What would the Implications of banning cars altogether?

Question

Mass unemployment for one from:
The Car industry
The traffic control industry
Petrol and diesel sales
driving instruction and testing
Taxation workers
Road repairers/builders


Any more?

Answer 1

The main effect, apart from the total collapse of the economy due to nobody being able to get to work on time, would be the huge increase in income tax, and/or VAT, to cope with the £40 billion that the motorist and related industries contributes to our economy every year, that's about £700 a year for every man, woman, and child living here.

Answer 2

We would still need modes of transport and it wouldn't happen overnight.

Traffic control would still apply for buses, cyclists, pedestrians

We would have alternative fuels in use

We would see an increase in Horse rider instructors, bicycle proficiency testers etc (cos no doubt it would become compulsory by the Labour government to make cyclists sit tests)
Taxation workers would continue as we have enough taxes without fuel tax, road tax et al for them to keep themselves busy with
Road repairers could be retrained to upgrade the train lines

Other implications would be reduced amount of deaths (currently about 1000 per year in the UK) directly associated with cars. Hospital A&E departments would be quieter. Reduced asthma attacks for those with the condition. Less smog. Top Gear would be entertaining (Stars on a reasonably priced push bike). Best of all no more Drive Through MacDonalds!

Answer 3

Cars won't be banned altogether. But it would be nice to make using them so much hassle, you would rather walk/cycle/use public transport.

It is happening a lot in town centres, where parking is limited, expensive, and increasingly difficult. Now let's get the numbers PARKED on the M1 on Friday afternoons down a little. Maybe £1 per mile driven would do the trick. It won't affect someone like you Boris, with your massive income.

Answer 4

If you mean cars for personal use only, I don't think the majority of cities would be prepared for mass transportation of their entire population. It takes me 20 minutes to drive from one corner of my town to the other. Our public bus stops nowhere near my neighborhood - I don't even think it stops within two miles of my house. Right now, we're under an ice storm warning - the roads are slick, it's not safe, and it's freezing outside. It's not practical. Plus it would take my town years to implement a transit system for everyone; it just wouldn't be feasible for years.

And what about people who live in surrounding towns who have to commute to the "big city" to find a job? Are they going to ride their bikes fifteen miles to get to work when temperatures are below zero?

Answer 5

Just cars, or all petroleum engines? Because, if it's the first, we'd just switch to motorcycles and things like that which aren't technically cars.
Also, ban vehicles or ban gasoline/diesel engines? Because if we can have electric cars, or cars that run on ethanol, we'd do that.

Answer 6

There will be more than enough new jobs in public transit to make up for any lost if private automobiles were banned. But we don't need to go that far. We just need non-petrol powerd autos for personal use.

Answer 7

Can't wait - then Gormless Gordon Brown and his muppet Darling would have to start taxing cyclists for sweat excretion

Answer 8

The price of horses would skyrocket and the rest of the economy would collapse

Answer 9

Lots of walking...more trains...more airplanes...more airports...more in flight accidents...lots of complaining...tired feet...mass protests from automakers...better smelling air...less 24/7's...more taxes on other things then gas...

Answer 10

It'd make cop shows boring, couldn't see the Sweeney running far