Top 3 ways to lower gas

T

thrustbucket

CAGiversary!
Feedback
7 (100%)
I don't know how to embed, sorry.

Link.

Now first of all, I am not a fan of Newt, persay (although I'd much prefer him to Bush), but I think he is dead on here. If any of the candidates stated this as their plan I would almost certainly vote for them. Especially number 1. Classic.


I would love to hear from people that disagree with this and why.
 
The entire strategic oil reserve has less than an 8 week supply of oil, and it would take a long time to withdraw it all since it was not designed to dispense vast amounts of oil quickly. Plus, you'd still run into the problem of not having enough refineries in this country.

That shale oil wasn't touched is because its very expensive to extract from the ground, not at all economical before now. The price wouldn't go down very much from here, but at least it would stabilize.

A lot of the oil in the Atlantic is also not economical or completely impractical to extract. Yes, new offshore drilling and opening up ANWR would be helpful, but it doesn't help you in the short term. The biggest reason oil prices are up is because the dollar is down 50%.
 
Anyone who talks about offshore drilling should shut the fuck up. Now.

I don't usually read DailyKos, but they sum it up quite nicely.

Basically, there are tons of areas leased for drilling that are currently not being drilled. U.S. daily production could double if all leased areas were actually being drilled. The oil industry has been stockpiling land leases where there is oil for years. This is nothing but a cynical political ploy by the GOP and anyone who falls for it shouldn't be allowed to vote.
 
[quote name='evanft']Anyone who talks about offshore drilling should shut the fuck up. Now.

I don't usually read DailyKos, but they sum it up quite nicely.

Basically, there are tons of areas leased for drilling that are currently not being drilled. U.S. daily production could double if all leased areas were actually being drilled. The oil industry has been stockpiling land leases where there is oil for years. This is nothing but a cynical political ploy by the GOP and anyone who falls for it shouldn't be allowed to vote.[/quote]

"The U.S. Senate on Tuesday blocked debate of a bill to offer about $17.7 billion in tax incentives for consumers to build renewable energy sources like windmills and solar arrays, and buy plug-in cars that run on electricity rather than gasoline."

Nice of that Democratic majority Senate to block that bill then.
 
[quote name='dafoomie']The entire strategic oil reserve has less than an 8 week supply of oil, and it would take a long time to withdraw it all since it was not designed to dispense vast amounts of oil quickly. Plus, you'd still run into the problem of not having enough refineries in this country.[/quote]

The things you list only apply if you do it to relieve gas price for consumers.

Newt was saying if tomorrow the president announced he's flooding the market with half the reserves immediately for the soul purpose of "teaching a lesson" to the spectators and futures markets (widely considered the main cause of oil going up).

Large investors and banks would lose billions literally in one day. And it might prevent them from continuing to "bet" on oil price increase if we show we'll do that randomly.

That shale oil wasn't touched is because its very expensive to extract from the ground, not at all economical before now. The price wouldn't go down very much from here, but at least it would stabilize.
Click to expand...

"According to a survey conducted by the RAND, a surface retorting complex (mine, retorting plant, upgrading plant, supporting utilities, and spent shale reclamation) is unlikely to be profitable unless real crude oil prices are at least US$70 to US$95 per barrel."

The last estimate I heard for shale oil extraction was about $30 a barrel.


A lot of the oil in the Atlantic is also not economical or completely impractical to extract.
Click to expand...
Maybe. But do you wan to place bets that other countries will start finding a way to do it economically pretty quick? We don't have the political will. And if they do, we will be forced to buy oil from them, and guess what happens to our economy and dollar then?

Yes, new offshore drilling and opening up ANWR would be helpful, but it doesn't help you in the short term. The biggest reason oil prices are up is because the dollar is down 50%.
Click to expand...
Maybe. But unless we have a plan that you know of for raising the dollar back up pretty quickly, I'd say it is pretty wise to start putting the slow cogs into motion sooner rather than later.

[quote name='evanft']Anyone who talks about offshore drilling should shut the fuck up. Now.

I don't usually read DailyKos, but they sum it up quite nicely.

Basically, there are tons of areas leased for drilling that are currently not being drilled. U.S. daily production could double if all leased areas were actually being drilled. The oil industry has been stockpiling land leases where there is oil for years. This is nothing but a cynical political ploy by the GOP and anyone who falls for it shouldn't be allowed to vote.[/QUOTE]

Touche

Believe me, with oil at $130 per barrel, they would drill on those lands if it made sense to do so! No, not all oil and gas leases are “being used”, because not all of them have production-worthy quantities of oil or gas. Lots of people have property that is not being used, but government doesn’t use it as an excuse to take it away, or to forbid the owners from buying other property.

First, a company may lease property, but never have the funds to properly explore it or drill an exploratory well. Second, after paying for further tests (such as seismic), they often decide the lease isn’t worth the high, high costs of drilling after all. Or they may hold onto the lease for years until either higher oil prices or new technology makes it feasible to drill. Third, a company may lease property but drill on another tract (which drains a “pool” that covers multiple leased tracts), so perhaps they’re counting it as “not used” if no well is sunk on that particular piece of property. Fourth, they may try to drill and be blocked by government bureaucrats, environmental lawsuits, etc.

Finally, not all acres are alike. Some have lots of oil. Others have virtually none. Saying they’re not drilling for oil everywhere is like faulting them for not digging a gold mine on every acre.
Click to expand...

and

What they also have failed to inform the general public about these leases is that many of them cannot be drilled because there is no oil in them. The government makes these oil companies purchase these leases before they are allowed to survey them. The company geologists then survey, find there’s nothing in there, and now the big oil companies are stuck with these leases that they can’t do anything with..and…who pays the cost for those non-productive leases? We the people do as a pass through expense. It’s just another scam by the government and something they don’t want everyone to know about.
Click to expand...

Once again, it looks like dailykos is running fast and hard towards the end zone without a ball in their hand.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']Now first of all, I am not a fan of Newt, persay (although I'd much prefer him to Bush)[/QUOTE]
Newt's the friggin man. He engineered one of the great political (one might say populist) movements of modern times. I'd kill for a return to (most of) the Contract.

I'm nervous about what might happen if we released a significant amount of the reserves. What if the market laughs it off, knowing it has an end and just waits them out? What if it succeeds and the banks, already starting to go underwater, really start getting drowned? Are we ready for an S&L type fear of banks?

And if the leases are so valuable that they need new ones, how high do prices have to go for them to go get the high hanging fruit in these "uneconomical" areas? Do the oil companies, of all entities on this planet, really want more pork right now?

It sure seems like the coastal states are going to be bearing a disproportionate level of the risk, too. Not everyone wants to be Alaska.


The last estimate I heard for shale oil extraction was about $30 a barrel.
Click to expand...

Maybe. But do you wan to place bets that other countries will start finding a way to do it economically pretty quick? We don't have the political will. And if they do, we will be forced to buy oil from them, and guess what happens to our economy and dollar then?
Click to expand...
The new president is going to have a powerful incentive to make the transition to new sources of power. It is a rough bet to make with the dollar being so friggin awful, though.
[quote name='VanillaGorilla']Nice of that Democratic majority Senate to block that bill then.[/QUOTE]
Name, number of bill?
 
[quote name='speedracer']
The new president is going to have a powerful incentive to make the transition to new sources of power. It is a rough bet to make with the dollar being so friggin awful, though.
[/QUOTE]

This is the one thing that keeps making the hairs on the back of my neck tingle.

It's definitively not a good sign that neither candidate has offered a comprehensive plan for energy, especially short term, for their candidacy.

This can mean one of several different things. But I have a hunch that it ultimately means a combination of A) They really have no good plan and B) The ideas they might have will likely be seen as very risky and unpopular, so it would not be a good idea to advertise them now.

Also, I have a hunch that this is all going to lead to a lot of shit with our neighbors to the south. Good or bad, I think we can expect to see various central and south American countries in our headlines more and more.
 
One simple fact that many overlook in all of this hubub over "Oil Company Profits" is that gasoline is a volume based profit (as opposed to margin). The Oil companies are making pretty much the same profit per gallon of gas that they were ten years ago when gas was $1.80 a gallon. My folk's used to run a gas station and made all of $0.06 per gallon profit on gasoline, not even enough to make it worth selling.

All of our current economic woes are based on foolish spending over the last 15 years. Interest rates kept going lower because the reserve wanted to pump more credit into the hands of consumers to bolster the economy. In doing so, prices for real estate were artificially inflated which is a leading indicator of prosperity (property ownership). Now that people who couldn't afford their homes in the first place are getting foreclosed, people are deciding to place the blame on the lendors. Do these same people not realize that it is the lendors who are losing their asses now?

You want real energy solutions? Easy. Reduce consumption. If you live within walking distance of your shopping, then walk. If you can't carry $300 worth of groceries for a week, go every other day and spend less. If your vehicle is a gas hog then simply drive less. Walk with your kids to the park instead of driving them 6 blocks. Turn the lights off in rooms of your house that are empty. Turn your A/C to 76 instead of 72. Go buy a badmiton or volleyball setup for the backyard and play outside instead of inside using energy. It's amazing how much you can personally save just by doing simple little things like this. I dropped my electricity bill by more than 1/3rd last year by being a bit more concientious of my consumption.
 
[quote name='nasum']
You want real energy solutions? Easy. Reduce consumption. If you live within walking distance of your shopping, then walk. If you can't carry $300 worth of groceries for a week, go every other day and spend less. If your vehicle is a gas hog then simply drive less. Walk with your kids to the park instead of driving them 6 blocks. Turn the lights off in rooms of your house that are empty. Turn your A/C to 76 instead of 72. Go buy a badmiton or volleyball setup for the backyard and play outside instead of inside using energy. It's amazing how much you can personally save just by doing simple little things like this. I dropped my electricity bill by more than 1/3rd last year by being a bit more concientious of my consumption.[/quote]

Communist!

America do with less or do with the same but smarter?

If God wanted me to walk, He wouldn't have made adjustable seats to reach the gas and brakes.

When I drive my kids to the park in my Hummer, I need to drive them from the swing set to the slide and back. I need to stay in the parking lot with the engine running so the AC stays cold.

When I get home, my house is too cold. 65! You know what I do? I open the windows to get it back up to 75.

EDIT: I was watching CNN today during my lunch of Ramen. They're paying college students $10/hour to drive into neighborhoods and replacing the light bulbs of po' folks to energy efficient types.

What killed me was one woman in her 60s claiming she didn't know energy efficient light bulbs existed.

Really? They've been out for over 5 years. They've been next to regular bulbs the entire time. You have to push the energy efficient light bulbs out of the way to get to the energy suckers. What more could be done to raise awareness? Does there need to be a mascot dressed like an energy efficient light bulb tackling customers in the checkout lanes who buy the old style lightbulbs?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']When I get home, my house is too cold. 65! You know what I do? I open the windows to get it back up to 75.[/quote]

Stuff like that happens unfortunately. My father does maintenance for a number of section 8 apartment complexes. They had to put locks on the thermostats because many of the tenants were setting the heat at 90-95 degrees...with the windows open.
 
The first step Newt mentioned would be a scare tactic to speculators. I don't believe gas would go down $50 a barrel, maybe $30 if we released that much.

The thing about offshore drilling, for what he said in that clip, is only true to the US. It's currently illegal for the US to drill in the Atlantic Ocean, because the US Congress said it was a good idea.

The transition thing is right on the money. Right now we have an insanely bad transition going on where people think new fuel will come in tomorrow and gas prices will drop like that when in fact ethanol costs more than a gallon of gas. So it definitely won't start lower than gasoline. Also, while we're getting less and less oil, we're not getting more alternative fuels. Meaning the increase in demand severely outweighs the supply.

Oh, and OPEC's a monopoly and since we're not going after oil, they know they're safe and can raise the price as much as they want because they know we aren't doing anything about it.
 
[quote name='KingBroly']
Oh, and OPEC's a monopoly and since we're not going after oil, they know they're safe and can raise the price as much as they want because they know we aren't doing anything about it.[/QUOTE]

This is the real issue. How high do gas prices have to get before our environmental pride finally breaks and we start actively trying to become oil independent.

Like you said, the weening off of oil is going to take time, and oil prices are going to only get higher while it happens.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']This is the real issue. How high do gas prices have to get before our environmental pride finally breaks and we start actively trying to become oil independent.

Like you said, the weening off of oil is going to take time, and oil prices are going to only get higher while it happens.[/quote]

I say we let the market take care of itself.

Two years ago, anybody driving a scooter would have been laughed at.

Now, scooter manufacturers can't keep up with demand and people driving or selling SUVs are losing their asses at the pump and on the lot.

90% of driving is commuting under 30 miles. My wife's commute was 100 miles. It is now 15 miles. My commute was 80 miles. It is now 36 miles and I'm firing off resumes everyday to places closer to home. My goal is to bike or walk to work. Why can't everybody attempt that? Don't worry. I already know every answer is an excuse.

Let people get their noses bloodied and the fingers burned. Pain and suffering ultimately leads to wisdom.

Gas prices will eventually come down. When they do, the people who learned how to survive or prosper with high gas prices will be even better off in the long run.
 
I like how he says "proven" and "fact" when it isn't proven or fact and he's just speaking out of his ass.

You want to know how to stop using so much oil? Make cars that don't have 8 TVs and DVD players, make cars that get 100 miles a gallon, and stop making SUVs.

And my mom has applied to at least 60-70 jobs, no one is hiring the economy is a mess. Why doesn't everyone just walk to work? Because they fucking can't!
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']
What more could be done to raise awareness? [/QUOTE]

About they only thing else they could do is just stop making the old light bulbs.

But that's not going to happen as the energy efficient one's have some limitations. Like not working with dimmers. Every bulb in my condo is is energy efficient except for the one in the dimmer light as it just flickers and buzzes if you put it on anything but all the way on--and I use the dimmer a good bit for back lighting when watching movies etc.

As for living close to work, it can be tough. There's not good housing (i.e. not in the ghetto) near where I work now, plus the problem that I work in academia and even if I move to a less urban college I don't want to live to close and be around students all the time. Public transit is available, but it takes literally 3 times as long and still costs a good deal more than gas prices for my 8 mile each way commute.

But in generally, I don't really care. I like the freedom of having my car, being able to go directly wherever I want before and after work etc. etc. so gas prices would have to get much higher before I consider giving all that up. I love owning a car and driving, I'll make a lot of cut backs to other parts of my budget before giving that up.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='bigdaddy']You want to know how to stop using so much oil? Make cars that don't have 8 TVs and DVD players, make cars that get 100 miles a gallon, and stop making SUVs.

And my mom has applied to at least 60-70 jobs, no one is hiring the economy is a mess. Why doesn't everyone just walk to work? Because they fucking can't![/quote]

Holy Christ! You want cars to be a way to reach point B from point A as easily as possible and not an outward expression of financial standing?

How could anybody drive a car without a TV in the headrest? Watching Bukkake makes me a more defensive driver. The kids seem to like it, too.

A car getting 100 miles a gallon? That would take $6,000 in Li Ion or NiMH batteries and a dedication to real hybrid cars instead pretend hybrids like the Prius.

Stop making SUVs? Already happened last month. http://buzz.yahoo.com/buzzlog/91472 GM and Ford's stocks aren't dropping because they're meeting American expectations.

...

Can't get an interview after applying for 60-70 jobs? Turn on spell checker, proofread and send to employment agencies in addition to just companies. Nothing says unqualified like "Empoyment Objection".

Can't get a job offer after 6-7 interviews? Start taking your meds and stop bathing in "Desperation" cologne.

Can't get a job within 2 miles of where you live? Buy a bike.

Can't get a job within 5 miles of where you live? Covert the bike to electric assist.

Can't get a job within 10 miles of where you live? Buy an used 50 cc gas scooter. Convert it to electric to be immune to gas prices.

Can't get a job within 20 miles of where you live? Live closer to work or work closer to where you live.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']About they only thing else they could do is just stop making the old light bulbs.

But that's not going to happen as the energy efficient one's have some limitations. Like not working with dimmers.[/quote]

Another one is they don't work if the light is enclosed in a glass dome. I found that out the hard way, aka it exploded.

Plus they have mercury in them, and everyone just throws them out so that's bad for the environment. I don't really care, the planet can take care of itself, but some people might.
 
[quote name='bigdaddy']Another one is they don't work if the light is enclosed in a glass dome. I found that out the hard way, aka it exploded.

Plus they have mercury in them, and everyone just throws them out so that's bad for the environment. I don't really care, the planet can take care of itself, but some people might.[/quote]

My biggest problem with them is that they don't work below 5 degrees Celsius.

That was a big concern in the winter time when the wife left the house before 6AM.

However, how can somebody not know about them?

It is like stupidity is a high jump and people like this woman are putting on jetpacks.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']But in generally, I don't really care. I like the freedom of having my car, being able to go directly wherever I want before and after work etc. etc. so gas prices would have to get much higher before I consider giving all that up. I love owning a car and driving, I'll make a lot of cut backs to other parts of my budget before giving that up.[/quote]

By in large, there's nothing wrong with this attitude. You view the car as a luxury item. It isn't a life or death item to you.

You're not flopping around wondering how you'll make ends meet because gas went up another nickel.

I must overhear people in the office whinebagging about gas prices for a hour every day.

CNN reports gas prices more than news. If we use refrigerated gas pumps, a car could go 500 miles instead of 490 miles. Wow, a 2% improvement before the cost of new pumps is calculated.

The State government is trying to get Louisville to stop using Reformulated gas. That's 10-15 minutes on the local newscasts. It'll save people a whopping quarter per gallon. That's nearly 6%! BFD.

Then, McCain weighs in. He acts like drilling holes in the continental shelf will have some immediate effect. Then he acts like going to war with Iran won't have any effect.

People need to get over high gas prices.

A highway capable scooter uses 1/3 gas.

A street traffic capable scooter uses as much gas and keeps up with traffic, but doesn't require insurance or registration.

An electric assisted bike can almost keep up with street traffic and costs 1 cent per charge if that.

In the long run, every dollar on the price of gas adds the equivalent of 4MPG to a long range electric car. Right now, the battery and fuel costs of an electric sedan would cost the same as the gas costs of a 15-17MPG gas sedan.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']Turn on spell checker, proofread

Covert the bike to electric assist.

QUOTE]

Ain't practicing what you preach a complete bitch?

I just can't for the life of me understand why people panic about gas prices when all one needs to do is reduce their own consumption.
 
[quote name='nasum'][quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']Turn on spell checker, proofread

Covert the bike to electric assist.

QUOTE]

Ain't practicing what you preach a complete bitch?

I just can't for the life of me understand why people panic about gas prices when all one needs to do is reduce their own consumption.[/quote]

People don't notice the bike has been converted. So, yeah, it's an electric assist covert. Aren't you up on the lingo? ;)
 
[quote name='nasum']I just can't for the life of me understand why people panic about gas prices when all one needs to do is reduce their own consumption.[/QUOTE]

Please, enlighten me. How can I reduce my consumption when I have to drive 25 miles one way to work?
 
[quote name='Liquid 2']Please, enlighten me. How can I reduce my consumption when I have to drive 25 miles one way to work?[/QUOTE]

Carpool or find out if your company offers a 4 day workweek (which seems to be teh new hotness).
 
[quote name='Msut77']Carpool or find out if your company offers a 4 day workweek (which seems to be teh new hotness).[/QUOTE]

It was a rhetorical question. I was highlighting that gas is essential to some.
 
No one seems to talk about the positive things high gas prices have done. Like spurring alternative fuel research. If gas prices went back down to previous price levels, the funding for alternative fuel research would probably go way down. We wouldn't care about research into electric cars if oil was cheap again.
 
[quote name='JolietJake']No one seems to talk about the positive things high gas prices have done. Like spurring alternative fuel research. If gas prices went back down to previous price levels, the funding for alternative fuel research would probably go way down. We wouldn't care about research into electric cars if oil was cheap again.[/quote]

Yeah, because alternative fuel would be less important if the shit was less expensive to begin with, no?
 
[quote name='linkpwns']Yeah, because alternative fuel would be less important if the shit was less expensive to begin with, no?[/QUOTE]

Actually, yes.

That's what the free market is all about.
 
I think what most people fail to realize that a large reason there is high gas prices is because of the perception that gas prices are going to skyrocket due to supply issues. Most financial markets are driven by perception.

The perception now is that the US Congress in conjugation with environmentalists has tied the hands of the US people so badly that they pose no threat to the supply of other oil markets, while US demand remains high - which is pretty much true. If those supply hands were to become untied, however, the perception would quickly shatter and oil prices would plummet overnight.

However, this is not happening for the same reason the hands were tied in the first place. US environmentalists backed by a supporting Democrat US congress and potential Democrat US president would rather have people be forced into more "green", "save the planet-esque" practices, even if it means making the economy tank and people in the US go broke. They want to force people to bike or walk to work (or at best use an electric car), just like someone stated on the previous page of this thread - because those methods are the most environmentally-friendly (less pollution). They are doing so through the overly restrictive laws that do not allow us to even start fixing the supply problem on our side. Oh, and if you can't walk/bike/electric car to work, you should get a new job - because the oil issue is your responsibility and it is much easier to buy a new vehicle and start a new job than it is to vote for someone who will actually do something to eradicate the overly restrictive anti-oil laws the US is held mercy to now.

And they are supported by the liberal mainstream media, both TV and Hollywood. Notice the massive "green" blitz we've seen on TV recently? Did you happen to catch "The Happening" or "Wall-E" in theaters? If we don't save the earth, plants will attack us and we will become fat mindless blobs who live on a spaceship because earth is covered with garbage and toxins. All part of systematic brainwashing of US people that we need to cut consumption instead of increase production. That's a pile of baloney, because even if we weren't able to fulfill needs overnight, the act of cutting free the restrictions on USA oil acquisition would make prices plummet overnight due to financial market perception that the USA will start to regain control over supply and hence the artificial "crisis" created by environmentalists and their supporting Democrats is over.

If you want to "save the planet" (lol), great. But do it on your dime, not mine. Hopefully one of the new candidates will propose a comprehensive plan that works towards the elimination of some of the ridiculous anti-oil laws that are killing US supply potential right now. Getting elected some politicians with the balls to start increading oil supply on US side is the #1 way to lower gas prices. Now there is change that I'd vote for! :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ruined I would like seeing a real competitor introduced to Oil and truly stay there. That way this shit would very likely not happen again as there would be that competition to keep them from gouging us.

Also Fooms hit it on the head when he said this is happening because the dollar is tanking. This is because of Iraq and Bush spending money on it when it's not there. When this happens it's used to bump the price up but more then it NEEDS to be. Couple this with earlier speculation about Sadaam or OPEC planning on changing the barrel sales to the Euro and you do the math. Also China is a factor, less so if Bush actually taxed us accordingly for the battle in Iraq. Part of this being that we would've pulled out of Iraq far sooner due to public outrage over the costs to our wallets.
 
[quote name='Sarang01']Ruined I would like seeing a real competitor introduced to Oil and truly stay there. That way this shit would very likely not happen again as there would be that competition to keep them from gouging us.[/quote]

I wouldn't mind that either, but I don't want the option of oil going away. There is no non-oil concept I have seen that will realistically deliver oil-level performance anytime soon for an affordable price. Environmentalists and their green movement want oil eliminated or at least severely crippled due to its impact on the environment.

Also Fooms hit it on the head when he said this is happening because the dollar is tanking. This is because of Iraq and Bush spending money on it when it's not there. When this happens it's used to bump the price up but more then it NEEDS to be. Couple this with earlier speculation about Sadaam or OPEC planning on changing the barrel sales to the Euro and you do the math. Also China is a factor, less so if Bush actually taxed us accordingly for the battle in Iraq. Part of this being that we would've pulled out of Iraq far sooner due to public outrage over the costs to our wallets.
Click to expand...

Nah, I think that is just interference that is being marketed to the US people to disguise the easy and obvious solution: increase domestic production. If US started to increase production through all means - which includes getting oil from places that upsets environmentalists - then the other markets would not have the power they have today. In the short term it would drastically change market perception which would make prices plummet, and in the long term the USA will have much greater supply which would ensure prices stay down. The problem is so long as we have a nation run by Democrat leaders who are sympathetic to environmentalists (house and senata are both democrat-controlled), increasing production significantly will be near-impossible - and that perception is part of the reason oil is skyrocketing! It is not at all a coincidence that it took so little time for this oil crisis to pop up right after Democrats got control of both the House and Senate.

If the Republicans are smart they would hit the Democrats where it hurts on every election bottom to top with this issue. Again, I think cheaper gas right now without having to buy a new car or get a new job is something everyone would vote for.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ruined my only issue is most people here are so short sighted and easily placated. As soon as the costs drastically lessen people would forget about Alternative Fuels and affordable and sensible one's being developed or prepared would go by the wayside. Even now I've heard GE is working on a second Electric Vehicle. I don't mind what you say happening but I'd like at least a few affordable electrics hitting the market as well as one's that use Propane, official plug-in Hybrid's and Diesel's with built in Biodiesel switches also.

I also disagree about it not being the dollar. The war in Iraq and the subsequent spending that was not taxed accordingly was seen as an opportunity to raise prices. Now with our dollar in the shitter Oil ompanies can demand more or threaten to sell instead to countries with exploding populations(China), many newly driving motor vehicles and exploding industries. Others with newly exploding industries(India).
 
Who has the best lifestyle?

Old Foc:
1. Spends $100 each month for every dollar gasoline is. ($3/gallon = $300/month).
2. Drives kids to daycare 5 miles away.
3. Drives 2 more hours a day commuting.
4. Eats a standard American diet.
5. Weight increasing.
6. Spends $100 each month on car repairs.

New Foc:
1. Spends $40 each month for every dollar gasoline is. ($3/gallon = $120/month).
2. Walks kids to daycare 1.5 miles away.
3. Drives 1 hour a day commuting.
4. Eats a standard American diet.
5. Weight stable.
6. Spends $40 each month on car repairs.

Future Foc:
1. Spends $0 each month for every dollar gasoline is. ($3/gallon = $0/month).
2. Walks kids to daycare 1.5 miles away.
3. Bikes 1 hour a day commuting.
4. Eats a standard American diet.
5. Weight decreasing until ideal weight.
6. Spends $0 each month on car repairs.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']Who has the best lifestyle?

Old Foc:
1. Spends $100 each month for every dollar gasoline is. ($3/gallon = $300/month).
2. Drives kids to daycare 5 miles away.
3. Drives 2 more hours a day commuting.
4. Eats a standard American diet.
5. Weight increasing.
6. Spends $100 each month on car repairs.

New Foc:
1. Spends $40 each month for every dollar gasoline is. ($3/gallon = $120/month).
2. Walks kids to daycare 1.5 miles away.
3. Drives 1 hour a day commuting.
4. Eats a standard American diet.
5. Weight stable.
6. Spends $40 each month on car repairs.

Future Foc:
1. Spends $0 each month for every dollar gasoline is. ($3/gallon = $0/month).
2. Walks kids to daycare 1.5 miles away.
3. Bikes 1 hour a day commuting.
4. Eats a standard American diet.
5. Weight decreasing until ideal weight.
6. Spends $0 each month on car repairs.[/QUOTE]

1. You are assuming that cars that don't use gas won't have other expenses instead, such as much bigger & much more expensive batteries that eventually fail to retain a charge.
2. What if there is no daycare 1.5 miles away? Not everyone lives in a city (nor wants to). Which results in 2a: children get no daycare, one parent must stay home and family is much worse off financially.
3. Not everyone will be able to bike due to physical limitations/injuries. Driving requires less physical strain and some may not be able to take a bike because of this.
4. No reason to include this since all three are the same.
5. You can get exercise other ways than walking to work or to daycare. Examples include walking the dog, running on a treadmill, etc...
6. And spend it on new shoes, bikes, batteries (even your bike is electric assist), etc, instead!

You forgot a couple of big ones:
7. Person wants to be able to visit family that lives far away
8. Person understands car can act not only as transportation, but simultaneosly entertainment. I think it would be hard to argue that you get the same enjoyment driving a Prius as you would a Mustang GT or Nissan 350Z. Well not you, but most guys I'd say :)
9. Person wants to travel around the US with their family for recreational and educational purposes.
10. Person wants geographical freedom a car delivers that bike and walking cannot.
11. Jobs near to a person offer far less money than jobs farther away (out of biking distance).
12. Everyone's definition of "best lifestyle" is obviously not going to be the same. Lets not assume our own is applicable to everyone else's, that is rather pretentious no?


Your post is a good example of the environmentalist's attitude to force others to adopt their "go green" agenda through overly restrictive oil laws that cause artificial inflation of gas prices combined with mass media brainwashing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Kind of a loaded set of scenarios.

I drive a good bit, but I'm still in good shape as I drive to the gym 4 days a week! ;)

Ideal for me is to have an hour or so total commute so I can live in a nice, quiet suburb (or even rural area if possible) and have a decent sized house, yard etc. I can't wait to get out of this condo in a noisy, crime ridden urban area!
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Ideal for me is to have an hour or so total commute so I can live in a nice, quiet suburb (or even rural area if possible) and have a decent sized house, yard etc. I can't wait to get out of this condo in a noisy, crime ridden urban area![/QUOTE]

"Walk 1.5 miles with kids to daycare; father & children are mugged on the way and mother is devestated, but HEY AT LEAST THE SMOG HAS REDUCED!"" ;)
 
[quote name='Ruined']1. You are assuming that cars that don't use gas won't have other expenses instead, such as much bigger & much more expensive batteries that eventually fail to retain a charge.
[/quote]

Great way to show you didn't read the post. Which one of the Focs owns an electric car?

[quote name='Ruined']
2. What if there is no daycare 1.5 miles away? Not everyone lives in a city. Which results in 2a: children get no daycare, one parent must stay home and family is much worse off financially.
3. Not everyone will be able to bike due to physical limitations/injuries. Driving requires less physical strain and some may not be able to take a bike because of this.
4. No reason to include this since all three are the same.
5. You can get exercise other ways than walking to work or to daycare. Examples include walking the dog, running on a treadmill, etc...
6. And spend it on new shoes, bikes, batteries (even your bike is electric assist), etc, instead!
[/quote]

That is all well and good, but the Focs are all the same person. The question was to determine which Foc had the best lifestyle.

IE:

Old>New>Future
Future>New>Old
Old>Future>New
New>Old>Future

[quote name='Ruined']
You forgot a couple of big ones:
7. Person wants to be able to visit family that lives far away
8. Person understands car can act not only as transportation, but simultaneosly entertainment. I think it would be hard to argue that you get the same enjoyment driving a smart car as you would a Mustang GT500. Well not you, but most normal people I'd say :)
9. Person wants to travel around the US with their family for recreational and educational purposes.
9. Person wants geographical freedom a car delivers that bike and walking cannot.[/quote]

To 7. How is this prevented? Which Foc doesn't own a car?
To 8. Each of the Focs has a penis. Assuming they didn't have penises, which Foc can't afford a Mustang GT500?
To 9. Which Foc can't travel for recreational or educational purposes? (unless you're assume recreation and education is done as a job.)
To 9(II). What geographic area can be accessed by car, but can't be accessed by bike or foot?
 
[quote name='Ruined']"Walk 1.5 miles with kids to daycare; father & children are mugged on the way and mother is devestated, but HEY AT LEAST THE SMOG HAS REDUCED!"" ;)[/quote]

^Good.

Better: Father & children are struck by a speeding car and mother is devastated.

...

Monger that Fear or it'll get away!
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Kind of a loaded set of scenarios.

I drive a good bit, but I'm still in good shape as I drive to the gym 4 days a week! ;)

Ideal for me is to have an hour or so total commute so I can live in a nice, quiet suburb (or even rural area if possible) and have a decent sized house, yard etc. I can't wait to get out of this condo in a noisy, crime ridden urban area![/quote]

Which Foc has more money to spend on a nicer house in a better neighborhood?
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']Which Foc has more money to spend on a nicer house in a better neighborhood?[/QUOTE]

But that's a moot point since you must have the commute to get to the nice suburban/rural neighborhood with the nice houses with big yards.

Like I said, I'll make cut backs elsewhere to deal with gas prices as I like the luxury of driving, of not dealing with city life etc. Right now I haven't really had to make any cut backs, gas prices aren't really impacting my budget that much at their current levels.
 
Again, the examples are hard to go buy as I don't know where they are living etc.

Old FOCs commute is too long, but I don't like all the walking and biking with New and Future. I also despise children, so that ruins all three Foc's for me as well. The Foc's just all suck I guess!

Ideal for me is having a 30 to 60 minute total commute, a nice house with a yard AND not having to walk or bike anywhere on a daily basis.

Again, gas prices would have to get a lot higher for me to care that much as I love being able to drive everywhere and will pay a premium for that luxury.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Again, the examples are hard to go buy as I don't know where they are living etc.

Old FOCs commute is too long, but I don't like all the walking and biking with New and Future. I also despise children, so that ruins all three Foc's for me as well. The Foc's just all suck I guess!

Ideal for me is having a 30 to 60 minute total commute, a nice house with a yard AND not having to walk or bike anywhere on a daily basis.

Again, gas prices would have to get a lot higher for me to care that much as I love being able to drive everywhere and will pay a premium for that luxury.[/quote]

LOL. We'll have to go into the trauma that caused you to despise children. Personally, I despise babies and PPD.

I think you're putting too much effort into it. The exercise isn't for you or anybody to become any version of Foc. The exercise is to evaluate which version of Foc is better. How you come to that conclusion is where you show your work.

Let's try an example:

Old Foc is spending $500 a month on gasoline and car repairs with gas around $4 per gallon just to reach work. The additional hour of commuting is another hour wasted unless Old Foc really enjoys driving. Driving kids to daycare 5 miles in a city requires almost as much time as walking the 1.5 miles to daycare. The daycares are comparable. The weight gain isn't a short term problem, but 20 years of gaining weight is a definite long term health problem.

New Foc is spending $200 a month on gasoline and car repairs with gas around $4 per gallon just to reach work. There is a hour saved that can be used for other things (porn, eBay, laughing at Ruined, sleep, etc.). Weight becomes a manageable problem that can fixed easier since there isn't an additional 20 years of weight gain.

Future Foc is spending $0 a month on gasoline and car repairs with gas around $4 (or $100) per gallon just to reach work. There is no additional time saved by biking as opposed to driving, but biking 5 hours a week would reduce or eliminate the need to exercise. In 20 years, future Foc is the healthiest version of Foc.

Let's assume all Focs earn the same amount, X.

How much money does each version of Foc have available after gas and repairs for commutes?

Old Foc: X-500
New Foc: X-200
Future Foc: X

So, which is better in terms of money after gas and repairs for commutes?

I would say: Old Foc
 
Yes fatherofcaitlyn, in the ideal dreamworld utopia where you ignore all the real-life problems your scenario would be great. But in the real world, it has a number of fallacies as several have pointed out (and you continue to pretend do not exist and/or are invalid because they torpedo your theory in a big way). Just like Communism's failures due to unrealistic ideals, the "green dream" fails similarly and for the same reason!

Exploring alternative energy sources in the long term would be wise, but ignoring our own untapped oil resources when people are going broke driving is ridiculous and no more than environmentalist agenda in full swing!
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']My goal is to bike or walk to work. Why can't everybody attempt that? Don't worry. I already know every answer is an excuse.

[/quote]
Uh, maybe living in a big city is more expensive than living in a suburb? Gee, I wonder. $1800 a month in rent to live in the cities and drive 10 miles to work, or $1100 a month in rent to live in a suburb and drive 30 miles to work. How is that an excuse? There are a lot of factors at play in deciding to live outside of the city you work in. Hardly excuses, pompous ass.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']LOL. We'll have to go into the trauma that caused you to despise children.[/quote]

Despise is probably too strong a word. I mainly just 100% don't want kids of my own. I don't have the patience for them, don't want to invest the time and money on them etc. I'm just far to selfish to make the sacrifice requred to raise kids.

The weight gain isn't a short term problem, but 20 years of gaining weight is a definite long term health problem.
Click to expand...

Again, that's moot. I'm in very good shape. I hit the gym 4 days a week, play some pick up sports etc. I drive to these things. I know you're just making up scenarios, but they aren't grounded in reality so it's a fruitless exercise.


[quote name='VanillaGorilla']Uh, maybe living in a big city is more expensive than living in a suburb? Gee, I wonder. $1800 a month in rent to live in the cities and drive 10 miles to work, or $1100 a month in rent to live in a suburb and drive 30 miles to work. How is that an excuse? There are a lot of factors at play in deciding to live outside of the city you work in.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. The scenario's are silly from the money standpoint. They don't factor in cheaper cost of living that comes with a longer commute (not living in the city). They add in crazy expensive car maintenance, far more than I've ever spent on a car.

Gas prices would have to get much higher for it to be cheaper to pay higher rent/mortgang in the city (or closer) vs. living further away in a cheaper area and driving more.

And again, my convenience/luxury will always come 100% first. Before the environment. Pretty much regardless of gas prices etc. I like driving, and I hate living in the city. I will say my ideal situation will be to find a good university to work at that's just in a small college town rather than a major urban area--but it's tough as most of the good programs in my field are in urban areas. But even if I found one I'd still live a bit away as I wouldn't want to live around students.
 
People only have so much control over where they live and work (and the distance inbetween).

I think the market can take care of itself IF the United States would remove the restrictions it placed on itself all those years ago (which is in turn affecting the market now with oil prices). The US already screwed with the market, skewing the results.

Also, our "environmental pride" is sort of going out the window now as people want the ethanol bill (passed last year) revoked (overrided, etc.) because that is also increasing our food prices as well as oil prices since ethanol costs more to produce than oil and gas.

Oh, and driving isn't a luxury. Well, a pure one at least. It's what I like to call a necessary luxury. Kinda like food, you need it to live. But this goes back to my original point that people don't have full control over where they live and work.
 
[quote name='VanillaGorilla']Uh, maybe living in a big city is more expensive than living in a suburb? Gee, I wonder. $1800 a month in rent to live in the cities and drive 10 miles to work, or $1100 a month in rent to live in a suburb and drive 30 miles to work. How is that an excuse? There are a lot of factors at play in deciding to live outside of the city you work in. Hardly excuses, pompous ass.[/QUOTE]ll

It's still an excuse. You may think it is legit but that doesn't change anything. Furthermore, people never weigh the total cost. It is not simply rent = XX in one location and X in another. It is time, fuel costs, stress, etc. Also, there are actually ways to get a job outside a city center. Believe it or not, People to it all the time.

All your post really proves is the myopia of some people

Dmaul may like his freedom but when it is spent on commuting, it's kind of wasted.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top