A 79-year-old woman takes her younger sister to get a car inspected in New York. The sister, around 65 and still working, wonders how much money they could save if they did not need a car.

I came across the exchange in a recent Medium essay, The Thing That Wore Me Down Most About American Life Wasn’t Work or Money. There was something quietly revealing about that conversation.

Neither woman was discussing a luxury purchase. They were talking about a car they needed for ordinary life and the money it continued to consume.

Americans are often told to manage their spending carefully. But what happens when the place where they live makes certain expenses almost impossible to avoid? A car is a good place to begin looking for an answer.

The $13,318 Cost of Getting Around

American consumer units spent an average of $13,318 on transportation in 2024, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Transportation accounted for 17% of their total expenditure. Housing absorbed another 33.4%.

Together, those categories consumed just over half of average spending. The figures cover consumer units, a statistical category that includes families and people living independently. Transportation includes vehicle purchases and operating expenses, as well as public and other transport.

The $13,318 figure is not what every American spends on a car. Someone living in Manhattan without a vehicle may spend far less. A suburban family maintaining two cars could spend much more.

The difficulty is that many people cannot simply eliminate transportation costs by deciding to spend less. A worker may live several miles from the nearest employer. The supermarket might be across a busy road, well beyond a reasonable walk.

Without reliable public transportation, a vehicle becomes part of the cost of keeping a job and managing a household.

The Real Price of Owning a Car

Petrol is only one part of the expense. In September 2026, the American Automobile Association estimated that owning and operating a new vehicle cost $12,863 annually. That works out to approximately $1,072 a month in total economic costs.

AAA’s calculation assumes five years of ownership and 75,000 miles of driving. It includes depreciation, financing and operating expenses. Depreciation alone averaged $4,422 a year in the study.

That amount is not a bill arriving in the post. It represents the estimated reduction in the vehicle’s resale value. An owner still has to budget for insurance and fuel, while preparing for maintenance and repairs.

There are important limits to AAA’s calculation. It models new vehicles, not the older cars that many Americans keep for years after paying them off. A fully paid-off used car may be considerably cheaper to own. Repair costs and the owner’s driving habits can change the calculation.

AAA also updated its methodology in 2026, so the headline estimate cannot be directly compared with earlier years as though nothing changed. Even with those qualifications, the wider issue remains. A car takes money from a household budget whether the owner enjoys driving or regards it as a necessary inconvenience.

Why So Many Americans Drive to Work

In 2024, 69.2% of American workers aged 16 and older drove alone to work. Only 3.7% used public transportation. Another 13.3% worked from home. The numbers come from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey.

They show how deeply private vehicles are embedded in American commuting. Americans did not arrive at this arrangement by accident.

During the twentieth century, highways encouraged development farther from established city centres. Suburban homes offered space that crowded urban neighbourhoods often could not. Businesses followed their customers. Shopping centres provided large parking areas, while offices spread along suburban roads.

Local zoning rules frequently separated residential development from commercial activity. Many families welcomed the arrangement. A detached house and a garden could be attractive, especially when the alternative was a small apartment in an expensive city.

Suburban development brought benefits that should not be dismissed. The problem emerged when driving became the only convenient way to reach ordinary services. A family could choose its preferred house. It could not always choose to live without a car.

The Cheaper House That Requires Another Car

Imagine a family considering two places to live. One apartment is close to shops and public transport. The rent is higher, but the family can manage with a single vehicle or perhaps none.

The other home costs less and offers more space. Unfortunately, it is far from the workplace. Grocery shopping requires driving, and the children cannot easily reach activities without being taken there. The family may need a second car.

The apparent savings on housing now have to be measured against vehicle expenses. There is no universal answer about which home is cheaper. Rent and transport prices differ between cities. Families also value space and privacy differently.

But a comparison based only on rent or mortgage payments misses part of the financial picture. Housing determines where people begin their journeys. Urban design influences how much those journeys cost. A lower housing payment can lose some of its advantage when transportation becomes expensive.

Why the Burden Falls Hardest on Lower-Income Families

The difference between rich and poor households becomes clearer when we examine transport spending against income. According to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics, American consumer units in the lowest income fifth spent an average of $5,105 on transportation in 2024. Those in the highest income fifth spent $25,378.

The wealthier group spent far more in dollars. Yet transportation spending represented 30.6% of before-tax income for the lowest fifth, compared with 9.6% for the highest. The denominator matters. These are income ratios, not percentages of total household spending.

Low-income households also vary greatly. Some own vehicles, others depend on buses or receive rides from relatives. Still, the figures expose a serious constraint.

For a worker who cannot reach a job without driving, transport expenses are difficult to cut. When a car breaks down, the immediate problem is paying for repairs. The larger danger is losing access to employment. A missed shift can make the repair bill even harder to pay.

What Happens When an Elderly Person Stops Driving?

I keep thinking about the sisters in that Medium essay. One was approaching 80. The other was still working at roughly 65. For decades, driving may have given them freedom.

But age can gradually alter the relationship between people and their cars. Some older Americans remain capable drivers well into later life. Others begin avoiding long journeys or night driving. Eventually, some stop driving altogether.

Their independence then depends partly on the neighbourhood around them. If shops and medical services are within walking distance, ordinary errands may remain manageable. If the closest supermarket is several miles away and public transport rarely arrives, a person may depend on family members for routine journeys.

A neighbourhood that once felt convenient can become restrictive. I would not claim that car-dependent communities automatically make people lonely. Health and personal relationships play major roles in social isolation.

But the physical environment can make remaining independent more difficult. That is an economic issue as well as a social one. A person who cannot drive may need paid transport or assistance that previously seemed unnecessary.

Why Doesn’t America Simply Build Better Public Transport?

It is easy to blame politicians for the arrangement. Changing it is harder. American transportation policy is divided among institutions.

Local governments influence zoning and street design. States manage important road networks, while federal programmes help fund transport infrastructure. Developers respond to market demand within those rules.

Existing residents have preferences of their own. Some welcome new housing and public transport. Others worry about congestion or changes to their neighbourhoods.

A bus route also requires more than painted stops and a timetable. Services need dependable funding and enough drivers. They must run frequently enough to fit people’s schedules.

In areas where homes are widely dispersed, providing frequent buses can cost considerably more per passenger than in dense urban neighbourhoods. The economics are different in rural communities. Cars may remain the most practical option for many people.

The aim should not be to eliminate private vehicles from American life. It should be to provide workable alternatives wherever possible.

America Already Has Different Ways of Living

It is misleading to describe the United States as one enormous suburb. New York City offers a very different experience. Many residents walk or use public transportation for daily journeys. Some households function without owning a car.

Other American cities contain neighbourhoods where shops and homes are close together. But those advantages are distributed unevenly. A worker living near a reliable subway line has options unavailable to someone in a distant subdivision.

The issue is therefore not simply whether Americans love their cars. It is whether people can choose a different form of transportation without giving up access to employment or essential services. Choice has little practical meaning when only one option works.

Why Higher Wages May Not Be Enough

I recently examined another part of America’s affordability problem in Why Americans Are Earning More but Feeling Poorer. In September 2026, average private-sector hourly earnings had risen 3% over the preceding year. Consumer prices had increased 3.7%. That meant a modest decline in real hourly purchasing power.

Car dependence adds a different pressure. Even when wages improve, some households remain tied to expenses created partly by where they live. They can shop for cheaper insurance. They might replace a costly vehicle with a used one.

Neither decision creates a useful bus service or moves their workplace closer to home. My earlier essay, America Is Still Rich. So Why Can’t the Middle Class Afford a Life?, explored the wider problem of middle-class affordability.

Transportation offers a more specific explanation. The cost of living is influenced by prices and income. It is also influenced by the physical distance between a household and the services it needs.

The Freedom to Live Without a Car

A better transportation system would not require everyone to stop driving. It would make some journeys possible without a private vehicle.

More housing near existing shops could reduce travel distances. Reliable buses might allow a family to keep one car rather than two. Safer walking routes could help older residents remain independent.

Such changes would not work equally well everywhere. Rural areas and distant suburbs present different challenges from dense city centres. Nor would transport improvements automatically make housing affordable.

They could, however, reduce one recurring expense for people who would prefer not to drive everywhere. The elderly woman in the Medium essay had reached a practical conclusion. Owning a car was expensive. Living without one might save money.

What she could not easily change was the structure of her daily life. That is the part of the American affordability debate that deserves more attention.

A person may be free to buy any car they can afford. Living comfortably without one is a different kind of freedom.

Data note: The BLS and BTS expenditure figures refer to 2024 consumer units. Census commuting figures also refer to 2024. AAA’s September 2026 estimate models the ownership and operation of a new vehicle over five years. The opening family anecdote comes from a Medium essay and has not been independently verified.