Oil pushes to $100

[Chet Kelly]

Originally Posted by wheelsup

Really? If someone walked up the average American who drives 12000 miles a year and said they'd get free fuel for the next X years..I'd wager they go out and buy a diesel yesterday!

No, that would not happen. Personally I would not do it and I average 12,500 miles per year. As I mentioned before, my truck is low mileage and PAID FOR. From a cost-benefit analysis I would be paying more in the long-term under your proposed scenario.

Even if the fuel is free for X amount of years, you still have the expense of a large capital purchase - i.e., that of a diesel. The cost of the purchasing the vehicle would more than offset the gain of free fuel.

And before anyone chimes in about how some diesels might not be that expensive, let me say that I'm not interested in purchasing a car the size of a dormitory refrigerator. If I buy a diesel, it is probably going to be along the lines of a new F-250 or equivalent. If not a truck, then some luxury type of diesel vehicle. Neither one of them are inexpensive enough to justify purchasing based SOLELY on the premise of free fuel.

[Chet Kelly]

Originally Posted by darrenf

Your continued claims that hybrids are "junk" doesn't do anything to solidify your argument, in fact, it has quite the opposite effect.

I'm not trying to solidify my argument as much as I'm just simply conveying my thoughts and opinions on the topic. If you (or anyone else for that matter) wants to waste your money on a hybrid then have at it.

[darrenf]

Originally Posted by Chet Kelly

I'm not trying to solidify my argument as much as I'm just simply conveying my thoughts and opinions on the topic. If you (or anyone else for that matter) wants to waste your money on a hybrid then have at it.

Some of us don't make decisions based solely on cost. For you, a hybrid doesn't fit the bill, that's fine. But not everyone has the same needs as you. For some, a hybrid makes sense. Are hybrids perfect, no, are they junk, hardly.

[Doug Taylor]

Now that's why China is going to whip our economic butts in the next decade.

We've been bred by cable news to make everything a political issue instead of thinking like technological revolutionaries, which we once were. Telephones, light bulbs, microchips, frozen concentrated orange juice, etc.

If this is indicative of the country at large, I'd better start looking for "The Rosetta Stone: Mandarin, Levels 1 & 2" on Bittorrent immediately.

Gah! To think 39 years ago we actually went to the moon. Anyone else concerned?

[surreal1221]

Originally Posted by Chet Kelly

I drive a "montrosity" of a vehicle. Why? Because I can! It gets 15mpg, low mileage and it's PAID FOR. Gas can hit $8/gallon and it will still be cheaper for me to own my truck than it would be to purchase some junk hybrid vehicle.

It's a free market and I happen to be a capitalist.

I'm also willing to bet you have a McMansion too right?

Do you also pay $1500+ a year for a Country Club Membership?

I'm not asking, but I'm also willing to bet you're trying very hard to continually fit into the upper echelon of your little secure gated community so you don't appear to be like one of us "common folk." Right?

I spot you McMansion owning, Monstrosity of a vehicle driving, Moving on Up in the gated community's Board of Governor types a mile away.

[flyover]

Originally Posted by Doug Taylor

Now that's why China is going to whip our economic butts in the next decade.

We've been bred by cable news to make everything a political issue instead of thinking like technological revolutionaries, which we once were. Telephones, light bulbs, microchips, frozen concentrated orange juice, etc.

If this is indicative of the country at large, I'd better start looking for "The Rosetta Stone: Mandarin, Levels 1 & 2" on Bittorrent immediately.

Gah! To think 39 years ago we actually went to the moon. Anyone else concerned?

Not about a lack of technology. Or China whipping us in the technologly area.

For one technology is global. Anyone can develop it, it benefits us all. And two, there is a huge technology boom going on right now in about any area you can think of (and some you haven't). But especially in the areas of energy exploration, extraction, refinement, conservation, etc. etc. It makes any ideas of dwindling supplies of oil (wrong by the way) moot.

And yes, we went to the moon. Then left the space program in government hands and we can't even get our high tech glider up on a regular schedule now.

But for sure you won't hear about any of this from the "sky is falling" politicians or the MSM. The people that are making this all happen don't watch much cable TV I'm guessing.

[tonyw]

Originally Posted by Doug Taylor

Now that's why China is going to whip our economic butts in the next decade.

We've been bred by cable news to make everything a political issue

Yup. And it's absurd.

"No, you can't have government subsidies. That's socialism."

Really? Then what the hell would you call all the farm subsidies, etc. We already ARE subsidizing things with tax breaks, grants, etc.

If you don't like socialism, it's already here. Deal with it!

[athomeinthesky]

Don't forget the subsidies we give to the oil companies, for what I really dont know.

Socialism is a word that is used in this country as a scare tactic, they know that when they say it people think of the former Soviet Union, China, etc.
Saying that regulating the size of cars by taxing people for bigger engines is a form of socialism is bull#####. It is also not about BIG government, its about the fact that America is being basically held captive by the same countries that hate us.

Nobody is asking anybody to walk to work but you don't need F250 if you don't use it for work, you don't need an expedition if you drive alone most of the time. If you do want it then you shouldn't have a problem paying more tax for it.

You also don't have to drive a hybrid, just a car that fits what you need it for.

[Chet Kelly]

Originally Posted by surreal1221

I'm also willing to bet you have a McMansion too right?

Do you also pay $1500+ a year for a Country Club Membership?

I'm not asking, but I'm also willing to bet you're trying very hard to continually fit into the upper echelon of your little secure gated community so you don't appear to be like one of us "common folk." Right?

I spot you McMansion owning, Monstrosity of a vehicle driving, Moving on Up in the gated community's Board of Governor types a mile away.

Since you asked, I'll answer.

I'm also willing to bet you have a McMansion too right?

Nope. My house is one story, 2000 square feet which does not include the full basement. While I could have easily have purchased a "McMansion", I chose to purchase something a lot more modest instead.

Do you also pay $1500+ a year for a Country Club membership?

Nope. I don't have a country club membership because I don't belong to one. When I golf I just pay as I go.

I'm not asking, but I'm also willing to bet you're trying very hard to continually fit into the upper echelon of your little secure gated community so you don't appear to be like one of us "common folk." Right?

WRONG. First, my subdivision is not gated. Second, most people who try to fit into the upper echelon are usually spending every penny of their paycheck with nothing left over each month.

My salary as an MD-11 f/o exceeds $200K/yr. I normally don't share this, but since you made some suppositions about me I think that I should. After full 401k contributions and basic living expenses (including a fixed-rate mortgage), my discretionary income each month exceeds $2000.00, a large chunk of which I invest in an interest-bearing account. Now, if I wanted to keep up with the proverbial "jones" as you implied, then this wouldn't be possible. True, some people try to outdo each other with the "bigger is better" mentality. Fine, good for them. But as Dave Ramsey said, "the paid off home mortgage is taking the place of the BMW as the status symbol of choice." I'll be there shortly and I'm not yet even 40!

Reread my posts CAREFULLY. You will notice that I said my truck is PAID FOR. i.e., no monthly payments and I own it outright. That should have been your first clue that I'm not the "upper echelon" type.

I spot you McMansion owning, Montrosity of a vehicle driving, Moving on Up in the gated community's Board of Governor types a mile away.

I suggest you get a new pair of glasses, because you missed this by at least a mile. I also suggest one other thing. Instead of making uneducated guesses about people who you perceive as "upper echelon" types, why don't you instead ask them how they got where they are. One of the best ways to become wealthy is to ask others who are how they did it.

[Kevin.Held]

Originally Posted by Doug Taylor

Now that's why China is going to whip our economic butts in the next decade.

We've been bred by cable news to make everything a political issue instead of thinking like technological revolutionaries, which we once were. Telephones, light bulbs, microchips, frozen concentrated orange juice, etc.

If this is indicative of the country at large, I'd better start looking for "The Rosetta Stone: Mandarin, Levels 1 & 2" on Bittorrent immediately.

Gah! To think 39 years ago we actually went to the moon. Anyone else concerned?

I think historically, technology and advancement are driven by a strong economy. Trying to create a new and innovative product is financially risky so without other products to fall back on, no company wants to take that leap in such a shakey US market. China, on the other hand is booming so we will see some great products over the next few years and luckily, we will be able to benefit from that latest technology.

I'm not saying I don't worry about where we are as a country, but I fall back on history and know that economies are cyclic and someday we'll be back on top.

Originally Posted by flyover

But for sure you won't hear about any of this from the "sky is falling" politicians or the MSM. The people that are making this all happen don't watch much cable TV I'm guessing.

Strong work, an acronym makes them sound so much more evil!

[Kevin.Held]

Originally Posted by Chet Kelly

I suggest you get a new pair of glasses, because you missed this by at least a mile. I also suggest one other thing. Instead of making uneducated guesses about people who you perceive as "upper echelon" types, why don't you instead ask them how they got where they are. One of the best ways to become wealthy is to ask others who are how they did it.

Maybe it's because we don't care.

[Chet Kelly]

Originally Posted by athomeinthesky

Don't forget the subsidies we give to the oil companies, for what I really dont know.

Socialism is a word that is used in this country as a scare tactic, they know that when they say it people think of the former Soviet Union, China, etc.
Saying that regulating the size of cars by taxing people for bigger engines is a form of socialism is bull#####. It is also not about BIG government, its about the fact that America is being basically held captive by the same countries that hate us.

Nobody is asking anybody to walk to work but you don't need F250 if you don't use it for work, you don't need an expedition if you drive alone most of the time. If you do want it then you shouldn't have a problem paying more tax for it.

You also don't have to drive a hybrid, just a car that fits what you need it for.

Do most people need a crotch-rocket if they are not professional racers? Do people need to rent and fly GA aircraft if all they are using it for is recreational purposes and not for air commerce?

You are correct in saying that I don't need an F250. But, most people purchase their vehicle because they want that type of vehicle.

[Chet Kelly]

Originally Posted by Kevin.Held

Maybe it's because we don't care.

I said:

I suggest you get a new pair of glasses, because you missed this by at least a mile. I also suggest one other thing. Instead of making uneducated guesses about people who you perceive as "upper echelon" types, why don't you instead ask them how they got where they are. One of the best ways to become wealthy is to ask others who are how they did it.

Kevin.Held said:

Maybe it's because we don't care.

Don't care about what - how to become wealthy?

There are two types of people out there. Those who choose to constantly depend on others to provide them with fish, and those who choose to learn how to fish and provide for themselves.

[jynxyjoe]

boy there are way too many opinionated hugely overgeneralizing posts on this thing which smell of classless classism.

[Doug Taylor]

Proletariat versus Bourgeoisie?

[jynxyjoe]

Originally Posted by Doug Taylor

Proletariat versus Bourgeoisie?

what did i say about dirty french words? replace with "god bless texas" or "freedom"... "frog" is acceptable too

[athomeinthesky]

Originally Posted by Chet Kelly

Do most people need a crotch-rocket if they are not professional racers? Do people need to rent and fly GA aircraft if all they are using it for is recreational purposes and not for air commerce?

You are correct in saying that I don't need an F250. But, most people purchase their vehicle because they want that type of vehicle.

No people don't need to rent GA aircraft just for recreational purpose the same as people don't really need cars. This is the real world and people aren't going to get rid of their cars or aircraft so I much prefer somebody having fun in a 152 than an empty learjet. Your not going to fly a learjet around empty if it went the same speed as a 152 would you? so why do people need to drive big cars around alone when everybody is held to the same speed limit anyway.

I see what your getting at and it makes sense to a point because people are going to have boats, planes, etc. but they make up a small part of the overall usage of oil so the emphasis should be on cars.

[Doug Taylor]

Labor versus Torrie?

[Chet Kelly]

Originally Posted by athomeinthesky

No people don't need to rent GA aircraft just for recreational purpose the same as people don't really need cars. This is the real world and people aren't going to get rid of their cars or aircraft so I much prefer somebody having fun in a 152 than an empty learjet. Your not going to fly a learjet around empty if it went the same speed as a 152 would you? so why do people need to drive big cars around alone when everybody is held to the same speed limit anyway.

I see what your getting at and it makes sense to a point because people are going to have boats, planes, etc. but they make up a small part of the overall usage of oil so the emphasis should be on cars.

so why do people need to drive big cars around alone when everybody is held to the same speed limit anyway.

I think the answer is found in your post with the word "prefer". As I mentioned before, I don't necessarily need a large truck, but I prefer one over most everything else. It is what I want to drive.

Now, there is a need part which does factor in. It has come in handy many times when I've used it to carry things home which wouldn't fit in a trunk or smaller vehicle. i.e., things such as furniture. True, it could be delivered but usually with a delivery fee. I've used it many times to help others who don't have a truck either move or help them deliver something.

[jynxyjoe]

Originally Posted by Doug Taylor

Labor versus Torrie?

ehhh..... ok. but i'm watching you.

[SteveC]

I >3 Dave Ramsey.

[WAFlyBoy]

Originally Posted by Kevin.Held

I'm not saying I don't worry about where we are as a country, but I fall back on history and know that economies are cyclic and someday we'll be back on top.

History also tells us that empires begin to fail when widespread interest in intellect and technological advancement are overwhelmingly replaced by interest in entertainment and sports. In the vein of this thread, there is evidence that empires/ecosystems begin to fail (or diminish) when their energy consumption achieves a critical mass that their environment (political, ecological, or otherwise) can no longer support.

[wheelsup]

Originally Posted by Chet Kelly

No, that would not happen. Personally I would not do it and I average 12,500 miles per year. As I mentioned before, my truck is low mileage and PAID FOR. From a cost-benefit analysis I would be paying more in the long-term under your proposed scenario.

Even if the fuel is free for X amount of years, you still have the expense of a large capital purchase - i.e., that of a diesel. The cost of the purchasing the vehicle would more than offset the gain of free fuel.

I agree with your assessment, and some of your points such as you driving a 15 mpg truck because you can. You are right! We are in America and you can do whatever you want as long as you don't hurt others.

That said, you are NOT the average American. Average Americans do NOT earn $200k/yr (more like around $40k/yr) and do NOT have a paid for car.

If you've been following my posts, I pointed out that the average American has a $360/month car payment. They have no additional large capital expenditures because they are already paying for their car. They would simply trade in one car for another.

I am however, agreeing with you personally. I ran the math in a previous post. It would take my wife 15 years to break even, and at my level of consumption 23 years to break even having free gas vs. buying a new car, even ignoring the insurance costs of buying a new "pre-owned" $7000 diesel with cash. A "new" $28,000 VW diesel would probably take infinity!!

Neither one of them are inexpensive enough to justify purchasing based SOLELY on the premise of free fuel.

That's for you. Again, you are NOT the average American. Put yourself in the shoes of the average person here. That's what my argument was tailored for, not a gentlemen who makes 99% more than the population...

I'll be honest, I really do expect people to switch but maybe I am wrong. Maybe they won't want to give up their gas powered cars. I would honestly think the average commuter would be up for it, but like I said I could be wrong. It really is only about $125/month in savings to the average person so I suppose the amount really isn't that significant.

[flyover]

Originally Posted by tonyw

"No, you can't have government subsidies. That's socialism."

Really? Then what the hell would you call all the farm subsidies, etc. We already ARE subsidizing things with tax breaks, grants, etc.

If you don't like socialism, it's already here. Deal with it!

Man I don't like it and you are absolutely right about the farm subsidies. Farmers are the biggest welfare recipients there are and it hasn't been good for US farming. Next scam, corn based ethanol.

And I say this all from the perspective of growing up on a large midwest farm.

As for the tax breaks, eliminate all corporate taxes and just sit back and enjoy the job expansion and the booming economy. It works everywhere else, why not here?

[tonyw]

Originally Posted by flyover

Man I don't like it and you are absolutely right about the farm subsidies. Farmers are the biggest welfare recipients there are and it hasn't been good for US farming. Next scam, corn based ethanol.

And I say this all from the perspective of growing up on a large midwest farm.

I would think that someone who grew up on a farm would be pissed as hell about megacorps getting most of the farm subsidies and getting paid to NOT grow crops!