4WD
$50 site donor 2025
And once it’s part of a supply chain - it’s irrigated and chemicals are part of the runoff …I had forgotten that part - so much corn grown just for fuel ethanol.
And once it’s part of a supply chain - it’s irrigated and chemicals are part of the runoff …I had forgotten that part - so much corn grown just for fuel ethanol.
It’s not, it may sound harsh because I don’t play the word games, but it was not an insult. Just an observation. Same as people calling my posts hard or bashful.That’s just an insult. I haven’t insulted you at all.
Being a farmer himself, your 39th wanted to keep farmland in production instead of paying farmers not to plant crops. The rest is history.I had forgotten that part - so much corn grown just for fuel ethanol.
Yes, they do. This is exactly the same thing as freedom of speech. Do I like all things people say? No. They should be free to say whatever they want except calling for violence, (though the definition of calling for violence has been abused by politicians, these days.)
So essentially what you’re saying is this:
People have the freedom to do X, (example say mean things or buy a ford excursion to commute)
I wish they would not do X (say mean things or buy an excursion to commute)
You say to me “your desire they adjust their behaviors doesn’t end at simply wanting change, it will lead to totalitarian quashing of freedom”
Which is wrong.
My position does end there.
It’s like you say, someone simply wishing people would curtail over consumption is wrong - like a direct route to a draconian society. Which I completely disagree with.
Some people want censorship - I do not want. I simply want people to exercise FREE WILL (please understand this!) restraint in what they say (or do, like buying massive vehicles without any measure of restraint by their own volition)
You accuse me by association. So stop comparing me to Karens and argue my point as spoken, because it is not right to associate my arguments with something that is blatantly contrary to my perspective like censorship or quashing people’s choice to buy what they want.
No. My viewpoint does not lead to government overreach. If a majority of the population said they don’t like overconsumption, but will DEFEND others’ right to do it, that is NOT destroying freedom.
I respect that you haven’t resorted to insults, or outbursts of anger, but still, your argument that my viewpoint is equivalent to “Karen” domination is wrong, my friend.
It was as predicted in the 1940’s, so not 40 years ago.Not sure where you’re getting all of this, but this has been predicted for the last 40 years and none of it came true.
Population collapse will not be pretty and it will not be cause by lack of resources
Maybe, but there are more than enough RAM trucks to go around.It was as predicted in the 1940’s, so not 40 years ago.
Our population is becoming increasingly impotent and diseased because our food is devoid of nutritional value due to what we predicted back in the 40’s
Our increases in lifespan have plateaued and are decreasing per most models, our youngest generation is smaller and dying at higher rates than the previous.
Much of our crop land can only grow gmo corn and soy which is virtually inedible without extensive processing , other more useful crops cannot grow due to lack of moisture and soil quality which are difficult to develop from scratch.
Despite valiant efforts by farmers altering their methods of farming top soil erosion is continuing to increase.
10% of western wells have gone dry in the last decade and we are approaching mechanical limits in many areas.
There are a not insignificant number of communities that get their water bottled or from rain barrels and AC because they can’t redrill a well deep enough to get water.
Our recent crop failure rates have gone up at a slow but predictable rate for about 20 years.
Those who don’t know just aren’t paying attention, maybe a slow boiling frog situation.
And more comingMaybe, but there are more than enough RAM trucks to go around.
I will say having dealt with this dealership before, they are excellent…….at least they were a few years ago.I put this up prior but this is my local dealer. Times are a changing.
View attachment 223925
Our population is becoming increasingly impotent and diseased because our food is devoid of nutritional value due to what we predicted back in the 40’s
This thread has had a number of posts that defy logic and are personally insulting, even when the authors of these posts claim that they are not.
I'm surprised that it's not locked.
I'll add this and then leave it alone.
Most of us are very capable of persuading ourselves that what we want coincides perfectly with what we actually need.
At least a couple of manufacturers have become quite adept at inducing the want with buyers who then construct the need for themselves.
When you have lemons you make lemonade and when you can only make money selling large and hefty vehicles then I think we know where the advertising and promotional dollars are going to go.
With regards to trucks, I dislike the proliferation of big cars everywhere on American roads. I don’t appreciate knowing that I am at a safety disadvantage because I’m not willing to DD a thirsty SUV or massive truck. That being said, I hate even worse a government that would mandate people driving small cars, so I say go ahead and drive whatever you want. I simply wished there was a cultural shift away from the vast majority of people driving big trucks and obese SUVs. Don’t take this personal, because you are not the vast majority.
Not sure whether you read my post with any attention to detail, but most of us don't tow 7500 lb trailers.Let me know how it goes towing my 7500 lb trailer behind your forester.
Most of us find it very easy to point out "flaws" in the choices of others, while remaining blissfully aware of their own excessive purchases and lifestyle. Boats, sports cars, big homes, air conditioned/heated homes, dining out, expensive streaming services, large tvs, pricy smartphones/laptops and other electronics, designer clothes, the list is long and endless. The fact that you're American puts your carbon footprint and lifestyle ahead of the vast, vast majority of men on this planet and definitely the top 99% when considering life to date. I bet you're not living in a mud hut eating beans from a can.
"Let those without sin cast the first stone."
Not sure whether you read my post with any attention to detail, but most of us don't tow 7500 lb trailers.
If you do, then a truck is what you need, not merely want.
My dogs would love the front bench!You can still get a stripper model if you so desire. Absolutely love mine and it handles big bumps/holes in the road far FAR better than my 300, Forte, or Caliber ever did.
*not pictured: the cloth seats (an optional extra) and a front bench seat which is better than any console
View attachment 224115
We do make choices.
You like having a travel trailer and need a thirsty truck to pull it with, so good for you.
We like couple of week vacations in Europe in summer and the Caribbean in winter.
As you say, it's all a matter of what one wants.
Wife and I want a travel trailer and a truck to tow it with about as much as we want weekly colonoscopies, although I'll admit we've considered it. For us, the math don't math.
You may feel the same about foreign travel and Forester or HAH ownership.
As you say, it's all about what one chooses.
I said no such thing.That's what I'm trying to say. Live and live.
But if you're going to go on a public forum and wish/suggest/demand the removal of "excessive" purchases like large cars and trucks, then lets not be hypocritical; lets look at own life as well and be ready to make sacrifices there too.
based on the experience of people I actually know, a sample size of 3, the Ecoboost 2.7 is a complete disaster to own past 75 K miles with 66% failure rate of the cam chains and guides. A very expensive repair, even after Ford good willed part of the repair. One needed a replacement engine. All that to save about 2 mpg. Not worth it.They did, Hurricane, the inline-6. The HEMI has always been an emissions headache, the chamber design has never lent itself to good emissions performance, that's why it has dual ignition. EVERYBODY is now offering lower displacement turbo engines, so it's not surprising that Stellantis went that direction a well. Some were much earlier to the party (Ford Ecoboost) than others. And some have been very successful (Ford Ecoboost) and others hot garbage (new Tundra engine).