun
      - disinterest in dealing with government/insurance regime
      - more interest in recreational drugs (booze and other)
      - the increasing intrusiveness, heavy fines, and penalties imposed by a police state with particular regard to vehicular travel

~~~
icpmacdo
200+ dollars a month for insurance is a big reason I think young people dont
have cars

------
badkangaroo
i wish less older people would drive as well, or at least be re-tested behind
the wheel after retirement.

~~~
aceofspades19
A thousand times this. It seems like no one cares about the elderly driving
but they are frothing at the mouth to punish young drivers and make
increasingly harder - and non-nonsensical restrictions on them. But a 90 year
old man that can't see and hear can drive as much as he wants without any
restrictions even though he is arguably higher risk than a young person who
can see, hear and react faster

~~~
Zak
Old people vote, and tend to have more effective lobbying groups than young
people do. Those under 18, in particular cannot vote, and those just over
often don't.

On a possibly related note: nobody I've voted for for Federal office has ever
won that office. I don't know enough about the relevant theory to say what
effect that might have on how hard a politician should go after my vote, but
it seems noteworthy.

------
blackjack48
The article neglected to mention that technology use really requires you to go
car-free. Many states are enacting hands-free laws and every indication
suggests that outright bans on cell phone use will follow.
(<http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/13/us/ntsb-cell-phone-ban>) Car manufacturers
have been trying to integrate voice commands and web services in car
dashboards, but those features can't compete with the full productivity
enabled by access to a mobile device. Public transit operators need to
understand that wifi access will be a deciding factor for many commuters
looking to go car-free.

~~~
john_w_t_b
I agree. Smartphones have made public transit much more enjoyable. You can
read HN or play games while waiting at the bus stop for example. I don't think
Wifi is a big deciding factor as mobile data plans are standard with most
smartphones and tethering is becoming more common also.

------
venomsnake
Got my driving licence the day I hit 18 (disclosure not living in the US) and
always had the means to support a car and drive (bonus of starting working as
a developer on age 15). Two years ago it expired and I didn't bother to renew
it. The car shines only outside the city - great public transport and cabs
give you more than enough flexibility.

I think that factors are coliding - the car is deromanticized, it is expensive
and it is a drain on the free time. I feel that rent-a-car is a industry in
grave need of disrupting.

There are a lot of owned vehicles that do less than 2K miles per year. A
Uber/Air bnb type startup that allows to rent a car from a person for the
weekend may have potential.

~~~
derwiki
www.getaround.com is at least one such site. Although my friend who has her
car posted said she gets only about one rental a month (in SF).

------
jonsterling
I'm 20 and I haven't the faintest idea how to drive; don't intend to learn in
the near future, though I may be forced to at some later day...

~~~
Tichy
I'm 40, got a drivers license when I was 23 and only used it 4 times. Now I
have forgotten how to drive because I haven't done it for years.

------
andyhmltn
Can anybody tell me if it's the same for young americans as it is for young
british drivers? I can't drive at the moment because the lessons cost £40 an
hour, the test costs ~£150 with car hire. Insurance can cost up to £4k a year
and petrol for my commute would cost me about £70 a week.

~~~
yardie
Former young American: Lessons? Have your parents drive you to the park or
just whip around the neighbourhood until you're confident to go on the main
streets. Driving schools are available (much fewer than in the UK or europe)
and the only ones that use them are people that have them as a court
requirement.

The test was $50 when I took it. The learners permit is written only. A few
weeks/months later you can drive back to the licensing office to take the
driving exam. You'll need a car, any car from a licensed driver will do.

Insurance will be about $180 or £1400. I paid less than that because I had
high grades (responsible student discount), no loan on the car, and I took the
state minimum with the sketchiest insurance company I could find.

I paid about $100/mo for petrol. Until 17 you can only go to school and work
during the week, weekends affords you more freedoms.

Working 20hrs/week part-time it's feasible to operate a car. While everyone
goes on about how public transport is great. I don't see anyone bringing SCUBA
gear on a bus, or moving apartments. Having a car meant freedom. Freedom to
date, go places, and do things.

~~~
TheCoelacanth
> Driving schools are available (much fewer than in the UK or europe) and the
> only ones that use them are people that have them as a court requirement.

Increasingly, taking some kind of formalized classes is becoming a requirement
to get a license. When I got my license in Virginia in 2005, anyone under 18
was required to take something like 5 hours of driving classes in lieu of the
normal driving exam. I believe the requirement has increased since then.

~~~
yardie
I looked at my state, Florida. They require a class on alcoholism and drunk
driving. This can be taken online and it's for all first time drivers. Teens
only have restricted operational hours, which exclude school and work.

------
beatpanda
1) Climate change is going to kill us all

2) A hot bike is more likely to get you laid than a hot car

CASE CLOSED. Now can we please stop talking about reduced driving like its a
problem?

------
downtoearth
For someone live in a country where traveling to work require an hour or two,
the "How" will be much more interesting than the "Why".

~~~
mooreds
I think the how is 'move closer to work', because unless both your home and
your work are next to public transit stops, an hour or two commute pretty much
requires a car.

------
NameNickHN
With all the gadgets like smartphones etc. to buy who has money to pay for a
car?

------
michaelochurch
Most U.S. driving miles are commuting, which _sucks_.

I took an 8,137-mile road trip when I was 22 and it was a blast. I'd love to
do something like that again. It cost me a few hundred bucks in gas, but it
was worth it.

However, racking up 20,000 miles in a year just to get from one point to
another, while a million people are (being forced into it by social
convention) trying to travel the exact same routes at the exact same time, is
just horrible. It's a total waste of life. I'd prefer to take public
transportation or to bike if at all possible. There is simply no good in a
high-traffic, stop-and-go, morning car commute.

Automotive traffic is a perfect example of failure-to-scale. Cars are
_amazing_ (I'm ignoring the environmental issues, which I imagine electric
cars will solve in ~20 years) when traffic is sparse, but become prisons in
the typical commute.

Also, in most cities, it's actually worth it to live in the city if your time
is worth more than about $30 per hour, and when you include career-building
effects that applies to most educated young people who have jobs, even if
their nominal wages are lower.

