Vehicle Size and What People "Need"

[tenderloin]

Originally Posted By: d00df00d

Is that really how you feel when someone criticizes your judgment?


If you ask a question like that, you will have no understanding of the answer.

 

[tenderloin]

As far as endless resources, in your lifetime or your childrens...that would not be oil.....

Should be

As far as limited resources, in your lifetime or your children's...that would not be oil.....

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: tenderloin
If you ask a question like that, you will have no understanding of the answer.

Don't worry. I think I already have a pretty good idea of what you were going to say.

 

[jcwit]

May get flamed for this but here me out anyway. Many say folks driving big boats getting poor milage does not affect them. Others claim only libs push for the small gas sipping cars. Others refuse to admit there is a finit supply of oil in the ground, which there is just as there was a finit supply of gold in the California gold valley.

Now not asking for or supporting any government controls of any kind, lets take this to the exstreme.

Suppose, just suppose 95% (never gonna happen I know) of the driving populous all of a sudden by their oun vocation purchased autos getting 40 plus miles per gallon. Do you honestly think Gas would stay at the current $3.00 (approx) amount it is now? By using this example I'm trying in bring out how gas guzzlers effect us all. One or two, no, but in the numbers we now have they do.

Another thought is why are todays P/U trucks so huge? The P/U's from the later 50's & 60 had the same bed size but overall were much smaller. Has our infrastructure gone to haydes that much? Or is it that everyone wants to go mountain climing? Why, just why are the current P/U's so high and bulky.

As I said previously I wish for personal responsibility not government control, and yes of course if needed thats an entirely different situtation. I have a single lady next door neighbor that drives a new car purchased every few years, not really a gas sipper but not a gas hog either. She also ownes an older P/U truck (10 yrs old or older) that she uses for trash hauling or using for large loads. This truck is available for the whole neighborhood to use and we all make it worth her while to plate and insure and upkeep with it. I would imagine it doesn't get 4/5 thousand miles a year but sure is handy to have and obviously doesn't create the dredded "carbon foot print".

 

[LS2JSTS]

Originally Posted By: tenderloin
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS


The argument is that people should make their own choices differently, and that the people affected by those choices should speak up.


By saying people should make their choices differently removes it being their choice.

No thanks....

Btw the vehicle, house, boat, airplane, TV on and on I choose to buy and use, has nothing to do with you or your life or lot in life.

Please take care of you and yours...I'll be fine. Thanks


For the record, that is not my comment you linked to. How is my name attached to that comment?

 

[d00df00d]

He probably accidentally excised the wrong text at the beginning of the quotation.

(For anyone who didn't notice, that was my comment.)

 

[Mr_Incredible]

If for some reason everybody went out and bought 40mpg cars, there would only be short time of a glut of gasoline that caused lower prices. The refining companies would be racing to see who could decommission refineries fastest. It wouldn't be long before capacity/supply were in tune again at $4gal. The commodities speculators would still be making money and the only thing changed would be a lot of people with a decrease in hauling capacity and head room.

As for the idea of a finite supply of gold in X place, perhaps it is finite...but how much is left now? You'll never know since you can no longer get to it. Off-limits federal lands, increased restrictions on how you can get to it, and increased exploratory costs preclude mining on any large scale there now. It's the same with oil. It's out there, we just can't go get it and bring it to market locally. Thus we HAVE to send our $$ across our borders and overseas to buy it from people that hate our guts.

 

[tenderloin]

jcwit

Taxes make up more of the price of a gallon of gasoline than oil companies profits.

With the new CAFE standards due in 2016, the government says these new cars will cost $900 more (low ball IMO) but save the consumer $3000 in gasoline purchases over the life of the vehicle.

HOWEVER, the states and feds get big dollars from gasoline taxes...taxes they depend on. Now when these new cars hit the market and gasoline consumption starts to drop...so will the taxes coming in. What happens next? Of course the gasoline taxes will have to be raised to make up for the reduced revenue due to lower consumption..so the $3000 savings is nothing but a lie (big surprise)

Add in the cap and trade nonsense as well as speculators etc...$3.00 won't be around much longer IMO

LS2JSTS Sorry for the mistake...

 

[jcwit]

I was only using gold as an example. The same holds true for many items, another ecample is copper in the UP of Mich., any coal mine that has run out, silver mines that no longer produce, oil wells that no longer pump oil, the only end to the list is the end of the commidity list.

BTW we do not have gas at $4.00 per gal. and the latest projection minutes ago on the FOX Financial channel says they expect the price of a barrel of oil to go back into the $70 dollar range.

You are correct that the oil companies would cut back on production. Are we only pawns in the great game of live?

Ah yes, I remember the days of $ .16 to $ .18 cent per gallon gas. Course we were using our own oil.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: Mr_Incredible
If for some reason everybody went out and bought 40mpg cars, there would only be short time of a glut of gasoline that caused lower prices. The refining companies would be racing to see who could decommission refineries fastest. It wouldn't be long before capacity/supply were in tune again at $4gal. The commodities speculators would still be making money and the only thing changed would be a lot of people with a decrease in hauling capacity and head room.

I agree with everything you said here until the underlined part. Two points in response, just for a start:

1. Such a drastic reduction in petroleum consumption would mean that we would have the flexibility to cut out some of the rather more unsavory countries from our oil market because friendly companies like Canada would be able to provide for much more of our demand. More business for our allies, less for our enemies, and more bargaining power for us.

2. With less pollution from road vehicles and fewer refineries, maybe it wouldn't be as urgent an issue to control pollution, and other businesses could be a lot more flexible. Heck, maybe we could get the government to stop ratcheting up emissions standards on cars as much.


And that's not even considering the consequences of a change in attitude toward favoring more efficient vehicles, which would go FAR beyond fewer visits to the gas pump.


Again, this is yet another reason I hate the argument that fuel economy and its costs to vehicle owners are the main point. It doesn't even consider a fraction of the issue.

 

[Win]

Originally Posted By: d00df00d
The argument is that people should make their own choices differently, and that the people affected by those choices should speak up.

The people who support free choice, and are tired of all of the complaining of people who perceive they are adversely affected by the free choice of other people, should likewise speak up at every opportunity.

I support free choice, and I don't care if anyone else likes, or does not like, what I drive, the size of my house(s), or any other characteristic of my existence.

To the people who take issue with any of same, I politely say myob.

 

[jcwit]

Problem is your business affects others, me encluded, as does what I do or do not do affects others encluding you. No one is an island.

 

[LS2JSTS]

Originally Posted By: tenderloin
LS2JSTS Sorry for the mistake...

Cool, no problems. Just wanted to clarify that I am firmly on the side of choice......

I choose to own both small and large vehicles and use them for their intended purpose.

For those who think that smaller cars as a universal standard will lower the price of gasoline.....Could you please explain why gas is so expensive in Japan and in Europe where the widespread use of smaller cars is the norm? Even the law in the case of Japan.

The government is a one way street, once they have a power or tax stream, they never cease to use it. Assuming that the regulation, laws and taxes on fuel will lighten up on the manufacturers or us is pure folly, it'll never happen.

 

[jcwit]

quote: For those who think that smaller cars as a universal standard will lower the price of gasoline.....Could you please explain why gas is so expensive in Japan and in Europe where the widespread use of smaller cars is the norm? Even the law in the case of Japan.

In a word "taxes".

 

[LS2JSTS]

Originally Posted By: jcwit
quote: For those who think that smaller cars as a universal standard will lower the price of gasoline.....Could you please explain why gas is so expensive in Japan and in Europe where the widespread use of smaller cars is the norm? Even the law in the case of Japan.

In a word "taxes".


Yes, but the point was made that the taxes, EPA requirements and such here would be lowered. Do you think the government would lower our fuel taxes? Or lighten up on EPA requirements? I just dont see that happening, if anything it would get worse, because they could argue that our total end costs would be a net break even.

Or do you think the government would use that sudden shift in car buyers habits to instantly raise fuel taxes in order to say pay for "much needed infrastructure improvements" or "universal healthcare"? I'm not argueing the validity or the usefullness of doing so. I'm just pointing out the universal truth that governments dont give back tax streams or lower them in general. The "need" for those funds would merely be shifted to other arenas, and we would all be left paying the same or more in the future.

Also, remember that all the while our government twits were lambasting "big oil" for the prices at the pump. They were in fact making more money off of every gallon that Americans bought than "big oil" did. The Government could have given people a REAL break on that tax, but they didn't. They need and thrive on that tax stream and it's not going anywhere. If anything, they will use it to submit the people to the whims we see expressed in this thread. They will use that tax to force people to "choose" whats "better" for them, in their opinion anyway. We have much higher gas taxes in our future, I cant for the life of me understand how anyone can figure differently.

 

[XS650]

I think low fuel consumption cars are a good thing, but they won't be a panacea. They will have much less effect of fuel prices than you would guess if you just consider fuel economy numbers and not the nature of the market.

Some other things to consider on the effects of the hypothetical sudden influx of 40 mpg cars.

About 60-70% of the price of gasoline is the price of crude oil.

The US uses a lot of crude to power it's automobiles, but it's not such a big percentage of worldwide crude consumption. Don't expect that to have a major impact on world crude prices.

As another poster said, if govt tax intake is reduced because of less domestic gasoline consumption, expect tax rates to go up to compensate.

If gasoline demand were suddenly halved in the US, the required changes in refining capacities would drive up the cost of refining gasoline, not reduce it. If crude prices drop a little and cost of doing business per gallon goes up, don't expect big price changes.

Lacking federal controls on where oil companies buy crude, they will buy it from the cheapest supplier, so less demand won't cause them to put on their patriotic hats and start buying primarily from North America. Any drop in crude prices will benefit the lowest cost crude producer and hurt the high cost producers. The US and Canada aren't the low cost producers.

Any major disruption in the market would be an opportunity for the speculators and other parasites to take a bigger share of the oil dollar.

A greatly reduced Us market would mean that some oil companies would be disappear as they were bought by the stronger companies. What does reduced competition do to prices?

There would be some price reduction, but nothing that would be noticeable to the average consumer because of the way prices fluctuate now.

I still believe in driving economical cars most of the time, my daily driver gets well over 40 mpg highway.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
I choose to own both small and large vehicles and use them for their intended purpose.

Then you are NOT a target of the criticisms with which this thread started. Same goes for everyone like you in this thread.

 

[Mr_Incredible]

Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: Mr_Incredible
If for some reason everybody went out and bought 40mpg cars, there would only be short time of a glut of gasoline that caused lower prices. The refining companies would be racing to see who could decommission refineries fastest. It wouldn't be long before capacity/supply were in tune again at $4gal. The commodities speculators would still be making money and the only thing changed would be a lot of people with a decrease in hauling capacity and head room.

I agree with everything you said here until the underlined part. Two points in response, just for a start:

1. Such a drastic reduction in petroleum consumption would mean that we would have the flexibility to cut out some of the rather more unsavory countries from our oil market because friendly companies like Canada would be able to provide for much more of our demand. More business for our allies, less for our enemies, and more bargaining power for us.

2. With less pollution from road vehicles and fewer refineries, maybe it wouldn't be as urgent an issue to control pollution, and other businesses could be a lot more flexible. Heck, maybe we could get the government to stop ratcheting up emissions standards on cars as much.


And that's not even considering the consequences of a change in attitude toward favoring more efficient vehicles, which would go FAR beyond fewer visits to the gas pump.


Again, this is yet another reason I hate the argument that fuel economy and its costs to vehicle owners are the main point. It doesn't even consider a fraction of the issue.


Puh-leez. Don't think for a minute that even if overnight mass purchasing of 40mpg cars occurred that there would be ANY relief from the No Drilling crowd. They would probably just get more intense. The Clean Air people would not give an inch, either. It's their religion and to take away their crusade flags would leave them with nothing to do...a dangerous prospect either way.

 

[d00df00d]

I wasn't talking about the lobbyists. I was talking about the government officials who listen to them.


EDIT: I just realized I called Canada a company in that post. Obviously I meant to call it a country. My apologies.

 

[expat]

Originally Posted By: tenderloin
expat

If your name means what I believe it does, IMO you have lost all right to even burp about this country...

If not, then be thankful that many of our dollars go to our neighbor to the North.


I’m not sure what you are referring to, I could claim citizenship in many countries, but not the U.S.
I have worked I the U.S. , I have friends in the U.S. , I have money invested in U.S. companies. I care about the U.S. economy, sadly, probably more than many Americans
We have a saying in Canada “If the U.S. economy sneezes, Canada gets the Flu” Yes, it’s nice to some extent that U.S. money is flowing North for our oil, but with the U.S. $ now at Par with our Dollar, it means my exports are now not competitively priced in the U.S., which in turn hurts our local economy. Stability would be better.
No, I don’t believe for a moment that cutting fuel consumption would cut fuel prices, Would you want your government to do that? Really, you guys have a lot of rebuilding to do down there, 6 million houses in foreclosure, countless more families over there head in debit! Someone has to pay the piper!
OK stick your head in the sand and send the wife off on the school run in a Superduty F250, but for your own good, you might want to start to Expect things to change!