"All I'm saying is that having an extra car can yield several benefits, the least of which is saving gas. "
Absolutely. So then we are in the realm of buying toys and/or basing the decision on other factors rather than a decision based on economy or gas costs. I've said the same thing about my motorcycles. I'd still have and ride them if they only got 20mpg. But 40 and 65mpg is just icing on the cake.
It's those that are buying vehicles strictly on the notion of gas or cost savings that need to look at the overall costs. Maybe some of the side benefits that you mention would push their decision over the edge in favor of a second vehicle (or third vehicle for a family). The extra benefits would offset the extra costs enough to justify it.
"I chose a 2nd vehicle (convertible) over a boat, and just rent a boat when I want to. We went boating twice last summer."
Same here - we came close to buying a boat, and, earlier, a motor home, but given how much we'd use it, renting is the better choice for us. I figured I could pay a huge amount per day and still come out ahead. I wonder if renting will become more popular now, with higher gas prices?
Renting is a great option and one that many occasional users overlook. Whether that is a boat, RV, or even a truck. Many hardware stores (like Home Depot) now have pickups and trailers available for day rentals. Most places that sell bulky items also offer delivery (though it's usually way cheaper to rent a truck or trailer and move it yourself because they have to add labor).
I see $20/day trucks for rent all over (though some of those charge an additional per-mile fee). For those that only occasionally need to haul or move something bulky, even if it costs a person $50 a month for rentals, many people would be way ahead when compared to owning a big vehicle. No payments, maintenance, etc. and you only get the poor mileage for one day compared to every day like if you owned it.
Same here - we came close to buying a boat, and, earlier, a motor home, but given how much we'd use it, renting is the better choice for us. I figured I could pay a huge amount per day and still come out ahead. I wonder if renting will become more popular now, with higher gas prices?
Since we use our boat just about every weekend from May to August it would be very expensive to rent when a comparable boat at the marina/campground where we keep our camper runs $250+ a day.
Not counting vacations, but only weekends. I can easily figure 12 weekends of use at $500/ weekend = $12k/yr Far more expensive than owning for us. Even at 1 day per weekend would be close to $6k/yr. Far more than my boat costs to own/yr. But if you only go a few times a summer, then certainly renting would be the way to go.
I see $20/day trucks for rent all over (though some of those charge an additional per-mile fee).
Better check in to that. I rented a truck from Home Depot this summer to bring a paddle boat home and they charged $20 for the first 75 minutes. Don't know what it was for the day, I was able to get it back under the 75 minute time frame.
Definitely the way to go if only need a truck's capability once in a while.
They're not going to gain much sympathy for their cause with this tactic. In fact if I was someone stuck behind one of these guys driving 20 mph whatever sympathy I did have would be quickly replaced with another emotion. In fact just thinking about them feeling justified in imposing on the general public, who are also being impacted by high fuel prices, pisses me off. If truckers find that they can no longer make a living hauling freight then the need to find another livelihood. That's the way it works for the rest of us.
If truckers find that they can no longer make a living hauling freight then the need to find another livelihood. That's the way it works for the rest of us.
It does not always work that way. You buy a semi tractor. Many times people mortgage their homes to buy a big rig. Then you are buried in costs that cannot be passed on. If you walk away you either lose equity in the rig or worse your home. Maybe you borrowed from parents to go into the trucking business.
I had a close friend that tried talking me into a big rig partnership. He had all the figures on how he would pay for the truck and make good money. That was in the late 1980s. He did it for 3 years and was never so happy when he sold the tractor.
I feel for those truckers out there. If I was going to lose my truck because of rising fuel costs. I would park it crossways on the 405 freeway take the keys and walk away. People in Orange county and LA are used to having the freeway blocked for hours with all sorts of crimes. Give the truckers some news coverage with their plight. The high cost of fuel will bring this Nation to its knees. It affects everyone.
you can rent a colorado at uhaul for $20/day plus mileage
the homedepot deal only works if you have one or two big piece items. If you are getting a lot sheetrock or plywood, you're better off going to uhaul. Or have them delivered for a $45 flat fee, you can buy the whole store and they will deliver for $45. The flip side is that you have to wait for delivery. I remember one time I bought paving stones and they were wrapped in a wood pallet when delivered. Gave the dude driving the fork lift a tip and he brought the whole pallet to the area where I want to put the stones down. Saved me hours of hard labor.
"I see $20/day trucks for rent all over (though some of those charge an additional per-mile fee). -chadx"
"Better check in to that. I rented a truck from Home Depot this summer to bring a paddle boat home and they charged $20 for the first 75 minutes. - dieselone"
I did, or I wouldn't have said it in the first place. U-haul has trucks for $19.99 a day. I've used them before. As mentioned, you often pay a per-mile charge for that as well.
As for the 75 minute limit from a Home Depot truck, that would be plenty for most people hauling something home from the hardware store. So sure, there are instances where it might cost you more, but even at $50, for the occasional hauler, it's a lot cheaper than a truck payment, insurance, and maintenance, isn't it? :shades:
Or like I said before, get a little flatbed trailer. Most cars can handle a couple thousand pounds so, minus the weight of the trailer itself, that still leaves quite a bit of available weight for cargo. And if you don't want to buy a trailer, you can rent those, too, for even cheaper than trucks and with unlimited mileage.
I forgot about Uhaul. Though, in my case the Home Depot truck worked better than a Colorado P/U would. The Home Depot truck had a nice flat bed with plenty of tie down anchors along with fold up sides. Really nice for hauling items that won't fit in a standard bed.
I did have to get my lawn tractor service this spring. The tractor service enter charged me $60 to pick-up and deliver the tractor. I looked at renting a flat-be trailer from Uhaul and it was around $20, which I would have had to rent twice and drive about 15 miles each way to get, then drive 30 miles the opposite direction to deliver the tractor. So I just spent the $60 on the deliver service.
One of those little flat bed trailers would be very handy, I'm just running out of room to put stuff!
I did have to get my lawn tractor service this spring. The tractor service enter charged me $60 to pick-up and deliver the tractor. I looked at renting a flat-be trailer from Uhaul and it was around $20, which I would have had to rent twice and drive about 15 miles each way to get, then drive 30 miles the opposite direction to deliver the tractor. So I just spent the $60 on the deliver service.
That's actually not a bad price, to pick up and deliver a tractor, especially when you consider the hassle it would have been otherwise. There's a lawn equipment service place about 2 miles from me, and I have a pickup already, so it's actually pretty convenient for me to just take it myself. Or it would be, if they didn't try to rip us off! We still have an old 1969 era Montgomery Ward tractor that my Granddad bought new. It wouldn't start, and my uncle took it in. They said it needed a bunch of major crap and would've been about $700, so we balked. I went and picked it up and brought it back home.
There's a local guy who works at a nearby golf course, and also works on lawn equipment for other people. I had him come over to look at it, and he got it running for like $100. It really didn't need much...some carb work and other odds and ends. And heck, once it fired up, it sounded healthier than our "new" tractor, a 1990 model.
I never thought about renting a trailer, if I didn't already have a truck. My Intrepid is only rated to tow 1,000 pounds, so it's pretty wussy. But I bet one of my '79 New Yorkers could handle one with ease.
Oh yeah, one of the tractors would definitely fit in the back of my truck. In fact, we brought the 1990 model home from the store in my truck. Well, it was Granddad's truck back then. He had lung cancer and knew he was going to die soon, and he figured that between my uncle and me, we'd kill the two tractors we already had, the '69 and an '85 Hechinger model, so he thought that if he bought a brand new one, my uncle and I would get a few good years out of it.
He died about a month or two after buying that tractor. Somehow I think he'd be proud of the fact that we've gotten 18 years out of that "new" tractor, and kept the old one alive. As for the Hechinger, my uncle gave that away to some friend of the family, and they destroyed it. Now that I think back on it, Granddad gave a '64 Ford Galaxie to them back in the late 70's, and they muffed that up, too. :sick:
It's kinda funny though, how once you get used to having a truck, it's easy to get it in your mind that you can't live without one. My Mom gave Granddad's truck to my Mom about 5-6 years after he died, and then Mom sold it to me in 2002. Before that, I had to make do with strapping down 4x8's and other lumber to the roof of my car, and that could get annoying.
Sometimes I think about getting a new, cheap truck to replace it, so I can get better fuel economy. But it just wouldn't be worth it to get into a monthly payment again just to go from 11-12 mpg to maybe 16. I guess that truck will die eventually, and have to be replaced, but who knows? My family tends to hold onto stuff forever.
if the truckers can't make it and fuel prices are bringing them to the point of not making any profit, what is the answer? Their company needs to charge a higher fee for their trucking job? If independent they have to charge the store a higher per mile fee? Which, in due turn, means that the store will have to pass that cost on to us, the consumers.
So, our costs to buy at the store go up while our costs to put ghastly in our rigs go up. Do our wages go up the same amount as our costs to clothe and feed our families, buy new cars, etc., etc.? Of course they don't. And many of us do make closer to a livable wage as people flipping burgers or helping little kids cross the street, nannies and babysitters, etc.
Do ya see where I'm heading with all of this? The truckers, in their own worlds, are being hurt by overly-high ghastly prices. But the average consumer is also being hurt and continues to be hurt by all of these forces. Blocking traffic on the busy interstates gets their thoughts across but really doesn't do squat to solve the problem.
One of the problems is simply the growth of Russia's independence, China's democracy reach, India's technology growth, and so on and so forth. Throw Brazil in for good measure to that argument, OK? They(gov-mints of those nations)are pushing for economic growth and their nations are answering the call. China's automotive industry is growing faster than the Chinese automakers can build their residents new cars. Everyone is wanting a new rig over there. So, they need more ghastly. OK fine. What does that do to the equation? It pushes up demand.
At the same time the oil companies are fulfilling this push for more gasoline by using their current refineries and not building any more. So, that pushes up the price of the crude oil but putting out just enough, metering it if you will, to maximize their profits.
I read this morning that Congress is starting to question the oil companies about this issue. Anyone know what Congress is trying to find out? Well, folks, we've got a big problem on our hands. The oil companies are going to make up any excuse they can think of to make it seem fine and normal how they've manipulated the economics of this while situation to acquiesce theirselves to maximum profits. You know Congress will make half-hearted attempts to get to the heart of that particular matter. Nothing will change.
Prices will just continue to rise. Consider this whole affair America's little gift to China and Russia and India. Friendly gestures of goodwill to share in the joy of automotive bliss. Thank you, Henry Ford. Your idea has basically been a successful one. Can't complain, huh? Right.
Bring on the all-EV i-MIEV, Mitsubishi! I become more interested each and every passing automotive day, my Japanese carmaking friends. Hybrids won't get me there but all-EV's will work like a vintage 70's song from Foghat cranked to the full maximum. Longer range of lithium ions is required and I'll be fully on board. Battery makers could be getting ready to build larger production facilities right about now, eh? Build 'em strong and build 'em right and charge competitive Wal*Mart prices and we'll all start being in like Flint.
"They may or may not be getting their point across, but the press has noticed."
Which is just great! :sick: We can count on them to focus on the wrong issue as usual. Give them a few more days and they will be back to running down Elvis leads...
The truckers are in trouble. Some have long term contracts that limit their ability to raise prices. They need to put something in their contracts that allows them to recover at least some of the additional costs as diesel prices rise.
Just checked AAA and I see that diesel is still running at $4.34 in New York. Nationally all the fuels, RUG, MUG, PUG and diesel are up a few tenths of a cent. E85 went down a whopping 1.5 cents.
People are adjusting (March sales) http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gsz39lpYrNG7OiKs3FJt6jhV6NEwD8VP9F880 GM truck and SUVsss are down 22 percent. Toyota trucks and SUVs are also down relative to their cars. Ford Expedition sales down 34% Ford F150 down 24% More people are picking the 4 cyl Fusion over the V6. Honda sales down 3%. I suppose that has nothing to do with Honda having the highest overall fleet MPG. Nope, probably nothing at all to do with MPG (sarcasm). I hear they make a mean cup holder. Detroit, on the other hand, keeps cranking out 500 hp vehicles. There will always be a market for high hp cars, it is just that the other 99.9% of us do not need or cannot afford to own one.
Going from 33 mpg to 85 mpg sounds great! So, how much does it cost? Yeah, that hydro-assist thing, how much does it cost?
Forget the "call for a free quote" routine. How much does the thing cost that they put on the Honda at the energy conference "sponsored by the government?"
Absent any response, I'll say that it costs between $10,000 and $15,000.
I got one of those kits, and not only did I triple my fuel economy, I no longer have to use premium gas.... in fact, right now I'm running a 50/50 mix of water and gasoline, and the thing is STILL running rich! Next tank I think I'll up the water to 75%... will keep you posted.
All I can think of with the 5? execs in a row yesterday with the congresspeople showing off acting like they're "fixing" something was the cigarette execs many years back all claiming no knowledge of the addiction to cigarettes.
"Have you thought about lowering the price of gasoline," to paraphrase followed by blank looks...
We are free to share in the "outrageous" profits of the oil companies by purchasing their stock.
Truckers have always known that the future of fuel prices is a big risk. They could have hedged these risks by buying fuel for the future at fixed prices. They chose to chance it and take the extra money when fuel prices were lower. Now they don't want to pay the higher prices. If you remove the emotions, it is just simple economics.
Good point - of course they're making "record" profits - I'd fire every one of them if they weren't! Also, on a percent basis, Microsoft does double the profits. Not satisfied? P&G (the soap maker) does better! Sounds like Congress is going to be real busy with hearings! Oh, I forgot, they're just trying to cover their, well, you know...
I'll ride my bike on the sidewalk, and you can keep up the lonely fight to have your bicycle treated like a car. Enough said
In many areas it is just as illegal to ride a bicycle on the sidewalk as it is to drive a car on it. You may continue to illegally ride on the sidewalk, railroad tracks or whatever - I'll choose the road that I subsidized paying for.
The roads are designed for the transportation of VEHICLES, whether they have a motor on them or not. I have as much right to use them as anyone else.
In order to be subsidizing something, you must be paying for it without using it, or paying for more of it than you use.
I believe the definition of subsidy that I highlighted below from dictionary.com falls into the category of what I pay through my motor vehicle registration fees and other expenses for the maintenance of roads that I use, whether that be via car or bicycle.
1. Monetary assistance granted by a government to a person or group in support of an enterprise regarded as being in the public interest. 2. Financial assistance given by one person or government to another. 3. Money formerly granted to the British Crown by Parliament.
And there is no proof that bike riders are "saving" the road through less wear and tear.
Do you REALLY believe that a 17 lb bicycle causes no less wear and tear on a road than a 2-ton car? :confuse:
Your right to the road means little when you are squashed by a truck cutting a corner too sharp. I don't mind sharing the highways with bike riders. Most are courteous. It is dangerous on some roads that are barely wide enough for two vehicles passing. In Kona I mostly rode against the traffic as I felt it easier to pull over and let them pass by me. I did that for close to a year. As the town got more crowded I rode less and less. Now I would not consider bike riding along the Kona Coast.
You can buy a good used motorcycle or scooter for the price of a 17 lb bicycle.
I wonder if an 80 mpg scooter is more efficient than a bicycle. No energy is free, human powered or not. If I ride a bike an hour a day, I'll probably need an extra 600-800 calories and an extra liter of water. I wonder how much energy is used in the production, transport, marketing, etc. of those additional food and drink items. Maybe it comes out to an equivalent of 80 mpg on a bicycle. Somebody should do a study and see if the scooter people can lay a smackdown on the bicycle people.
The roads are designed for the transportation of VEHICLES, whether they have a motor on them or not.
Mostly not where I live; the roads are a widened cow-path barely wide enough for a car. The roads are mostly suburban, and it is legal to ride a bike on the sidewalk; only downtown isn't it legal. And you know what, if traffic is heavy, I don't care about legal when it comes to my safety. I'd rather be safe on the sidewalk and illegal, then mangled and legal in the road.
And it is legal to sing to go to a bar and tell people you think they smell and are ugly, but you're ignoring the fact that it is not the societal norm. If you ride your bike such that it interferes with the faster flow of motorized vehicles. Motorized vehicles are the norm, whether you are legal or not.
You don't have to like or agree with it; but that's the way it is.
We are free to share in the "outrageous" profits of the oil companies by purchasing their stock.
Assuming one can afford it given how much they're pumping into their tank. And assuming the companies decide to actually PAY dividends, many of which no longer do so.
I read some place that Aura sales have jumped because GM has added the 4-cylinder Aura to the mix. It was a fairly healthy, double-digit increase in sales IIRC.
So it is not surprising that 4-cylinder Fusion sales are jumping too. I wonder if the mix of CamCord sales has changed at all - they were always 80/20 4-cylinder vs 6, I think.
The truckers in trouble are the independents - while they are painting this as the "plight of the truckers", most large trucking operations and their drivers are not in the same kind of trouble at all. Which still stinks, if the independents get chased out of the trucking industry the way independents have been chased out of just about everything else in this country.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Yes it seems Congress doesn't have a clue as to why so many people give $ to the oil companies in exchange for stock. If I didn't feel that either I was going to get dividends or the wealth of the company was going to increase, why would I put my money into it? If I decide that the return on oil companies is not good, that the governement now wants more of the profit, then people will withdraw their $ and there will be less money that can go into finding/producing more oil. Sure the people that work for the oil companies get paid well, but the blue-collar workers work in areas not many of us would want to, and the management probably gets paid just like any other large company.
I believe most of what Congress is doing is trying to deflect criticism from themselves. They don't have much of an energy policy, their economic policies have wrecked the value of the $, they can't figure out how to get people affordable health-care, and after all these years of spending billions upon billions on education and inner cities, a city like Detroit has a 25% graduation rate.
Congress should take a few years and berate themselves!! :mad:
I believe Congress is not accusing the oil companies of excessive profit-making - that's not illegal. They want to satisfy themselves on two questions: 1. is their price collusion going on? 2. should they quit subsidizing the oil industry with major tax breaks that other industries don't get.
My feeling is that (1) there isn't collusion, and (2) YES, the oil industry doesn't need one more dime of tax breaks. That is what profits are for: reinvesting in your company, which is new oil exploration in th case of oil companies. Their little sob story to Congress that removing the tax breaks would limit new oil development is so much hogwash IMO. All it would really mean is that they would actually have to reinvest in their own companies instead of letting taxpayers bear the brunt of that cost.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
(2) It is debateable what level of tax is "fair" either for an individual or a corporation to pay. But I have looked at the Income Statements of some of these oil companies, and they do pay more in tax than they make in profit. So without these tax-breaks then you can say the tax-rate must be really onerous.
I certainly wouldn't want to make $100,000 pay $60,000 in tax, and then have the government tell me that they're taking away my tax break of a standard deduction, such that I'll now get $35,000. Oh and since it is a corporation, the stock-holders who are the owners, get taxed a 2nd time when the corporate dividend gets transferred to their personal account.
So I don't think it a sob story.
And of course corporations reinvest their profits. Any executive who lets their profits sit in cash, will quickly be ousted as the stockholders expect any corporation to make a >10% return. Or else they wouldn't invest in the stock either.
When gas reaches $4-5/ gallon, I have a dream.... to buy a big diesel tourbus/ RV, convert it to WVO, add 400 gallon extra capacity, and cruise the country coast to coast AND back without stopping to fill up, FOR FREE!
Haul two diesel motorcycles (yes, Virginia, there are diesel motorcycles) just for fun, along with our 24' diesel powerboat. And have our diesel airplane on the runway at home (there is a diesel engine going through aircraft certification right now) for when we're there and need some yucks.
And when electricity becomes too expensive (because of all the plug-in cars) have a single cylinder Lister diesel engine spinning a 20KW generator that powers my home and gets me a check FROM the power company for supplying them with my excess electricity...ALL FOR FREE!
And most importantly, TURN MY BACK on the Middle East, stop dealing with terrorists for oil, and let them all go on happily enslaving and killing each other as they have gleefully done for thousands of years.
Oh, and thumb my nose at the oil companies & the electric companies, too!:D
tedebear: I believe the definition of subsidy that I highlighted below from dictionary.com falls into the category of what I pay through my motor vehicle registration fees and other expenses for the maintenance of roads that I use, whether that be via car or bicycle.
2. Financial assistance given by one person or government to another.
No.
You are not providing financial assistance to the unit of government responsible for road building and maintenance when you pay your vehicle registration and driver's license fees.
You are paying a user fee, and if you own a vehicle and use the roads even periodically (which I assume that you do, otherwise, why own a vehicle?), or benefit from goods delivered by those roads, you are still using those roads, even if indirectly.
User fees are not the same thing as financial assistance (or a subsidy).
If you are providing financial assistance to an entity, you are giving it money without expecting anything in return, or loaning it money, either at no interest or at a very low interest. You are not doing either of these things when you pay vehicle registration or driver's license fees.
tedebear: Do you REALLY believe that a 17 lb bicycle causes no less wear and tear on a road than a 2-ton car?
As was shown by kernick a few days back, the biggest problem is weather, and its effects on roads, not cars.
Also, most roads are built to handle 80,000 pound tractor trailers, and even local roads must handle large delivery trucks (heating oil delivery, furniture delivery, etc.). The wear-and-tear caused by cars is nothing, as those roads HAVE to handle much heavier vehicles. Any difference in wear caused by bicycles versus cars is basically a non-issue.
If you ride your bike such that it interferes with the faster flow of motorized vehicles. Motorized vehicles are the norm, whether you are legal or not.
You know, it is the attitudes of some misguided individuals who feel bicycles are toys that should be banned to parking lots and city parks. Many of us use bicycles for transportation and save a lot more resources than any hybrid ever made.
You don't have to like or agree with it but that's the way it is.
It's a sob story because no other industry enjoys the breaks they do, and because they are selling a commodity for which they can charge virtually any price they want. Why invest in refineries when not doing so will squeeze the supply and cause gasoline made from exactly the same oil, with the same processing costs, to sell for more? It wouldn't squeeze the supply if people saw prices rise and simply used less, but we know (and so do the oil companies) that it won't happen.
The perfect private corporation model you have constructed for your argument is valid, but the commodity the oil companies are selling should cause an exception to me made in their case. At least as far as tax breaks. Give ME a break!
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Somebody should do a study and see if the scooter people can lay a smackdown on the bicycle people.
I'd gladly welcome that study. A scooter belches pollutants into the air we breathe, 80 mpg or not.
And if you're eating an extra 600-800 calories per hour because you're riding a bike you are eating WAY too much. I've ridden 24 hour races and longer events where my average calorie intake is less than 1/2 half that.
Exxon/Mobil does not pay dividends but when their profits are high they use some of this money to buy back stocks. This tends to drive up the price of the stock,which benefits the shareholders. Actually it's better since if they paid dividends the shareholders would have to pay taxes on this.
Comments
Absolutely. So then we are in the realm of buying toys and/or basing the decision on other factors rather than a decision based on economy or gas costs. I've said the same thing about my motorcycles. I'd still have and ride them if they only got 20mpg. But 40 and 65mpg is just icing on the cake.
It's those that are buying vehicles strictly on the notion of gas or cost savings that need to look at the overall costs. Maybe some of the side benefits that you mention would push their decision over the edge in favor of a second vehicle (or third vehicle for a family). The extra benefits would offset the extra costs enough to justify it.
I just use the convertible a lot more often, is all.
When it's out of service for whatever reason, and I have to drive the van in to town, and it feels cumbersome in comparison.
Of course, compared to a Miata, most cars would.
I would consider any fuel miser options out there, but they gotta be fun and have a folding top!
Same here - we came close to buying a boat, and, earlier, a motor home, but given how much we'd use it, renting is the better choice for us. I figured I could pay a huge amount per day and still come out ahead. I wonder if renting will become more popular now, with higher gas prices?
I see $20/day trucks for rent all over (though some of those charge an additional per-mile fee). For those that only occasionally need to haul or move something bulky, even if it costs a person $50 a month for rentals, many people would be way ahead when compared to owning a big vehicle. No payments, maintenance, etc. and you only get the poor mileage for one day compared to every day like if you owned it.
Truckers Protest High Fuel Prices, Clog NJ Turnpike - WNBC
They may or may not be getting their point across, but the press has noticed.
kcram - Pickups Host
A strike where they stopped driving would make more sense to me.
Since we use our boat just about every weekend from May to August it would be very expensive to rent when a comparable boat at the marina/campground where we keep our camper runs $250+ a day.
Not counting vacations, but only weekends. I can easily figure 12 weekends of use at $500/ weekend = $12k/yr Far more expensive than owning for us. Even at 1 day per weekend would be close to $6k/yr. Far more than my boat costs to own/yr. But if you only go a few times a summer, then certainly renting would be the way to go.
Better check in to that. I rented a truck from Home Depot this summer to bring a paddle boat home and they charged $20 for the first 75 minutes. Don't know what it was for the day, I was able to get it back under the 75 minute time frame.
Definitely the way to go if only need a truck's capability once in a while.
It does not always work that way. You buy a semi tractor. Many times people mortgage their homes to buy a big rig. Then you are buried in costs that cannot be passed on. If you walk away you either lose equity in the rig or worse your home. Maybe you borrowed from parents to go into the trucking business.
I had a close friend that tried talking me into a big rig partnership. He had all the figures on how he would pay for the truck and make good money. That was in the late 1980s. He did it for 3 years and was never so happy when he sold the tractor.
I feel for those truckers out there. If I was going to lose my truck because of rising fuel costs. I would park it crossways on the 405 freeway take the keys and walk away. People in Orange county and LA are used to having the freeway blocked for hours with all sorts of crimes. Give the truckers some news coverage with their plight. The high cost of fuel will bring this Nation to its knees. It affects everyone.
the homedepot deal only works if you have one or two big piece items. If you are getting a lot sheetrock or plywood, you're better off going to uhaul. Or have them delivered for a $45 flat fee, you can buy the whole store and they will deliver for $45. The flip side is that you have to wait for delivery. I remember one time I bought paving stones and they were wrapped in a wood pallet when delivered. Gave the dude driving the fork lift a tip and he brought the whole pallet to the area where I want to put the stones down. Saved me hours of hard labor.
"Better check in to that. I rented a truck from Home Depot this summer to bring a paddle boat home and they charged $20 for the first 75 minutes. - dieselone"
I did, or I wouldn't have said it in the first place.
As for the 75 minute limit from a Home Depot truck, that would be plenty for most people hauling something home from the hardware store. So sure, there are instances where it might cost you more, but even at $50, for the occasional hauler, it's a lot cheaper than a truck payment, insurance, and maintenance, isn't it? :shades:
Or like I said before, get a little flatbed trailer. Most cars can handle a couple thousand pounds so, minus the weight of the trailer itself, that still leaves quite a bit of available weight for cargo. And if you don't want to buy a trailer, you can rent those, too, for even cheaper than trucks and with unlimited mileage.
I did have to get my lawn tractor service this spring. The tractor service enter charged me $60 to pick-up and deliver the tractor. I looked at renting a flat-be trailer from Uhaul and it was around $20, which I would have had to rent twice and drive about 15 miles each way to get, then drive 30 miles the opposite direction to deliver the tractor. So I just spent the $60 on the deliver service.
One of those little flat bed trailers would be very handy, I'm just running out of room to put stuff!
That's actually not a bad price, to pick up and deliver a tractor, especially when you consider the hassle it would have been otherwise. There's a lawn equipment service place about 2 miles from me, and I have a pickup already, so it's actually pretty convenient for me to just take it myself. Or it would be, if they didn't try to rip us off! We still have an old 1969 era Montgomery Ward tractor that my Granddad bought new. It wouldn't start, and my uncle took it in. They said it needed a bunch of major crap and would've been about $700, so we balked. I went and picked it up and brought it back home.
There's a local guy who works at a nearby golf course, and also works on lawn equipment for other people. I had him come over to look at it, and he got it running for like $100. It really didn't need much...some carb work and other odds and ends. And heck, once it fired up, it sounded healthier than our "new" tractor, a 1990 model.
I never thought about renting a trailer, if I didn't already have a truck. My Intrepid is only rated to tow 1,000 pounds, so it's pretty wussy. But I bet one of my '79 New Yorkers could handle one with ease.
Heck it might fit in the truck! LOL
He died about a month or two after buying that tractor. Somehow I think he'd be proud of the fact that we've gotten 18 years out of that "new" tractor, and kept the old one alive. As for the Hechinger, my uncle gave that away to some friend of the family, and they destroyed it. Now that I think back on it, Granddad gave a '64 Ford Galaxie to them back in the late 70's, and they muffed that up, too. :sick:
It's kinda funny though, how once you get used to having a truck, it's easy to get it in your mind that you can't live without one. My Mom gave Granddad's truck to my Mom about 5-6 years after he died, and then Mom sold it to me in 2002. Before that, I had to make do with strapping down 4x8's and other lumber to the roof of my car, and that could get annoying.
Sometimes I think about getting a new, cheap truck to replace it, so I can get better fuel economy. But it just wouldn't be worth it to get into a monthly payment again just to go from 11-12 mpg to maybe 16. I guess that truck will die eventually, and have to be replaced, but who knows? My family tends to hold onto stuff forever.
So, our costs to buy at the store go up while our costs to put ghastly in our rigs go up. Do our wages go up the same amount as our costs to clothe and feed our families, buy new cars, etc., etc.? Of course they don't. And many of us do make closer to a livable wage as people flipping burgers or helping little kids cross the street, nannies and babysitters, etc.
Do ya see where I'm heading with all of this? The truckers, in their own worlds, are being hurt by overly-high ghastly prices. But the average consumer is also being hurt and continues to be hurt by all of these forces. Blocking traffic on the busy interstates gets their thoughts across but really doesn't do squat to solve the problem.
One of the problems is simply the growth of Russia's independence, China's democracy reach, India's technology growth, and so on and so forth. Throw Brazil in for good measure to that argument, OK? They(gov-mints of those nations)are pushing for economic growth and their nations are answering the call. China's automotive industry is growing faster than the Chinese automakers can build their residents new cars. Everyone is wanting a new rig over there. So, they need more ghastly. OK fine. What does that do to the equation? It pushes up demand.
At the same time the oil companies are fulfilling this push for more gasoline by using their current refineries and not building any more. So, that pushes up the price of the crude oil but putting out just enough, metering it if you will, to maximize their profits.
I read this morning that Congress is starting to question the oil companies about this issue. Anyone know what Congress is trying to find out? Well, folks, we've got a big problem on our hands. The oil companies are going to make up any excuse they can think of to make it seem fine and normal how they've manipulated the economics of this while situation to acquiesce theirselves to maximum profits. You know Congress will make half-hearted attempts to get to the heart of that particular matter. Nothing will change.
Prices will just continue to rise. Consider this whole affair America's little gift to China and Russia and India. Friendly gestures of goodwill to share in the joy of automotive bliss. Thank you, Henry Ford. Your idea has basically been a successful one. Can't complain, huh? Right.
Bring on the all-EV i-MIEV, Mitsubishi! I become more interested each and every passing automotive day, my Japanese carmaking friends. Hybrids won't get me there but all-EV's will work like a vintage 70's song from Foghat cranked to the full maximum. Longer range of lithium ions is required and I'll be fully on board. Battery makers could be getting ready to build larger production facilities right about now, eh? Build 'em strong and build 'em right and charge competitive Wal*Mart prices and we'll all start being in like Flint.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Which is just great! :sick: We can count on them to focus on the wrong issue as usual. Give them a few more days and they will be back to running down Elvis leads...
The truckers are in trouble. Some have long term contracts that limit their ability to raise prices. They need to put something in their contracts that allows them to recover at least some of the additional costs as diesel prices rise.
Just checked AAA and I see that diesel is still running at $4.34 in New York. Nationally all the fuels, RUG, MUG, PUG and diesel are up a few tenths of a cent. E85 went down a whopping 1.5 cents.
People are adjusting (March sales) http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gsz39lpYrNG7OiKs3FJt6jhV6NEwD8VP9F880
GM truck and SUVsss are down 22 percent.
Toyota trucks and SUVs are also down relative to their cars.
Ford Expedition sales down 34%
Ford F150 down 24%
More people are picking the 4 cyl Fusion over the V6.
Honda sales down 3%. I suppose that has nothing to do with Honda having the highest overall fleet MPG. Nope, probably nothing at all to do with MPG (sarcasm). I hear they make a mean cup holder.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Forget the "call for a free quote" routine. How much does the thing cost that they put on the Honda at the energy conference "sponsored by the government?"
Absent any response, I'll say that it costs between $10,000 and $15,000.
http://www.philly.com/philly/hp/news_update/20080402_Oil_Moguls_Defend_Profits.h- tml
I got one of those kits, and not only did I triple my fuel economy, I no longer have to use premium gas.... in fact, right now I'm running a 50/50 mix of water and gasoline, and the thing is STILL running rich! Next tank I think I'll up the water to 75%... will keep you posted.
"Have you thought about lowering the price of gasoline," to paraphrase followed by blank looks...
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Gotta admit, the stuff is making your car shinier too Tex.
Check out the Gas Saving Gizmos & Gadgets discussion for more ways to increase your gas bill.
Truckers have always known that the future of fuel prices is a big risk. They could have hedged these risks by buying fuel for the future at fixed prices. They chose to chance it and take the extra money when fuel prices were lower. Now they don't want to pay the higher prices. If you remove the emotions, it is just simple economics.
In many areas it is just as illegal to ride a bicycle on the sidewalk as it is to drive a car on it. You may continue to illegally ride on the sidewalk, railroad tracks or whatever - I'll choose the road that I subsidized paying for.
The roads are designed for the transportation of VEHICLES, whether they have a motor on them or not. I have as much right to use them as anyone else.
I believe the definition of subsidy that I highlighted below from dictionary.com falls into the category of what I pay through my motor vehicle registration fees and other expenses for the maintenance of roads that I use, whether that be via car or bicycle.
1. Monetary assistance granted by a government to a person or group in support of an enterprise regarded as being in the public interest.
2. Financial assistance given by one person or government to another.
3. Money formerly granted to the British Crown by Parliament.
And there is no proof that bike riders are "saving" the road through less wear and tear.
Do you REALLY believe that a 17 lb bicycle causes no less wear and tear on a road than a 2-ton car? :confuse:
Your right to the road means little when you are squashed by a truck cutting a corner too sharp. I don't mind sharing the highways with bike riders. Most are courteous. It is dangerous on some roads that are barely wide enough for two vehicles passing. In Kona I mostly rode against the traffic as I felt it easier to pull over and let them pass by me. I did that for close to a year. As the town got more crowded I rode less and less. Now I would not consider bike riding along the Kona Coast.
I wonder if an 80 mpg scooter is more efficient than a bicycle. No energy is free, human powered or not. If I ride a bike an hour a day, I'll probably need an extra 600-800 calories and an extra liter of water. I wonder how much energy is used in the production, transport, marketing, etc. of those additional food and drink items. Maybe it comes out to an equivalent of 80 mpg on a bicycle. Somebody should do a study and see if the scooter people can lay a smackdown on the bicycle people.
Mostly not where I live; the roads are a widened cow-path barely wide enough for a car. The roads are mostly suburban, and it is legal to ride a bike on the sidewalk; only downtown isn't it legal. And you know what, if traffic is heavy, I don't care about legal when it comes to my safety. I'd rather be safe on the sidewalk and illegal, then mangled and legal in the road.
And it is legal to sing to go to a bar and tell people you think they smell and are ugly, but you're ignoring the fact that it is not the societal norm. If you ride your bike such that it interferes with the faster flow of motorized vehicles. Motorized vehicles are the norm, whether you are legal or not.
You don't have to like or agree with it; but that's the way it is.
I've owned a few scooters. And yes we could! LOL
Had an 84 Honda Aero 125cc.
Later on I had a 88? Yamaha Razz 50cc scooter. Used it to go 2 miles to a subway station.
The Razz was stolen.
Assuming one can afford it given how much they're pumping into their tank. And assuming the companies decide to actually PAY dividends, many of which no longer do so.
So it is not surprising that 4-cylinder Fusion sales are jumping too. I wonder if the mix of CamCord sales has changed at all - they were always 80/20 4-cylinder vs 6, I think.
The truckers in trouble are the independents - while they are painting this as the "plight of the truckers", most large trucking operations and their drivers are not in the same kind of trouble at all. Which still stinks, if the independents get chased out of the trucking industry the way independents have been chased out of just about everything else in this country.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
If I decide that the return on oil companies is not good, that the governement now wants more of the profit, then people will withdraw their $ and there will be less money that can go into finding/producing more oil. Sure the people that work for the oil companies get paid well, but the blue-collar workers work in areas not many of us would want to, and the management probably gets paid just like any other large company.
I believe most of what Congress is doing is trying to deflect criticism from themselves. They don't have much of an energy policy, their economic policies have wrecked the value of the $, they can't figure out how to get people affordable health-care, and after all these years of spending billions upon billions on education and inner cities, a city like Detroit has a 25% graduation rate.
Congress should take a few years and berate themselves!! :mad:
1. is their price collusion going on?
2. should they quit subsidizing the oil industry with major tax breaks that other industries don't get.
My feeling is that (1) there isn't collusion, and (2) YES, the oil industry doesn't need one more dime of tax breaks. That is what profits are for: reinvesting in your company, which is new oil exploration in th case of oil companies. Their little sob story to Congress that removing the tax breaks would limit new oil development is so much hogwash IMO. All it would really mean is that they would actually have to reinvest in their own companies instead of letting taxpayers bear the brunt of that cost.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I certainly wouldn't want to make $100,000 pay $60,000 in tax, and then have the government tell me that they're taking away my tax break of a standard deduction, such that I'll now get $35,000. Oh and since it is a corporation, the stock-holders who are the owners, get taxed a 2nd time when the corporate dividend gets transferred to their personal account.
So I don't think it a sob story.
And of course corporations reinvest their profits. Any executive who lets their profits sit in cash, will quickly be ousted as the stockholders expect any corporation to make a >10% return. Or else they wouldn't invest in the stock either.
to buy a big diesel tourbus/ RV, convert it to WVO, add 400 gallon extra capacity, and cruise the country coast to coast AND back without stopping to fill up, FOR FREE!
Haul two diesel motorcycles (yes, Virginia, there are diesel motorcycles) just for fun, along with our 24' diesel powerboat. And have our diesel airplane on the runway at home (there is a diesel engine going through aircraft certification right now) for when we're there and need some yucks.
And when electricity becomes too expensive (because of all the plug-in cars) have a single cylinder Lister diesel engine spinning a 20KW generator that powers my home and gets me a check FROM the power company for supplying them with my excess electricity...ALL FOR FREE!
And most importantly, TURN MY BACK on the Middle East, stop dealing with terrorists for oil, and let them all go on happily enslaving and killing each other as they have gleefully done for thousands of years.
Oh, and thumb my nose at the oil companies & the electric companies, too!:D
2. Financial assistance given by one person or government to another.
No.
You are not providing financial assistance to the unit of government responsible for road building and maintenance when you pay your vehicle registration and driver's license fees.
You are paying a user fee, and if you own a vehicle and use the roads even periodically (which I assume that you do, otherwise, why own a vehicle?), or benefit from goods delivered by those roads, you are still using those roads, even if indirectly.
User fees are not the same thing as financial assistance (or a subsidy).
If you are providing financial assistance to an entity, you are giving it money without expecting anything in return, or loaning it money, either at no interest or at a very low interest. You are not doing either of these things when you pay vehicle registration or driver's license fees.
tedebear: Do you REALLY believe that a 17 lb bicycle causes no less wear and tear on a road than a 2-ton car?
As was shown by kernick a few days back, the biggest problem is weather, and its effects on roads, not cars.
Also, most roads are built to handle 80,000 pound tractor trailers, and even local roads must handle large delivery trucks (heating oil delivery, furniture delivery, etc.). The wear-and-tear caused by cars is nothing, as those roads HAVE to handle much heavier vehicles. Any difference in wear caused by bicycles versus cars is basically a non-issue.
You know, it is the attitudes of some misguided individuals who feel bicycles are toys that should be banned to parking lots and city parks. Many of us use bicycles for transportation and save a lot more resources than any hybrid ever made.
You don't have to like or agree with it but that's the way it is.
The perfect private corporation model you have constructed for your argument is valid, but the commodity the oil companies are selling should cause an exception to me made in their case. At least as far as tax breaks. Give ME a break!
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I'd gladly welcome that study. A scooter belches pollutants into the air we breathe, 80 mpg or not.
And if you're eating an extra 600-800 calories per hour because you're riding a bike you are eating WAY too much. I've ridden 24 hour races and longer events where my average calorie intake is less than 1/2 half that.