"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
RCE wrote:
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
The real problem is one of religion, Bryan. In this great country, cars
occupy almost mythical status in the mind of the consumer.

And I see absolutely nothing wrong with that. It's part of the American
culture.

This is the alternative:

http://www.thatvideosite.com/view/2052.html


RCE




What's wrong with the alternative?

Because they are not a solution. They are a symbolic statement, which is
fine if that's what floats your boat.


I don't care where fuel prices are, the NEXT car we buy will be a high MPG
vehicle.

And mine will probably be a low MPG vehicle that I drive less often. What's
the difference?

RCE

"RCE" wrote in message
...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
RCE wrote:
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
The real problem is one of religion, Bryan. In this great country, cars
occupy almost mythical status in the mind of the consumer.

And I see absolutely nothing wrong with that. It's part of the American
culture.

This is the alternative:

http://www.thatvideosite.com/view/2052.html


RCE




What's wrong with the alternative?

Because they are not a solution. They are a symbolic statement, which is
fine if that's what floats your boat.

So, in between an Escalade and a hybird, there are no in-between solutions?

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"RCE" wrote in message
...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
RCE wrote:
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
The real problem is one of religion, Bryan. In this great country,
cars occupy almost mythical status in the mind of the consumer.

And I see absolutely nothing wrong with that. It's part of the
American culture.

This is the alternative:

http://www.thatvideosite.com/view/2052.html


RCE




What's wrong with the alternative?

Because they are not a solution. They are a symbolic statement, which is
fine if that's what floats your boat.

So, in between an Escalade and a hybird, there are no in-between
solutions?


Yes, common sense. If hybrids and being politically correct floats your
boat, do so without preaching.
If an Escalade floats your boat, do so, responsibly. The same applies for
everything in between.

RCE

"RCE" wrote in message
news

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"RCE" wrote in message
...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
RCE wrote:
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
The real problem is one of religion, Bryan. In this great country,
cars occupy almost mythical status in the mind of the consumer.

And I see absolutely nothing wrong with that. It's part of the
American culture.

This is the alternative:

http://www.thatvideosite.com/view/2052.html


RCE




What's wrong with the alternative?

Because they are not a solution. They are a symbolic statement, which
is fine if that's what floats your boat.

So, in between an Escalade and a hybird, there are no in-between
solutions?


Yes, common sense. If hybrids and being politically correct floats your
boat, do so without preaching.

You are very defensive about all this. It's not absolutely NOTHING to do
with being politically correct. Nada. Zip.


If an Escalade floats your boat, do so, responsibly. The same applies for
everything in between.

Correct. It applies to everything in between. But, if your daily routine
(work, shopping) can't be altered, and sometimes it can't, there is a
floor - a minimum below which you cannot go, in terms of using a vehicle.


I have a question for you. Do you believe that to an extent, the prices of
commodities are determined by demand?

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...


So, in between an Escalade and a hybird, there are no in-between
solutions?


Yes, common sense. If hybrids and being politically correct floats your
boat, do so without preaching.

You are very defensive about all this. It's not absolutely NOTHING to do
with being politically correct. Nada. Zip.

Not defensive at all. I have nothing to be defensive about. I don't have
to burn up fuel in low MPG autos to still enjoy them.

If an Escalade floats your boat, do so, responsibly. The same applies
for everything in between.

Correct. It applies to everything in between. But, if your daily routine
(work, shopping) can't be altered, and sometimes it can't, there is a
floor - a minimum below which you cannot go, in terms of using a vehicle.


I have a question for you. Do you believe that to an extent, the prices of
commodities are determined by demand?


Of course they are, as you say, "to an extent". But prices are also
determined by other factors as well, such as inflation, rising costs of
production, quality, etc.

RCE

"RCE" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...


So, in between an Escalade and a hybird, there are no in-between
solutions?


Yes, common sense. If hybrids and being politically correct floats your
boat, do so without preaching.

You are very defensive about all this. It's not absolutely NOTHING to do
with being politically correct. Nada. Zip.

Not defensive at all. I have nothing to be defensive about. I don't have
to burn up fuel in low MPG autos to still enjoy them.

If an Escalade floats your boat, do so, responsibly. The same applies
for everything in between.

Correct. It applies to everything in between. But, if your daily routine
(work, shopping) can't be altered, and sometimes it can't, there is a
floor - a minimum below which you cannot go, in terms of using a vehicle.


I have a question for you. Do you believe that to an extent, the prices
of commodities are determined by demand?


Of course they are, as you say, "to an extent". But prices are also
determined by other factors as well, such as inflation, rising costs of
production, quality, etc.

RCE


If you personally have the ability to influence one of those factors, and
you are bothered by rising prices, do you think it makes no sense at all to
do your part to effect a change? I'm curious, because I'll bet you call
yourself patriotic.

Here's another thought exercise for you. Don't debate each point which
begins with an asterisk. They're true. Wait for the question at the end.

* It requires energy to build everything, including cars.

* By nature of their design & manufacturing details, some cars are more
expendable than others. Therefore, their early demise and replacement
represents an earlier requirement for more energy use.

* Careful with this one: Regardless of the type of vehicle, some are made
more expendable due to the actions of the people who buy them.


This is the question: What could consumers do to reduce the tendency of
vehicles to be more quickly expendable?

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Here's another thought exercise for you. Don't debate each point which
begins with an asterisk. They're true. Wait for the question at the end.

* It requires energy to build everything, including cars.

* By nature of their design & manufacturing details, some cars are more
expendable than others. Therefore, their early demise and replacement
represents an earlier requirement for more energy use.

* Careful with this one: Regardless of the type of vehicle, some are made
more expendable due to the actions of the people who buy them.


This is the question: What could consumers do to reduce the tendency of
vehicles to be more quickly expendable?


I'll answer your question in the form of another truth asterisk:

* Not all, but some consumers purchase items, including cars, to use and
enjoy, not as investments in longevity.

I've forgotten ... do you currently own a boat? If so, do you enjoy it? Is
it really a necessity?

RCE

"RCE" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Here's another thought exercise for you. Don't debate each point which
begins with an asterisk. They're true. Wait for the question at the end.

* It requires energy to build everything, including cars.

* By nature of their design & manufacturing details, some cars are more
expendable than others. Therefore, their early demise and replacement
represents an earlier requirement for more energy use.

* Careful with this one: Regardless of the type of vehicle, some are made
more expendable due to the actions of the people who buy them.


This is the question: What could consumers do to reduce the tendency of
vehicles to be more quickly expendable?


I'll answer your question in the form of another truth asterisk:

* Not all, but some consumers purchase items, including cars, to use and
enjoy, not as investments in longevity.

I've forgotten ... do you currently own a boat? If so, do you enjoy it?
Is it really a necessity?

RCE


Now you're dancing. Humor me. What could consumers do to reduce the need to
manufacture so many vehicles?

* It requires energy to build everything, including cars.

* By nature of their design & manufacturing details, some cars are more
expendable than others. Therefore, their early demise and replacement
represents an earlier requirement for more energy use.

* Careful with this one: Regardless of the type of vehicle, some are made
more expendable due to the actions of the people who buy them.


This is the question: What could consumers do to reduce the tendency of
vehicles to be more quickly expendable?


Interesting, all this talk about the expendability and wastefulness of
certain types of cars. Odd, considering the nature of the group, that no
one has mentioned the expendability and wastefulness of pleasure boats and
the vehicles required to haul them around, assuming they're towable.
Heresy, or is it that goring an ox that lives a bit too close to home?

Let the stoning of the heretic begin.