A European couple planning three weeks in California asked a question that seemed genuinely baffling to them: Do we need a car for five days in Los Angeles?
To Americans, the answer is obvious. To Europeans accustomed to functional public transit, the very premise that a major global city might require a personal vehicle for basic mobility is almost incomprehensible.
The Reddit thread perfectly captures the culture shock European visitors experience when confronting America's car-dependent infrastructure. "I don't understand the car situation in California," the poster wrote, noting they'd "never left Europe" and have no friends who've visited California.
The responses from Americans and experienced travelers were unanimous: Yes, you absolutely need a car. Not just for Los Angeles—for virtually everywhere in California outside San Francisco's city center.
The harsh reality: Los Angeles spans roughly 500 square miles with attractions, beaches, and neighborhoods separated by freeway-linked sprawl. The metro system exists but serves limited areas poorly. Buses are slow and time-consuming. Rideshares for a three-week trip would cost thousands of dollars. Walking between destinations? Not feasible—distances that look close on maps translate to hours on foot along highways without sidewalks.
California's other popular destinations tell the same story. San Diego? Need a car for anything beyond downtown. Santa Barbara? Absolutely. Wine country in Napa or Sonoma? Impossible without one. National parks like , , or ? No public transit access whatsoever.
