I'm amazed that Uber is considered an affordable commute device. Is that a SV phenomenon ?
Here's a super ball park monthly cost breakdown:
- Car payment: $250
- Parking: $200
- Insurance: $85 (~$500 every 6 months)
- Gas: $50
- Registration: $40 (~$500+ a year)
- Saving for maintenance: $50 (assuming $600 a year, which is probably low)
That's super super napkin math, but that's almost $700 a month for a car, which is basically the same as $30 each work day for a month. On top of that, you don't have to deal with the hassle of parking in a city, which has to be worth something.
My comment was basically in support of using Uber for regular transportation as it costs about the same as owning a car. At the end I even mentioned that Uber only might be easier because you don't have to worry about parking.
If I'm reading your comment correctly, you are also in favor of an Uber only lifestyle because it allows you more time with your kids, saves you time, and you don't have to deal with parking (which I also mentioned).
If that's the case, I think we're on the same side.
I live in the rust belt, which is probably the worst environment for vehicles. I buy new, keep cars for 6 years or so, and I spend very little on maintenance. New vehicles simply don't require much to keep running well.
Also, $40 a month for registration? Most places are $50-$100 a year. Is California that much more?
Just the cost of registering a car in CA buys you a lot of Uber rides. Then there's parking and maintenance (the HN demographic is taking their cars to the dealer, not down the street to the neighbor who fixes cars as a side gig) and the fact most people rich enough to afford to use Uber every day are comparing to the payments on a Tesla, not a one time purchase of an old Civic.
It's an upper-class phenomenon that's exacerbated by some SV and CA specific economic circumstances.
If both rides are around $15 on average, than you get an afvantage.
In which case owning the car is a no brainier because of the personal freedom and massive amount of inconvenience it affords. If you want to go on a road trip or eat taco bell at 1AM you can do that for just the price of gas (though you probably shouldn't do the latter because odds are if you want Taco bell at 1AM you're also stoned out of your mind and unfit to drive).
Even in Toronto, which has some of the highest daycare costs in Canada, it was only $1,500/month. Aftercare at the school is $800/month. I'm very fortunate to make a good living so I can afford such things but even I balk at the idea of taking a daily Uber to drop my kid off.
You should really read your post from the perspective of the working poor and think about what you're saying from a position of privilege.
And this is hacker news. I am reasonably sure that we aren't representing working poor here but mostly well paid and skilled professionals.
You're out of your mind if you think most people with children are paying $3k a month for child care. $3k a month is the entire income for a minimum wage couple with a child isn't it? I don't think your experience is typical.
At this point, you have no argument but probably are just pissed that families are co-habiting your preferred non-family only city space.
Get a life and do something with it.
The fact that child restraints are not required on public transport (which is itself mysterious) makes it preferable to car transit, for our family.
Also, there are other things which have improved too. Such as less drunk driving, improved safety especially when traveling at nights, predictability vs. taxis etc.