The subject line is phrased as a question, but a study of American
streets shows the answer.

At least half of people driving full-size trucks (and SUVs) could live
with something more efficient. Probably 2/3rds of them could. Large
trucks are too clean and too empty too much of the time. Too many of
them are dressed up or lowered down and rendered impractical for real
hauling.

It's easy to spot an actual work truck vs. a fragile-ego-booster. "Get
out of my way, I've got more mass than you!" "Look at my bad-ass
grille looming in your mirror!" We've all seen these pinheads.

American trucks have been full-size for decades, which is no crime IF
they are used to capacity, not as displays of resource gluttony. The
2007, whale-like Toyota Tundra and newer Tacomas are disappointing. I
see little evidence that the new Tundras, especially double-cab short
bed, are used much beyond an ego-trip. Toyota could have kept them at
their relatively compact size but they bowed to the drill here, drill
now, anti-conservation crowd, who think any vehicle < 250HP makes you
a wimp.

What compels people to occupy as much space as possible on the road?
Are obese women more desirable than slim ones? Think about that for
awhile. If there was the same stigma against being seen with a fat
truck as a......

FYI, the reason fuel prices have dropped recently is due to supply and
demand, not a miraculous resurgence in the amount of global oil.
People really started conserving this summer after the futures spike,
and the credit-default-swap mess has kept them cautious. Oil itself is
as finite as ever; more so every second. It's unclear when the price
will push $4/gallon again, but it will, and it will keep rising as
global production peaks.

The argument that you have a "right" to waste as much oil as you want,
and deny all evidence for AGW, is also bogus. With the global
population growing by 77 million annually, and the world not getting
any bigger, everyone should stop being a glutton.

E.A.

http://enough_already.tripod.com/

Old conservative adage: waste not, want not.
New conservative adage: waste a lot, want more.

"Enough Already" <enough_already@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:2d28aac9-c795-45a7-8975-c7d250e05b52@u18g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
> The subject line is phrased as a question, but a study of American
> streets shows the answer.
>

I have mine for utility. I feed my ego with a BMW convertible.

In article
<2d28aac9-c795-45a7-8975-c7d250e05b52@u18g2000pro.googlegroups.com>,
Enough Already <enough_already@lycos.com> wrote:

> The subject line is phrased as a question, but a study of American
> streets shows the answer.
>
> At least half of people driving full-size trucks (and SUVs) could live
> with something more efficient. Probably 2/3rds of them could. Large
> trucks are too clean and too empty too much of the time. Too many of
> them are dressed up or lowered down and rendered impractical for real
> hauling.
>
> It's easy to spot an actual work truck vs. a fragile-ego-booster. "Get
> out of my way, I've got more mass than you!" "Look at my bad-ass
> grille looming in your mirror!" We've all seen these pinheads.
>
> American trucks have been full-size for decades, which is no crime IF
> they are used to capacity, not as displays of resource gluttony. The
> 2007, whale-like Toyota Tundra and newer Tacomas are disappointing. I
> see little evidence that the new Tundras, especially double-cab short
> bed, are used much beyond an ego-trip. Toyota could have kept them at
> their relatively compact size but they bowed to the drill here, drill
> now, anti-conservation crowd, who think any vehicle < 250HP makes you
> a wimp.
>
> What compels people to occupy as much space as possible on the road?
> Are obese women more desirable than slim ones? Think about that for
> awhile. If there was the same stigma against being seen with a fat
> truck as a......
>
> FYI, the reason fuel prices have dropped recently is due to supply and
> demand, not a miraculous resurgence in the amount of global oil.
> People really started conserving this summer after the futures spike,
> and the credit-default-swap mess has kept them cautious. Oil itself is
> as finite as ever; more so every second. It's unclear when the price
> will push $4/gallon again, but it will, and it will keep rising as
> global production peaks.
>
> The argument that you have a "right" to waste as much oil as you want,
> and deny all evidence for AGW, is also bogus. With the global
> population growing by 77 million annually, and the world not getting
> any bigger, everyone should stop being a glutton.
>
> E.A.
>
> http://enough_already.tripod.com/
>
> Old conservative adage: waste not, want not.
> New conservative adage: waste a lot, want more.

And so?

Some people waste money on booze; some on cocaine, some on heroin; some
on porno; and some on tobacco and loose women. Also some waste money on
gasoline and maintenance for a big SUV when all they need is a bicycle.

The point being that they are paying for the stuff. You are not being
asked to finance their vice; they get to pay more for vehicle
registration, tires and a new vehicle when they put down the dollars to
buy the thing.

I personally don't get it either but I also know that you cannot
legislate brains nor do you have any particular right to force others to
live by your standards or beliefs. I used to have a little Escort
wannabe in the early 1980s; when I moved up to an Explorer in the early
1990s I noticed that the 250 mile trips I made regularly seemed to
shrink by about 1/3, due to the superior ride and comfort of the
vehicle. Mind you the big SUVs we have now are a lot bigger than that
dinky little Explorer, but still the point is there. And I think
someone in an Explorer is a lot smarter than someone in a Smart Car -
I'd think their legs could be broken if they hit a horsefly at highway
speeds. I sat through a safety film a decade ago or so which stated
that cars are actually engineered to give the guy making the payments
room to live in case of an accident. Now I know that you don't need a
Hummer for this but you also ain't gonna get it with a Smart Car either.

Obviously most people live where they could utilize some form of public
transportation for part of their traveling - but if they choose instead
to fight traffic; fight for parking spaces and pay all the associated
costs to operate a vehicle, why not? After all it is watching these
folks that convince most of the remainder to use some form of public
transportation, I think.

How do I put out an appeal for tolerance of those who are not just like
you in deed and belief?

Or what?

H.

"Rowbotth" <rowbotth@telusplanet.net> wrote in message
news:rowbotth-75790E.11483802112008@news.newsgroupdirect.com...

> Obviously most people live where they could utilize some form of public
> transportation for part of their traveling - but if they choose instead
> to fight traffic; fight for parking spaces and pay all the associated
> costs to operate a vehicle, why not? After all it is watching these
> folks that convince most of the remainder to use some form of public
> transportation, I think.
>


My limited experience is that "most" is not accurate at all. "Some," is
accurate, but I would suggest that "most" is a stretch.

In my little valley, there are 250,000 inhabitants. There is virtually no
public transportation to speak of. There is very limited bus service, and
even less taxi service. We have to drive 40 miles to the train station,
there are three trains outbound in the morning and three inbound in the
evening, and the schedule at each end of the line does not align very well
with the workday.

"Enough Already" <enough_already@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:2d28aac9-c795-45a7-8975-c7d250e05b52@u18g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
> The subject line is phrased as a question, but a study of American
> streets shows the answer.
Snip

Are lengthy troll posts done for utility or ego?

On Sun, 2 Nov 2008 10:13:23 -0800 (PST), Enough Already
<enough_already@lycos.com> wrote:

> The subject line is phrased as a question, but a study of American
> streets shows the answer.

Nobody cares. Grow up.


--
http://desertphile.org
Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water
"Why aren't resurrections from the dead noteworthy?" -- Jim Rutz

Enough Already wrote:
> The subject line is phrased as a question, but a study of American
> streets shows the answer.

I have my 3/4 ton for utility. I drive my Durango for 1/2 Utility and
1/2 because I love it. I drive my PT cruiser as a city commuter.

This post is one of many of the liberal mantra of someone trying to tell
others what they should buy to suit their desires rather than the one
buying. People buy what they want, need and enjoy. Why do others have
a problem with that?

"Enough Already" <enough_already@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:2d28aac9-c795-45a7-8975-c7d250e05b52@u18g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
> The subject line is phrased as a question, but a study of American
> streets shows the answer.
>
> At least half of people driving full-size trucks (and SUVs) could live
> with something more efficient. Probably 2/3rds of them could. Large
> trucks are too clean and too empty too much of the time. Too many of
> them are dressed up or lowered down and rendered impractical for real
> hauling.
>
> It's easy to spot an actual work truck vs. a fragile-ego-booster. "Get
> out of my way, I've got more mass than you!" "Look at my bad-ass
> grille looming in your mirror!" We've all seen these pinheads.
>
> American trucks have been full-size for decades, which is no crime IF
> they are used to capacity, not as displays of resource gluttony. The
> 2007, whale-like Toyota Tundra and newer Tacomas are disappointing. I
> see little evidence that the new Tundras, especially double-cab short
> bed, are used much beyond an ego-trip. Toyota could have kept them at
> their relatively compact size but they bowed to the drill here, drill
> now, anti-conservation crowd, who think any vehicle < 250HP makes you
> a wimp.
>
> What compels people to occupy as much space as possible on the road?
> Are obese women more desirable than slim ones? Think about that for
> awhile. If there was the same stigma against being seen with a fat
> truck as a......
>
> FYI, the reason fuel prices have dropped recently is due to supply and
> demand, not a miraculous resurgence in the amount of global oil.
> People really started conserving this summer after the futures spike,
> and the credit-default-swap mess has kept them cautious. Oil itself is
> as finite as ever; more so every second. It's unclear when the price
> will push $4/gallon again, but it will, and it will keep rising as
> global production peaks.
>
> The argument that you have a "right" to waste as much oil as you want,
> and deny all evidence for AGW, is also bogus. With the global
> population growing by 77 million annually, and the world not getting
> any bigger, everyone should stop being a glutton.
>
> E.A.
>
> http://enough_already.tripod.com/
>
> Old conservative adage: waste not, want not.
> New conservative adage: waste a lot, want more.

And what's it to you?

plonk

On Sun, 2 Nov 2008 16:02:41 -0800, "SteveB" <toquerville@zionvistas>
wrote:

>And what's it to you?

Steve! I'm laughing...

Oren

On Sun, 2 Nov 2008 10:13:23 -0800 (PST), Enough Already
<enough_already@lycos.com> wrote:

>The subject line is phrased as a question, but

this post is really a troll.

> With the global
>population growing by 77 million annually, and the world not getting
>any bigger, everyone should stop

having so many damned children. Especially when they grow up (oops,
did I say that, 'Enough Already' has not grown up one tiny bit...) and
troll Usenet with mindless blather.