It may feel like you spend half your life in traffic jams, but that's just a delusion. According to this very spiffy – and highly depressing – infographic from Carbuzz, even Chicagoans are spending less than two percent of their waking existence staring at someone's muffler.

There. Don't you feel better now?

Even though it's only two percent of their time, these delays cost drivers over $1,700 a year, so it's easy to see why Chicago and D.C. have already invested in public transportation, and it certainly looks as if it would be easy to justify more of everything that isn't a car.

The full image, complete with world's worst traffic jams and more depressing statistics on just how much time and money are spent being enslaved to overcrowded highways, can be found after the jump.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 41 Comments
      Polly Prissy Pants
      • 3 Years Ago
      This is only part of it. I've altered or cancelled many shopping related trips just due to the hassle of fighting traffic to get to a particulatr store. Add in the economic depression caused by traffic and your number would likely double. Still, if you told people you were going to raise gas taxes by 10 cents a gallon to build and improve roads they'd run you out of town as some sort of tax 'n spend liberal.
        Jake
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Polly Prissy Pants
        If the gasoline taxes actually all went to road maintenance and construction, I wouldn't have a problem with it. Raise it to the level that it needs to be.
        Travisty
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Polly Prissy Pants
        There's a new study out showing exactly how much local taxpayers (ie, property taxpayers, NOT gasoline taxpayers) have to pay each year for roads, and how much the gas taxes would have to be raised to cover it: http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/gas-tax-short-of-covering-roads-131432403.html
      Hazdaz
      • 3 Years Ago
      "...but, but, but improving the roads or adding mass transit is too costly. We can't possibly afford it!" /s
        NissanGTR
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Hazdaz
        Mass transit is designed for bums and degenerates.
          axiomatik
          • 3 Years Ago
          @NissanGTR
          You should fit in nicely, then.
          Papi L-Gee
          • 3 Years Ago
          @NissanGTR
          OK, where did my previous comment go...?
          dohc73
          • 3 Years Ago
          @NissanGTR
          Depends on what city you're in. In the NYC-metro area it's not the same. But I hate mass-transit all the same. People are dirty.
          ryan
          • 3 Years Ago
          @NissanGTR
          Ever been to DC? id rather take the metro then drive.
          Papi L-Gee
          • 3 Years Ago
          @NissanGTR
          Wow. Come back to the real world sometime. It's not so scary a place.
        bobmarley
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Hazdaz
        the only place mass transit works (operates in the black) is in japan and thats because they force people to pay enormous tolls to use the roads in lieu of the trains. In Atlanta GA the mass transit MARTA is going to go broke in 2 years unless they double prices.
          John S
          • 3 Years Ago
          @bobmarley
          Show me a road that operates "in the black". They don't.
          Papi L-Gee
          • 3 Years Ago
          @bobmarley
          MARTA gets no state tax money. That's part of the problem.
          dreadcthulhu01
          • 3 Years Ago
          @bobmarley
          cashsixeight - No, mass transit systems only turn a profit in part of Japan, and a small handful of other places, like Hong Kong. Everywhere else ticket sales cover only a fraction of the cost to run mass transit systems, with tax money being used to make up the difference. That's why European have such high gasoline taxes, and the Japanese so many toll roads. You didn't think those trains paid for themselves, did you? Now, how much funding mass transit systems should get, if any at all, from tax dollars, is another debate entirely.
          Hazdaz
          • 3 Years Ago
          @bobmarley
          When was the last time ANY road system turned a profit?? When does I95 make money? What about the local sewer system or the bridge across the street from grandmas? Roads, bridges and the like are part of our infrastructure. To think that mass transit has to make a profit, is both ignorant and shows how far removed most people are to understanding the problem. At best, some bridges across the nation have enough tolls to pay for their upkeep (or part of it at least), but infrastructure as a whole costs us money so a society can function. To think that those infrastructure projects need to pull in a profit is moronic at best, and a rather dangerous idea at worst.
          cashsixeight
          • 3 Years Ago
          @bobmarley
          Actually it works well in places with really high population density. Like all of Japan. Parts of europe. NYC. ETC. It doesn't work in Chicago very well because the whole city is so spread out.
          Mike
          • 3 Years Ago
          @bobmarley
          That's because Atlanta is one of the most spread out cities in the entire world and mass transit operates most efficiently in higher density places.
      • 3 Years Ago
      [blocked]
      The Dude
      • 3 Years Ago
      i freaking hate traffic
      cashsixeight
      • 3 Years Ago
      Move closer to work, idiots.
        RocketRed
        • 3 Years Ago
        @cashsixeight
        And tell us how a family making median income can afford to live any where near DC/SF/NYC/Etc? I guess they can all pack into a one bedroom walk-up across the hall from you, and commute to work on fixies.
          Commute Alternatives
          • 3 Years Ago
          @RocketRed
          I live close to downtown Phoenix in a house my wife and I bought recently. Granted, 5 years ago we wouldn't have been able to afford the place, but now we can. Most of my friends who live in the faraway suburbs cite a "bigger house" and a "nice neighborhood" as reasons for buying far away from work. But is it really worth an extra room or two you rarely use or a neighborhood full of newer, cookie-cutter houses? I don't think so. I love my Central Phoenix neighborhood. And I bike-commute to work. On a fixie.
        Quen47
        • 3 Years Ago
        @cashsixeight
        Take a high school course on Home Economics, idiot
        Bscar
        • 3 Years Ago
        @cashsixeight
        The cost of gas to commute would still be cheaper than buying a new house
      m52go
      • 3 Years Ago
      It doesn't have to be one or the other. Drive cars long-distance and bike/mass-transit to commute. If our bone-headed politicians would put the millions of dollars they're putting into rebuilding perfectly nice roads into building safer, dedicated, lighted, paved (covered?) bike paths, the world would be an infinitely better and healthier place.
      Sgt Beavis
      • 3 Years Ago
      It doesn't cost me a dime. 100% Telecommuting FTW!
      • 3 Years Ago
      [blocked]
      RocketRed
      • 3 Years Ago
      DC has hideous traffic but it a "strong" public transit system? DC's sytem is very limited. It has a very hub and spoke subway system,with no express tracks. And it has busses. It is a joke compared to real system like NYC, London, Berlin, Paris. You can't use it to commute between the major commercial areas outside the District without traveling a long distance. Even going downtown from the suburbs it's massively overcrowded and slow in the rush hours. And it is very expensive.
      Jonathan
      • 3 Years Ago
      ... 18 million cars? How long did it last?!?!?!?
      ?!
      • 3 Years Ago
      Well thats makes my commute in Manhattan seem a lot less painful...
      Jay
      • 3 Years Ago
      Seems a bit incorrect if you ask me. I commute in and out of SF every day and at 30minutes of delay each way that sums on to be 1 hour of delay per day. At a average of 20 working days per month that is 240 hours I am stuck in traffic each year. I don't know where the 49 Hours/year in delay is coming from... But again this is an average calculation and I can be just a one off.
    • Load More Comments