We review products independently, but we may earn affiliate commissions from buying links on this page. Terms of use.

If you search for images of the self-driving future, it's filled with lots of good-looking professional types—and large turtlenecks. I get that upscale automakers like Mercedes-Benz and Volvo want to show aspirational images, but as Jalopnik asked this week, what about those who can't afford a luxury vehicle?

Low-income populations already spend an inordinate amount on transportation compared to the middle and upper class. According to the Pew Charitable Trusts, "lower-income households spent nearly 16 percent of their income on transportation in 2014, up from 9 percent four years earlier. In contrast, households in the middle spent about 11 percent of their income on transportation in 2014, while those at the top spent 8 percent."

Public transportation is, of course, a low-cost alternative to car ownership. But as Harvard professor and author Rosabeth Moss Kanter tells The Atlantic, there are challenges. Public-transit riders in low-income areas "reported that bus drivers sometimes didn't complete routes late at night because there were very few passengers and the neighborhoods were considered dangerous," she said. "Or bus drivers would sometimes pass people by standing at bus stops."

A 2015 study from Harvard found that access to efficient and affordable transportation is associated with aspects of upward mobility such as employment, education, healthcare, quality food, and goods at reasonable prices. And the longer the commute time, the less chance someone has of moving up the economic ladder.

"Without really good public transportation, it's very difficult to deal with inequality," Kanter said. But contrary to Jalopnik's take, autonomous technology could provide solutions for the underprivileged.

New Options for Low-Income Populations

When it comes to getting from point A to point B, cost-per-mile is an important metric, although it doesn't take into account the hassles of public transportation. If autonomous technology could lower costs-per-mile and provide the convenience of point-to-point transportation like private vehicles or ride-sharing, it could offer new options for low-income populations.

Last year a Deutsche Bank market research team examined the cost of vehicle ownership versus the cost of UberX in the top 20 largest US metro areas, and also added in the estimated cost of a "future driverless taxi." While the cost of vehicle ownership varied by city—the New York/Tri-State area was the most expensive at $1.53 per mile, while St. Louis was the cheapest at $0.67 per mile—the US average was $0.90 per mile.

In almost all 20 metro areas, the estimated cost of a future driverless taxi was just slightly over the cost of vehicle ownership. While this is a ballpark figure, many experts believe the cost of robo-taxis will be even lower or perhaps subsidized so that it's free.

"Without human drivers, we estimate that on-demand mobility companies will be able to [operate] at $0.89 per mile; close to the $0.90 per mile average cost of operating a car in the top 20 US [metro areas]," Deutsche Bank reported. It also noted that options like UberPool, where the cost of the ride is shared with others, could make the cost even lower.

This concept of ride-sharing is what's fueling the vanpool service Chariot, which was acquired by Ford last year. And, despite pictures on its website of vans filled with young professionals, Chariot helps fill the gaps between public transit for low-income populations in expensive areas like San Francisco and New York.

There's little doubt that Chariot and other services that will likely follow it will one day be autonomous, much like Waymo is now doing without drivers in a trial in the Phoenix area. Then maybe we'll see pictures of low-income population taking advantage of self-driving technology, sans turtlenecks.