住宅と交通の予算のパラドックス

I get it. I get all of it. Just one question: are all of the homes shown here connected with other homes or are they independent dwellings? I could save all the money I want, but if I'm in prison for murdering my noisy, criminal, rude neighbor, then I lose everything.

2000% cost reduction is insane!

Several years back I was complaining about my rent costs and a coworker was telling me I should buy a house that was 'relatively' cheap that was just up the street from where she lived. The issue? My current apartment is a mile from work, there is a grocery literally next to the apartment complex, and a Walmart (if you need a big box store) just two miles away. Also, my doctor is about a mile away as well. I can drive to work every day and still only need to buy half a tank of gas every 2-3 weeks. She on the other hand lives about minimum 30-minute drive away, longer if traffic gets backed up, which it often does.

I told her, yes, I might be able to save a bit on mortgage vs rent but include upkeep on the house itself and the vastly increased costs of gas and vehicle maintenance and I'll be spending more money living way out where she does. She really just didn't understand why I approached the issue from that angle, to her buying the house a 30-minute drive away just made more sense regardless.

Cyclings sucks – simple as that. Works for a small minority of people which are pain in the a** for the others.

3:50 .. ' 3 bed rooms and 3 bath rooms ' ? Why do you need 3 bath rooms for … 4 persons when you use it only 10-15 minutes max a day .
The space, the hardware ..🤔

i feel like there's an issue with how you approached this experiment. your suburban "affordable" option was basically the same price as everything else. i thought what you were trying to illustrate was that cheaper houses in the suburbs can actually be more expensive with transportation factored in.

i think a better way to approach this problem would be to choose necessities for what the house has to have, say for a family of 4. now see what the housing costs come to in each place.

that said, i think you really nailed down the transportation values in a way that neatly demonstrates the second half of your hypothesis.

$670,000 to live in a tract house half a day away from downtown Calgary?
That's insane.
We have bigger problems than lack of bike lanes.

Agree with the premis

A few thoughts though as to why some home buyers still don’t agree:

– none of your options (as outside the price range? Or as your selections reflect the reality of new homes in increasingly expensive calgary?) included a “standard” Canadian suburban house (4 bed, 2 garage, big garden….) in urban sprawl.. For all their urbanism downsides, they tick many boxes for families

– if need the space (kids…) of a suburban house, live near a train station. From what I recall of Calgary’s metro system, there is a line that runs due south…..near the first two homes?…so an opportunity for locals to save on transport costs by a mixed “drive to station, get the train” Still probably need a car to get there, but not using much fuel and free parking at station? . Of course, not all areas of Calgary (or other cities) have good transit ….. city of Calgary and AB province still arguing over costs of the line to the south east?!! investment in expansive and cheap transit systems, esp light rail / metro, would achieve many of the same goals as cramming a population into a “rideable to work” circumference.

– the first house was 3 bed and a (small) garden. Whilst not what you’d call a typical Canadian suburban house, it still had space for 2 kids to have their own room (their own time, own space…quiet times for homework, friends over etc) and for (when are young) them to play unsupervised in the garden – don’t need to be taken to / supervised in a city park…with its hints of helicopter parenting

– the 2nd home is an apartment, with balconies. Not ideal for young kids safety?

– 3rd home only 2 beds. Only good for a “single kid family”. And no garden for that kid to play in when young

– I suspect there’s a common misconception by inner city dwellers that everyone else, like them, works Downtown. But “first home owners” out in the burbs more likely (than inner city dwellers) to work elsewhere – in the commercial / industrial areas (poorly served by metro), suburban retail, the airport etc ….the distance to Downtown isnt always a key factor for them

– proximity to (downtown) multiple cafes and restaurants isn’t such a “biggie” to young families, they want to be near to parks, soccer pitches, the kids school(s)….

A final thought, following the approach to its conclusion Alberta would end up with two densely packed high rise cities looking like Singapore. ….surrounded by empty prairies. Better urban planning would be to spread the population around more than just two large cities, push development to smaller cities (where the current suburbs are bikeable distance to their downtown) and load those cities up with good bike lanes, transit systems etc? In a way that’s what the Dutch do… Amsterdam as a city is (deliberately) tiny, only 12 km wide…. The Dutch actively plan for development in other nearby cities. Alberta to slow suburban development in Calgary and Edmonton and push for development in Red Deer, Lethbridge, Medicine Hat….

When I ran the numbers some years ago before retiring, if I were to move to a transport friendly city, my living costs alone would exceed my combined transport and living costs, both then and now. If the cost of living weren't so exorbitant to live in a transport friendly city, I'd think about it. However, until that changes, I'll stay put.

In the case where you can use car-sharing, ride-sharing, public transit, bicycle and walking to forego car ownership altogether, you also save the cost of car insurance, which inflates the savings for the urban property.

I seem to recall an old mantra: "Location, Location, Location"

it surprises me how unpopular small motercycles and scooters are. 70 to 100mpg (around 2-3l per 100km.) they work on car cetric infrastructure. i mean its not as safe but in gridlock or down town enviromemt ( below 50km or 30mph they are pretty compareable in safty to a bike.

My ebike monthly payment is $177 for 12 months. My monthly gas savings $150. The ebike is practically free and will start putting money in my pocket after 1 year.

Thanks for this great video! My siblings often believe that a cheaper house is everything, partly because of Canada's housing crisis. They don’t enjoy the bustling city and are only familiar with most North American cities. However, they’re overlooking the fantastic missing middle homes and the much better transit-connected suburbs in other cities and larger towns across Canada.

Cars can be cheap if you do your own maintenance and repairs. My cars are paid off, and I've never gone to a mechanic. However, I've recently (partly thanks to your videos) become fascinated with the idea of using my own body to get me to work. Riding 6 miles each way 4 days a week saves me about $42 per month in gas. not much, but the health benefits make it worth it. However, here in the states, you need a car. There is no way around it. Life can be difficult if you have to go everywhere on a bike, and it takes time away from your family when you could be home helping with the kids. But overall, we would all be better off with the exercise and less micro plastics from car tires. 😂

Ries & Mjuler
In Germany this is what we would write the way you pronounce Riese & Müller. 😀

But a great topic in general! 🙂

eBikes are already way cheaper than cars

Transport costs are outrageous and yet completely ignored.

What would it cost per day to commute by a mobility scooter?