For the individual owning the car, It is very high. When we take the societal costs into consideration, it is even higher.

• A paper from Gössling et al., 2019, "The Social Cost of Automobility, Cycling and Walking in the European Union", 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.12.016, via CityNerd (youtube video).
• Another paper by Gössling et al. in Ecological Economics, 2022 was really eye-opening. Over 50 years, the total lifetime cost of ownership of a "cheap" car will reach 600,000 EUR, out of which almost a third is effectively a subsidy from society to the car's owner. If you are considering owning your own car, I strongly recommend to at least skim this paper (CC license, HTML and PDF freely available).
• Another paper (Mattioli et al., Energy Research & Social Science, 2020), this is one is a review that considers our car dependence from a systems of provision approach. Quite interesting if you want to learn more about the of the political-economic underpinnings of car dependence (CC license, HTML and PDF freely available).
• A 2023 paper that tells how the car industry has deliberately pushed motorists into greater debt in order to save itself: The financialisation of car consumption. Nice summary in this Mastodon thread.

The Gössling paper generated some news items across the web, for example

• Kea Wilson, StreetsBlog USA, 2022. Takes an American perspective, which mainly means that everything gets worse.
• Carlton Reid, Forbes, 2022. Again, puts an American perspective on the numbers, but correctly states that "cars suck more cash than most people imagine".

I also remember a Youtuber doing a nice video on the Gössling paper, but I cannot recall enough about it to find it at the moment. Maybe I will find it later.

En väldigt grundläggande kurs bestående av förinspelade lektioner av universitetslärare i ekonomi.

Kursen är uppdelad i fyra delar: grunder i finansiell kunskap, hur man köper ett hus, hur man sparar för sin pension och hur man investerar pengar på, till exempel, aktiemarknaden.

Via IT-pedagogen.

Scientific Sense by Gill Eapen: Prof. Robert Lustig who is Professor Emeritus of Pediatrics at the University of California, San Francisco, and the Director of the Weight Assessment for Teen and Child Health (WATCH) Program at UCSF. His most recent book is Metabolical – The Lure and Lies of Processed Food, Nutrition and Modern Medicine.

Most of the video is about diet and metabolism. Very interesting.
The last 15 minutes discusses food subsidies.

How much could 10 french franc in 1898 buy in today's rupees? What was the worth of 1 billion German mark in 1923 or 1000 Polish zloty in 1980? Was an annual wage of 25 pounds per year in 1780 much compared to the wage rates at the time?

Via http://www.myntkabinettet.se/fakta/rakna_ut_penningvardet

Svensk historisk prisomvandlare

From Patrick Collison's review:

World Bank data indicate that 3.7 billion people, about half the world’s population, are exposed to more than 50 µg/m³ of PM2.5 on an annual basis, 5x the unit of measure for most of the findings below.

• Substantial declines in short-term cognitive performance after short-term exposure to moderate (median 27.0 µg/m³) PM2.5 pollution: “The results from the MMSE test showed a statistically robust decline in cognitive function after exposure to both the candle burning and outdoor commuting compared to ambient indoor conditions. The similarity in the results between the two experiments suggests that PM exposure is the cause of the short-term cognitive decline observed in both.” […] “The mean average [test scores] for pre and post exposure to the candle burning were 48 ± 16 and 40 ± 17, respectively.” – Shehab & Pope 2019.
• Chess players make more mistakes on polluted days: “We find that an increase of 10 µg/m³ raises the probability of making an error by 1.5 percentage points, and increases the magnitude of the errors by 9.4%. The impact of pollution is exacerbated by time pressure. When players approach the time control of games, an increase of 10 µg/m³, corresponding to about one standard deviation, increases the probability of making a meaningful error by 3.2 percentage points, and errors being 17.3% larger.” – Künn et al 2019.
• A 3.26x (albeit with very wide CI) increase in Alzheimer’s incidence for each 10 µg/m³ increase in long-term PM2.5 exposure? “Short- and long-term PM2.5 exposure was associated with increased risks of stroke (short-term odds ratio 1.01 [per µg/m³ increase in PM2.5 concentrations], 95% CI 1.01-1.02; long-term 1.14, 95% CI 1.08-1.21) and mortality (short-term 1.02, 95% CI 1.01-1.04; long-term 1.15, 95% CI 1.07-1.24) of stroke. Long-term PM2.5 exposure was associated with increased risks of dementia (1.16, 95% CI 1.07-1.26), Alzheimer’s disease (3.26, 95% 0.84-12.74), ASD (1.68, 95% CI 1.20-2.34), and Parkinson’s disease (1.34, 95% CI 1.04-1.73).” – Fu et al 2019. Similar effects are seen in Bishop et al 2018: “We find that a 1 µg/m³ increase in decadal PM2.5 increases the probability of a dementia diagnosis by 1.68 percentage points.”
• A study of 20,000 elderly women concluded that “the effect of a 10 µg/m³ increment in long-term [PM2.5 and PM10] exposure is cognitively equivalent to aging by approximately 2 years”. – Weuve et al 2013.
• “Utilizing variations in transitory and cumulative air pollution exposures for the same individuals over time in China, we provide evidence that polluted air may impede cognitive ability as people become older, especially for less educated men. Cutting annual mean concentration of particulate matter smaller than 10 µm (PM10) in China to the Environmental Protection Agency’s standard (50 µg/m³) would move people from the median to the 63rd percentile (verbal test scores) and the 58th percentile (math test scores), respectively.” – Zhang et al 2018.
• “Exposure to CO2 and VOCs at levels found in conventional office buildings was associated with lower cognitive scores than those associated with levels of these compounds found in a Green building.” – Allen et al 2016. The effect seems to kick in at around 1,000 ppm of CO2.