s/o Those of you that think gas prices should equal Europe's

[mumto2]

Sadly the more efficient vehicles are more expensive too.

 

I drive a small car and the mileage is not bad (although it's older and they do make more fuel efficient cars).  I've priced more fuel efficient cars and it would not save me money because I don't drive enough.

 

Eta: Something is going very wrong with this post. The following is my comment:

 

My car is rated as "eco friendly" in the UK and we paid about $16000 for it three years ago, new. Ford. Cheaper then many other comparable cars here. With my accountant hat on the difference in fuel cost equaled the premium for eco compared to non eco at that time. Bought partly in case fuel prices increased. Car is rated at 80 mpg but we average 60 with 4 adult size passengers.

[Mergath]

I admit I don't walk and bike pretty much ever anywhere.  I have a park up the street that I usually drive to it.  Why?  Because they (those stupid overlords who ruin our lives and control everything) have not made the city safe for walking in many places.  My children and I were nearly run over once because some yahoo thought it was a good idea to make the walk light turn green at the same time as a left turn light.  It's just totally messed up for walking around here.  There is no sidewalk from here to the park either.  People drive 50 around the corners and it's hard to see pedestrians.  So I worry about walking there.

 

I would love to walk more.  I just kinda like living better than taking my chances with walking around here. 

 

But yeah I agree that I wish people would stop opposing making things better for walking! 

 

We have a few intersections like that around here.  A couple times when someone almost hit dd and I, I was tempted to stop right in the middle of the intersection and chew the person out while they sat in their vehicle, lol.  We really need to change the culture so that pedestrians are a common sight, and drivers know they have to be careful and watch for people out walking, or at the very least provide safe places for people to walk.

 

This whole topic is a pet peeve of mine.  If you couldn't tell. ;)

[Mergath]

We have nothing with that kind of gas mileage within that price range that I am aware of.  if there is, please someone tell me and I will go buy one tomorrow. 

 

 

Google Ford ECOnetic. ;)

[Haiku]

I'm in favor. Cheap fuel encourages a wasting of resources, inefficient city planning, and a lack of public transit, not to mention that taxpayers finance the huge subsidies to oil companies that give us "cheap" gas. 

[mlbuchina]

I don't agree.

 

North America is a lot more spread out than Europe.

 

Canada's prices are close to those of Europe. With even less population density than the US, and those people still have to drive to get to work. All it does is cost more for everything, including wages. My family, in rural Saskatchewan, have a higher cost of living than we do in San Diego. Most people think SoCal is expensive, but in my experience, it's not as bad as it could be!

 

I find this image to be eye opening.

 

 

 

It helps to think of European countries like states in the US, at least for me.  I often get it into my head that countries are huge, and take forever to travel through.  For many, this is not the case.

 

I am not in favor of artificially raising the price of gas.

[Mergath]

I'm not finding anything with 80, 60, or hell even barely 30 mpg.

 

Help!

 

I'm very curious now.

 

According to the wiki:

 

 The car has presently been tested to be capable of 80 mpg, putting it ahead of the 70.6 mpg Toyota Prius Hybrid and 74.3 mpg Volkswagen Golf BlueMotion.^[4]

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECOnetic

 

ETA: Here's another article.  They seem to have improved the mpg since 2009, but it'll give you the basic idea:

 

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2009/02/ford-will-give/

[Haiku]

I am not in favor of artificially raising the price of gas.

 

The price of gas in the US is artificially lowered. We are "protected" from the true cost of fuel through massive subsidies to oil companies.

[mumto2]

 

You found it :) Great car and not horrible to be a passenger in. We take some pretty long car trips with no complants. We occasionally get the average to go up when just dh drives it for a few hundred miles but realistically it is 60 for our family.

 

 

 

According to the wiki:

 

 The car has presently been tested to be capable of 80 mpg, putting it ahead of the 70.6 mpg Toyota Prius Hybrid and 74.3 mpg [/size]Volkswagen Golf [/size]BlueMotion.[/size]^%5B4%5D

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECOnetic

 

ETA: Here's another article.  They seem to have improved the mpg since 2009, but it'll give you the basic idea:

 

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2009/02/ford-will-give/

[Alte Veste Academy]

These cars aren't available here though are they?

 

That's is what I was getting at. We don't have these super fuel efficient cars here and the few newfangled electric/etc. that might are much more expensive.

We don't have them readily available here because people are not clamoring for them because gas is cheap. We are, generally speaking, ignorant and happy as clams.

[Mergath]

These cars aren't available here though are they?

 

That's is what I was getting at.  We don't have these super fuel efficient cars here and the few newfangled electric/etc. that might are much more expensive.

 

Oh, I thought you meant was the tech available anywhere.  Nope, not available here, or I'd have one in the driveway right now.

[Farrar]

I do advocate for prices to more accurately reflect reality.  If the government would stop paying subsidies to oil companies, then prices would go up and I think they should.  Realistically speaking, the prices are going to rise because the supply is dwindling and all the government efforts to stop that - from wars to control the supply to paying for the pipelines and oil infrastructure - not to mention all the car infrastructure that the government pays for while they only toss paltry bits at mass transit.  Fracking is helping keep prices (overall, for fossil fuels) controlled for now, but that's a whole other can of environmental worms.  Earthquakes and poison water, anyone?

 

I get that many people are against this and I understand why.  It's not an issue I'm out crusading about by any means because it's hard to campaign against your own interests.  Also, I think it's all going to he-hockey sticks in a handbasket and there's nothing I can do.  We live in a city, but homeschoolers all live in the burbs so we drive too much.  So we benefit from lowered prices.

 

Our choice to live in a city is tied to our belief in walkable communities and mass transit.  So my belief that the gas prices should rise isn't caused by my living in a city - they're linked together.

 

I don't think it's right that people shouldn't pay the real cost of something that's harmful to our environment.  No one has a right to live in a way that they can't afford.  And many people can't really afford to live out in the middle of nowhere just because they want to and commute hundreds of miles a day if the government doesn't help them do it.

 

And now...  where's my flame proof suit?

[ThatHomeschoolDad]

What about subsidies for those who use trucks etc for farming, logging, transport ?

 

Idk. I think it's a pipe dream. This is one area where I think the feds of either persuasion won't do any kind of a good job. In bed with BigOil.

 

We have those, but they're hidden.  There's a "light truck" loophole that affects pricing, taxes, and fuel economy requirements, and allows us to drive much larger vehicles than we actually need.

[Audrey]

I pay those prices and live in the countryside.  I work as an office administrator and spend £35 a week on petrol (small car) for my commute, so about USD 58.  One lives with it.

 

L

 

Right now a litre is $1.29 CDN here.  That translates to $4.82 CDN per US gallon, or $5.85CDN per UK gallon.

 

I live in the relative middle of relative nowhere and so use a vehicle on a daily basis. We do not pay nearly the same price as in European nations, but do pay significantly higher than in the US.  We also have a far higher minimum wage and free healthcare. 

 

Yes, you do get used to it, but I recognize the benefits of those offsets in that equation. Americans do not have the personal security we enjoy and so I can sympathize with how the much higher gas prices would hit many of them much harder than they do us.

[Haiku]

No one has a right to live in a way that they can't afford.  

 

Pretty much the entire US economy is unsustainable, and it's all going to come tumbling down eventually.

[Catwoman]

 

I don't think it's right that people shouldn't pay the real cost of something that's harmful to our environment.  No one has a right to live in a way that they can't afford.  And many people can't really afford to live out in the middle of nowhere just because they want to and commute hundreds of miles a day if the government doesn't help them do it.

 

And now...  where's my flame proof suit?

I don't think most people live out in the middle of nowhere and commute incredibly long distances each day because they want to; I think it's often because it's all they can afford, particularly if they work in a large city with a high cost of living. Housing is often much cheaper as you get farther away from the city. If gas prices increased dramatically, those people would be in a terrible bind. There is often no public transportation available, and no one with whom to carpool to get to work.

[mumto2]

Quick comment before I go to bed. A small diesel with a manual transmission should get between 40 and 50, at least. A pp said she is getting 47 for a diesel with automatic. Something to consider.

[Melissa in Australia]

Our gas prices at the pump do not reflect the true cost of gasoline. The relatively low price of gas in America is an artificial construct. It is lower because we subsidize the heck out of gas in this country. That money comes from somewhere. We're paying it, just not at the pump. But we like our illusions. Perhaps pulling back the curtain to reveal the illusion and moving steadily toward personally paying the real cost of gasoline would also accelerate progress toward reducing our dependence on it. At the very least, it would cause many to reconsider gas guzzlers.

this is exactly the information that Rosie and I were referring to.

[FaithManor]

Pretty much the entire US economy is unsustainable, and it's all going to come tumbling down eventually.

I agree with this statement completely. It's a sinking ship. Dh and I have been trying to figure out a way to get off the ship with my parents and his mother as well. So far no opportunity has presented itself. He has had many options for jobs in other nations, however, none of those have an immigration policy that will allow for retirees to just up and move there. He keeps looking in Belize because the immigration is much looser there and we think that if MIL and my parents had a wing of a much larger house that hopefully we could afford to purchase, then they would be able to make it there due to not having housing costs.

 

Sigh....I suppose we could just "save ourselves", but it seems like a really crappy thing to do. I don't think our consciences would allow it.

 

Faith

[Melissa in Australia]

Lots of Europe is rural too. Most people live in small villages, not big towns. There is a rail system that connects the small villages to bigger towns. I'd like to reiterate that I'm not advocating for doubling our gas prices. But, I do think the argument is usually using the tax money to improve our infrastructure, to include rail systems. It might hurt people in the short term, but it would change things in the long term. At least, that's how I would see things happening.

believe me when I say that most of Australia is very rural.

 

 

even my very rural small country town way out at the end of whop-whop has public transport. there is a bus that connects to the train that goes to Melbourne  and return 

[ThatHomeschoolDad]

this is exactly the information that Rosie and I were referring to.

As Tony Blair used to say during his PM's q&a sessions, I refer the right honourable member to the graph I posted some moments ago.

[Melissa in Australia]

I find this image to be eye opening.

 

 

 

It helps to think of European countries like states in the US, at least for me.  I often get it into my head that countries are huge, and take forever to travel through.  For many, this is not the case.

 

I am not in favor of artificially raising the price of gas.

Australia is around the same land mass as USA.

 we don't artificially subsidies out full prices here.  Even rural towns are connected by public transport of some description

[FaithManor]

Oh, and our old Ford Taurus gets 33 mph, and the Chevy Cruze gets 37-40 for local driving and more than that on the freeway. Thankfully, the sticker price is better than on many models. My dad is VERY angry about dh driving the Cruze because he thinks light, economy models aren't safe. Truth be known, they aren't. A Cruze or Taurus is no match for a 1 ton speeding pick-up truck, the soccer mom mini-van, or the worst...a loaded semi. But, it is what it is. Due to the speed, and the way American roads are designed and laid out, small cars are quite simply not even remotely safe as they are in Europe. As dd the medic says, "If Americans start driving them en masse but the speed limits remain the same and the number of trucks is not GREATLY decreased, then I am guaranteed a job for life trying to save people." Not a pretty thought, but it is the truth. We can't just adopt nothing but small cars on the roads without also addressing speed and the staggering numbers of heavy vehicles sharing those same roads. Now, if we made some sort of law that made most roads off limits to semi's, delivery trucks, and farm vehicles from 6:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m., we might keep traffic fatalities down if that is also combined with more public transportation infrastructure. We all know THAT will never happen!!

[ThatHomeschoolDad]

Diesel also costs more per gallon though. So I'm wondering if you would not just break even in the end.

It's more per gallon, but delivers more energy per gallon, which is why heavy trucks here use it (and trains), and why lighter diesel cars get great mpg.

[MistyMountain]

Gas prices in the US don't reflect the reality. They just don't. They are heavily subsidized. It is leading us to build our lives in ways that are not sustainable for the long run. We will not change if the prices don't reflect reality like they do elsewhere. We do not pay the true cost of gas and they do need to be more realistic for change to be made. It can't happen overnight but it does need to happen.

 

It will happen whether we like it or not because oil is a limited resource and we will be hitting a peak eventually where our use outpaces what can be produced. Drilling in the Arctic will not solve our problem. The amount there is just a small percentage of our use. Suburban sprawl is one of the biggest resource and environmental problems we face. It is a huge waste of resources. Our current life will not last indefinitely. More and more of the world is trying to live like Americans and there simply is not enough resources for that. We could have built our cities more efficiently and not around the automobile but we didn't. My city actually had a decent plan that was a ten year effort and a compromise between what developers wanted and what everyone else who cared about making a more sustainable city wanted. It passed but then with a change of mayors then plan was dead in its track and ten years of effort went to waste. Literally hundreds of people showed up from all walks of life in support of keeping the land use plan but it was of no use. Paying artificially cheap prices led to horrible sprawling city design and unsustainable practices. Yes it will hurt since we are so sprawled out but we need to change our ways. There simply isn't enough to support this lifestyle of heavy gas use indefinitely.

[MistyMountain]

Diesel also costs more per gallon though. So I'm wondering if you would not just break even in the end.

I have a diesal volkswagon Jetta and it gets way better gas mileage then other station wagons of similar size like the Subaru. I am definitely saving over owning something like a Subaru.

[Renee in NC]

If the price increase was for taxes to support a better transportation infrastructure so that you could take an efficient bus/train route to work, would you think it worth it? 

 

Yes.  However, I don't have a lot of expectations for any public transport out here in the middle of nowhere.    There is a bus that goes to the nearest town 8 miles away, but it doesn't run late enough.  Not only that, but I would have to get to the 4yo's Pre-K first, THEN get on the bus.

 

It takes me an hour to take the 4yo to school, and then get to work.  That has me gone from 7am to 6pm already.  I would hate for my commute to be any longer than that.

[poppy]

Wow, an opinion from the unpopular opinion thread is unpopular! Whodathunkit.

[sewingmama]

Australia is around the same land mass as USA.

we don't artificially subsidies out full prices here. Even rural towns are connected by public transport of some description

Not here in SA. Barely any public transport outside Adelaide. We live two hours outside Adelaide. We have to drive 40 minutes to get to the one bus to Adelaide. That bus trip will cost you $18. It only runs once a day so if you aren't able to make it to the 5pm bus you are stuck....especially if you are working in the city.

 

DH commutes an hour to his job. We basically go nowhere else because of the gas prices. It gets boring after a while.

 

One thing that always struck me when I lived in Canada and visited the US is how big the cars are. Everyone has a truck or SUV. I get that you often have to drive through snow and such..but we would never be able to afford such a big car here...the gas costs would be too enormous. We might have cheaper medical care here but we also have outrageous water and electricity costs, food is triple the cost of the USA and so are our houses. So every way you look...the USA has it so much better then most places in the world. Even with higher gas prices your COL is so much cheaper.

[Renee in NC]

Lots of Europe is rural too. Most people live in small villages, not big towns. There is a rail system that connects the small villages to bigger towns. I'd like to reiterate that I'm not advocating for doubling our gas prices. But, I do think the argument is usually using the tax money to improve our infrastructure, to include rail systems. It might hurt people in the short term, but it would change things in the long term. At least, that's how I would see things happening.

 

But I live 8 miles outside of a small town, so I would have to get to that town, and then into the city where I work, and then to my actual workplace. 

 

i rode the bus everywhere when i lived in Cincinnati.  I was excited when we moved to Durham, NC because there was public transport.  Unfortunately, it took forever (and 3 buses) to get anywhere.

 

I guess I worry about the extra time having to take public transport would take.  Adding an hour each direction would mean 2 more hours a day my children were home alone.

[Renee in NC]

We don't have them readily available here because people are not clamoring for them because gas is cheap. We are, generally speaking, ignorant and happy as clams.

 

I'm happy that I have a 1993 Celica to drive. LOL  Even if a $16K car that gets that high of gas mileage were available, I would have to pay for it. 

 

Either way, it will cost me more. 

[poppy]

Saying "I live remotely and need cheap gas or I'd not be able to afford to drive anymore!" is not a great reason to sustain what we have.  " I need it cheap because I live where I do because gas is cheap", basically..... I mean, I completely understand the sentiment, I get it, I don't begrudge anyone that sentiment.  (And I sure don't want to spend more on my sad 20mpg Chevy either). But in terms of policy, "it's too expensive to sustain what we have
is not a good enough reason.    It'd be like saying "Here in 1850s Georgia I need slaves on my plantation, I can't afford to pay for labor! And the people who buy my clothes don't want to  pay more for textiles either!"  Everything in that statement makes sense and is true.  Still not OK.

 

(Not comparing gas guzzlers to slave owners, just trying to come up with an analogy....)

[Haiku]

I dunno if I agree.  I don't really see it.  But what do I know.  Maybe I'm living in la la land.  LOL 

 

Most industries are not sustainable without massive government welfare and externalization of costs. 

[Farrar]

I don't think most people live out in the middle of nowhere and commute incredibly long distances each day because they want to; I think it's often because it's all they can afford, particularly if they work in a large city with a high cost of living. Housing is often much cheaper as you get farther away from the city. If gas prices increased dramatically, those people would be in a terrible bind. There is often no public transportation available, and no one with whom to carpool to get to work.

This really hasn't been my experience. It's true for some, but the bigger reason I see is people choosing the suburbs in order to get space and big lawns and a perceived sense of security. It's a choice. In my area, for the same money, you can get a house way, way out with a yard and a suburban feel or you can get a rowhouse in the city with less space in a much more urban feeling neighborhood. That's not being forced out of the city, it's a choice.

 

Everyone is being subsidized in different ways - here and in Europe. The US government has chosen to subsidize people living and commuting a really long way in individual vehicles. The governments in Europe have made other choices.

[Mbelle]

I can't afford gas right now.  I get one tank for two weeks.  So does DH.   I can walk to library and restaurants (but I don't like any of them so I don't).  Although I can walk I don't because people have almost run over us.  Right in front of the police station!  I have been getting cabin fever and it is driving me crazy. Ha!  Two grocery stores are one mile away, but I really can't walk there every single day and unless I take the buggy home it's not really possible to do my weekly shop.  If we did that they would start making us pay for them like we did in other countries.  I did live in Europe and I did not have a car for three years.  It was great.  The bus part was not so great, but I could usually get a ride to a subway or train station.  Also, I have three kids and would like more and therefor not be able to drive a smart car.  Right now I'm not in favor of it.

[ThatHomeschoolDad]

Saying "I live remotely and need cheap gas or I'd not be able to afford to drive anymore!" is not a great reason to sustain what we have.  " I need it cheap because I live where I do because gas is cheap", basically..... I mean, I completely understand the sentiment, I get it, I don't begrudge anyone that sentiment.  (And I sure don't want to spend more on my sad 20mpg Chevy either). But in terms of policy, "it's too expensive to sustain what we have

is not a good enough reason.    It'd be like saying "Here in 1850s Georgia I need slaves on my plantation, I can't afford to pay for labor! And the people who buy my clothes don't want to  pay more for textiles either!"  Everything in that statement makes sense and is true.  Still not OK.

 

[Jane in NC]

Diesel also costs more per gallon though.  So I'm wondering if you would not just break even in the end.

 

Diesel fuel here costs 10-15 percent more than gasoline yet my car is at least 50% more efficient than a gas model. Breaking even? Nope.  I am saving money.

 

 

Plus the actual engines last longer.

 

Indeed.  The body on my last diesel car fell apart but the engine kept going and going...and going....

[Renee in NC]

It's rather baffling to me that people living in the middle of nowhere wouldn't want a more fuel efficient car!

 

I fill up less than once a month.  So that my gas mileage isn't anything to write home about (although not dreadful) it doesn't hurt that badly.  But if I had to fill up weekly or more...ouch!

 

Why aren't people clamoring?  Really, gas is not expensive enough?  I find this hard to believe.

 

It isn't that I don't want one.  I can't afford one.  Sure, it may save me money over time, but I don't have the money up front to invest.

 

I drive a car that isn't worth $1600, much less $16K.

[Renee in NC]

This really hasn't been my experience. It's true for some, but the bigger reason I see is people choosing the suburbs in order to get space and big lawns and a perceived sense of security. It's a choice. In my area, for the same money, you can get a house way, way out with a yard and a suburban feel or you can get a rowhouse in the city with less space in a much more urban feeling neighborhood. That's not being forced out of the city, it's a choice.

 

Everyone is being subsidized in different ways - here and in Europe. The US government has chosen to subsidize people living and commuting a really long way in individual vehicles. The governments in Europe have made other choices.

 

I rent the worst house in the best school district I could afford.  I will NOT send my kids to school where my work is, and I can't afford (in any way, shape, or form) to live in the next closest town.

 

I don't live in a suburb so I can have a big lawn.  I live in an old doublewide in the country so my kids can go to good schools.

[Renee in NC]

Yeah same here.  We are one of the few among my husband's coworkers who live in the icky city.  Most others live much further out in the nice burbs.  We just don't like driving and don't mind the icky city.  Well, that, and we don't care about the schools since we homeschool.  I think the schools is a huge factor for a lot of families.  They are willing to drive an hour or more knowing their kid isn't going to the crap school in the city.

 

I should've quoted you!  I cannot homeschool anymore, because I work FT to support my 6 dc at home.

[mlbuchina]

The price of gas in the US is artificially lowered. We are "protected" from the true cost of fuel through massive subsidies to oil companies.

 

I don't think that oil companies should be subsidized.  I don't think that any company should be subsidized.  Let the market do it's job, and stop "protecting" us from the true cost of anything.

 

Someone told me they paid $16k for a car with this awesome gas mileage in the UK in response to me saying the fuel efficient things out there aren't that cheap and if there is something out there here for that cheap please let me know.

 

I did come across one (which is more than I want to spend, but that certainly is impressive gas mileage).  It's the Prius 2014 plug in.  Gets 95 city (50 highway).  That would be great for me since I mostly do city driving.  But it starts at around 30K.  And then there is the whole when you eventually have to replace the batteries thing (they cost thousands). 

 

What is the purpose of having these cars, though?  I mean, saving on gasoline, I get that, but if a majority of people started driving plug-ins, then the cost of electricity would skyrocket, too.  The power coming from the plug is mostly made by burning coal, so if one is wanting the car to save the environment, this isn't the car for that, either.

 

I think that if we are going to have alternative energy sources any time soon, then the government needs to get out of the way and let the market work it out.  People coming up with all kinds of ideas, and those that will really work will start being available.  (This statement probably needed to be on the unpopular opinion thread.   :D )

[Mrs Mungo]

I will have to answer some of the posts from my computer, so they will have to wait for just a bit until after I make dinner. :)

 

Australia is around the same land mass as USA.

we don't artificially subsidies out full prices here. Even rural towns are connected by public transport of some description

But, your *population* by and large is near the coast, without much in the center. That is a pretty big difference compared to how the US population is spread out.

[FaithManor]

And then there is heating...the next largest percentage of petroleum consumption goes to that. Every year

we have at least one elderly person in our community die from freezing to death because of poverty...if

fuel oil or propane takes a major price increase then it happens to more than one. Additionally, a huge

number of apartment complexes heat with electric causing all kinds of havoc on the environment from

coal fired plants.

 

So part of this equation of how much people should pay per gallon for petroleum products should also be

how many people we are willing to let die. I'm not being difficult here. It is an unavoidable

consequence of living on a continent in which most of the country must have winter heat. Yes people can

turn their thermostats down. But that only goes so far. I know numerous families who set their thermostat

just high enough to keep the pipes from freezing and wear coats, hats, and gloves inside, use tarps

and plastic sheets to cordone off portions of the house with everyone sleeping in one room, and the

suffering of the elderly is palpable. They don't have the money to move to Florida or Arizona.

 

So if the board is going to have an honest discussion about petroleum prices and consumption, then there

needs to he a frank talk about this too.

 

And no, the answer is not burning wood. We have our own sustainable woodlot, a ridiculous EPA efficient/

certified exterior wood boiler, and radiant floor heating which is very efficient. But we live in an area

with no air quality issues so the amount of particle pollution (much greater than that of a heavily used

car for an entire year for a primary heating season of Nov. - Mid April) is not a problem. Urban

areas already have too much air pollution to even consider wood heating and there isn't enough wood in

America to make that sustainable for population of 300 million people. We have solar panels to help run

the electronics but do not get enough sunlight to heat the house with solar powered electric. We

aren't close enough to the lake to get enough wind to do it either. I would cost $25,000-30,000 to put in

a wind system and in the course of it's entire life would never produce enough to cover the initial

investment much less the lifetime maintenance. These huge wind farms they are putting up all over mid

Michigan are taxpayer money sucking pork barrel projects that will never produce enough to shake a stick

at. But, they are springing up all over to make the populace believe that wind energy is a viable

alternative.

 

There are no easy answers because these issues should have been in thenproblem solving stage 40 years ago

instead of being passed from one administration to the next to the next because it didn't poll well

during election years. Anyone who says they have the answer and it's not that difficult to implement

and nobody gets hurt is selling Jim Jones coolaid and you should not believe anything that huckster says!

 

Faith

[Crimson Wife]

I would walk/bike more if the crime rate wasn't so high. I live in a "nice" neighborhood but unfortunately gangs are no longer solely an inner-city problem. There have been drive-by shootings, armed carjackings and other armed robberies, and even an attempted rape in broad daylight on the regional bike trail. The suburbs aren't what they used to be in terms of safety.

[Crimson Wife]

And then there is the whole when you eventually have to replace the batteries thing (they cost thousands).

My dad has a Camry Hybrid and he had to replace the battery last year at 127k miles. It cost him a whopping $4500 to do so. Now MA probably has higher-than-average labor rates but you'd still be talking several grand.

[Mrs Mungo]

But I live 8 miles outside of a small town, so I would have to get to that town, and then into the city where I work, and then to my actual workplace. 

 

i rode the bus everywhere when i lived in Cincinnati.  I was excited when we moved to Durham, NC because there was public transport.  Unfortunately, it took forever (and 3 buses) to get anywhere.

 

I guess I worry about the extra time having to take public transport would take.  Adding an hour each direction would mean 2 more hours a day my children were home alone.

 

 

I rent the worst house in the best school district I could afford.  I will NOT send my kids to school where my work is, and I can't afford (in any way, shape, or form) to live in the next closest town.

 

I don't live in a suburb so I can have a big lawn.  I live in an old doublewide in the country so my kids can go to good schools.

 

When you compare the US to how things are in Europe though (which is what we're doing here), you wouldn't have much choice in schools. There would be one school per village. High school aged kids would probably ride public transport. Kids are sorted into high schools according to academic progress, test scores and desired career track. It's not strictly an economic issue there like it is here. You wouldn't have any houses 8 miles out from town because people couldn't afford to live that way. Eight miles out of the village is another village. You don't have the urban sprawl surrounding one big city like you do in the US.

 

Towns would have to develop in a different way than they currently function. That is exactly what people are saying. IF gasoline gets too expensive/scarce for whatever reason, then things will have to change from the way they function now. Again, we already see this happening to some extent in expensive, congested areas. They are developing different areas because all of the people *can't* get into the one area where everything was.

 

European gas prices would be the death knell for small American farmers--you know, the ones we all say we're going to support instead of mega-agriculture. Yeah, my 1940's-50's tractors aren't terribly fuel efficient, but they're paid for and I can't afford 5 new tractors at $50,000 a pop. Whatever happened to the "reduce, reuse, recycle" push? I'm reusing old equipment.

 

Ride the bus to town? What bus? There is none here. There IS a ski bus, but we have to get to town to take it. And it only goes to the ski area.

 

Bike to town? We got a foot of snow today and it will be -20 in another hour. That's a recipe for someone freezing to death. Just got an email from the U of WY that they're offering rides to campus for the next few days, because the wind chill will be -50. It will be -29 WITHOUT wind chill tomorrow.

 

Europeans just don't get USA distances. My dd has to see the doctor tomorrow. It will be a MINIMUM of a six hour drive. There is no other doctor that does her surgery. And she can't drive herself, so dh will drive her to Denver, then Laramie and THEN drive home. This is just for a 15 minute doctor appointment. It's not like she can pop down to the olde family doc just down the street. Sorry, guys, but we don't live in little villages with everything we need. The West never did have that.

You wouldn't have a specialized surgeon in a tiny German village either. They would send you to one of the big university hospitals. You would drive or take the train there. Only people in extremely large cities have *everything* they need, but that applies everywhere.

[Deb in NZ]

I pay those prices and live in the countryside.  I work as an office administrator and spend £35 a week on petrol (small car) for my commute, so about USD 58.  One lives with it.

 

L

I just filled up our car & it cost $102 after discount.  I'm hoping that this will last us 10 days, but most likely we'll need to fill up in a week.  Prices are less than what they were mid-year.  I don't bother to convert currency as I'm spending the same currency that I'm paid in.  Today's fill-up is half a day's pay for me.  We only live 12 km from the centre of town & drive a small car.  

[Alte Veste Academy]

For the people saying that they are are too remote to benefit from mass transit, OK. Even in countries with wonderful mass transit systems, there are outliers. But just because a relatively small percentage of people live out of reach of possible solutions doesn't make those solutions unworthy of consideration for everyone. If you imagine concentric circles surrounding population centers, it stands to reason that practical solutions can be found for a large percentage of citizens. Everyone? No. But not everyone takes the train to work in Europe either.

 

And yes, by all means, use old equipment until it needs to be replaced. No one in this thread has suggested anything so ridiculous as everyone running out in one fell swoop to buy new cars, trucks, tractors, etc. to replace the inefficient ones we currently have. Rather, as has been said many times, it is about making slow and steady incremental changes in the direction of reducing our overall consumption of gasoline.

[Mrs Mungo]

Ah, but that specialized surgeon would be what? an hour away by rail? Wouldn't that be nice. Only we don't have passes that railways can GO through--they're too steep! To put a rail line back into our valley would take you 250 miles out of the way--which in Europe would be a different COUNTRY! We couldn't even have standard gauge RRs here--they can't make the switchbacks, only narrow gauge. Just to see the fool orthodontist is 4 hours of driving for us, over two major passes. Our town simply isn't big enough to have one. He comes up once a month, when the pass is open, only today he didn't make it--too many avalanches!

I've lived in both, you know. ;) Have you been to the alps? They have rail systems.

 

I only hope dd can MAKE her appointment tomorrow--they shot avalanches on Monarch all afternoon, but if they get a bunch more snow tonight, they'll have to shut the pass down again. And then there's Red Hill, Crow Hill, Kenosha, Trout Creek and who knows if South Park will be open--depends on the wind. Driving along, only being able to see the double-height delineators in a ground blizzard is no fun. And that's hoping that they're aren't 200 head of elk on the road... Much of the winter the RR that used to run through there wasn't running. They couldn't keep it open. Distances here are a completely different deal than Europe.

Yes and no. The rail system travels throughout Europe. The rail system isn't managed and governed by one single country. It travels across country borders. It travels through Siberia and the Alps. They have the same problems on a large scale.

[Alte Veste Academy]

Ah, but that specialized surgeon would be what? an hour away by rail? Wouldn't that be nice. Only we don't have passes that railways can GO through--they're too steep! To put a rail line back into our valley would take you 250 miles out of the way--which in Europe would be a different COUNTRY! We couldn't even have standard gauge RRs here--they can't make the switchbacks, only narrow gauge. Just to see the fool orthodontist is 4 hours of driving for us, over two major passes. Our town simply isn't big enough to have one. He comes up once a month, when the pass is open, only today he didn't make it--too many avalanches!

 

I only hope dd can MAKE her appointment tomorrow--they shot avalanches on Monarch all afternoon, but if they get a bunch more snow tonight, they'll have to shut the pass down again. And then there's Red Hill, Crow Hill, Kenosha, Trout Creek and who knows if South Park will be open--depends on the wind. Driving along, only being able to see the double-height delineators in a ground blizzard is no fun. And that's hoping that they're aren't 200 head of elk on the road... Much of the winter the RR that used to run through there wasn't running. They couldn't keep it open. Distances here are a completely different deal than Europe.

You would be an outlier. I imagine there are outliers in the Alps too. I think of this more as a conversation about the general direction the country would benefit from moving in, not a 100% perfect solution for 100% of Americans.

[Melissa in Australia]

I will have to answer some of the posts from my computer, so they will have to wait for just a bit until after I make dinner. :)

 

 

But, your *population* by and large is near the coast, without much in the center. That is a pretty big difference compared to how the US population is spread out.

But we have to drive everywhere. The closest large city to me is Melbourne - over 400 km away. The closest largish shopping center is over 100 km. the closest town is 20 km away. The closest cinema is 70 km away(not that I go). I live right  on the coast. believe me we have a lot of coast and we are spread right along it. still a long way to drive to anything