Motorists Resigned to Soaring Gas Prices

Scott en Aztl=E1n wrote:
> This article just reinforced what I've believed for a long time: gas
> prices aren't really that high, especially when you consider what gas
> cost in 1979 (after inflation adjustments). People just like to bitch
> and moan, but when it comes right down to it, they still drive their
> SUVs to work instead of taking public transit.
>
> http://www.dailystar.com/dailystar/metro/67541.php
>
> There's not much you can do: If you want to get to work and school,
> shop for necessities and perhaps see relatives and friends, you have
> to buy gasoline at prices that are much higher than you'd like.
>
> That's the bitter pill Tucson motorists say they're swallowing.
>
> Local gas prices have been above the psychologically scary
$2-a-gallon
> mark and climbing steadily for about three weeks.
>
> In the past, spikes in gas prices have angered consumers, triggering
a
> public outcry. This time, the only sound coming from consumers seems
> to be the swipe of their credit cards at the pumps.
>
> No, they say, they're not complacent, just accepting.

Americans have been hoodwinked. They knew the iraq invasion was never
about fighting terrorism or spreading democracy. They knew it was about
stealing oil and keeping gas prices down. Wrong again.

> No, they say, they're not complacent, just accepting.

And their alternative is?

John Harlow wrote:

>>No, they say, they're not complacent, just accepting.

> And their alternative is?

Cycling.

On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 23:25:10 -0500, John Harlow , one of an infinite
number of monkeys at an infinite number of typewriters said the following
in rec.autos.driving...

>
> > No, they say, they're not complacent, just accepting.
>
> And their alternative is?

Walking?

"Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
news
> This article just reinforced what I've believed for a long time: gas
> prices aren't really that high, especially when you consider what gas
> cost in 1979 (after inflation adjustments). People just like to bitch
> and moan, but when it comes right down to it, they still drive their
> SUVs to work instead of taking public transit.
>
> http://www.dailystar.com/dailystar/metro/67541.php
>
[snip...]

Now, I don't have an SUV, but still--the only limit these high gas prices
will have on my driving are for any long distance trips, but they won't have
any impact on my commute to and from work or for local shopping trips.

So yeah, I'll still drive, because for the places of business I drive
to--public transit doesn't travel where I need to go, and doesn't get me to
where I need to go when I need to get there, and it's a tremendous sacrifice
of personal freedom to use public transit. This goes for all the ill-planned
overly optimistic bus, train, and light-rail transit systems: they are no
good to me whatsoever if they cannot get me to a location using ONE SINGLE
TRANSIT VEHICLE'S SCHEDULED RUN and then later on, back home from a location
using ONE SINGLE TRANSIT VEHICLE'S SCHEDULED RUN.

First of all, a one way trip to anywhere significant requires multiple bus
transfers--even from a train or light rail, there is still at least one bus
transfer connection. That also assumes that buses depart on time (which
means that instead of drivers taking an extended break at the end of a run
and loading buses at departure time for the next run... they should load
early and LEAVE at departure time). And, that also further assumes that they
arrive at the transfer/time point on time as scheduled (which can get
further screwed up by traffic, schedules that don't allow enough recovery
time for any disabled passengers, or even the inevitable bus mechanical
breakdown).

Second, running buses every 30 minutes still isn't efficient enough--one
missed connection makes me a minimum of 30 mintues late arriving to wherever
I wanted to go. Oh yeah, and then there's the whole planning of the return
trip so that I can get home on time, preferably not having to connect with
the last bus of a given route and/or run.

I'm not finished yet--there's also the additional problem of bus service
being unreliable: schedule changes are periodic (usually eliminating bus
runs), route changes are periodic (which may remove a bus stop here and
there), and then there are also cross-transit agency hassles with
transfers/tokens/day passes having inconsistent acceptance policies.

Still not done--the buses themselves often have worn or broken seat
cushions (often further damaged by graffiti), standee rails may be missing
securement screws (oh yeah, like that's really safe), window locks stick and
prevent a window from being opened or closed properly, and drivers can't
manage the bus climate properly (often resulting the bus being too hot in
summer or too cold in winter) due to poor design of the bus climate control
system.

Finally, the various bus driver attitude issues, bus driver safety issues
(e.g., exceeding the posted speed limit on routes that travel along two lane
mountain roads that often results in excessive coach lean), and the all too
common passenger attitude and/or hygene issues... they all make the already
full-of-hassle public transit travel even that much more of an obvious
sacrifice of personal independence and freedom.

So yeah, the high gas prices do suck, but I value my independence and
freedom far too much to ever consider using public transportation as a
viable alternative. Public transportation, for me, will always be a
transportation method of absolute last resort.

Others may vary--and at the minimum, they must have better planned/scheduled
and more efficient transit systems.

They didn't whimper and complain about a lack of national energy policy
during the 1990's. They didn't complain when the Clinton and Bush
administrations failed to enact higher CAFE standards, caving in to the Big
Three's demands for more business as usual. These people need to look in
the mirror if they wonder why gas is expensive, the American people
literally have nobody to blame but themselves; time to pay the piper.

John Harlow wrote:

>>No, they say, they're not complacent, just accepting.
>
>
> And their alternative is?

TDIs or Civics

"John Harlow" > wrote in message
news
>
>> No, they say, they're not complacent, just accepting.
>
> And their alternative is?
>

1. Sell the McMansion and move closer to work (check)
2. Get rid of the guzzler and get something more economical... like a TDI
VW (check)
3. Ride a bike, walk, or tele-commute. (check)
4. Drive less. (check)
5. Or, STFU and keep on paying.

Gas isn't going to get any cheaper. Check out world demand for
crude(barrels per day) then look at worldwide production. Right now we're
right at the point where supply is just meeting demand (84 M bpd). With
worldwide demand projected to grow at 2.5% annually, and production
projected to stay right around 84 million barrels per day or decline
gradually, the price of all products related to petroleum will continue to
increase until demand for petroluem falls.

Simple economics really. And a little geology thrown in for good measure.
Google Hubbert's Peak for a primer.

The above steps can reduce your energy usage. Those who make those changes
sooner will experience much less pain and upheaval than those who bury their
heads in the sand and either deny that there is a problem.

Change is inevitable. IMO our current way of life is unsustainable due to
our dependence on cheap oil.

My 2¢ worth.

Roy

On 27 Mar 2005 19:21:39 -0800, "Laura Bush murdered her boy friend"
> wrote:

>Americans have been hoodwinked. They knew the iraq invasion was never
>about fighting terrorism or spreading democracy. They knew it was about
>stealing oil and keeping gas prices down. Wrong again.

Absolutely.
And did you notice how the gas prices went down after we stole
Kuwait's gas?

--
Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"

In article >,
Arif Khokar > wrote:
>John Harlow wrote:
>
>>>No, they say, they're not complacent, just accepting.
>
>> And their alternative is?
>
>Cycling.

Ahh, cycling in a 42 degree rainstorm. Such fun.


--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.