Wife does'nt drive

snowleopard61

Another way of looking it is this: I don't drive and have no desire to do so, and therefore I accept that where I can live, work and socialise will always be dictated by access to public transport and occasional taxis. I wouldn't move to live somewhere that made it difficult to get to my existing job,which is about half an hour's walk each way. If for some reason I lost it I know that there is similar work to be had in the same area (in so far as there is work around at all in the middle of a recession) because I chose where I live for its proximity to a city centre and good transport links. I'm happy to walk or use public transport to meet my friends, but if they choose to go somewhere I can't get to, they give me a lift; in that case it's their choice and I would tend to reciprocate by offering to bring a picnic or paying an entrance fee.

Learning to drive and running a car is a massive expense and I'm constantly amazed that so many people regard it as a priority, but it's their priority; I just can't imagine making it mine.

Abbafan1972

It's been really interesting reading all these replies.

I don't drive and my hubby does. He drives for a living which is a van, he also has a car for when he's not at work, as he's not allowed to use the van for personal trips.

Hence there is a Ford Mondeo on the drive as we speak, which rarely moves in the week. Hubby tries to go out in it often to keep car running and the battery charged (it has gone flat on us a couple of times).

I have taken lessons before about 20 years ago and I failed the test. After that I couldn't continue with it. My nerves are just so bad with it. I could never understand the gears properly, because of this I have considered trying to pass the automatic test. Obviously we would have change the car for an automatic, so I could use it when hubby is at work.

My place or work is easy to get to on public transport, so I'm not fussed about that. I have a bus pass which is £48 a month, so I want to get my money's worth out of that. Everybody else at work drives there and I know for a fact that parking is a nightmare, because we don't have our own car park. People that work nowhere near to our office park there, so they don't have to pay for parking in Birmingham city centre :mad: So at least I don't have any of that to worry about.

It's very rare that hubby will drive me anywhere. I can get to most places via public transport. I don't badger him about it or make him feel guilty for not driving me. If he does offer then that's great. Recently I've had a couple of hospital appointments and I made my own way there, as the hospital is quite accessible by bus.

My only worry at the moment is when oldest DD starts secondary school and now I'm going to get them both to school!

Op your wife is being very childish by expecting you to drive her everywhere!

Idiophreak

Steel wrote: »

Having a car is not the be all and end all. Life doesn't just stop or is unlivable because God forbid you have to use what's on the end of your ankles for what they were intended or mingle with others on public transport.
...
Right now the £300 or so I would use in petrol plus the life-time costs of having a car I'd pay every month to get to work, shopping etc etc, actually gets spent on improving our house, overpaying our mortgage and pensions, and generally enjoying our hobbies.

I think what you mean is that *your life* wouldn't stop or become unliveable, but that doesn't mean it's the case for anyone else. A good number of people have no access to public transport, or find it unsuitable.

If I, for example, were to commute on public transport it would be:
Walk to bus stop: 5 mins
Wait for bus: 5 mins
Bus to town. 15 mins
Walk to station: 5 mins
Wait for train: 15mins
Train to other town: 15 mins
Wait for bus: 10 mins.
Bus to office: 10 mins
Walk to office: 5 mins.
So that's 1hr 25 and that's absolute best case.

To drive, I do:
Walk to car: 1 minute.
Drive to office: 18 minutes.
Walk to office: 1 minute.

Personally, I use the 2 hours I save on the commute every day to spend more time with my friends and family and enjoy my hobbies (a good deal of which would also be completely impractical by public transport).

Financially, by the time I'd got bus passes for the two different companies involved, plus the train pass, I think it would be much the same cost...

And I really do love your use of the word "mingle" to describe interactions with others on public transport. I have to say, after years of using public transport, I was very pleased to cease "mingling".

In my car, I don't have anyone "mingle" with me by coughing or sneezing in my face. I don't have anyone "mingling" with me by playing their crappy, tinny, music out loud on their mobile phone, or even just through their headphones. I don't have to put up with people "mingling" with me by sweating, drooling or squashing me. I don't miss seeing people "mingling" with eachother, either, screaming at each other, punching each other, sexually assaulting each another (I always used to feel for the poor girls travelling alone on the night bus). Most importantly, though, I don't have anyone "mingle" with me by calling me names, spitting at me or holding a knife to my throat for loose change (only happened once...but it wasn't a highlight of my life, it's fair to say). Call me antisocial, but I'm quite happy not to "mingle" these days.

(it's also worth noting that I live in the country, in around as middle-class an area as you're ever likely to find. Lord knows what goes on on public transport in rough areas).

snowleopard61

Abbafan1972 wrote: »

My only worry at the moment is when oldest DD starts secondary school and now I'm going to get them both to school!

Abbafan, I was in this position and the only solution for us was for the secondary school child to make her own way to school. We did several trial runs over the summer with her 'pretending' she was travelling alone and her little sister and I following at a distance so that she knew exactly what to do, which in her case involved a bus and a short walk with some crossing of roads. It was absolutely fine. Children who are used to walking and travelling by public transport with a parent tend to be much more confident and safe learning to do so by themselves when they are older than those who have been ferried about by car all their lives. My daughter was unfortunate in that almost no-one she knew went on to the same secondary school, but most children will be able to travel with friends.

Gloomendoom

I gave up my car for three years and travelled mostly by train. I read an awful lot of books in that period.

heartbreak_star

Idiophreak wrote: »

And I really do love your use of the word "mingle" to describe interactions with others on public transport. I have to say, after years of using public transport, I was very pleased to cease "mingling".

In my car, I don't have anyone "mingle" with me by coughing or sneezing in my face. I don't have anyone "mingling" with me by playing their crappy, tinny, music out loud on their mobile phone, or even just through their headphones. I don't have to put up with people "mingling" with me by sweating, drooling or squashing me. I don't miss seeing people "mingling" with eachother, either, screaming at each other, punching each other, sexually assaulting each another (I always used to feel for the poor girls travelling alone on the night bus). Most importantly, though, I don't have anyone "mingle" with me by calling me names, spitting at me or holding a knife to my throat for loose change (only happened once...but it wasn't a highlight of my life, it's fair to say). Call me antisocial, but I'm quite happy not to "mingle" these days.

Idiophreak, I think I'm a bit in love with you for this! It's so true!

I also catch a lot less colds and other bugs since I stopped using public transport.

HBS x

Steel_2

Idiophreak wrote: »

I think what you mean is that *your life* wouldn't stop or become unliveable, but that doesn't mean it's the case for anyone else. A good number of people have no access to public transport, or find it unsuitable.

If I, for example, were to commute on public transport it would be:
Walk to bus stop: 5 mins
Wait for bus: 5 mins
Bus to town. 15 mins
Walk to station: 5 mins
Wait for train: 15mins
Train to other town: 15 mins
Wait for bus: 10 mins.
Bus to office: 10 mins
Walk to office: 5 mins.
So that's 1hr 25 and that's absolute best case.

To drive, I do:
Walk to car: 1 minute.
Drive to office: 18 minutes.
Walk to office: 1 minute.

Personally, I use the 2 hours I save on the commute every day to spend more time with my friends and family and enjoy my hobbies (a good deal of which would also be completely impractical by public transport).

Financially, by the time I'd got bus passes for the two different companies involved, plus the train pass, I think it would be much the same cost...

And I really do love your use of the word "mingle" to describe interactions with others on public transport. I have to say, after years of using public transport, I was very pleased to cease "mingling".

In my car, I don't have anyone "mingle" with me by coughing or sneezing in my face. I don't have anyone "mingling" with me by playing their crappy, tinny, music out loud on their mobile phone, or even just through their headphones. I don't have to put up with people "mingling" with me by sweating, drooling or squashing me. I don't miss seeing people "mingling" with eachother, either, screaming at each other, punching each other, sexually assaulting each another (I always used to feel for the poor girls travelling alone on the night bus). Most importantly, though, I don't have anyone "mingle" with me by calling me names, spitting at me or holding a knife to my throat for loose change (only happened once...but it wasn't a highlight of my life, it's fair to say). Call me antisocial, but I'm quite happy not to "mingle" these days.

(it's also worth noting that I live in the country, in around as middle-class an area as you're ever likely to find. Lord knows what goes on on public transport in rough areas).

I also live in the country, but I have good transport links. For those people who need it to get to work, fine. For those who have poor transport links fine. For those living in a dangerous area fine. For those who have hobbies that need transportation fine.

My point is, not every house needs two cars or even one car sometimes. Now, I'm going to rant - not at you Idiophreak or anyone else - and I'm sorry about this but something happened today which left me so mad.

I believe a huge number of people could go without a car with not too much more added inconvenience. They just don't want to give up their cars because they equate them with freedom and independence, when in fact it is just convenience (exceptions if you live in the country with no transport etc etc)

I had to sit and listen to two women in my office today talking about how much weight they had put on recently and complaining they don't have any money so they can't afford a gym membership to lose the weight. When I suggested they walked to work to save the money they need, I was told the 30/40 minute walk is too far so they *have* to use the car. What about biking? Up went their noses? A scooter? Oh very Italian they sneered and up went their noses. What about car share? Up went the noses. What about public transport? The noses nearly hit the ceiling by that point.

I'm just going to ignore them now as it's just a front. The real reason is they can't be bothered, and if that's the case fine. Say that. But I can't stand the winge about a lack of money and exercise and how much driving costs when they live 30/40 minute walk from the office. Even if they walked on just the dry days and used the car for the wet nasty weather days they'd save money on fuel.

One of hubbies friends insist they need two cars, one of which sits on the drive most of the time because occasionally the husband has to go to a meeting 30 miles away 1-2 times a month and he refuses to get a taxi to the station and a train (which his firm will pay for). They go into work together and she drops him off. The costs of having that car on the drive mount every month for them and they have money problems. It has all sorts of problems that need to be fixed now because it failed its last MOT and the bloody thing only comes out probably 25 times a year.

I am so sick of hearing people complaining about not having any money or not getting enough exercise, but clinging to their cars desperately. It's almost like the car is so sacrosanct (and swiftly behind that is Sky TV, but that's another grumble for another day) that we dare not speak of not having one.:rotfl:

The possibility of getting rid of a car and finding other ways to travel if you can balance the cost-effectiveness with the added inconvenience, safety etc doesn't seem to figure much on people's list of moneysaving ideas.

But then you're talking about a Dave Ramsey advocate here. If you're going to get out of debt, go gung-ho and get the hell out of debt. Put up with the added inconvenience for a set period of time if the promise of achieving a debt-free life faster is there.

I feel better for that rant now...;-)

Gloomendoom

Steel wrote: »

One of hubbies friends insist they need two cars, one of which sits on the drive most of the time because occasionally the husband has to go to a meeting 30 miles away 1-2 times a month and he refuses to get a taxi to the station and a train (which his firm will pay for). They go into work together and she drops him off. The costs of having that car on the drive mount every month for them. It has all sorts of problems that need to be fixed now because it failed its last MOT and the bloody thing only comes out probably 25 times a year.

He sounds like me... except I have several cars, not just the one.

I just like cars and I can't really see why anyone else should have a problem with that.

KiKi

Gloomendoom wrote: »

He sounds like me... except I have several cars, not just the one.

I just like cars and I can't really see why anyone else should have a problem with that.

Nothing wrong with that at all.

I didn't think Steel's post was having a go at people who have or like cars (although I'm sure lots of people will interpret it that way!).

It's people who complain they have no cash but then complain their cars cost them too much - but won't look at any cheaper alternatives. Or people who complain they can't lose weight, but refuse to walk to work once a week if it's doable.

I can understand that - not about cars, but about weight. I hate when people complain about not being able to lose weight then eat three packets of crisps in a row!! Or people who whinge about their kids' behaviour, then don't discipline them.

I also hate when people are desperately struggling to pay bills but refuse to give up Sky and pay out £80 a month for it (some of my family are in this position).

It's the hypocrisy I see Steel talking about - and the refusal to consider an alternative to something (in this case a car) when they then complain it's causing them problems.

KiKi

Steel_2

Gloomendoom wrote: »

He sounds like me... except I have several cars, not just the one.

I just like cars and I can't really see why anyone else should have a problem with that.

I was going to comment but Kiki got it spot on. I'd have a problem only if you spent time complaining that you have no money and take out payday loans to afford to live, etc etc while running several different cars that cost you a lot of money.

Perhaps it's because we never had a car while I growing up that's shown me what can be achieved without one, which in my parents case for two working class people on average wages was financial freedom at 55.

My mother walked 25 minutes to and from work, and my father did his rounds across London on his bike.

My father freely admits that if they ran a car, him and my mum couldn't have saved for a mortgage deposit or paid for a mortgage afterwards once the kids turned up.