The automobile has been pitched as a machine for freedom, but travelling inside a small metal box, strapped to a chair, forced to focus on the road while your life is threatened by two-ton projectiles doesn’t sound like freedom to David Levinson.
A new study calls for "universal auto access" to combat poverty. It recommends subsidizing auto ownership or access for those who are economically unable to afford the high cost of owning, maintaining, and operating a personal motor vehicle.
Data show that cars are more effective than transit in providing poor people to jobs and economic opportunity. But does that mean transit systems are fundamentally inadequate or just currently inadequate?
Many advocates for new ways of thinking about places and streets argue for reduced use of cars as the dominant mode of transportation. A new study finds, however that poverty is improved when the poor have access to a car for transportation.
Last week the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace published a report, In Search of the Global Middle Class: A New Index, by researcher Uri Dadush, which uses car ownership rates as an indication of the size of a country's middle class
Planners strive to anticipate future needs, which sometimes creates self-fulfilling prophecies: by preparing for a situation we help cause it. This is particularly true of automobile dependency. Planning decisions intended to accommodate automobile.
Let me wade into an ongoing debate among fellow Planetizen bloggers Samuel Staley and Michael Lewyn concerning the meanings of accessibility and mobility, and their implications for transportation and land use policy.