Given the levels of automation entering road vehicle use in the next few years, there may soon come a time where an automated road transport "pod", for want of a better word, will become the norm; one will simply apply for a pod to turn up at one address and to deliver its occupant(s) to another after which it goes away on its own to repeat the exercise for someone else. When this happens, the concept of owning a car may well become as outdated as the car itself, and the ambition of ownership will simply evaporate.

The ambition of programming a pod? Now that would be really cool!

You wrote, "The ambition of programming a pod? Now that would be really cool!"

More like, the ambition of hacking a pod and it won't be the one the hacker is riding.

Additionally, from your perspective in a small country, such transport would seem very sensible.

For the US it would be much harder to envision given the wide gulfs of space between cities, towns and even individuals.

?

What is your point or question?

You see thousands of people driving on a highway.

I see thousands of people with jobs they have to get to.

The sign of a HOT economy.

This is likely NOT an inter-city road. I think it more likely commuter traffic. So all those people "could" tuck themselves into busses, trains and subway cars. A stiff economic incentive would work like a charm.

...... even individuals.

Hmmm. thought provoking. The North American people I know love their cars all out of proportion to their value. With the space available here, I cannot see that attitude changing any time in MY lifetime. Europe however, in my fairly limited experience as a tourist, is increasingly getting pissed off with cars. You can spend twice as much on a car as on a house during a lifetime, not counting fuel. Everybody knows somebody who has lost a brother, a father or a relative in a vehicle collision. Public transit "works".

As far as "vehicular pod" idea goes, my uncle in Medicine Hat Alberta (you don't get any more off the beaten track, and away from public transport!) does not own a car. He figured out years ago that it was cheaper to rent one (mobile pod!) for the odd weekend he had to go to a wedding out of town. That a taxi was cheaper for a weekly grocery trip than paying for the insurance on a depreciating asset. As far as commuting to work, he had a bicycle. Once he retired, he got rid of that too.

Apparently my uncle is unusual in that he does not have an emotional attachment to an automobile. This may change as North Americans remove the blinders from their eyes and realize that the depreciating asset in the driveway may well kill their kids, and keep them from an early retirement.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/how-the-first--driverless-car--was-invented-in-britain-in-1960-093127757.html?vp=1#QUhfgpG

I think car culture is still alive. It depends on what part of the country you live in. I live in a rural area and kids as young as 12 drive. Conditions are not conducive to bicycle travel, so cars and more usually trucks are the preferred means of transportation. In rural areas, we live with our vehicles. City slickers usually don't have the need for a vehicle. I was born and raised in New York City and a car was not something we were interested in. It's only when I moved out of the big city that I learned the value of a vehicle. Vehicles cost much more than they did 40+ years ago. By more, I mean the cost has exceeded the standard of living. Back then, I could afford a $2000 car, but today cars cost upwards of $30000 for something equivalent. How many kids can buy a 30K car. Here, kids go fishing, hunting, off-roading. City kids don't have that luxury. Although I'm from N.Y. my kids and grandkids were brought up in a country setting and they still like messing around with cars.

Another slant on the car culture: There are those who like to work on cars, fix them, modify them, build them; that to me defines a car culture; not the guy who buys cars for show and sells them for profit.

I am in the auto industry and I do see the car culture dying. What I mean by car culture is the people who have a passion for cars, not just think of them as an appliance. Here are some reasons why I think this has happened:

1. Back in the 70's, manufacturers changed the body style nearly every year. There was excitement when the new models came out - the dealers would make a big deal of it and cover the cars up until the reveal. Now a Toyota Camry (#1 seller) looks the same for 5 years.

2. We were able to work on cars, to customize them to our personality or to make them faster. New cars don't give you much choice in customization and people aren't comfortable "tinkering" with new cars, due to the electronics and the potential damage that can be done - if you can't smog a car, it's pretty much worthless.

3. In the 70's (and early 80's), GM had some very popular two door models. Camaro, Firebird, Riviera, Eldorado, Toranado, Regal, Cutlass Supreme, Grand Prix, Grand Am, Can Am, Chevelle, Monte Carlo, Vega, Monza, Firehawk, Sunbird, Sunfire, Nova, El Camino, Omega, Skylark and Corvette. Two doors were hard to get in and out of, but they looked good. Today, the number one seller is a four door and has been for decades.

4. Kids are into electronics now. In my generation, a car was a status symbol. It was an extension of me. Today, the type of phone or tablet is the status symbol.

5. Money is key. A nice sporty car starts in the mid-high $20K range (FR-S). I paid $2,100 for my hot little used Camaro I drove as a kid. My friends had Trans Ams, Firebirds, Gran Torinos, Mach 1's, GTX's, Mustangs, etc.

6. Racing from light to light was what we did. Peeling out was cool! Doing donuts was fun. Today's cars are mostly front wheel drive. Can't have much fun doing that in a Camry.

The small group of car culture kids nowdays think of 60's and 70's era cars as cool - look at the photo above. They're trying to relate to us in our era, but this is a different time and they should be thinking about cars less than 10 years old - cars they grew up with, not the ones we did. Mazda RX8s, 350Z's, Mustangs, WRX's, STI's, Evo's, S2000's, 3 series, GTI's and Camaros.

In a nutshell, the youth doesn't "get" our car culture. That's why there are no cars being marketed to them. The "cool" stuff is being marketed to the Baby Boomers - AMG's, M Sport BMW's, 450+ hp Vettes, Shelby's, Viper's, 911's, RS4, 5 and 6's, Camaro SS/RS, Cadillac CTS-V, SRT's, LF-A's, R8's, F-Type's and Caymans. Think about it.

Good post.

Actually, the "cool" stuff is marketed to the Baby Boomers because that is where the cash is!

It's much more than cars. It is motorcycles, TVs, stereos, electronics, music, white goods, anything you can think of that those generations can relate to, marketing is busy tapping into it because it is gold.

Marketing to the late teens and early 20-something simply lacks the disposable cash that the Baby Boomers have. For the auto industry they will follow the deeper pockets and you see a resurgence of the car brands from the 60s and 70s to serve that.

Even the late 20-something and 30-something crowd does not have the financial pockets because they are starting families.

However, when those kids grow up and go out the door, the parents tend to reconnect with the things they had and more importantly, wanted, when they were busy raising those kids.

Despite the economy, Baby Boomers did well earning money and have more to spend than their parents did. I am not so sure that the following generations will have it quite so well, but that is how the market is working right now.

Kids see the older 70s cars the same way the Baby Boomers saw the old '56 Chevys, only the 70s provided a wider variety of classics to draw from than the 50s.

When I was a kid, the new cars were just starting to get over the mid/late 70's problems. I learned to drive on my parents 1981 Monte Carlo with a 267 V-8. The car wasn't going to win any races, but it had enough umph to have fun. Later, I did own a 1980 Camaro with a 305 V-8. My friends and I tore the exhaust out, put bigger heads, taller intake, taller/longer duration cam, Holly 650 carb, roller timing chain, shift kit and bigger tires on the car. I think we got her up to around 260 hp. I could chirp the tires from first to second (Th 350 tranny) and I hit 135 mph on quite a few occasions. I didn't have the torque that my friends had (455 Trans Am, 403 V-8 Firebird Formula, 440 Six Pack GTX, 351 Mach One), but once moving, I could keep up with most of them (except the GTX) and even outrun the Formula.

The oldest cars were in the 10 year old range. I remember one kid driving a '57 Chevy, but that was the only "old" car. There was one kid who had a Porsche Turbo, then moved up to a Ferrari and finally a Lamborghini (not the Countach, I think it was called a Jalpa) - this was something to see, considering that we were all kids of blue collar type parents.

In my school, most of us had a car and we were very proud of it. I've noticed that nowdays, kids don't even push their parents for a drivers license. It's simply a different era with different agendas