|
Peak Oil - counterargument
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... How about this: "I own a Hummer just because I can." Does that strike you as a good idea, since this country really does need to lower its demand for oil? Or, is this not your country? I have to admit, a Hummer is where I draw the line. I support everyone's freedom of choice to buy what excites them, but for the life of me I don't understand the fascination with a 1500 GM pickup truck chassis and a military, "Terminator" sheet metal body. Reminds me of those toys the kids play with --- "Transformers" or something like that .... the ones that you pull on the doors or whatever and it turns into a Robot. RCE |
Peak Oil - counterargument
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "RCE" wrote in message ... " JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT comREMOVETHIS wrote in message . .. "RCE" wrote in message ... "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... Look around you, Jimmy. There is absolutely, positively no way in hell that the enormous increase in truck ownership over the past 30 years is due to actual need. -Most don't even have a hitch on them. They tow nothing. -There've been surveys indicating that the average SUV owner carries 1-2 passengers most of the time, and never more than 4. -We have not seen a 10-fold increase in the number of construction workers and trades people. Furthermore, I have housing developments in progress near me. I see more of the workers arriving in cars, not trucks. You don't need a truck to haul 2 hammers, a tool belt, and a cordless drill. They're smart enough to figure this out, and apparently, they see no need to drive a pickup because someone else does. So much for "construction sites", as you mentioned. Too bad soccer moms can't figure this out. You keep coming back to people who actually need them. Do you know what the typical female truck buyer gives as a reason? I do. .... (this is really getting comical) ... maybe not "typical" .... but.. Mrs.E used to have a Lincoln Navigator. She liked it because it had some room for her stuff, grandkids and the fact that she felt "safe" in such a large vehicle. This spring she traded it in and got one of those new Lincoln pickup trucks (I forget what you call them). It looks just like a Navigator from the front, but with a pickup bed in the back. (It's basically a dolled up Ford F-150) She loves this now, because it still seats 5 people, but she can easily haul around her horse saddles, bales of hay, shopping conquests, boat stuff, flowers, pots, trees and other bulky, large items that she used to have to wait for me to pick up for her. RCE But she is a WOMAN and according to Doug WOMEN do not need trucks, only MEN do. She is nothing more than a soccer MOM riding around in a MAN's truck. Doug has evidence to prove it. Now kindly tell Mrs. E. that Doug Kanter would like her to sell her truck as, being a woman, she obviously does she *need* one. ;-) I am afraid it will only serve to support Doug's position. Ford obviously targeted the Lincoln pickup towards women, IMO. RCE There have been ads from several manufacturers which, instead of the macho music and guys driving through rocky streams, there's a mom gently putting seat belts on the kiddies la la la. They're still pitching the safety concept. There was one from Ford which showed a lady driving an Explorer on an unplowed highway it what looked like 3 feet of snow. THAT is what I meant. Neither type of commercial conveys an accurate message, really. It's not unique to Detroit. I like the one for a Saab or Volvo or Audi or whatever it was (see how effective the ad was?) that shows the car driving up a ski jump. RCE |
Peak Oil - counterargument
"RCE" wrote in message ... "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "RCE" wrote in message ... " JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT comREMOVETHIS wrote in message . .. "RCE" wrote in message ... "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... Look around you, Jimmy. There is absolutely, positively no way in hell that the enormous increase in truck ownership over the past 30 years is due to actual need. -Most don't even have a hitch on them. They tow nothing. -There've been surveys indicating that the average SUV owner carries 1-2 passengers most of the time, and never more than 4. -We have not seen a 10-fold increase in the number of construction workers and trades people. Furthermore, I have housing developments in progress near me. I see more of the workers arriving in cars, not trucks. You don't need a truck to haul 2 hammers, a tool belt, and a cordless drill. They're smart enough to figure this out, and apparently, they see no need to drive a pickup because someone else does. So much for "construction sites", as you mentioned. Too bad soccer moms can't figure this out. You keep coming back to people who actually need them. Do you know what the typical female truck buyer gives as a reason? I do. .... (this is really getting comical) ... maybe not "typical" .... but.. Mrs.E used to have a Lincoln Navigator. She liked it because it had some room for her stuff, grandkids and the fact that she felt "safe" in such a large vehicle. This spring she traded it in and got one of those new Lincoln pickup trucks (I forget what you call them). It looks just like a Navigator from the front, but with a pickup bed in the back. (It's basically a dolled up Ford F-150) She loves this now, because it still seats 5 people, but she can easily haul around her horse saddles, bales of hay, shopping conquests, boat stuff, flowers, pots, trees and other bulky, large items that she used to have to wait for me to pick up for her. RCE But she is a WOMAN and according to Doug WOMEN do not need trucks, only MEN do. She is nothing more than a soccer MOM riding around in a MAN's truck. Doug has evidence to prove it. Now kindly tell Mrs. E. that Doug Kanter would like her to sell her truck as, being a woman, she obviously does she *need* one. ;-) I am afraid it will only serve to support Doug's position. Ford obviously targeted the Lincoln pickup towards women, IMO. RCE There have been ads from several manufacturers which, instead of the macho music and guys driving through rocky streams, there's a mom gently putting seat belts on the kiddies la la la. They're still pitching the safety concept. There was one from Ford which showed a lady driving an Explorer on an unplowed highway it what looked like 3 feet of snow. THAT is what I meant. Neither type of commercial conveys an accurate message, really. It's not unique to Detroit. I like the one for a Saab or Volvo or Audi or whatever it was (see how effective the ad was?) that shows the car driving up a ski jump. RCE Right. Well, what percentage of male SUV owners use them to ford streams? :-) And, who's going to venture out on an unplowed road with 3 feet of snow, other than plow drivers? But, people eat that up. |
Peak Oil - counterargument
RCE wrote: "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... How about this: "I own a Hummer just because I can." Does that strike you as a good idea, since this country really does need to lower its demand for oil? Or, is this not your country? I have to admit, a Hummer is where I draw the line. I support everyone's freedom of choice to buy what excites them, but for the life of me I don't understand the fascination with a 1500 GM pickup truck chassis and a military, "Terminator" sheet metal body. Reminds me of those toys the kids play with --- "Transformers" or something like that .... the ones that you pull on the doors or whatever and it turns into a Robot. RCE I agree, aside from being butt ugly, they are too wide and unmaneuverable for todays parking lots and streets. I watched some fool with his penis, I mean Hummer trying to park at an office complex. He was there when I got there, I parked, got my briefcase out of the back, while talking on my cell phone, and he was still parking when I went in! |
More gas on gas
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "Bryan" wrote in message . com... "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "Bryan" wrote in message . net... "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "Bryan" wrote in message . net... "tillius" wrote in message oups.com... JohnH wrote: On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 19:01:23 -0400, Harry Krause wrote more political bull**** which was deleted: You're trying, Harry. Hopefully enough folks will realize just what you're trying to do. -- 'Til next time, John H ****************************************** ***** Have a Spectacular Day! ***** ****************************************** Don't worry. Enough folks already know what Harry and the rest of you socialist Demoncraps are trying to do. Till Till, I've been a republican, a democrat, a libertarian, and an independent. I vote the issue and the man, not the party. Please leave the name calling for another group. "I'm a WAR president!" LOL! Thanks, you're sending me to the airport with a smile on my face. I didn't want to call him any more names tonight. So, I thought I'd just remind you in an indirect way that your president was a lete ------- -----. Doug, I'm back from the airport, the kids are tucked in and sleeping like logs, and I'm confused. When did he become MY president? Is what we have here, a failure to communicate? Did you vote for him? Does not matter who you or anyone else voted for. You got Bush as your President, if you are a USA citizen! |
Peak Oil - counterargument
On 24 Apr 2006 15:45:22 -0700, "basskisser" wrote:
RCE wrote: "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... How about this: "I own a Hummer just because I can." Does that strike you as a good idea, since this country really does need to lower its demand for oil? Or, is this not your country? I have to admit, a Hummer is where I draw the line. I support everyone's freedom of choice to buy what excites them, but for the life of me I don't understand the fascination with a 1500 GM pickup truck chassis and a military, "Terminator" sheet metal body. Reminds me of those toys the kids play with --- "Transformers" or something like that .... the ones that you pull on the doors or whatever and it turns into a Robot. RCE I agree, aside from being butt ugly, they are too wide and unmaneuverable for todays parking lots and streets. I watched some fool with his penis, I mean Hummer trying to park at an office complex. He was there when I got there, I parked, got my briefcase out of the back, while talking on my cell phone, and he was still parking when I went in! Yeah, but weren't all the girls standing around his Hummer, just waiting for him to get out so they could ogle his manliness? -- 'Til next time, John H ****************************************** ***** Have a Spectacular Day! ***** ****************************************** |
More gas on gas
"While the oil companies deny any manipulation, public confidence was eroded
at the recent report that exiting Exxon Mobil executive Lee Raymond was getting a 400 million dollar retirement package." |
Peak Oil - counterargument
On 25 Apr 2006 06:26:17 -0700, "basskisser" wrote:
JohnH wrote: On 24 Apr 2006 15:45:22 -0700, "basskisser" wrote: RCE wrote: "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... How about this: "I own a Hummer just because I can." Does that strike you as a good idea, since this country really does need to lower its demand for oil? Or, is this not your country? I have to admit, a Hummer is where I draw the line. I support everyone's freedom of choice to buy what excites them, but for the life of me I don't understand the fascination with a 1500 GM pickup truck chassis and a military, "Terminator" sheet metal body. Reminds me of those toys the kids play with --- "Transformers" or something like that .... the ones that you pull on the doors or whatever and it turns into a Robot. RCE I agree, aside from being butt ugly, they are too wide and unmaneuverable for todays parking lots and streets. I watched some fool with his penis, I mean Hummer trying to park at an office complex. He was there when I got there, I parked, got my briefcase out of the back, while talking on my cell phone, and he was still parking when I went in! Yeah, but weren't all the girls standing around his Hummer, just waiting for him to get out so they could ogle his manliness? -- 'Til next time, John H Uh, yeah...sure..... He probably doesn't have much in the pants to ogle....hence the Hummer! Amen! -- 'Til next time, John H ****************************************** ***** Have a Spectacular Day! ***** ****************************************** |
More gas on gas
On Tue, 25 Apr 2006 13:41:09 GMT, Ignatius Thistlewhite
wrote: You wrote: "While the oil companies deny any manipulation, public confidence was eroded at the recent report that exiting Exxon Mobil executive Lee Raymond was getting a 400 million dollar retirement package." If you do not like the fact that ExxonMobil used part of its 9 cents per gallon profit to compensate a retiring executive, patronize another supplier of the company's products. If you do not like the fact that government taxes account for 40 cents per gallon, well, there's nothing you can do about that. From where comes the 9 cents a gallon figure and the 49 cents a gallon figure? -- 'Til next time, John H ****************************************** ***** Have a Spectacular Day! ***** ****************************************** |
Peak Oil - counterargument
Doug Kanter wrote:
I drive a 6-cylinder Totota pickup, about 30 miles per week. My ex drives a Subaru 4-cylinder. I drive a Ford Excursion V10 (gas). When I'm driving it, I think of Douglas Kanter, and all the fuel he is saving with his vehicles so I can have enough fuel for my huge vehicle. Tick tock, tick tock... |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:17 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com