progress parked?

Last month, a friend drove from Goa to Bihar for work.
He came back describing two completely different Indias.

Same country.
Same government.
Same economic policies.

But the streets told completely different stories.

In Goa, every second house had a car parked outside.
Streets lined with Swifts, Cretas, and even the occasional Fortuner.
The normalcy of car ownership was so pervasive that he stopped noticing it.

Then Bihar.

Hours of driving through towns where cars felt like rare sightings.
Where families on scooters were the norm. Cars felt like exceptions.
Parking lots sat mostly empty.

Later I checked the numbers: 
Goa has 45.2% of households owning cars.
Bihar? Just 2%.

A 22-fold difference. Inside one country.

This isn't about being rich or poor.

It's about something deeper that most Indians don't understand about how we move.

The national average tells us only 7.5% of Indian households own cars.

But that number is meaningless when you look at the state-by-state breakdown.

Kerala ranks second at 24.2% despite being only the 15th richest state by GDP per capita.

Jammu & Kashmir sits at 23.7%.

Himachal Pradesh at 22.1%.

Punjab at 21.9%.

Meanwhile, West Bengal languishes at 2.8%, Odisha at 2.7%, Andhra Pradesh at 2.7%.

The conventional wisdom would say this is about income.

Richer states buy more cars. Simple, right?

Except it's not.

Kerala shouldn't have 24.2% car ownership.

Its GDP per capita ranks 15th nationally.

States far wealthier show much lower ownership rates.

But then I found the hidden variable: Kerala receives ₹2 lakh crore ($24 billion) annually in NRI remittances, representing 19.7% of India's total and the highest among all states.

With 2.1 million Kerala emigrants globally, 88.5% in Gulf countries, this money flows directly into standard of living upgrades.

The data shows 40% goes to land purchases and construction, 38% to daily living expenses.

Car purchases that income alone couldn't support suddenly become possible.

But there's more.

Kerala transitioned from traditional matrilineal joint families to nuclear families.

Nuclear families make independent spending decisions, prioritizing personal assets over pooled resources.

High female literacy and workforce participation create two-income households with greater purchasing power.

Kerala is a case study in how non-income factors determine car ownership.

While I was obsessing over India's internal gaps, I stumbled onto something that changed how I see transportation entirely.

Singapore maintains approximately 120 cars per 1,000 people.
Compare that to America's 890.

You'd think Singapore just can't afford cars, right?

Wrong.

Singapore deliberately restricts car ownership through the Certificate of Entitlement (COE) system.

Before buying any vehicle, you must first bid for a license granting the right to own a car for 10 years.

Recent COE prices hover around S$92,000-141,000 ($68,000-105,000 USD) depending on vehicle category.

That's the cost of the license. Before buying the actual car.

The total upfront cost for a basic car typically ranges S$120,000-150,000 ($89,000-111,000 USD) including COE.

Yet Singapore maintains world-class mobility through its 240 km MRT network carrying 3.24 million daily passengers with average fares around $1.50.

The lesson?

Low car ownership doesn't mean low mobility. It means different infrastructure choices.

The American Opposite Revealed Something Else

America maintains 890 vehicles per 1,000 people, with over 91% of households owning at least one car.

This didn't happen by accident.

Post-World War II, the Federal Housing Administration insured mortgages exclusively for properties in white-only neighborhoods.

The 1956 Federal-Aid Highway Act authorized $25 billion (equivalent to $220 billion today) to construct 41,000 miles of Interstate Highway System.

Highway construction deliberately targeted Black and brown neighborhoods, displacing over 1 million people in the first 20 years.

Meanwhile, modern American suburbs remain physically impossible to navigate without cars due to Euclidean zoning that separates residential areas from shops, offices, and services by law.

Single-family homes occupy 70% of suburban housing, creating distances of 3-10+ miles between homes and basic services.

The result?

Americans drive an average of 13,476 miles annually, nearly double Europe's 10,000 km per capita, despite similar car ownership rates.

The Pattern That Changed Everything

Here's what stunned me most.

Germany maintains 586-590 cars per 1,000 inhabitants.

Yet Germans drive only half the distance annually compared to Americans.

They own cars but don't rely on them exclusively.

In Germany, Munich's U-Bahn operates with 98.7% on-time performance.

The Germany Ticket provides unlimited nationwide transport access for €49 monthly. The Netherlands created 35,000+ km of dedicated cycle paths, achieving 27% national cycling mode share.

Car ownership and car dependency can be completely decoupled.

Infrastructure determines behavior more than preferences determine infrastructure.

Back to that Goa-Bihar divide.

It's not just about income. 

Bihar has less than 1 bus per lakh population, the lowest nationally.

Yet Bihar has strong railway density providing some mobility alternatives.

Goa's 16.43% tourism contribution to GSDP creates service sector incomes. But it's also about poor public transport and compact geography making personal vehicles practical.

Himachal Pradesh (22.1%) and Jammu & Kashmir (23.7%) face mountainous terrain creating limited public transport infrastructure.

Roads become seasonal. Buses prove unreliable.

Personal vehicles become essential for basic mobility regardless of income.

Delhi's 19.4% car ownership despite high income reflects its extensive Metro + bus network.

The Delhi Metro carries 4.63 million passengers daily. Infrastructure creates alternatives.

The national context reveals only 63 of 458 Indian cities with 1+ lakh population have formal bus networks.

Average national bus availability reaches just 10.8 buses per lakh population.

This infrastructure deficit forces car reliance in tier-2 and tier-3 cities for families that can afford it.

India's vehicle ownership will likely double to 309 per 1,000 by 2050 as GDP per capita rises from current $2,700 to projected $10,500.

But here's what nobody is asking: Are we building the infrastructure to make that sustainable?

Singapore chose restriction + transit excellence.

America chose highways + car dependency.

Europe chose high ownership + low usage through alternatives.

China chose simultaneous massive investment in both highways and public transit.

India is choosing... what exactly?

The Goa-Bihar gap will persist. 

States with NRI remittances, tourism economies, and geographic necessity will maintain leads. Eastern states with good railways and continued poverty may lag.

But the real choice is whether we'll build infrastructure that makes mobility accessible to all Indians, regardless of whether they own a car.

Think about it: What would happen if your city suddenly had Singapore's transit quality?

Would you still drive every day?

I know so many friends in Bombay who have now ditched their car for the aqua line metro in bombay to commute to work. Because they value time over status. 

Until next week,
Ritesh