Comments on: OK, I'm glad we got hosed at the pump

There, I said it. In fact, I was quite ecstatic if that would lead Hummer Nation to rethink its ways.

[gefitz]

Amen. I don't wish ill to anyone, but really, companies that refuse to use ANY profit for innovation are the bane of any economy.

More R&D into the things that MATTER, like building useful tools that cost society LESS. First giant company that gets that and jumps in with both feet will be the winner!

[Maccess]

There already are car companies that use profit for innovation--designing extremely efficient and low emission cars and building them in the US. The two most well-known are Toyota and Honda.

[Nicholas Buenk]

Nice to see that Obama seems to have made it ok to finally talk with some sanity.
I guess people feel there's now hope in dealing with the climate and peak oil.
Although I disagree with you on one point, car companies can't sell an SUV if nobody wants to buy it. It takes two to tango. Car companies didn't invest in efficient and green tech, and the public just wanted big cars and didn't want to think about the serious problems we have.

[Lerianis]

There are also the people who NEED a big car because they have a big family (4 adults/teenagers are barely going to fit into a car, anymore than 4.... you need an SUV).

[manualfunky]

to Lerianis, wouldn't say a station wagon of even a Van suffice?

[c|net Reader]

A large SUV fits more people than a car and navigates snow better. If you live in the city, that's not such a big deal. IF you live farther from things, it is. Not everyone lives the same life. It isn't your job to tell others how to live, no matter how much you'd like that. If fuel is expensive, those driving SUVs that don't need to will switch. Those that need to will suffer, but c'est la vie.

[Nicholas Buenk]

First of all any sedan can fit 5 people.
Second of all people shouldn't be having families larger than that anyway, don't forget there is an overpopulation problem.
Responsibility, people. I mean come on. There is no reas

[ScottMo]

Wow. So now you're telling people what size family you think is "responsible" as well as what size car a family should drive. If my spouse & I decide to have six kids and we can afford it, its none of your freakin' business. Unbelievable that someone would make a comment "people shouldn't be having families larger than that anyway".

[numbingpain]

Um, people shouldn't be spewing out babies right now; he is correct. It's not a question of money. It's a question of morality and civic duty. The planet is going to buck the human race one day and it will be because of all the religious idiots who can't stop procreating.

[Nicholas Buenk]

What I was trying to say, which for some reason was cut off, is that there is no reason it should be cheap to have a large family, if you want to be that irresponsible, you can, but expect to pay a lot.

[mattumanu]

"The planet is going to buck the human race one day and it will be because of all the religious idiots who can't stop procreating. "

How utterly stupid.

[ScottMo]

The 2008 population growth rate estimate in the USA & Canada is under 0.9%. "Spewing out" babies? numbingpain, you couldn't be more wrong. Really. That growth rate in the North America is low, less than a percent. So you're lovely take on delivering a new life into the world doesn't match reality.

In a free market country, personal choice is left to the individual. You want it, you pay for it. I got no problem with that. Necessity is the mother of invention. When we run out of cheap gas, we'll get something better.

And for the record: three kids & a Mazda minivan.

[Nicholas Buenk]

The over-population problem will not be solved until there is a solution for China, India and Africa.
Note, there is not enough resources on the planet for everyone to live with dignity, or even to live comfortably as people in the west do. If we want to solve poverty and poorness, we need fewer people, every where.
Personal choice is a good thing and is the foundation of democracy, to enable everyone in the world to have the benefit of it, we need a greater sense of responsibility and fewer people.

[jture]

The Hummer and its obscenely inefficient cousins are an environmental and economic abomination and I for one would like to see them disappear from the face of the earth.

[Lerianis]

Actually, jture.... for the size, weight, etc. of the Hummer...... they get quite a good 'miles to the gallon'. I didn't want to believe that myself, until I looked and saw that for cars IN THEIR WEIGHT CLASS (and they are in class of their own almost) they get good gas mileage.

[The_Decider]

Leria,

Nice attempt at spinning the fact that SUV's are gas guzzling pigs.

[Solaris_User]

:: roll eyes ::

Yes, Obama will make the grass green and the birds sing.

[karpenterskids]

When Obama won the election, these black girls on my campus all started crying, and one of them (with tears in her eyes) declared, "I'll never have to pay off my student loans again!"



It's saddd.
I wonder how long it'll take people like her to realize that Obama's only a man.

[Imalittleteapot]

You know, I didn't really vote or pay any attention this time around, but back when Bush was running again I heard a group talking behind me while I was having coffee. The conversation was something about when Bush gets reelected we can nuke Iran and Pakistan and the whole Middle East and we'll never have to go to war with them again! Also, Bush is going to get a law passed that any women that has an abortion will receive the death penalty immediately! He's going to pass a constitutional amendment to make it happen!

Come on now, did you really think there was a shortage of dumb people? Trust me, there's enough to go around on both sides and they do. Picking out one dumb person to make the whole group look bad, now that's just your average Fox news tactic and it isn't like we don't see what you're trying to do.

[numbingpain]

"You know, I didn't really vote or pay any attention this time around, but back when Bush was running again I heard a group talking behind me while I was having coffee. The conversation was something about when Bush gets reelected we can nuke Iran and Pakistan and the whole Middle East and we'll never have to go to war with them again! Also, Bush is going to get a law passed that any women that has an abortion will receive the death penalty immediately! He's going to pass a constitutional amendment to make it happen!

Come on now, did you really think there was a shortage of dumb people? Trust me, there's enough to go around on both sides and they do. Picking out one dumb person to make the whole group look bad, now that's just your average Fox news tactic and it isn't like we don't see what you're trying to do."

Don't bother being objective...

[Dalkorian]

by Imalittleteapot November 7, 2008 8:59 PM PST
You know, I didn't really vote or pay any attention this time around ...

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amazing. You haven't been paying attention and your right (RESPONSIBILITY!) to vote is unimportant to you (otherwise you would have voted!), but you expect others to listen to your brainless drivel? Go play outside, the grownups are talking here.

[Imalittleteapot]

Dalkorian:
It's not my responsibility to vote. It's my right to vote and like all my rights it is also my right to not vote. I can choose to exercise them or not. Also, just because I don't support one candidate doesn't mean I automatically have to give my vote to the other guy that I dislike just as much. I can vote for A, I can vote for B, or I can keep my vote and take support away from all the candidates and I should have the right to do that. You may not like it, but I don't give a crap.

This mantra that you have a responsibility to vote is just propaganda to get out the vote for both sides that you've obviously fallen for because you believe everything you see on TV. It's not actually true you know. I realize a non-vote is just as much of a vote, but it's a different vote and it's the one I made this time around.

A vote of 0-0 is a much different vote than 1-0 or 0-1. Just because I don't support A doesn't mean I have to give B that extra vote they need to cross over the 50% mark or some other threshold. If you don't understand the math behind all that then I feel sorry for you. If neither side has earned my vote then I won't give my vote. They didn't earn it. If you have two employees that don't work for you the proper thing to do is to fire both of them. It isn't to fire one and give the other one a raise just because you hate that employee less.

When someone does something to earn it they will get it. If you can't understand that then obviously you need to grow up. You go ahead and superficially vote for the lesser evil all you want. At least I know your vote doesn't really mean anything to you. You'll just throw it away on someone you hate just because you like the other guy less. Not me though. My vote means something to me and you have to earn it no matter what side you are on. Just because the other guy didn't earn it doesn't mean you get mine for free or by default. But yes, the get out the vote propaganda they have sold you does sound good doesn't it? I just didn't fall for it because I know that I have a right to not vote and it does make a difference if people exercise that right.

Now, off to play outside. It sounds like fun and you bore me now anyway.

[tsport100]

Thank God that Bush clown is finally out of the White House. Surely he?ll go down in history as the biggest preventable disaster in US history. Could that idiot have been more corrupt and pro oil?? It was the Bush administration that actually gave incentives on such ridiculous vehicles as the Hummer. What we?re seeing is the changing of the guard from the Fat Cat boys club generation who?s only care seemed to be playing Golf and their own personal wealth? We can all see the results of that generation?s brilliant management of resources and the economy, both are global disasters. Good job Bush!! Finally we get a generational change in power!

[kentiler]

We drive a GMC Yukon XL (same as Chevy Suburban). We have 4 kids, and had 3 foster kids for 18 months. We also have 3 labrador retrievers. We had to add an extra set in the back of the Yukon so we could all fit!

We get 16-18 MPG in this yehicle. Our other choice in vehicle would be a full size van. My brother and sister both drive these, and our Yukon XL gets far better mileage than they do!

Now that we're back down to our small family of 6, we can take the extra back seat out and not have to pull a trailer if we are going on a trip!

We also live in the country so we don't do much city driving. We looked at the Yukon Hybrid, but unless you are driving a lot in the city, the MPG won't ever make up for the cost difference in going for the Hybrid.

I must say I am so SICK of people bashing SUVs! I agree we have to get away from oil dependency and find a better fuel, but until then, drive the vehicle that fits your life!

[therealbean]

Well, sure. But you're a rare exception where an SUV makes sense. For many SUV drivers, it's a huge over-purchase made for reasons other than immediate need. Given that their choice of vehicle fouls our environment and raises gas prices, I think it's surely permissible for others to complain--since they're paying part of the tab.

[mrcockrell]

people arent bashing SUVs that are purchased for necessity, they are referring to the SUV trend where everyone and their grandma are buyng bigger and bigger gasoline guslers evn if they are single or 2-3 person families

if you do indeed agree we should get away from oil dependancy then shut it
anyone who already has 4 kids then goes out gets 3 foster kids and 3 large dogs and feels the need to constantly drive around with every last one of them in the car is retarded anyway if you ask me

[numbingpain]

"if you do indeed agree we should get away from oil dependancy then shut it
anyone who already has 4 kids then goes out gets 3 foster kids and 3 large dogs and feels the need to constantly drive around with every last one of them in the car is retarded anyway if you ask me"

I approve this statement.

[D3vildog699]

I am in college right now and the only vehicles i have ever owned are SUV's. My first truck was a 1992 Ford Explorer which saved me so many times its not even funny, winter in Wisconsin/ MN is no joke... I have been in the ditch a few times and the only reason i got out was because of my SUV and its 4x4.. My current Vehicle is a 98' Olds Bravada gets the same gas mileage 16-17 miles... I still wouldn't give it up for a tiny care.... You ever been on a highway that gets turned to pure ICE in 3 hours?? No? Well guess what here.. i am expected to be at work on time even if the roads are deadly. I have seen So many Little Sedans, or even the 06' Impala SS with a V8 Get stuck in the ditch, and i roll on through. I say, if i don't mind paying it, leave me alone. I like having a reliable vehicle. Keep your tiny little Sedans.

[Dalkorian]

by mrcockrell November 8, 2008 6:05 AM PST
anyone who already has 4 kids then goes out gets 3 foster kids and 3 large dogs and feels the need to constantly drive around with every last one of them in the car is retarded anyway if you ask me

------------------------------------------------------------------

It's amazing how many people posting here think they somehow have a right to dictate how others live their lives. It becomes funny when such people call others retarded and yet can't seem to figure out capitalization or use punctuation. It's OK, we'll wait for you to look those big words up in the dictionary.

[FireNorvTurner]

While I agree about a majority of your comments, I have to wonder what you are smoking regarding F-150 trucks. Have you ever tried to get a wheelbarrow into the back of a Civic? While full size trucks are overkill to drive to the office, work crews still require them. You also may have missed that the F-150 has regained the sales title as the number one vehicle seller in the US. The new F-150 has also been in development for some time and also has an increase in fuel mileage. Certainly not as good of mileage as my Scion, but I bet those construction workers that need them for a living are happy with whatever increase they can get. And yes, the automakers did just get loans to develop more efficient vehicles. You must be smoking some good stuff to expect them to develop a 100 MPG work truck and bring it to production in less than 30 days. Those bastard! What are they waiting for??? When you write crap like that it only undermines your credibility.

[meh130]

Charles is right. We do not need large, gas guzzling cars. Nor do we need laptop computers, iPods, and many other convenience. No one needs broadband in the home. We don't need YouTube, cable television, or Xboxes. We sure as hell do not need to live in houses we cannot afford on a normal mortgage with a normal downpayment. Just like driving small, efficient cars, we can type letters on a manual typewriter and mail them, listen to cassette tapes or LP records, use Lynx on a bulletin board over a dial-up modem on a 286 computer, watch the big three, and play board games for entertainment.
If somebody wants to spend their money on gasoline (or iTunes songs, or PS/3 games, or an subprime adjustable rate mortgage), so be it. It is their choice. It is a free country. Or at least it used to be.
If we can bail out irresponsible, greedy people who used a subprime, interest-only, adjustable-rate, 100% down mortgage so they could get into a house which cost 50% more than they can afford, we should also bail out the poor saps taken advantage of by predatory car loans stuck in an SUV they cannot afford to put gas in.

[numbingpain]

"Charles is right. We do not need large, gas guzzling cars. Nor do we need laptop computers, iPods, and many other convenience. No one needs broadband in the home. We don't need YouTube, cable television, or Xboxes. We sure as hell do not need to live in houses we cannot afford on a normal mortgage with a normal downpayment. Just like driving small, efficient cars, we can type letters on a manual typewriter and mail them, listen to cassette tapes or LP records, use Lynx on a bulletin board over a dial-up modem on a 286 computer, watch the big three, and play board games for entertainment.
If somebody wants to spend their money on gasoline (or iTunes songs, or PS/3 games, or an subprime adjustable rate mortgage), so be it. It is their choice. It is a free country. Or at least it used to be.
If we can bail out irresponsible, greedy people who used a subprime, interest-only, adjustable-rate, 100% down mortgage so they could get into a house which cost 50% more than they can afford, we should also bail out the poor saps taken advantage of by predatory car loans stuck in an SUV they cannot afford to put gas in."

The psych ward says you need to be back before 8PM for meds and snack time.

[MadLyb]

I used to have a small private laugh when urbanites would make statements about how we all should be driving 8 foot tin cans barely big enough to hold 4 people.

But, these increasingly aggressive and self-righteous attitudes have worn down my patience.

I am a single person, so no family to haul around and yet I drive an Acura MDX.

Why you may ask, because it makes better economic and environmental sense than driving a small car AND a truck. There is barely a weekend that I don't have a trailer behind the car to haul supplies or equipment for the farm I live on or how much equipment I fill my car with for the Sound and Lighting Production company I co-own.

I did my research and ended up with a vehicle that gets mid 20's on the highway and was ULEV before most people had even heard of the certification. The car has been with me for over 7 years and almost 130K miles with no mechanical issues.

So, next time before you jump to judge, stop and realize that what works for you may not work for the guy next to you and just because I don't drive a glorified golf cart doesn't mean I don't care about my impact on the planet.

[guy-rouillier]

I agree that we need to use energy more responsibly. However, Charles, you have the law of supply and demand backwards. demand does not rise to meet supply, rather supply rises to meet demand. In other words, don't blame Detroit for making gas guzzlers; blame consumers for wanting to drive 2-3 ton vehicles to commute back and forth to work.

[Dalkorian]

Uh, you're talking to a blogger that used the title "I'm glad we got hosed at the pump" and trying to explain supply and demand to him?. LOL!

Think about it for a moment, the public got RAPED by greedy oil executives who have been retiring with multi-billion dollar severance packages and he's happy about it.

I'm glad the repukes got thrown out of government and we can now start rebuilding and trying to put some sanity back into this nation of ours.

[ejschlapp]

If America were serious about energy independence, our government would keep the price of imported oil above $80/bbl. or some other fixed price.
This price guarantee would enable companies to invest in bio-diesel, tar sands, shale, drilling or whatever technology with only the risk of getting their technology to work cost effectively. I doubt that any politicians have the backbone to do this.

[dadsgravy]

Keep coming up with all the excuses you can think of to keep your SUV and I'll keep giving you the finger. It works out for both of us. I mean, I've got a lot of hate and anger inside me. Therapy just isn't going to do it. Neither are pills. I have to flip you off. I just can't get along with out it. Hey, it's not for everybody. I just happen to have special circumstances. You know how it is.

[Dalkorian]

by dadsgravy November 8, 2008 12:00 AM PST
I mean, I've got a lot of hate and anger inside me.

--------------------------------------------------------------

I guess so. Sucks to be you then. Why do you think I or anyone else should care what mental problems you have?

[alphaomega118]

so because some of us live in states with agriculture production.. are we supposed to drive civics on the dirt/mud roads? have you ever been to texas? your small gas saving cars may work in the city, but trucks are a necessity and will continue to be no matter who is president if you want this country to have any agricultural production.. go ahead, give me the finger, but you'll be hard pressed to find clothing and food that wasnt produced with the help of a gas guzzler..

[LexTaliones]

Wow ... I didn't realize what an ignorant jerk you were until just now. How'd that one slip by me. Oh well, one less Blog to read now.

[sdw44444]

yeah, thats what we need more r&d wait till they come out with a tool that replaces your job idiot!

[kenmccaz1]

You say: "Of course, I was blaming the wrong party. People drive what car makers serve up. " Always amazing that "intelligent" people actually think it's a push from above and not pulled by consumers.

[markdoiron]

I drive one of those fuel-inefficient vehicles--a 2007 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited JK. It's similar to the Hummer many around here excoriate, except it's designed for off-road work, versus being a truck chassis with an off-road looking body. I also consider myself reasonably sensitive to environmental issues--I recycle tons, use reusable grocery bags, have CFL lights in my home, run a compost pile, have reduced my driving to less than a tank every two weeks (yes, in the JK), etc.

I need the Wrangler because of what I do: I enjoy the outdoors, and it gets me to trailheads for hiking and backpacking to wilderness places where I practice photography. The Unlimited has enough room for my gear for an extended trip--sometimes as long as three-four weeks. And, I've been know to take the Wrangler out on the rocks for a little play--but only where permitted (Moab, UT; Disney, OK, etc).

I guess at the end of the day I agree that any soccer moms/mall crawlers out there who own a Wrangler (or Hummer or whatever) would be better suited to buy something else. Station wagons and vans would work. Yeah, any guy wouldn't be caught dead driving either one, but that's a perception thing. And, if your real life is so boring that all you do is drive the kids to soccer games and crawl the malls, you probably aren't going to change anyone's perception about you just because you buy a Wrangler that's unsuited for the task. --mark d.

[merlion73]

For the parents with kids, using the fuel resources now means less for your kids. You better be praying that by the time they need the fuel, alternatives have been found. Otherwise, think of their future and not just live in the present!!!

[numbingpain]

"For the parents with kids, using the fuel resources now means less for your kids. You better be praying that by the time they need the fuel, alternatives have been found. Otherwise, think of their future and not just live in the present!!!"

That would require empathy and understanding though...

[seespottype]

The big picture here is that the market responds to pressures far better then conservative or liberal pundits.

Cheap gas, and the world lives with gas guzzlers and pollution. Attempts to force automakers to produce eco friendly products only irks conservatives - and auto makers spend more time finding work arounds. The fault is that the corrective action is aimed at the middle man -- the automaker. That is telling the automaker, "hey, forget about what the market is telling you. " which is antithetical to good capitalism.

Expensive gas changes demand. Now politics is out of the equation. Automakers are now free to do what is in their best interests, which in this case, is to product efficient, and likely cleaner, products.

[Nicholas Buenk]

This might work in the case of oil. However, the price could shoot up as it depletes and harm the economies ability to deal with the problem, which is a case for government intervention, to reduce the impact of the resource running out.
But the real problem, is with climate change, the damage to the environment is not accounted for in the free market. This is why we need either a cap and trading system or a carbon tax.
What the market is telling the automakers, can also be the wrong thing, if the consumers are short sited and irresponsible.

[nicholdraper]

The real problem is our government. I have vehicles that range from a scooter that gets 77 mpg to an Expedition that gets 8 to 12 when pulling my trailer. For those who think we have an over population problem, start reading modern reports. Sure in the 1970's population was growing, but in all industrialized countries, population is shrinking. It would be shrinking in the US if not for the Hispanic population. Claiming that people have no reason for a big vehicle is stupid. Even single guys have friends and like to go hunting, fishing and boating together. Try pulling a boat with a scooter, it can't be done safely. We need to stop the name calling and make laws that make sense. Charge taxes and insurance on the first vehicle. Allow people to buy second and third vehicles tax free and require the insurance companies to cover them. Then the people would be able to keep the boat hauler in the driveway while taking a sensible car, or motorcycle to work. I have to pay an extra $200 a year for a scooter even though I cannot drive it at the same time I drive my Expedition. Our gas tax should go up a little as well, peg it to inflation, rather than a flat 40 cents. If I'm driving my Expedition with eight people in it, I get better MPG per person than the author in his Honda.