1
   

SUV'S suck?

 
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Dec, 2004 11:32 am
cjhsa wrote:
Just about every day. It's a family vehicle...

And no we don't want another minivan. Ten years of one is enough.



Rent a Sienna for a road trip and you may change your mind on that.
0 Replies
 
candidone1
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Dec, 2004 11:35 am
McGentrix wrote:
Candidone1, Do you suppose wealthy people would choose to drive a ford focus? How about a Kia? Obviously not. Why is that you suppose? Is because they can afford to drive what ever they choose? Not because they need a status symbol, but because they can and they do.


"...because they can and they do" with respect to the purchase and ownership of a massive SUV exemplifies the rationale that so many of us loathe...rich and poor. I have the money (or I can pretend I have the money) so I will do with it as I please...damn the environment.

McGentrix wrote:
The statement above
Quote:
"If the wealthy need status symbols, or if people in fact think as you do--that the unwealthy have "SUV-envy"--then it makes the purchase of such an item an even more shallow endeavor."

comes off very much like the type of statement a nearly homeless hippie would say as they see a Humvee drive by while sharing a bottle of thunderbird with their friends...


...I guess if you see that as a relevant or fair comparison, I'm not going to argue with you.
But I think you're off base.
Way off base.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Dec, 2004 11:45 am
candidone1 wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
Candidone1, Do you suppose wealthy people would choose to drive a ford focus? How about a Kia? Obviously not. Why is that you suppose? Is because they can afford to drive what ever they choose? Not because they need a status symbol, but because they can and they do.


"...because they can and they do" with respect to the purchase and ownership of a massive SUV exemplifies the rationale that so many of us loathe...rich and poor. I have the money (or I can pretend I have the money) so I will do with it as I please...damn the environment.

McGentrix wrote:
The statement above
Quote:
"If the wealthy need status symbols, or if people in fact think as you do--that the unwealthy have "SUV-envy"--then it makes the purchase of such an item an even more shallow endeavor."

comes off very much like the type of statement a nearly homeless hippie would say as they see a Humvee drive by while sharing a bottle of thunderbird with their friends...


...I guess if you see that as a relevant or fair comparison, I'm not going to argue with you.
But I think you're off base.
Way off base.


Actually, I was referring to
Quote:
A very wise man once told me: "nothing says jackass quite like a humvee".
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Dec, 2004 11:52 am
No, you're wrong about this one, McG.

Nothing DOES say Jackass like a Humvee. There are two types of people who buy them; women with more money than they know what to do with, and men with small penises.

Hell, they aren't even competent offroad vehicles (the H2 at least). Make whatever argument you want about why people have the right to get one, it doesn't change the fact that they both wasted their money and our environment by doing so, and that=jackass.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Dec, 2004 12:04 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
No, you're wrong about this one, McG.

Nothing DOES say Jackass like a Humvee. There are two types of people who buy them; women with more money than they know what to do with, and men with small penises.


That's kind of like suggesting that only two types of people would drive a prius; limp-wristed metro-sexuals and tree hugging eco-terrorists.

Quote:
Hell, they aren't even competent offroad vehicles (the H2 at least). Make whatever argument you want about why people have the right to get one, it doesn't change the fact that they both wasted their money and our environment by doing so, and that=jackass.

Cycloptichorn


...in your opinion, which in the free country of ours you are entitled to. Much the same as the person that wants to drive what ever they choose to.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Dec, 2004 12:08 pm
I fully agree that people should be able to drive whatever they choose. But we should stop shielding them from the consequences of their choices (i.e. forcing gas prices down) and for heavens sake stop incentivizing poor choices.

Let the gas prices climb and people will start demanding better fuel efficiency of their auto makers.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Dec, 2004 12:09 pm
You're right about them not being very capable off-road vehicles. You'd be much better off with a Dodge 4x4, or even a Mercedes or BMW SUV.

Here's a pic. The guy bent over is none other than Ted Nugent, wondering how to un-stuck the H2 someone let him drive. Never loan your truck to Uncle Ted.

http://www.bremencastings.com/JEBPics/TEDH2.jpg
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Dec, 2004 01:11 pm
Hell, you could get a Land Rover for the same amount of money, which is not only somewhat more fuel efficient, but twice as cool.

A good friend of mine had a '91 Range Rover. There was a little warning on the dash that reminded you to take off some of the fan belts if you plan on going deeper than 42" into water, so it wouln't sling water all over the top of the engine.

Now that's an off-road vehicle. Hummer merely has snazzy advertising.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Dec, 2004 01:31 pm
cjhsa wrote:
You're right about them not being very capable off-road vehicles. You'd be much better off with a Dodge 4x4, or even a Mercedes or BMW SUV.

Here's a pic. The guy bent over is none other than Ted Nugent, wondering how to un-stuck the H2 someone let him drive. Never loan your truck to Uncle Ted.

http://www.bremencastings.com/JEBPics/TEDH2.jpg


I think the question, cjhsa, is why is Uncle Ted wanting to push that small hill out of the way?

Or, maybe they ran over a Prius, and are trying to figure out how to pull it out of the tire?
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Dec, 2004 01:38 pm
Looks to me like they ambushed that nights dinner and are making sure the got it...
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Dec, 2004 01:41 pm
Looks to me like Ted can't drive. I seem to recall he avoids drugs and booze, so it can't be for either of those reasons....
0 Replies
 
candidone1
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Dec, 2004 02:40 pm
FreeDuck wrote:
I fully agree that people should be able to drive whatever they choose. But we should stop shielding them from the consequences of their choices (i.e. forcing gas prices down) and for heavens sake stop incentivizing poor choices.

Let the gas prices climb and people will start demanding better fuel efficiency of their auto makers.


This is evolving into a smokers vs. non-smokers rationale.
I have a problem with gas the guzzling, excessive poulluting SUV's in my city the same way I have a problem with smokers in my restaurants and coffee shops. The "right" to pollute one's environment affects not only the polluter, but the millions who choose to live in a less polluting less toxic environment--and no amount of "taxes" are going to act as a deterrant.

If the government wold only hold SUV's in the "car" category for emissions standards, instead of the with the "trucks" (where lower emissions standards were instituted to help poor farmers, and assist them in using purple gas, and other farm grade fuels), then the problem would be solved.
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Dec, 2004 02:44 pm
candidone1 wrote:
If the government wold only hold SUV's in the "car" category for emissions standards, instead of the with the "trucks" (where lower emissions standards were instituted to help poor farmers, and assist them in using purple gas, and other farm grade fuels), then the problem would be solved.


AMEN!
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Dec, 2004 02:53 pm
candidone1 wrote:
If the government wold only hold SUV's in the "car" category for emissions standards, instead of the with the "trucks" (where lower emissions standards were instituted to help poor farmers, and assist them in using purple gas, and other farm grade fuels), then the problem would be solved.


I agree that the government should do it's utmost to enforce stricter standards on emissions and fuel efficiency. But absent that, we're talking about people's personal decisions on what to drive. I don't feel comfortable condemning someone strictly for their choice as I don't know what their needs are. I do feel that people would make different choices if there weren't certain incentives for the ones they are making now.
0 Replies
 
lab rat
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Dec, 2004 03:18 pm
Interesting trends:
When technology advancements brought about significant increases in car fuel efficiency in the 80s-90s, we Americans did not take advantage of that to reduce our oil dependency. Rather, we saw the advent of the SUV and other larger vehicles, a trend that absorbed whatever progress the new technology could have made towards reduced foreign oil dependence. Similarly, when home heating prices dropped, we simply built bigger homes--the average sq ft of a new home nearly doubled from the 1960s to the 1990s. I find this interesting, and a bit depressing.

Hybrid vehicles may finally be a step forward that achieves public acceptance. I'm still waiting, though, to see what happens when the first generation of Prius'/etc. age to the point where they need the battery replaced. I've heard that the maintenance cost of this procedure is on the order of ~$7000, only a select few dealerships can do the work, and it's not on warranty. (Maybe just a rumor started by the SUV fans?) If true, that could erode public enthusiasm pretty quickly.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Dec, 2004 03:21 pm
I think that people did take advantage of increased fuel efficiency in the late 70's and through the 80's. But when gas prices came back down we threw it out the window thinking that oil was inexhaustible.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Dec, 2004 03:25 pm
My next SUV.

http://www.hcc-nd.edu/images/hummer.gif
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Dec, 2004 03:52 pm
Good luck in the parking lot at WalMart.
0 Replies
 
candidone1
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Dec, 2004 03:58 pm
lab rat wrote:
Interesting trends:
When technology advancements brought about significant increases in car fuel efficiency in the 80s-90s, we Americans did not take advantage of that to reduce our oil dependency. Rather, we saw the advent of the SUV and other larger vehicles, a trend that absorbed whatever progress the new technology could have made towards reduced foreign oil dependence. Similarly, when home heating prices dropped, we simply built bigger homes--the average sq ft of a new home nearly doubled from the 1960s to the 1990s. I find this interesting, and a bit depressing.

Hybrid vehicles may finally be a step forward that achieves public acceptance. I'm still waiting, though, to see what happens when the first generation of Prius'/etc. age to the point where they need the battery replaced. I've heard that the maintenance cost of this procedure is on the order of ~$7000, only a select few dealerships can do the work, and it's not on warranty. (Maybe just a rumor started by the SUV fans?) If true, that could erode public enthusiasm pretty quickly.


Maybe not so interesting as it is sad...

Ever realize the people generally buy a house that they are approved by a bank or mortgage broker to buy...and not what they need, or can truly afford?

As people earn more money, or feel as though they are earning more money, they spend it equally as fast as it comes in.
one particular friend of mine spends $70 000 a week.
A WEEK
He says he couldn't imagine living on any less...and many of us working stiffs can't imagine trimming any of the fat off of our lifestyles in order to meet more pressing needs.

This sad trend will continue...SUV's will get more gawdy and less economical, homes will continue to grow in size...while the dependency we have on fossil fuels grows exponentially as a result.

We are but a microcosm of the greater society in which we live that scoffs at environmental mandates like Kyoto.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Dec, 2004 04:20 pm
You need to sleep with your friend.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » SUV'S suck?
  3. » Page 6
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/21/2024 at 05:56:51