Car ownership under Socialism

So what do you cats think?

Personally I see it as a dying trend even in capitalism and under socialism we'd be even less likely to waste resources on private cars.

I've been thinking a lot about this and I think that until public transport has significantly improved, private cars will continue to exist. I think they're destined to die out though. If cars like they exist now even survive, they'd probably be like public transport cars that anyone can use.

Yeah that's what I figure. I just can't imagine a socialist state actually continuing the huge waste of resources that is Car Culture. I also figure it would take at least that much to actually end car fetishism.

Car ownership will, and should, increase under Socialism: However, old, gas-guzzling cars should be phased out in favor of new, hybrid/electric cars. Personal vehicles provide a lot of utility, and low-consumption vehicles are pretty much sustainable.

Why do we need individual cars?

'Cause it's impossible to have public transportation covering transit from every point A to every point B?

Yeah but surely we could get public transport expanded to a point where you would need to walk no more than ten minutes to get anywhere. A little walking would aid the world.

But you'd inevitably need to get a whole lotta trains to get from point A to point B (if they're sufficiently obscure): Much faster to just drive there.

Cars are a huge waste now because they burn non-renewable resources: Once low consumption hybrids and full electrics are the norm, cars won't be that wasteful. When cars get high-tech enough, they could be built for sheer durability (like most Soviet stuff got built): Without planned obsolescence, cars could last pretty much forever.

They've got their uses, and people like'em. There's plenty of good jobs in making cars. I see no reason for getting rid of'em.

Yes, it should expand to the point that every family/household has one. But car usage should be to a large part replaced by public transport.

Quote:

Yeah but surely we could get public transport expanded to a point where you would need to walk no more than ten minutes to get anywhere.

Certainly. But sometimes you really need a car.

you can have rentable (or rather borrowable) cars, DUH.

car OWNERSHIP will certainly decrease, but if we had like 2 billion cars for everybody to share it wouldn't hurt either

I agree with Mabool: He's whacked the nail on the head.

Collective cars are an awesome idea: Cars are expensive, and most people can't afford switching cars when much more fuel-economic (or much safer, or much more whatever) vehicles come up. If the commune has cars and they lease you one for a nominal fee when you're on vacation, and they lease you a truck when you need to haul your stuff from Point A to Point B... It's just much more efficient.

You don't spend a shitload of cash in a car: If you plan to go somewhere, you just borrow one. When you're not using that car, it's not just lying down in a garage: Other people get it. Less cars can serve more people.


For day-to-day transportation needs (especially in urban areas) small motorcycles are just much more practical. Folks could have a small motorbike for daily usage (unlike cars, motorbikes are cheap) and use cars just when they're actually needed.

KlassWar wrote:

But you'd inevitably need to get a whole lotta trains to get from point A to point B (if they're sufficiently obscure): Much faster to just drive there.

Trains are way faster than cars. It's not like we're gonna build steam engines when even in capitalist times there are trains that exceed 200 miles per hour.

KlassWar wrote:

Cars are a huge waste now because they burn non-renewable resources: Once low consumption hybrids and full electrics are the norm, cars won't be that wasteful. When cars get high-tech enough, they could be built for sheer durability (like most Soviet stuff got built): Without planned obsolescence, cars could last pretty much forever.

It's a waste of resources if we can make public transport ubiquitous. Personal cars are irresponsible in such a climate.

KlassWar wrote:

They've got their uses, and people like'em. There's plenty of good jobs in making cars. I see no reason for getting rid of'em.

There are more jobs in producing mass transit vehicles, transit infrastructure, and drivers. Producing your forever cars would make car production shrink considerably.

Loz wrote:

Yes, it should expand to the point that every family/household has one. But car usage should be to a large part replaced by public transport.

Why should they have a car if public transport fits their needs?

Loz wrote:

Certainly. But sometimes you really need a car.

Only because of poor civic planning and commuting, neither of which have a place in socialism.

As to mabool's suggestion: San Francisco has a program like this already, but with bicycles. You buy a pass or something and then wherever you find these designated bikes (there are racks all over the city that you can leave bikes at and pick them up from) you can take one and ride it pretty much anywhere. Mass transit is the socialization of movement.

I doubt it'd disappear, but it'd propably lessen, compared to what it is now. Imagine how much energy could be saved, even by cutting US car use in half.

It will require significant upgrades of infrastructure though in many areas, but that will be part of the socialist reconstruction period in any event.

Quote:

Only because of poor civic planning and commuting, neither of which have a place in socialism.

I don't want to go to a picnic or fishing or whatever by bus.
If your child gets sick at 4 AM for example it's also inconvenient to take public transport to get it to the hospital.

It's inconvenient because public transport is not developed or progressive as it exists. You seemed to miss the part where I said needs. For frag's sake we'd probably even have dudes who just waited around to take peope to the hospital. It would be safer and there could even be special lanes designated. A small amount of planning makes personal cars look more and more reactionary.

Historically, socialist states a good public transport network but cars were used (and highly sought after) even in completely new purpose-built towns such as Pripyat.

soviet78 wrote:

By the way, how would someone in a mass transit society drive one of these? Perhaps through some showroom that rents cars for a short pleasure drive? Perhaps only in the virtual world?

Easy as pie: Consumer's cooperatives! Hobbyists' associations could perfectly buy and restore classic cars, then lease them to the members for pleasure drives.

In places with a large leisure and hobbyist car culture, these associations would exist. I'm certain a socialist America would have'em.

They've got advantages over individual collectorships: Working class individuals that love classic cars could drive lots of them through their lives with relatively little financial effort, instead of making sacrifices to buy one or two classic cars during your life. Even when it comes to classic cars, economies of scale come into play.