> It's always fascinating how people here generalize an entire continent's major cities by anecdotal evidence from one city.
I apologize for my misleading post, my experience is based on living in multiple major and / or university cities in southwestern Germany, 3-10 days visits to smaller and larger towns all across Europe and frequent visits to Switzerland.
> But even for Europe, saying you don't need a car is a very narrow-minded outlook.
You seem to confuse me with a no-car evangelist/fundamentalist, because I have never said that. I have merely stated that if you live in a town with some sort of car sharing and an average public transportation system, you do not need to own a car. From what you describe, I would consider the public transportation system in the city you lived in edge-case average for a 350k city, but certainly not optimal. However, a 3 mile distance to the city center (where the train station appears to be) is easily covered by bike.
> For me, getting to see a friend in the next town over (~15mi) would take me 25 mins by car, including traffic, and 1hr to 90mins by public transport. Going to work, a solid hour by car due to really bad traffic, took 90mins to 2 hrs using public transport (~30 miles).
I would also choose a car for visits to your friend. But you do not visit you friend daily, so why would you need to own a car for that? Even if you visit him weekly, car sharing might be enough, and less overhead. Your daily commute may indeed be a reason for owning a car. However, if I would have to choose between a 1h car ride to work, or a 90 min PT ride, I would still choose public transportation, for the reasons stated below (you can do stuff on PT).
> I apologize for my misleading post, my experience is based on living in multiple major and / or university cities in southwestern Germany, 3-10 days visits to smaller and larger towns all across Europe and frequent visits to Switzerland.
In my experience (I'm from the West), the southern cities in Germany have better public infrastructure compared to what I lovingly call the German Rust Belt. I have been to Hamburg and Berlin for work, where using public transport was a lot easier as well, but those cities are not comparable in size.
> From what you describe, I would consider the public transportation system in the city you lived in edge-case average for a 350k city, but certainly not optimal.
It is decent for folks living close to any type of train, as a lot of my friends do who are still in college. Car sharing did not exist when I left, that might have changed. But even if it does, the problem of the famous last mile pertains - if the area where I live is too much of an edge case for any type of public transport, it is hard to profitably provide supply. Here, I can at least get an Uber in fairly remote locations (as the car picks me up wherever I am, albeit for a premium).
> However, a 3 mile distance to the city center (where the train station appears to be) is easily covered by bike.
Not in a suit or when it rains, not to mention medical conditions. However, I agree, that is a good point.
> But you do not visit you friend daily, so why would you need to own a car for that? Even if you visit him weekly, car sharing might be enough, and less overhead.
Yes, that is a good perspective on it. However, this serves as an example - in that region, a lot of the interesting places are fairly spread out, often across cities. This quickly becomes a view of opportunity cost and convenience. As long as public transport doesn't offer enough incentives - reliability, flexibility, quality, and price - I am personally very willing to invest the money for a car, as I generally value time and convince more than money.
Doing anything on PT often proves challenging. I personally cannot read or work on a bus (get horrible car sickness), but I know other people can manage just fine. On a train, it depends on the availability of seating and WiFi - which, in my experience, is a huge gamble. If those were true, see above, one could justify the extra time invested.
But to your point here, yes, need becomes a subjective term in that regard.
I apologize for my misleading post, my experience is based on living in multiple major and / or university cities in southwestern Germany, 3-10 days visits to smaller and larger towns all across Europe and frequent visits to Switzerland.
> But even for Europe, saying you don't need a car is a very narrow-minded outlook.
You seem to confuse me with a no-car evangelist/fundamentalist, because I have never said that. I have merely stated that if you live in a town with some sort of car sharing and an average public transportation system, you do not need to own a car. From what you describe, I would consider the public transportation system in the city you lived in edge-case average for a 350k city, but certainly not optimal. However, a 3 mile distance to the city center (where the train station appears to be) is easily covered by bike.
> For me, getting to see a friend in the next town over (~15mi) would take me 25 mins by car, including traffic, and 1hr to 90mins by public transport. Going to work, a solid hour by car due to really bad traffic, took 90mins to 2 hrs using public transport (~30 miles).
I would also choose a car for visits to your friend. But you do not visit you friend daily, so why would you need to own a car for that? Even if you visit him weekly, car sharing might be enough, and less overhead. Your daily commute may indeed be a reason for owning a car. However, if I would have to choose between a 1h car ride to work, or a 90 min PT ride, I would still choose public transportation, for the reasons stated below (you can do stuff on PT).