CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!

"Poor car-owning households spend more than a quarter of income on motoring"

(44 posts)

No tags yet.


  1. Arellcat
    Moderator

    I managed for about 12 years in Edinburgh without a car and since we got one I've found it's an excellent way to haemorrhage money

    I've often thought that owning a car is the best reason for not owning one ever again. I generally figured on about £500 per year to cover insurance and VED. Servicing was generally something you did when the MOT tester came out sucking his* teeth, and was often in the £250 ballpark for an older vehicle that needed tyres or brakes or a fan belt or welding or some other black hole of money. With a motorbike the money I saved on VED basically went towards servicing each year instead, resulting in a happier MOT man*.

    * In my experience, they're all men, they're invariably grumpy, and they're all a little bit scary.

    Since fuel is proportional to use, and with car and then bike averaging 35mpg between them, I realised that it was more fun to spend that money on bicycles and accessories, and keep my brain working at the processing speed it preferred. In amongst cycling most weeks of the year I rarely exceeded 2000 miles a year in any vehicle—say 60 gallons, or somewhat over 250 litres. That's £350 a year or so on fuel at today's prices, so it becomes quite easy to be spending the best part of £1000 a year maintaining and driving a vehicle, and that's not even for a regime of driving most days. I once had a colleague who commuted about 100 miles a day, five days a week, but car shared; the cost of fuel on even 8000 miles a year would've been horrendous; imagine the cost without car sharing.

    Posted 12 years ago #
  2. neddie
    Member

    'Poor' people are often 'poor' because of bad spending choices as opposed to not earning enough.

    Posted 12 years ago #
  3. "'Poor' people are often 'poor' because of bad spending choices as opposed to not earning enough."

    'Often' might be stretching it. Sometimes certainly. But having grown up on a council estate poor people are 'often' poor because, well, they don't have enough money, combined with essentials being too expensive (viz. gas costs continually rising).

    Reminds me of a news report recently on poverty in the UK and they interviewed an air-headed student in St Andrews (I think) who declared, "Not being rude, but, like, couldn't poor people just work a bit harder?"

    Posted 12 years ago #
  4. Smudge
    Member

    @WC nope not giving up cycling, no chance! Just selecting the most appropriate vehicle for me for the individual task(s) :-)

    For those with enquiring minds re fuel consumption, fuelly.com can be a useful tool/browse.

    Posted 12 years ago #
  5. PS
    Member

    If you live in a city, you don't need a car

    Warning: no mention of cycling in the article.

    Posted 12 years ago #
  6. Darkerside
    Member

    Think I ditched my car spending spreadsheet, but from memory in a year and a half I did just over 20,000 miles on a £650 Volvo 940 estate. It did a religious 31mpg and I sold it on for £150. Insurance over two years was about £1400 (young and male...), servicing £600 (you can fix most things with a hammer) and tax £240. Fuel about £4.5k.

    Working out at a total of a bit over £7k, or 35p per mile. Seems reasonable for costs at the cheap end of the scale (albeit with slightly daft mileage).

    Definitely prefer having the bike(s...)

    Posted 12 years ago #
  7. fimm
    Member

    Lots of mentions of cycling in the comments, though!

    Posted 12 years ago #
  8. Instography
    Member

    When making the spending choices that most people make without much thought can be considered 'bad' and contributory to your further impoverishment, you're already poor.

    Posted 12 years ago #
  9. Dave
    Member

    Going a bit OT, but I quite enjoy (if don't necessarily agree with) Simple Living in Suffolk who occasionally picks up on stuff like this (see link for rant).

    Posted 12 years ago #
  10. Instography
    Member

    Surely that's what the Daily Mail is for - to pick up on a gross caricature and use it to justify a policy that will affect far more ordinary people? The common realities, as opposed to Ray, your stunt double for Aunt Sally, have already been well rehearsed in less frothing style by Shelter, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation and even by DWP's own analysis. The simple fact is that the levels of benefits affected by the cap come about by a combination of low wages (which lead to tax credits) and high rents, particularly private rents in London and the south east (which lead to housing benefit). It has almost nothing to do with people like Ray.

    It's a paradox of coalition policy that they are trying to cut benefits that directly help not the recipients in particular but employers and landlords. But then maybe that's worth it for the greater benefit of encouraging people to see the roots of the problem in poor people, whose benefits need to be capped, rather than bankers, whose bonuses somehow don't need to be capped.

    Posted 12 years ago #
  11. Dave
    Member

    Yes - but while we're all subjected to the Daily Mail (whenever they touch on cycling it seems to be posted across all the internet by cyclists, perversely increasing their ad revenue) it's not always the case that you get exposed to the other side. I can't remember reading many Guardian rants in the Daily Mail style (not that I read the Guardian either. Probably there is an equivalent somewhere).

    When it comes to anything as tricky as welfare I find it best to read a wide breadth of obsessive rants, allowing me to find the one that is least jarring to my pre-held beliefs.

    Posted 12 years ago #
  12. bdellar
    Member

    It's worth remembering that cycling is not easy to get into if you're starting from scratch. If you're not fit, you can't cycle fast. You won't have the guts to take the lane, and if you do, cars will get annoyed because you're too slow because of your fitness. It's dangerous and scary.

    Which is why we need safe cycle paths. Then switching from car use is easy.

    Posted 12 years ago #
  13. Instography
    Member

    If you follow Owen Jones on twitter (@OwenJones84) you'll get all the Guardian-style socio-political ranting you need.

    Posted 12 years ago #
  14. lionfish
    Member

    what bdellar said!

    Posted 12 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin