My prediction is that car usage will go thought the roof when AI cars work.
People can have a stress-free commute to a nice house in the countryside and work in the cities. Because the car is electric, it will be inexpensive to run.
People can have a stress-free commute to a nice house in the countryside and work in the cities. Because the car is electric, it will be inexpensive to run.
I can read on the subway, but while a 20 min subway ride is fine, an hour each way is still a lot, and a two hour train commute just doesn't leave much time in your life for doing social things.
Also, I think there's going to be a huge surge in in-demand AI buses. Rideshares will take people to a random spot, you'll wait 2 minutes for a predetermined seat on a specific bus, and then switch to a rideshare van for the last 5 minute drive to your office in the city.
It's just going to be so much cheaper. With economies of scale and urban congestion pricing, you'll have to choose between dropping $45 on a dedicated hour-long door-to-door car trip, or $6 for the car-bus-van version which is only 20% slower anyways.
OTOH, if I'm in a decent-sized car (minivan?) for 45 minutes+, I can get work done. I can then stay less time at work.
You're clearly wrong.
> Late-stage capitalism will find ways to make it cost exactly as much as driving your own car.
Late-stage capitalism is a defunct theory based on Marxism.
Real, actual capitalism results in competition which drives prices down, as long as there are two or more competitors and antitrust law is enforced. Which is generally the case.
And in the case of monopolies like city buses, cities set prices directly in response to democratic pressure. By your argument, NYC subways ought to be $25 a ride... but they aren't.
I generally agree with you here, (though it's a bit simplistic for things not directly related to price: for example good luck avoiding arbitration clauses)
> Which is generally the case.
Now our opinions differ. Lina Khan was an exception, and I certainly can't imagine the current regime standing up against money.
Some recent(ish) ones I think have been less than great for competition
HBO / Discovery?
Facebook/Instagram/Whatsapp?
LiveNation / Ticketmaster?
Disney / Fox?
Charter / Time Warner Cable?
AT&T / Time Warner?
CBS / Viacom?
Comcast / NBC?
JP Morgan / Chase?
CVS / Aetna?
Cigna / Express Scripts?
Sinclair Medianot with the current set of voters it wont
(And that was not the only close call I had with that geezer at that corner.)
If you drive a lot (like the person in the countryside) the car that is there when you want to is worth owning vs a shared car that you might have to wait for. Plus by owning the car you can just leave your golf clubs in the trunk.
If you can stand being in a used car you will discover that shared cars are all more expensive just because at the first sign of cosmetic wear they get rid of it while seats that have been sat in a few times are still good enough for many more years. (unless you almost never drive anyway)
Because of the above I don't see much growth in the shared car market. There will be some because there are people who don't have parking, people who don't drive much, and people who demand a new car that they don't otherwise care about. However the vast majority of people will still own their own car.
(we are going to a remote location where I wouldn't expect public transit to serve, but the train station is in a small town that still should have some transit but doesn't)