Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So in a city where the median home price is pushing a million dollars whose mass transit system is supposed to be offsetting this, you have 4 million people saying "man it sure is expensive here, I think I'll buy this car and pay to park it in my 75,000 ppsm neighborhood just in case I need it for something, of course, this is NYC where you absolutely don't need a car but hey you never know."
Makes sense.
The "large family" argument can be applied to any metro even the ones with basic bus systems only. If you need a car for family in NYC then its not really different from any other place.
Sad to see this narrative fall apart so fast.
I mean, most NYer's do not NEED a car, but unless you're in Manhattan it can be helpful to have one. Subway service in the outer boroughs is spotty, particularly once you get away from western Brooklyn or Queens (areas adjacent to Manhattan.) In Manhattan I think of car ownership as an actual hindrance, although there are plenty of well off residents who have one.
Although I don't live in the city of NY but immediately across the Hudson from it, we choose to have a car. I use it maybe once every two weeks or so. We use it to take city breaks out to the mountains/shore, visit relatives, occasionally (gasp!) to a suburban shopping mall. My condo came with a garage spot, so we're lucky in that way I guess. I don't find it to be a financial burden as we have no car loan and parking is free. I fill my gas tank every two months or so.
All of my day-to-day errands are done via walking: grocery store, dry cleaners, restaurants, doctors/dentists, etc. So I do think that this differentiates it from many other cities. Compared to my time in Dallas (living downtown), I still needed a car for most day-to-day activities.
It's also a lot easier to own a car in LA so that could play a part in transit stats. Follow me on this. If you lived in central LA and had a 16 mile round trip daily commute, you could likely do that very easily with public transportation. Maybe even easier than many (not necessarily most) NYC commutes for the same distance. But it still might be more convenient to do that LA commute by car, especially if you have a free place to park on at least one end. But in NYC that car commute is likely going to be much tougher than it is in LA.
Well yeah, the easier you make it to drive the more people will. LA's job centers are more decentralized too which makes commuting by transit difficult.
I mean, most NYer's do not NEED a car, but unless you're in Manhattan it can be helpful to have one. Subway service in the outer boroughs is spotty, particularly once you get away from western Brooklyn or Queens (areas adjacent to Manhattan.) In Manhattan I think of car ownership as an actual hindrance, although there are plenty of well off residents who have one.
Although I don't live in the city of NY but immediately across the Hudson from it, we choose to have a car. I use it maybe once every two weeks or so. We use it to take city breaks out to the mountains/shore, visit relatives, occasionally (gasp!) to a suburban shopping mall. My condo came with a garage spot, so we're lucky in that way I guess. I don't find it to be a financial burden as we have no car loan and parking is free. I fill my gas tank every two months or so.
All of my day-to-day errands are done via walking: grocery store, dry cleaners, restaurants, doctors/dentists, etc. So I do think that this differentiates it from many other cities. Compared to my time in Dallas (living downtown), I still needed a car for most day-to-day activities.
This is me also. I live in Long Island City, and by no means need a car to live. I live 2 blocks from one subway line, and a 10-15 minute walk of 5 others. 90% of my day-to-day travel is done by walking or the train, mostly into Manhattan. I chose to keep my car because it doesn't cost much on a monthly basis (paid off), and it does make some things like CostCo trips, out-of-city travel, and getting around in crappy weather easier. Street parking is generally not an issue most of the time, and it sits parked there for the vast majority of the week.
It's very easy to live without a car in New York, and plenty of people who would have no problem affording a car do it.
I'd go with LA because of the SoCal weather. Most New Yorkers I've met here in NC, I didn't like due to their 'I'm better because I'm from NYC' attitude. Plus it's an ugly city.
I mean, most NYer's do not NEED a car, but unless you're in Manhattan it can be helpful to have one. Subway service in the outer boroughs is spotty, particularly once you get away from western Brooklyn or Queens (areas adjacent to Manhattan.)
You could say this about dozens of other metros in the country, including places like Fresno and Bakersfield.
When pretty much any other place has bad traffic and congestion, its because infrastructure in America is terrible, the place is a big suburb, etc.
When NYC metro has WORSE congestion and LONGER average commute times than these places its somehow exempt from those characterizations because "NYC don't need car."
It looks like the don't need a car meme is more of a projected image than a reality.
I think it's also pertinent to mention that 45% of NY is a larger physical population that 88% of LA. It's relevant and adds context to "not needing a car"...
OK, Tokyo has more households that have cars than Phoenix in absolute numbers as well, that doesn't mean you need a car in Tokyo compared to Phoenix...
There is a HUGE difference between car ownership rates between NYC and LA. Most people who move into NYC, move into areas that you do not need a car.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TacoSoup
You beat me to it. This was my first thought when everyone kept bringing up transportation costs. As I recall, my friends that moved to NYC after college that stayed for an extended period all ended up getting cars within a couple of years (maybe a couple didn’t?). I now know a slew of people there through my wife, in the city proper and suburbs, and pretty much all of them own cars as well. It’s not just because they’re old and have families, although kids are one great reason to own one, but many are childless and around her age (31).
With that said, those who brought up the expense of a car in LA vs the Metrocard in NYC are assuming these commuter don’t own cars in NYC, and as you pointed out a great many do. Not only that, the $120 a month that’s getting thrown around is a gross understatement if they’re taking the train first to Grand Central/Penn stations before getting on the subway. You can add an extra $300+ a month there (and headache).
Well, your friends do not actually live in New York City, so their suburban experience is different compared to someone who lives in NYC. NYC is a one fare zone, so all you need is a Metrocard to get around and nothing else. If your friends need to pay for other rail options such as LIRR, Metro North, NJT, PATH, etc. they do not live in NYC and their day-to-day experience will be different, compared to someone who is moving in/lives in NYC.
FYI, I live and Brooklyn and do not own a car. Yes, I can easily afford it.
Last edited by Gantz; 10-30-2019 at 02:04 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
