Replying to G, though we know who I'm replying to.What total garbage. When you exchange your dollars, you are recognizing value because otherwise you would keep your dollars. Hogwash, nonsense and crap. You buy gasoline because you have to . As yet no commercially viable substitutes exist.Therefore we can't do without. Not because we choose to exchange because we derive value. Give it up, that may be one of the most specious arguments ever made. Neither refecting either neo-monetarianism nor neo- keynesianism it underscores a lack of understanding of market fundamentals, I dub it neo-crapism. "cutting back but also changing jobs, carpooling, changing domiciles, alternate forms of transportation and alternate forms of fuel ( these are in fact the very subject of this thread ). The difference is that we have choices all the time. " Choices but not viable ones. We can choose to end our lives, making the discussion moot.When you constrict supply , you can game the market, but not for long.Of course you have choices, but viable one's ? And if demand is being constrained as has been evidenced, why are prices rising ?
This is wrong and patently false. One does not have to buy gasoline. It is not an essential for life. You may think that you have to buy gasoline but that is only one view in the world.
"Sprawl was bound to stall sooner or later, it just couldn't keep going."
True, but higher fuel prices are accelerating the trend in a big way.
"Pollution has been dropping for quite a while so have traffic deaths. So you cannot give $4/gallon gas credit for that."
Yes you can give partial credit to the high prices. The rest can be attributed to cars with better emission controls replacing older cars and newer cars being safer.
"So $4/gallon gas means the police departments hired more cops? If anything they have less gas to patrol the streets."
I think they are referring to the police walking the neighborhoods as opposed to driving around. I wonder if this will impact trips to the local donut hole???
"Only a very small percentage of one percent of the population went to 4 day work weeks."
So far that is probably true. The trend may increase. Utah state workers just went to a mandatory 4 day work week.
But somewhere, someone in that carpool group is having to buy gas to get to work. And if they buy a more efficient car, they still have to get to work. It's that or starve. So people do have to buy gas.
"Sprawl slowed in '99 with $1.53 gas under Clinton. "
How do you know that was the case? Are you talking just about your local area? Sprawl nationwide did not slow. Just look at Las Vegas, Texas, Florida, California, even Fargo ND, if you want to see how much sprawl did not slowdown.
What you describe is just some of the adjustments people will need to make as gasoline and energy prices climb. Too many Americans think they have a right to cheap gas or ravenous energy use. The gas guzzling life style is coming to an end.
the market will react to high prices, but it will be even slower than the way GM reacted to change over the last 30 years. And that led to their demise. China bought 9 million new cars and trucks in 2007. We have 300 million people and we bought 12 million new ones. China has 4 times our population.They could conceivably get to a 24 million new cars a year rate within a decade. Throw in India and the rest of Asia. Realize also, that it takes 5-6 years and 55,000 miles for the introduction of a new car to our planet to reach the break even point where the lower consumption of the newer vehicle over the one it replaces equals the energy expended to create the new vehicle. Reaching 55,000 miles has to include the US traffic accident rate of a crash every 30 seconds and efficient cars are most likely to be totalled.
I think that is a very narrow view of reality. If you are a 30 year old single mother of 3 living 10 miles from your job. You have to get to work somehow. Even if on the slim chance you can carpool. Someone is buying fuel for a car or bus and you are paying the doubled price from last year. To make matters worse your food prices have increased and you are making the same wage as you were last year. Most people I know personally around here cannot afford a new car. They are either on a fixed retirement or making low wages. We are one of the more affluent neighborhoods. All of my neighbors have owned here for 10 years or more. Most of them could not afford to buy here now. That is part of the BIG picture your blanket statement does not address. Moving to the city so you can ride your bike is totally out of the question. Housing there is only for the very rich. The same ones that can afford a new Prius to save gas.
We are seeing cuts in our minimal bus service to outlying areas due to the high cost of fuel. When you ride the bus you are still buying gas. In most of our buses it is CNG. So how does the average working person avoid buying fuel in some form?
When the Mexican fellow that works for me on occasion had car trouble, he parked it 3 miles from here near the Bus stop. His routine went like this. He leaves his home in Tijuana at 10 PM. Rides the TJ Bus to the Otay mesa border crossing. There he catches the last bus at 11 PM. That takes him to the trolley station where he catches the trolley to El Cajon. Back on the bus headed East. He gets out here to Alpine about 2AM. Sleeps in his car until he goes to work at 6AM. Gets off at 2:30 PM and gets back to TJ after 6 PM. That costs him $10 for the SD portion of the trip. Not sure what he pays in MX. He was happy when he was able to get the engine in his very old Ford Escort rebuilt. That cost $700 in Tijuana. He goes through all that for $100 per day. I feed him breakfast and lunch. Most of the people he works for do not. They probably feel as you do. Let them eat cake.
I find your view of the gas prices very elitist. Most people cannot afford a fancy hybrid for their long commutes.
In the case of a carpooler one or more people have jointly said that the current price of petro-fuel is too much for one person but it's worthwhile to spend that money if 2 or 3 others chip in to reduce the price per person.
But beyond that it may not even be a necessity at all. There are other means of transport and other sources of fuel. Then there are the 'no fuel options' , staying at home, walking, mass transit and biking.
We only think it's a necessity because we've been brought up that way. In fact it is not.
I disagree with you. If you spend $3 on gas or milk, you are making the choice that you think it is worth it. That doesn't make it a "good value." But it makes it good enough. If you didn't think it was worth it you wouldn't do it. That doesn't contradict the idea that you'd like it more if it was cheaper.
Actually, the US is more likely to invade Canada for its oil. Besides, Canada will allow for that pipeline to travel through it from Alaska to the Midwest as long as the US can come up with the funds to build and maintain it.
BTW, the jargon 'eh' is rarely used in Canada nowadays and considered by most to be an improper English or French expression.
And I view yours as elitist. Whether gas is worth it is not the issue. Can the average working person afford what they need to survive. I say NO, you say too bad. We just disagree.
Fuel efficiency is limited by weight. Many of the dubious accessories (which consumers demand) add weight and thus contribute to poor fuel efficiency and to vehicle purchase price and maintenance cost. Included are: 1) fog lights: these do nothing whatsoever but look sporty 2) rear view back up camera (try turning your head and looking back) 3) high quality stereo system (20 speakers, etc). Road noise makes the car a poor listening space. Any light headphones with an ipod will outperform the 50 pound beast called state of the art. 4) air conditioning adds weight but is a effective and desirable addition for most. 5) Leather seating and trim add weight compared to cloth. 6) Filling a 20 gallon gas tank to full adds about 175 pounds to the load. Half a tank saves mileage. Smaller tanks would be inconvenient but a ten gallon tank would itself weight less and permit (in an efficient car) a 300 mile range. Get out and stretch your legs every three hundred miles. 7) Engines that provide extreme acceleration are big and heavy. Unless you have access to a track a 0-60 mph time of 7-8 seconds should provide all you need to protect yourself from others and drive safely. These big engines (and the accompanying piping) add about 300 pounds. 8) Spoilers are unnecessary on most cars which sport them (20 pounds). 9) Safety systems (seat belts airbags, etc) are necessary but add 30-40 pounds 10) A trunk full of junk. If you carry your golf clubs and cart in the trunk that is 35 pounds of constant weight. Likewise snow chains, sand bags, etc. 11) Many cars designed as two seaters nonetheless cram in a theoretical miniature rear seat (making them less expensive to insure since it puts them in a different class). This adds weight and uses up storage space. 12) 26 cup holders add weight and design time.
You get my point. If consumers didn't demand this laundry list of features the cars would be lighter and more fuel efficient. The Lotus Elise is the ultimate low weight car (just under 2000 pounds) but too spartan and too small for most users. The typical sedan today weighs north of 3700 pounds, sometimes way north. If the carmakers could provide a reliable, no frills, 3100 pound car "for the people", not the very rich or the gearhead, I think it would sell very well and address the fuel problem at the same time.
One final poke: If you weigh enough that you are "sensitive" about your spouse's comments and avoid places where you might wear a bathing suit, then you too could lose weight. That's a fuel and weight equation as well.
Let me put it this way. I am thankful I do not have to depend on a $8 per hour job that requires me to have transportation with gas at $4.50 per gallon.... About half of our citizens are in that unenviable position. I put about 25 miles on two vehicles this week. That cost me approximately $7. I have had the AC in the house going during the day all this week. I think that will cost about $25. I could have survived without either. I am glad I don't have to. I feel for those that do not have the luxury I have. I know two older couples in our church that sit in front of a fan all day wiping their head with water to keep cool. Sadly they believed in a system that is broke.
You get my point. If consumers didn't demand this laundry list of features the cars would be lighter and more fuel efficient.
Some good points there.
Obviously, so many things on an auto add weight, but more importantly for automakers add profit. They want to load it up as do the dealers who order them for their inventory.
Take the useless sunroof. For last 20+ years I have had to accept sunroof, and inflated base price, because brand and models of cars I wanted "came with" a sunroof. Never understood why some drivers have sunroof open, or shade open, on a hot summer day with sun beating down on their heads.
In 1997, wanted a certain model sedan because of performance attributes, but had to buy it with a useless sunroof and a spoiler. Fortunately, was able to get it in cloth rather than leather.
What about the extra pounds of soundproofing put in cars to get quieter interiors.
Some automakers putting in thicker glass which is extra weight and perhaps does not improve safety in event of crash.
Don't know, but do power windows add more weight over old-fashioned crank handles.
What about center console. How heavy do these get.
To extent multi-speaker sound systems add significant weight, then an AM/FM/XM receiver with smaller speakers(4?) would be fine.
Wheels and tires could be reduced in size and weight if overall weight of car comes down. All other parts could accordingly be reduced in size, from suspension to brake components.
Finally, what about personal weight? Understanding people have differing bone structures, but even so, look how much transported weight could be reduced if drivers/passengers stayed close to "ideal" weight as advocated by MDs?
Could the Corola or Civic size car be the norm in the near future in order to save gas and cut down on purchase of $4+ gallon gas? Even these car models could benefit from various things being eliminated to save weight.
I have had the AC in the house going during the day all this week. I think that will cost about $25. I could have survived without either.
In my part of country, AC in houses did not catch on with the masses until maybe the late 60's. Majority of houses had basements where one could go to cool off. Some even set up second kitchens and rec rooms in basement for summer use.
If we get to affordable, reliable electric cars (GM Volt perhaps), I would probably trade off use of my AIR for charging of car to avoid $4-5 gallon gas on what amount of electricity and/or gas that might be rationed out to us. Of course, would have to put in CFLs and LED lamps throughout and other energy saving procedures/devices.
In my part of country, AC in houses did not catch on with the masses until maybe the late 60's. Majority of houses had basements where one could go to cool off. Some even set up second kitchens and rec rooms in basement for summer use.
I think that's pretty much how it was around these parts, too (DC suburbs). Around 1960, Levitt and Sons (of Levittown PA fame) broke ground for a huge housing development, and I think those places might have had central a/c standard. At least, everybody I've ever known that's lived in that community had central air. I think they used natural gas for heat. The condo I used to live in was built in 1973, and it had central air.
My grandmother's uncle built the house I currently live in, which dates back to 1916. I have three window unit a/c's. I asked my grandmother how Uncle Luther and Aunt Carrie used to survive the heat of summer, and she said that they'd just pull the shades down and deal with it. I guess people must have been built tougher back in those days!
As for my grandmother, her house was built in 1947, a cinder block cape cod. They always had one window unit on the main level, a big 220V thing that would do a pretty good job at cooling the main level. Never did have any a/c upstairs. When I lived over there with them, my bedroom was upstairs, and would get hotter than hades. In the worst days of summer, I'd usually just sleep downstairs on the couch! My uncle lives with her now, and sleeps upstairs, but he has a window unit. I dunno how they dealt with it in the old days, but Granddad was a farmer, so I guess he was used to the heat!
I don't remember anyone having AC back in the 1940s-50s-60s here is San Diego. Our high school did not have any and it would get over 100 degrees a lot in September after we were back in school. You just lived with it. Our homes had swamp coolers that did a reasonable job of cooling the room they were tied into.
I think we have all gotten softer. Or just used to the higher standard of living. We should enjoy it while we can. It may deteriorate rapidly in the future. All the fuel saving the USA can muster is not going to slow down the growth of the rest of the World. They have looked upon what America has and they want the same...
Our high school did not have any and it would get over 100 degrees a lot in September after we were back in school. You just lived with it.
LOL, that brings back memories! The high school I went to was built in 1976, and it was the first school in the county to have central a/c. I think most of the schools just had those old fashioned water chiller things that had the vents built in near the windows. Well, they had the foresight to build that school without windows, because it had central air, so who needed windows?! Alas, the central air wasn't all that reliable, so when it broke down, they'd send us all home early, because there were no windows to open. And on days when it got hot enough, even if the central air was working okay, we STILL got sent home early along with the other schools, because otherwise we'd interfere with the bus schedules!
I think it's funny all the luxuries we have become so used to having in the U.S. that we now view them as necessities. Nedless to say, they are not.
If gas doubles in price, and we were already right at the ragged edge of what we could afford, and there is no place else we can possibly conserve in our lives, then we need to halve the amount of driving we do. I would be prepared to go out on a limb and say there is no-one posting here, not one person, for whom commuting to a job is more than 50% of their driving.
And I would bet that if push came to shove, and gas reached $8 or $10 a gallon next year, more than 50% of everyone here, maybe more than 70%, would be able to substitute an alternate mode of transport for their solo occupant car even for their commute. Yes, 10,000 posts here have made it clear people would be very very very very very very unhappy to do so, and that many of those same people feel that U.S. citizens are entitled to low gas prices, but the fact remains that the price would finally be high enough then to dramatically reduce demand.
In the meantime, it clearly isn't.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Just curious, to which system do you refer? Their AC system? Social Security System? Save for a rainy day system?
'21 Dark Blue/Black Audi A7 PHEV (mine); '22 White/Beige BMW X3 (hers); '20 Estoril Blue/Oyster BMW M240xi 'Vert (Ours, read: hers in 'vert weather; mine during Nor'easters...)
I think it's funny all the luxuries we have become so used to having in the U.S. that we now view them as necessities. Nedless to say, they are not.
Yeah, I have a feeling that most of us would probably cry like little bee-atches if we had to go back to the "good old days"! I remember awhile back, one of my roommates asking if I wanted to go in with him on a big screen tv. My answer...sit closer to the tv! We already had two 32" tv's! Well, he was able to get a good deal on a 50" hi-def plasma back around Christmas, that was just too good to refuse. I mean, the picture is so big and detailed, that I was watching an episode of Rod Serling's Night Gallery, and you could see a mustache on Patty Duke! :surprise: I had never noticed it before, but on that big screen there it was, plain as day. I notice crows feet and wrinkles show up a lot better, too.
Once you get used to a big tv, it's hard to go back to a small one. And I swear, once you get Tivo and can pause it, roll it back, etc, it'll spoil you rotten. Geeze, how did we ever get along before all that! :P
I would be prepared to go out on a limb and say there is no-one posting here, not one person, for whom commuting to a job is more than 50% of their driving.
That's definitely true in my case. My commute to work is about 3.5 miles one way, where I usually park. There's a lot right behind my building that's more like 3.8 miles, and if I wanted, there's a lot just inside the main gate, that drops it to about 3.2 miles, and gives me a little exercise. So, if all I did was drive to work and back, we're only looking at around 1800 miles per year. And there's a gas station and grocery store along the way to work, a liquor store 2 miles out of the way, and a bank that I can walk to during my lunch hour at work. If I was to take a wild guess, I might only drive about 5-6,000 miles per year, but even with mileage that low, I could cut some out if I wanted to.
And I would bet that if push came to shove, and gas reached $8 or $10 a gallon next year, more than 50% of everyone here, maybe more than 70%, would be able to substitute an alternate mode of transport for their solo occupant car even for their commute.
If it got to that price, I think I'd just put my roommate back in my Intrepid, and use my older cars to go to work. That's what I did a few years ago, when he had to drive about 40 miles round trip. These days it's only around 10, so while he still has a longer commute than me, they're close enough that I figure he can suffer with my old truck, while I drive the Trep. He gets about 10 mpg with the truck, and would probably get around 18 with the Trep, as he has a heavier foot than me. I could probably get 11-12 with the truck, and 20 with the Trep. And, I figure that since the older cars need to be driven every once in awhile anyway, why not just drive them to work, or to run errands?
I've been trying to do that a bit more, lately. Sometimes, I'll just fire one of my old cars up and drive it around the neighborhood, not really going anywhere. But this morning I took my '79 NYer to the bank. And then took my '76 LeMans on an ice cream run that would've only been around 3.5 miles round trip, but I took the scenic route and made it around 18, to give the car a good run. Probably wouldn't be doing that with $8-10/gal gas, though!
All the governments social programs. They are all big on promises, poor on delivery. I do feel for those that trust in those systems. It is usually too late when they find out the truth. I have been against big government social programs since before I could vote. I am more convinced now than ever. So, don't blame me I voted for Goldwater.
Don't know, but do power windows add more weight over old-fashioned crank handles.
I seriously doubt if it's much. I replaced a couple power window motors myself, in my '79 New Yorker. I'd say they were about 2-3 pounds apiece, and bolted into the same lift mechanism that the crank would have. So you'd gain the weight of the window motors, plus the switches, wiring, etc, and you'd lose the weight of the cranks. So I'd guess power windows, on the whole, might add 20 pounds, at best, to a 4-door car?
And since 1979, I'm sure they've only made those power window motors lighter. I think the lift mechanisms are lighter, as well. I think these days, the window lift is just a piece of heavy vinyl tape with slots cut into it, rather than those old fashioned metal lifts with the cogs cut into them.
A center console doesn't add much weight, I don't think. However, bucket seats, believe it or not, do. At least, in the old days, they used to. I dunno how they managed this, but with a typical 60's car, a solid bench seat that could seat 3-across actually weighed less than two bucket seats! Just taking a wild guess, but if you took out bucket seats and a console and put in a solid bench seat, you might save about 50-60 pounds? I guess 20 pounds here, 50-60 there, doesn't seem like much, but it adds up. Still, I have a feeling that power windows and bucket seats and consoles are here to stay.
I would be prepared to go out on a limb and say there is no-one posting here, not one person, for whom commuting to a job is more than 50% of their driving.
[raises hand]
I have a 35-mile round trip, which works out to about 9,000 a year, and I know I don't drive anywhere near 18,000 miles a year. Probably 13,000 or so; I'd have to go dig out the inspection receipts and count up the mileage.
I think these days, the window lift is just a piece of heavy vinyl tape with slots cut into it, rather than those old fashioned metal lifts with the cogs cut into them.
The winder in the '92 Sentra is a double cable reel that loops back to a vertical channel that the window rides up and down on. Cranking the handle loops up one cable while letting out the other one. The assembly doesn't weigh much at all.
This is wrong and patently false. One does not have to buy gasoline. It is not an essential for life. You may think that you have to buy gasoline but that is only one view in the world.
It is a practical essential to tranportation if one does not have ready access to carpooling and buses. Many of the cities if not most that are not large NE urban areas have not invested in wide spread public transportation.While gasoline may not be an essential for life, it is an essential for employment the loss of which woulld result in a very poor quality of life. I believe gagrice has already made this argument most cogently. In the future one may not have to buy gasoline for transportation. In the here and now you do.
Well, maybe that day, but tomorrow you could trade your car for a more efficient model, car pool, whatever. "
Did so earlier this year, current vehicle gets twice the mileage of my former. So I'm one one those adding to reduced consumption. Car pool ,bus not an available solution for me. I can afford gas if it goes to $20 a gallon. I just have this dislike of global recessions.
Thank you, you two! You have served to prove me wrong! :sick:
;-)
So for folks whose driving is more than 50% commuting, it would seem you have picked homes outside the new 2008 "comfort radius" of your job! For you, it WILL have to be one of the other things people have mentioned before: carpooling with someone from work so you can split the gas expense, making public transport work for you somehow, moving a little closer to the job, or moving the job a little closer to you. That is, if you find the gas expense onerous now. Kdhspyder, I suspect you don't, driving that Prius.
And yes in future, until we can make a systematic commitment to improving public transportation (which may never happen, who knows) people will have to draw from a smaller radius around their homes to find jobs, if they find themselves pinched for money because of gas prices.
It's a lot of pain for some people now, but it actually will probably be good for the U.S. in the long run.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
"It's a lot of pain for some people now, but it actually will probably be good for the U.S. in the long run." I agree. Should we actually restrict oil futures buying to those that can prove ability to take physical delivery ( unlikely). And should the reduction of 90%-95% of the oil speculators bring oil down to $65-70, the price OPEC has stated it believes reflects where world demand is currently. And should gasoline prices fall to $2 per gallon. I would be amenable to a federal tax that would raise the price to $3 per gallon some what along the lines of europe. It would bring in revenues deperately needed to a government that is operating in the red as they have done for the last 26 years. Note to government, use it to reduce our debt, don't spend as you have in the past. It would alleviate some of the inflation, 25% cut from current prices while still shifting demand toward fuel efficent vehicles.And it would shift public sentiment allowing us to possibly raise rates and still avoid a recession. lastly, gradually increase the tax in accordance with economic conditions and keep the focus on oil independence.
In my case, the increased mortgage payment from moving would more than eat up any gas savings, so I'm staying put for the time being. 860 bucks a year (9100 miles /45 mpg x 4.25) is kinda annoying but it's not going to break me. Those poor schlubs who fooled themselves into buying 15 mpg SUVs are going to have to make some major adjustments going forward.
OT. Ahh my bruddah the dark side has indeed won. The short recess seems long indeed. The p match did get ooh,but o' pharoh, let my people go. Btw absolutely correct re: z, I have met my match.JJ, M & B Mcg. Animals Hors.. Question for the sales frontline, Is anyone biting on the $2.99 gas for a year/ free gas for summer incentives? Back to the angst of gas prices.
I bet you're wond'rin' how I knew 'bout your plans to make me blue
Just necessary commuting and our errands: Gas at $4.25 before move getting 14/23 mpg =$5768 per year. Gas at $4.25 after move getting 15/24 mpg =$1593 per year. Difference per year of $4175 put towards interest on new home loan at 5.375%. Difference covers the interest on the first $77666 of loan principal. Amt of loan paid by gas savings fluctuates with gas prices. Gas savings is just under 100 gallons a month. About 20,000 fewer miles per year being driven. Most families don't even drive 20,000 miles a year.
Some people don't realize that only 50 miles in a day in a 14 mpg Astro (in town mpg) uses in gas what the interest on a $100,000 home loan is, in a day. (Based on $4.25 /gallon, 5.4% interest rate).
Oh bumpy, were you the other one to chime in? So the only two people who raised their hands to prove me wrong are the two people driving the two most fuel-efficient models on the market today? Well, you picked your car well for such a commute. Good for you (and moderately good for planet Earth too ;-)), and I'm glad to hear the gas prices aren't impacting you much.
Duke: yes, kdhspyder drives a Prius on that looooong commute he mentioned. A soccer mom driving a couple of kids to practice and going to the store in her Suburban or Sequoia uses as much gas in a day as kdh uses for his whole commute.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I think my Mom & stepdad commute around 120 miles per day, round trip. They carpool in together. My stepdad drops my Mom off, and then drives on to work. I think she's about 35 miles away, and he's about 60.
Now true, they are taking steps to save gas, such as carpooling. But they've always done that, for as long as they've lived down in Southern MD. Since her job is on the way to his, and their hours allowed for it, it just made sense to carpool, even back when gas was cheap. When they first moved down there in 1989, he had an '84 Tempo and she had an '86 Monte Carlo. They mainly used the Tempo for commuting, but gas was cheap enough that the Monte Carlo got used fairly often, as well. The Tempo gave way to a 1991 Stanza which, ironically, wouldn't prove to be as reliable as the Tempo! They have a '99 Altima now that they commute in. They probably get around 30 mpg on that commute, which I guess would come out to around 20 gallons per week. Or around $80, at today's prices.
That sounds pretty brutal, but they both have good-paying jobs. My mother is eligible for retirement, and would have gone out at the end of this year, but they enticed her to stay. Plus, their monthly mortgage payment is a pittance. Up in my area, for the same payment, you could get into an apartment that's within walking distance of the local crack den. :sick:
If gas prices doubled, I dunno if my Mom & stepdad would really change much. Right now, they might pay about $4,000 per year in fuel for commuting. Doubling it would put it to $8K. They did recently buy an '08 Altima, which should get better fuel economy than the '99, but for some reason they keep driving the '99. Want to get every last penny out of it, I guess. On that same route, I guess it might get about 10% better economy, so if they started driving it, that would put their commuting bill to around $7200, versus $8000. It might actually be more economical than that...I think the '99 was EPA rated 23/29, while the '08 would be 26/34 if they used the same rating method, but I was trying to be conservative.
I don't know if fuel prices like that would be enough to make my Mom reconsider retirement. Plus, since her job is on the way to my stepdad's, taking her out of the equation wouldn't save any fuel.
I doubt if my Mom & stepdad would ever consider moving. Although she has jokingly threatened to move in with me! And don't think that hasn't given me nightmares! :surprise:
True, but higher fuel prices are accelerating the trend in a big way.
I don't think so because it was slowing down greatly before. Around here they stopped moving outward and started building up areas not yet built up but within the current area of "urban sprawl".
Traffic In Major U.S. Cities Lessens Due To High Gas Price
The Illinois Tollway lost about 2-3% of its traffic and its believed to be due to construction and not high gas costs.
I think they are referring to the police walking the neighborhoods as opposed to driving around.
The only areas where that would result in greater police presence is in areas of high density population with a large police department, as far as I know that has always been the case in those areas. Most suburbs foot patrols wouldn't be to effective and would lead to less police presence as foot patrols can only effectively patrol a very small area.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I am thankful I do not have to depend on a $8 per hour job that requires me to have transportation with gas at $4.50 per gallon.... About half of our citizens are in that unenviable position.
I do believe that that is greatly exaggerated
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
What? Wait, they sent kids home due to hot weather? My high school was built in the 1920's (with additions over time) and didn't have A/C and we stayed in school on the hottest of days.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Our local Sheriff's dept has started using light weight motorcycles. They look like they are probably 250cc size. I know they patrol one area heavily and write a LOT of tickets for speeding. It is a 4 lane posted 35 MPH. Traffic is usually going 45+ through there. That should save the local Sheriff money on gas.
What? Wait, they sent kids home due to hot weather? My high school was built in the 1920's (with additions over time) and didn't have A/C and we stayed in school on the hottest of days.
Yep, strange as that may sound, they did it. I don't recall it ever happening when I was in elementary school or middle school, but it happened a few times in high school. Maybe by the time the mid 80's came around, parents were more sue-happy or something? I have a friend who's a teacher in the public school system; I'll have to ask him if it's still something they do. There are a lot of newer school buildings these days though, and many of the older ones have been remodeled, so the HVAC systems may be better these days.
Seems like September 1985, when I started 10th grade, was when we got sent home the most. I remember it happening a couple of days. Maybe we were going through a real heatwave that year.
According to the tax rolls the lower half of the US households only pay 3.6% of the income tax and have a household income $30k and below. You cannot get a good picture of what the people in the lower income brackets make by median income. It is skewed by all you high wage earners. How many millions of people are on SSI and SS? They also buy gas and need to heat their homes. As several have pointed out including myself. Gas is a small part of the high cost of Energy from oil for many Americans. My propane and electricity far exceeds my gas for the cars each month.
PS Our trash pickup has gone from $75 to $100 every two months due to high fuel costs. Our water is way up. So yes gas prices are fueling our pain in many ways.
You cannot get a good picture of what the people in the lower income brackets make by median income. It is skewed by all you high wage earners.
Actually, that's MEAN income, and not MEDIAN. Mean income is the average, and is the one that gets thrown out of proportion by high wage earners. Median is the number exactly in the middle. So if the median household income is $30K, then that means half the households out there earn more, half earn less. BTW, is it REALLY only $30K? I thought median household income was more like $54K?
I don't think that in all four years of high school we were closed for any type of weather and we had some horrific snow storms those years. I know I missed a few days in elementary school and a few days in Jr, high where the school was practically empty but never missed a day of high school due to the weather.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Things have changed. We can't expect kids to be somewhat uncomfortable and still learn... :sick:
Dayton City Schools (totally messed up with poor superintendent and board choices through the years) went to year-round school in many of it's older buildings last summer!!! They ended up with 5 calamity days used in the first 6 days of school. The total allowed by the state for the whole school year is 5. Of course winter snow adds some here in the beautful Midwest.
Their busing is so messed up they have a private company promising to save them 40% of their costs. All schools are reeling from the increase in fuel costs they face for this coming year. The impact of running air conditioning during the summer in many buildings, not just a few for makeup courses for failing students, will add to that cost. Diesel and gasoline cost predictions for their busing make the news here.
Can't feel too sorry for them because they have an intricate netword of times and multiple runs for busing. The State of Ohio makes the public school responsbile for subsidizing the busing for private, charter, parochial, special needs schools. Add to that a mishmash of times that could be coordinated but aren't for school and they probably waste half their fuel running their publicly owned fleet.
I expect lots of schools to make unpopular moves to reduce fuel costs in this state. They can't go ask voters for more money for fuel because voters are paying more for themselves and aren't going to vote additional money in the future (which takes a year to start being collected).
My explanation of the school's self-made mess of busing is not meant to start an off topic discussion; it's to show how much fuel they are wasting along with electrical expense for AC.
Comments
"cutting back but also changing jobs, carpooling, changing domiciles, alternate forms of transportation and alternate forms of fuel ( these are in fact the very subject of this thread ). The difference is that we have choices all the time. " Choices but not viable ones. We can choose to end our lives, making the discussion moot.When you constrict supply , you can game the market, but not for long.Of course you have choices, but viable one's ? And if demand is being constrained as has been evidenced, why are prices rising ?
Next case.
Well, maybe that day, but tomorrow you could trade your car for a more efficient model, car pool, whatever.
True, but higher fuel prices are accelerating the trend in a big way.
"Pollution has been dropping for quite a while so have traffic deaths. So you cannot give $4/gallon gas credit for that."
Yes you can give partial credit to the high prices. The rest can be attributed to cars with better emission controls replacing older cars and newer cars being safer.
"Couldn't tell that by the traffic around here.'
http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7011493302
Traffic In Major U.S. Cities Lessens Due To High Gas Price
"So $4/gallon gas means the police departments hired more cops? If anything they have less gas to patrol the streets."
I think they are referring to the police walking the neighborhoods as opposed to driving around. I wonder if this will impact trips to the local donut hole???
"Only a very small percentage of one percent of the population went to 4 day work weeks."
So far that is probably true. The trend may increase. Utah state workers just went to a mandatory 4 day work week.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
How do you know that was the case? Are you talking just about your local area? Sprawl nationwide did not slow. Just look at Las Vegas, Texas, Florida, California, even Fargo ND, if you want to see how much sprawl did not slowdown.
What you describe is just some of the adjustments people will need to make as gasoline and energy prices climb. Too many Americans think they have a right to cheap gas or ravenous energy use. The gas guzzling life style is coming to an end.
"Population growth is the ever-expanding denominator that gives each person a shrinking share of the resource pie. "
http://www.theglobalist.com/storyid.aspx?StoryId=5707
Realize also, that it takes 5-6 years and 55,000 miles for the introduction of a new car to our planet to reach the break even point where the lower consumption of the newer vehicle over the one it replaces equals the energy expended to create the new vehicle. Reaching 55,000 miles has to include the US traffic accident rate of a crash every 30 seconds and efficient cars are most likely to be totalled.
I think that is a very narrow view of reality. If you are a 30 year old single mother of 3 living 10 miles from your job. You have to get to work somehow. Even if on the slim chance you can carpool. Someone is buying fuel for a car or bus and you are paying the doubled price from last year. To make matters worse your food prices have increased and you are making the same wage as you were last year. Most people I know personally around here cannot afford a new car. They are either on a fixed retirement or making low wages. We are one of the more affluent neighborhoods. All of my neighbors have owned here for 10 years or more. Most of them could not afford to buy here now. That is part of the BIG picture your blanket statement does not address. Moving to the city so you can ride your bike is totally out of the question. Housing there is only for the very rich. The same ones that can afford a new Prius to save gas.
We are seeing cuts in our minimal bus service to outlying areas due to the high cost of fuel. When you ride the bus you are still buying gas. In most of our buses it is CNG. So how does the average working person avoid buying fuel in some form?
When the Mexican fellow that works for me on occasion had car trouble, he parked it 3 miles from here near the Bus stop. His routine went like this. He leaves his home in Tijuana at 10 PM. Rides the TJ Bus to the Otay mesa border crossing. There he catches the last bus at 11 PM. That takes him to the trolley station where he catches the trolley to El Cajon. Back on the bus headed East. He gets out here to Alpine about 2AM. Sleeps in his car until he goes to work at 6AM. Gets off at 2:30 PM and gets back to TJ after 6 PM. That costs him $10 for the SD portion of the trip. Not sure what he pays in MX. He was happy when he was able to get the engine in his very old Ford Escort rebuilt. That cost $700 in Tijuana. He goes through all that for $100 per day. I feed him breakfast and lunch. Most of the people he works for do not. They probably feel as you do. Let them eat cake.
I find your view of the gas prices very elitist. Most people cannot afford a fancy hybrid for their long commutes.
In the case of a carpooler one or more people have jointly said that the current price of petro-fuel is too much for one person but it's worthwhile to spend that money if 2 or 3 others chip in to reduce the price per person.
But beyond that it may not even be a necessity at all. There are other means of transport and other sources of fuel. Then there are the 'no fuel options' , staying at home, walking, mass transit and biking.
We only think it's a necessity because we've been brought up that way. In fact it is not.
I disagree with you. If you spend $3 on gas or milk, you are making the choice that you think it is worth it. That doesn't make it a "good value." But it makes it good enough. If you didn't think it was worth it you wouldn't do it. That doesn't contradict the idea that you'd like it more if it was cheaper.
Your Darwinian politics...
BTW, the jargon 'eh' is rarely used in Canada nowadays and considered by most to be an improper English or French expression.
And I view yours as elitist. Whether gas is worth it is not the issue. Can the average working person afford what they need to survive. I say NO, you say too bad. We just disagree.
1) fog lights: these do nothing whatsoever but look sporty
2) rear view back up camera (try turning your head and looking back)
3) high quality stereo system (20 speakers, etc). Road noise makes the car a poor listening space. Any light headphones with an ipod will outperform the 50 pound beast called state of the art.
4) air conditioning adds weight but is a effective and desirable addition for most.
5) Leather seating and trim add weight compared to cloth.
6) Filling a 20 gallon gas tank to full adds about 175 pounds to the load. Half a tank saves mileage. Smaller tanks would be inconvenient but a ten gallon tank would itself weight less and permit (in an efficient car) a 300 mile range. Get out and stretch your legs every three hundred miles.
7) Engines that provide extreme acceleration are big and heavy. Unless you have access to a track a 0-60 mph time of 7-8 seconds should provide all you need to protect yourself from others and drive safely. These big engines (and the accompanying piping) add about 300 pounds.
8) Spoilers are unnecessary on most cars which sport them (20 pounds).
9) Safety systems (seat belts airbags, etc) are necessary but add 30-40 pounds
10) A trunk full of junk. If you carry your golf clubs and cart in the trunk that is 35 pounds of constant weight. Likewise snow chains, sand bags, etc.
11) Many cars designed as two seaters nonetheless cram in a theoretical miniature rear seat (making them less expensive to insure since it puts them in a different class). This adds weight and uses up storage space.
12) 26 cup holders add weight and design time.
You get my point. If consumers didn't demand this laundry list of features the cars would be lighter and more fuel efficient. The Lotus Elise is the ultimate low weight car (just under 2000 pounds) but too spartan and too small for most users. The typical sedan today weighs north of 3700 pounds, sometimes way north. If the carmakers could provide a reliable, no frills, 3100 pound car "for the people", not the very rich or the gearhead, I think it would sell very well and address the fuel problem at the same time.
One final poke: If you weigh enough that you are "sensitive" about your spouse's comments and avoid places where you might wear a bathing suit, then you too could lose weight. That's a fuel and weight equation as well.
Some good points there.
Obviously, so many things on an auto add weight, but more importantly for automakers add profit. They want to load it up as do the dealers who order them for their inventory.
Take the useless sunroof. For last 20+ years I have had to accept sunroof, and inflated base price, because brand and models of cars I wanted "came with" a sunroof. Never understood why some drivers have sunroof open, or shade open, on a hot summer day with sun beating down on their heads.
In 1997, wanted a certain model sedan because of performance attributes, but had to buy it with a useless sunroof and a spoiler. Fortunately, was able to get it in cloth rather than leather.
What about the extra pounds of soundproofing put in cars to get quieter interiors.
Some automakers putting in thicker glass which is extra weight and perhaps does not improve safety in event of crash.
Don't know, but do power windows add more weight over old-fashioned crank handles.
What about center console. How heavy do these get.
To extent multi-speaker sound systems add significant weight, then an AM/FM/XM receiver with smaller speakers(4?) would be fine.
Wheels and tires could be reduced in size and weight if overall weight of car comes down. All other parts could accordingly be reduced in size, from suspension to brake components.
Finally, what about personal weight? Understanding people have differing bone structures, but even so, look how much transported weight could be reduced if drivers/passengers stayed close to "ideal" weight as advocated by MDs?
Could the Corola or Civic size car be the norm in the near future in order to save gas and cut down on purchase of $4+ gallon gas? Even these car models could benefit from various things being eliminated to save weight.
In my part of country, AC in houses did not catch on with the masses until maybe the late 60's. Majority of houses had basements where one could go to cool off. Some even set up second kitchens and rec rooms in basement for summer use.
If we get to affordable, reliable electric cars (GM Volt perhaps), I would probably trade off use of my AIR for charging of car to avoid $4-5 gallon gas on what amount of electricity and/or gas that might be rationed out to us. Of course, would have to put in CFLs and LED lamps throughout and other energy saving procedures/devices.
I think that's pretty much how it was around these parts, too (DC suburbs). Around 1960, Levitt and Sons (of Levittown PA fame) broke ground for a huge housing development, and I think those places might have had central a/c standard. At least, everybody I've ever known that's lived in that community had central air. I think they used natural gas for heat. The condo I used to live in was built in 1973, and it had central air.
My grandmother's uncle built the house I currently live in, which dates back to 1916. I have three window unit a/c's. I asked my grandmother how Uncle Luther and Aunt Carrie used to survive the heat of summer, and she said that they'd just pull the shades down and deal with it. I guess people must have been built tougher back in those days!
As for my grandmother, her house was built in 1947, a cinder block cape cod. They always had one window unit on the main level, a big 220V thing that would do a pretty good job at cooling the main level. Never did have any a/c upstairs. When I lived over there with them, my bedroom was upstairs, and would get hotter than hades. In the worst days of summer, I'd usually just sleep downstairs on the couch! My uncle lives with her now, and sleeps upstairs, but he has a window unit. I dunno how they dealt with it in the old days, but Granddad was a farmer, so I guess he was used to the heat!
I think we have all gotten softer. Or just used to the higher standard of living. We should enjoy it while we can. It may deteriorate rapidly in the future. All the fuel saving the USA can muster is not going to slow down the growth of the rest of the World. They have looked upon what America has and they want the same...
LOL, that brings back memories! The high school I went to was built in 1976, and it was the first school in the county to have central a/c. I think most of the schools just had those old fashioned water chiller things that had the vents built in near the windows. Well, they had the foresight to build that school without windows, because it had central air, so who needed windows?! Alas, the central air wasn't all that reliable, so when it broke down, they'd send us all home early, because there were no windows to open. And on days when it got hot enough, even if the central air was working okay, we STILL got sent home early along with the other schools, because otherwise we'd interfere with the bus schedules!
If gas doubles in price, and we were already right at the ragged edge of what we could afford, and there is no place else we can possibly conserve in our lives, then we need to halve the amount of driving we do. I would be prepared to go out on a limb and say there is no-one posting here, not one person, for whom commuting to a job is more than 50% of their driving.
And I would bet that if push came to shove, and gas reached $8 or $10 a gallon next year, more than 50% of everyone here, maybe more than 70%, would be able to substitute an alternate mode of transport for their solo occupant car even for their commute. Yes, 10,000 posts here have made it clear people would be very very very very very very unhappy to do so, and that many of those same people feel that U.S. citizens are entitled to low gas prices, but the fact remains that the price would finally be high enough then to dramatically reduce demand.
In the meantime, it clearly isn't.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Just curious, to which system do you refer? Their AC system? Social Security System? Save for a rainy day system?
'21 Dark Blue/Black Audi A7 PHEV (mine); '22 White/Beige BMW X3 (hers); '20 Estoril Blue/Oyster BMW M240xi 'Vert (Ours, read: hers in 'vert weather; mine during Nor'easters...)
Yeah, I have a feeling that most of us would probably cry like little bee-atches if we had to go back to the "good old days"! I remember awhile back, one of my roommates asking if I wanted to go in with him on a big screen tv. My answer...sit closer to the tv! We already had two 32" tv's! Well, he was able to get a good deal on a 50" hi-def plasma back around Christmas, that was just too good to refuse. I mean, the picture is so big and detailed, that I was watching an episode of Rod Serling's Night Gallery, and you could see a mustache on Patty Duke! :surprise: I had never noticed it before, but on that big screen there it was, plain as day. I notice crows feet and wrinkles show up a lot better, too.
Once you get used to a big tv, it's hard to go back to a small one. And I swear, once you get Tivo and can pause it, roll it back, etc, it'll spoil you rotten. Geeze, how did we ever get along before all that! :P
I would be prepared to go out on a limb and say there is no-one posting here, not one person, for whom commuting to a job is more than 50% of their driving.
That's definitely true in my case. My commute to work is about 3.5 miles one way, where I usually park. There's a lot right behind my building that's more like 3.8 miles, and if I wanted, there's a lot just inside the main gate, that drops it to about 3.2 miles, and gives me a little exercise. So, if all I did was drive to work and back, we're only looking at around 1800 miles per year. And there's a gas station and grocery store along the way to work, a liquor store 2 miles out of the way, and a bank that I can walk to during my lunch hour at work. If I was to take a wild guess, I might only drive about 5-6,000 miles per year, but even with mileage that low, I could cut some out if I wanted to.
And I would bet that if push came to shove, and gas reached $8 or $10 a gallon next year, more than 50% of everyone here, maybe more than 70%, would be able to substitute an alternate mode of transport for their solo occupant car even for their commute.
If it got to that price, I think I'd just put my roommate back in my Intrepid, and use my older cars to go to work. That's what I did a few years ago, when he had to drive about 40 miles round trip. These days it's only around 10, so while he still has a longer commute than me, they're close enough that I figure he can suffer with my old truck, while I drive the Trep. He gets about 10 mpg with the truck, and would probably get around 18 with the Trep, as he has a heavier foot than me. I could probably get 11-12 with the truck, and 20 with the Trep. And, I figure that since the older cars need to be driven every once in awhile anyway, why not just drive them to work, or to run errands?
I've been trying to do that a bit more, lately. Sometimes, I'll just fire one of my old cars up and drive it around the neighborhood, not really going anywhere. But this morning I took my '79 NYer to the bank. And then took my '76 LeMans on an ice cream run that would've only been around 3.5 miles round trip, but I took the scenic route and made it around 18, to give the car a good run. Probably wouldn't be doing that with $8-10/gal gas, though!
All the governments social programs. They are all big on promises, poor on delivery. I do feel for those that trust in those systems. It is usually too late when they find out the truth. I have been against big government social programs since before I could vote. I am more convinced now than ever. So, don't blame me I voted for Goldwater.
I seriously doubt if it's much. I replaced a couple power window motors myself, in my '79 New Yorker. I'd say they were about 2-3 pounds apiece, and bolted into the same lift mechanism that the crank would have. So you'd gain the weight of the window motors, plus the switches, wiring, etc, and you'd lose the weight of the cranks. So I'd guess power windows, on the whole, might add 20 pounds, at best, to a 4-door car?
And since 1979, I'm sure they've only made those power window motors lighter. I think the lift mechanisms are lighter, as well. I think these days, the window lift is just a piece of heavy vinyl tape with slots cut into it, rather than those old fashioned metal lifts with the cogs cut into them.
A center console doesn't add much weight, I don't think. However, bucket seats, believe it or not, do. At least, in the old days, they used to. I dunno how they managed this, but with a typical 60's car, a solid bench seat that could seat 3-across actually weighed less than two bucket seats! Just taking a wild guess, but if you took out bucket seats and a console and put in a solid bench seat, you might save about 50-60 pounds? I guess 20 pounds here, 50-60 there, doesn't seem like much, but it adds up. Still, I have a feeling that power windows and bucket seats and consoles are here to stay.
[raises hand]
I have a 35-mile round trip, which works out to about 9,000 a year, and I know I don't drive anywhere near 18,000 miles a year. Probably 13,000 or so; I'd have to go dig out the inspection receipts and count up the mileage.
The winder in the '92 Sentra is a double cable reel that loops back to a vertical channel that the window rides up and down on. Cranking the handle loops up one cable while letting out the other one. The assembly doesn't weigh much at all.
It is a practical essential to tranportation if one does not have ready access to carpooling and buses. Many of the cities if not most that are not large NE urban areas have not invested in wide spread public transportation.While gasoline may not be an essential for life, it is an essential for employment the loss of which woulld result in a very poor quality of life. I believe gagrice has already made this argument most cogently. In the future one may not have to buy gasoline for transportation. In the here and now you do.
Well, maybe that day, but tomorrow you could trade your car for a more efficient model, car pool, whatever. "
Did so earlier this year, current vehicle gets twice the mileage of my former. So I'm one one those adding to reduced consumption. Car pool ,bus not an available solution for me. I can afford gas if it goes to $20 a gallon. I just have this dislike of global recessions.
250 wd x 145 mi = 36000+ mi annually commuting.
Actually after that there's not much time for any other driving so I'd say that 90+% of my driving is commuting.
;-)
So for folks whose driving is more than 50% commuting, it would seem you have picked homes outside the new 2008 "comfort radius" of your job! For you, it WILL have to be one of the other things people have mentioned before: carpooling with someone from work so you can split the gas expense, making public transport work for you somehow, moving a little closer to the job, or moving the job a little closer to you. That is, if you find the gas expense onerous now. Kdhspyder, I suspect you don't, driving that Prius.
And yes in future, until we can make a systematic commitment to improving public transportation (which may never happen, who knows) people will have to draw from a smaller radius around their homes to find jobs, if they find themselves pinched for money because of gas prices.
It's a lot of pain for some people now, but it actually will probably be good for the U.S. in the long run.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I agree. Should we actually restrict oil futures buying to those that can prove ability to take physical delivery ( unlikely). And should the reduction of 90%-95% of the oil speculators bring oil down to $65-70, the price OPEC has stated it believes reflects where world demand is currently. And should gasoline prices fall to $2 per gallon. I would be amenable to a federal tax that would raise the price to $3 per gallon some what along the lines of europe. It would bring in revenues deperately needed to a government that is operating in the red as they have done for the last 26 years. Note to government, use it to reduce our debt, don't spend as you have in the past. It would alleviate some of the inflation, 25% cut from current prices while still shifting demand toward fuel efficent vehicles.And it would shift public sentiment allowing us to possibly raise rates and still avoid a recession. lastly, gradually increase the tax in accordance with economic conditions and keep the focus on oil independence.
kdh, are you driving a Prius?
Question for the sales frontline, Is anyone biting on the $2.99 gas for a year/ free gas for summer incentives? Back to the angst of gas prices.
I bet you're wond'rin' how I knew
'bout your plans to make me blue
Gas at $4.25 before move getting 14/23 mpg =$5768 per year.
Gas at $4.25 after move getting 15/24 mpg =$1593 per year.
Difference per year of $4175 put towards interest on new home loan at 5.375%.
Difference covers the interest on the first $77666 of loan principal.
Amt of loan paid by gas savings fluctuates with gas prices.
Gas savings is just under 100 gallons a month. About 20,000 fewer miles per year being driven. Most families don't even drive 20,000 miles a year.
Some people don't realize that only 50 miles in a day in a 14 mpg Astro (in town mpg) uses in gas what the interest on a $100,000 home loan is, in a day. (Based on $4.25 /gallon, 5.4% interest rate).
Duke: yes, kdhspyder drives a Prius on that looooong commute he mentioned. A soccer mom driving a couple of kids to practice and going to the store in her Suburban or Sequoia uses as much gas in a day as kdh uses for his whole commute.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Now true, they are taking steps to save gas, such as carpooling. But they've always done that, for as long as they've lived down in Southern MD. Since her job is on the way to his, and their hours allowed for it, it just made sense to carpool, even back when gas was cheap. When they first moved down there in 1989, he had an '84 Tempo and she had an '86 Monte Carlo. They mainly used the Tempo for commuting, but gas was cheap enough that the Monte Carlo got used fairly often, as well. The Tempo gave way to a 1991 Stanza which, ironically, wouldn't prove to be as reliable as the Tempo! They have a '99 Altima now that they commute in. They probably get around 30 mpg on that commute, which I guess would come out to around 20 gallons per week. Or around $80, at today's prices.
That sounds pretty brutal, but they both have good-paying jobs. My mother is eligible for retirement, and would have gone out at the end of this year, but they enticed her to stay. Plus, their monthly mortgage payment is a pittance. Up in my area, for the same payment, you could get into an apartment that's within walking distance of the local crack den. :sick:
If gas prices doubled, I dunno if my Mom & stepdad would really change much. Right now, they might pay about $4,000 per year in fuel for commuting. Doubling it would put it to $8K. They did recently buy an '08 Altima, which should get better fuel economy than the '99, but for some reason they keep driving the '99. Want to get every last penny out of it, I guess. On that same route, I guess it might get about 10% better economy, so if they started driving it, that would put their commuting bill to around $7200, versus $8000. It might actually be more economical than that...I think the '99 was EPA rated 23/29, while the '08 would be 26/34 if they used the same rating method, but I was trying to be conservative.
I don't know if fuel prices like that would be enough to make my Mom reconsider retirement. Plus, since her job is on the way to my stepdad's, taking her out of the equation wouldn't save any fuel.
I doubt if my Mom & stepdad would ever consider moving. Although she has jokingly threatened to move in with me! And don't think that hasn't given me nightmares! :surprise:
c57
I don't think so because it was slowing down greatly before. Around here they stopped moving outward and started building up areas not yet built up but within the current area of "urban sprawl".
Traffic In Major U.S. Cities Lessens Due To High Gas Price
The Illinois Tollway lost about 2-3% of its traffic and its believed to be due to construction and not high gas costs.
I think they are referring to the police walking the neighborhoods as opposed to driving around.
The only areas where that would result in greater police presence is in areas of high density population with a large police department, as far as I know that has always been the case in those areas. Most suburbs foot patrols wouldn't be to effective and would lead to less police presence as foot patrols can only effectively patrol a very small area.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
But are illegal to use while driving.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I do believe that that is greatly exaggerated
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Yep, strange as that may sound, they did it. I don't recall it ever happening when I was in elementary school or middle school, but it happened a few times in high school. Maybe by the time the mid 80's came around, parents were more sue-happy or something? I have a friend who's a teacher in the public school system; I'll have to ask him if it's still something they do. There are a lot of newer school buildings these days though, and many of the older ones have been remodeled, so the HVAC systems may be better these days.
Seems like September 1985, when I started 10th grade, was when we got sent home the most. I remember it happening a couple of days. Maybe we were going through a real heatwave that year.
According to the tax rolls the lower half of the US households only pay 3.6% of the income tax and have a household income $30k and below. You cannot get a good picture of what the people in the lower income brackets make by median income. It is skewed by all you high wage earners. How many millions of people are on SSI and SS? They also buy gas and need to heat their homes. As several have pointed out including myself. Gas is a small part of the high cost of Energy from oil for many Americans. My propane and electricity far exceeds my gas for the cars each month.
PS
Our trash pickup has gone from $75 to $100 every two months due to high fuel costs. Our water is way up. So yes gas prices are fueling our pain in many ways.
Actually, that's MEAN income, and not MEDIAN. Mean income is the average, and is the one that gets thrown out of proportion by high wage earners. Median is the number exactly in the middle. So if the median household income is $30K, then that means half the households out there earn more, half earn less. BTW, is it REALLY only $30K? I thought median household income was more like $54K?
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Things have changed. We can't expect kids to be somewhat uncomfortable and still learn...
Dayton City Schools (totally messed up with poor superintendent and board choices through the years) went to year-round school in many of it's older buildings last summer!!! They ended up with 5 calamity days used in the first 6 days of school. The total allowed by the state for the whole school year is 5. Of course winter snow adds some here in the beautful Midwest.
Their busing is so messed up they have a private company promising to save them 40% of their costs. All schools are reeling from the increase in fuel costs they face for this coming year. The impact of running air conditioning during the summer in many buildings, not just a few for makeup courses for failing students, will add to that cost. Diesel and gasoline cost predictions for their busing make the news here.
Can't feel too sorry for them because they have an intricate netword of times and multiple runs for busing. The State of Ohio makes the public school responsbile for subsidizing the busing for private, charter, parochial, special needs schools. Add to that a mishmash of times that could be coordinated but aren't for school and they probably waste half their fuel running their publicly owned fleet.
I expect lots of schools to make unpopular moves to reduce fuel costs in this state. They can't go ask voters for more money for fuel because voters are paying more for themselves and aren't going to vote additional money in the future (which takes a year to start being collected).
My explanation of the school's self-made mess of busing is not meant to start an off topic discussion; it's to show how much fuel they are wasting along with electrical expense for AC.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,