Mobility is an opportunity to connect people to work, schools, hospitals, and leisure. Mobility fuels self-determination, i.e. controlling one's own fate. Mobility could refer to both social and residential mobility. Upward social mobility is an exercise in self-determination too. Climbing the social ladder gives one choice, which is closely linked with the basic definition of freedom. Is that it, though? There are two kinds of freedoms- negative freedom (in simpler terms, freedom from), and positive freedom (or freedom to). Negative freedom refers to the absence of hurdles in self-determination, while positive freedom refers to choice.
Freedom is, thus, associated with the autonomy of decision (self-determination) and with immunity from interference by others, with the first feature depending on the second.
Both positive and negative freedoms hold immense value. Uncertainty about our own preferences makes it useful to have more options. Putting this in the context of mobility, personal mobility is often sold as "freedom" or one's path to self-determination. I write to argue against it. In an unequal society, all sections of the society do not have similar positive freedom. For example, a captive bus user (the bus user who can't afford anything else but a bus) is by definition not free to choose any other form of transport. On the other hand, one would hardly ever see a public figure taking public transport unless it's a PR activity. The presence of social constraints affects the mode choice of the rich too.
It is also pertinent to understand the two kinds of mobilities - potential mobility and manifested mobility. Potential mobility concerns itself with just the intent to go from point A to point B., while manifested mobility is going from point A to point B. In my opinion, we as a society mix up the two. While potential mobility could mean freedom for some, manifested mobility isn't. Knowing that one can reach anywhere anytime might be liberating, but getting there might not be a "free" process.
Consider this example: you're sitting in your shorts and T-shirt at home and you feel like having an ice cream. You have the choice to order in (or not travel) but you also have a choice to travel. You exercise choice and drive to the nearest Baskin Robbin's or Natural's or Milano (because I'm an Indira Nagar bro now). But so did 50 other people, exercising choice. Did you get the freedom to drive and eat ice cream? Yes. But was it absolutely untainted? No. Did you get freedom from (say) potholes on the road? No. Did you get freedom from congestion? No. Did you get freedom from standing in the queue? No. Negative freedoms are hard to get. Since negative freedom affects positive freedom, so is positive freedom. Personal mobility doesn't mean freedom because often personal mobilities cross paths.