Should SUV Driving amount to Drunk Driving?

"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
Tim McNamara wrote:
In article ,
"Jack May" wrote:

"Pat" wrote in message
.
..
On Dec 10, 7:42 pm, "Jack May" wrote:
"donquijote1954" wrote in message

.
com...
Oil will NEVER run out. That is a common fallicy. Eventually it
will get scare and with scarcity comes a higher price. As prices
get higher, substitutes become economical. Then the substitutes
take over the demand.

As gas prices rise, bio-diesel, ethenol, etc. become more viable.
At some point they will take over and replace oil. It's just a
matter of time. Meanwhile, the last of the prohibitively expensive
oil will sit in the ground.
Certainly true.

There are reports though that we are late already and the alternative
energy sources will not be ramped up in time. Of course shortages
will cause a lot of alternative fuel production to ramp up quickly.
Maybe we will make the transition by the thinnest of margins without
shutting down the US economy. It will be a cliff hanger.

Nope, it's too late. The window of opportunity is closed. Oil wars are
the trend of the future. Buckle up. The US economy will be ****ed
beyond all recognition. But it it's any consolation, so will the
Chinese economy.

The foolish and puny humans will have their comeuppance for their
arrogance and faith based beliefs within the next century. If the human
race is lucky, 5% will survive into the 22nd Century.

That pretty well proves you won't be one of them.

"Amy Blankenship" wrote in message
.. .

"George Conklin" wrote in message
...

"Tim McNamara" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Jack May" wrote:

"donquijote1954" wrote in message


...
Bicycles though are the ultimate weapon against Climate Change and
safer roads...

1- They are cheap, so they are DEMOCRATIC.

2- They are healthy, so we keep the Medical Industry on a diet.

3- They are here now, not sometime in the future.

Since the food used to power bikes is air shipped from all over the
world, it is an energy hog.

Not if you shop with a modicum of awareness. It's easy to minimize the
foods you buy from other parts of the world, and it's easy to buy
(relatively) local. Well, at least if your grocery store is also
paying
a modicum of attention. Fortunately mine does (currently all the food
in my fridge, with the exception of condiments, was produced within 200
miles of my home).

If you are eating fruits and veggies all year round you are not
growing
it in the winter.

In my part of the country, you can in fact grow fruit and veggies all year
round. In many others, you can certainly grow them most of the year and
store them for the rest.



People never did do that. There is a limit to what you can store.
Foods were seasonal, and an orange for Xmas was a treat, not something you
did daily.

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 08:34:09 -0500, "George Conklin"
wrote:

"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...


Oh, ********! I have to drive pick-up trucks for work and they are quite
lousy to drive and uncomfortable compared to my Honda Civic, which gets
a real world 35+ mpg in urban driving.

The Honda Civic? My sister-in-law had one about 20 years ago. She
hated it too.

I love my 85 Corolla Seca, I can toss most of my bikes in the back
without removing the front wheel - and that's what matters.

Aeek wrote:
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 08:34:09 -0500, "George Conklin"
wrote:

"Tom Sherman" wrote in message

Oh, ********! I have to drive pick-up trucks for work and they are quite
lousy to drive and uncomfortable compared to my Honda Civic, which gets
a real world 35+ mpg in urban driving.

The Honda Civic? My sister-in-law had one about 20 years ago. She
hated it too.

I love my 85 Corolla Seca, I can toss most of my bikes in the back
without removing the front wheel - and that's what matters.

I love my '98 Dodge Ram half ton, 4WD, V8 pickup truck!

Just toss 12 bikes plus camping gear in the back (and on a
bike rack) and the team's bikes go from MA to IA in about
27 hours with no nicks, scrapes or dings.

And quite honestly, that truck is a very comfortable
driving vehicle. I think the more upright seating is
probably why.

Now the $100 to fully fill the tank isn't so nice. That's
one reason I bicycle commute (though not the only one, as
I've been bike commuting for 15+ years) and leave the
"global warmer" at home for tasks it is more amenable to.


SMH

SMH

"donquijote1954" wrote in message
...
On Dec 11, 1:36 pm, "George Conklin" wrote:
"Jack May" wrote in message

. ..







"donquijote1954" wrote in message
...
On Dec 11, 11:03 am, Bawana wrote:
On Dec 11, 10:13 am, donquijote1954
wrote:

Bicycles though are the ultimate weapon against Climate Change and
safer roads...

Tard.
Bicycles cannot replace the auto.
They certainly cannot replace trucks, buses, planes, and trains.
Do the math.

Only lib-tards celebrate stupidity.
You should toast yourself, you ignorant ****-wit.

What's wrong with the idea of HAVING OPTIONS? Or do you want an
America where all drive SUVs?

The problem with options is that Government often spends far more money
than
can be justified to support those options.

Even after the California legislator gutted transit funds in the budget
this
year, the Bay Area is still spending two thirds of it transportation
funds
for four and a half percent of the travelers and only a third of its
money
on the 90% plus of travelers using personal vehicle.

The increase of funds for personal vehicles if from the $40B bonds the
voters approved to partially repair the damage done to California by the
foolish spending on transit over the last decades.

Having options is the brain dead cliché used by people that don't
understand
that funds are limited and options are often far more expensive than
main
stream transportation. Options usually carry far too few people to be
of
any real value.

But, as you have noted, transit riders tell us they are morally,
culturally
and intellectually superior to people in cars, who are isolated, lonely
and,
yes, as this thread says, basically drunk.-

I haven't said you were drunk. You are worse than drunk when you use a
cell phone at the wheel.

And you are ADDICTED... to oil.

No we want the capability to be free to travel so we can have higher paying
jobs than people that are mobility limited. Besides the alternative fuels
are being developed by people that drive, not by the poor that use
alternative transportation.

Alternative fuels will insure that we continue our freedom of travel and to
have higher paying jobs which are not necessarily in range of alternative
transportation options,

So as usual you have it backwards. Alternative transportation is of little
importance where alternative fuels are of critical importance.

"Dane Buson" wrote in message
...
In rec.bicycles.misc George Conklin wrote:
"Jack May" wrote in message

Having options is the brain dead clich? used by people that don't
understand that funds are limited and options are often far more
expensive than main stream transportation. Options usually carry far
too few people to be of any real value.

But, as you have noted, transit riders tell us they are morally,
culturally and intellectually superior to people in cars, who are
isolated, lonely and, yes, as this thread says, basically drunk.

Oh no George! You've forgotten that people who use sensible
transportation (i.e., not cars) are also hipper, more sexually
desirable, fitter, and all around just more Fabulous!

Just thought I'd help you out that little bit!

Actually research is clear that people that don't use cars tend to be
poorer, less educated, and less socially connected. Being poorer makes you
less sexually desirable and tends to result in being less fit.

"Amy Blankenship" wrote in message
. ..

"Jack May" wrote in message
. ..

The increase of funds for personal vehicles if from the $40B bonds the
voters approved to partially repair the damage done to California by the
foolish spending on transit over the last decades.

I don't think ripping all the roads out would completely repair all the
damage done by them. But I don't see what connection that would have to
transit.

The connection is extremely easy to see even by California politicians. The
large amount of money spent on transit over the last few decades starved the
roads resulting in a crumbling of the infrastructure and increased
congestion.

The funds spent on transit over the past decades, as usual, did nothing to
solve our transportation problems.

"Tim McNamara" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Jack May" wrote:

"donquijote1954" wrote in message

...

Better that than the brain-dead notion you espouse, that trillions of
dollars should be spent subsidizing the use of one car for every
commuter.

The problem is that very little was spent on roads resulting in decaying
roads and increased congestion. The money spent on transit did nothing to
improve transportation. Alternative transportation has proven to be a big
problem, not a solution.

Those problems caused by foolish transit spending resulted in the voters
approving the $40B in bonds.

"donquijote1954" wrote in message
...
On Dec 11, 12:59 pm, "Jack May" wrote:

Having options is the brain dead cliché used by people that don't
understand
that funds are limited and options are often far more expensive than main
stream transportation. Options usually carry far too few people to be of
any real value.-

What's the cost of bike lanes? Or could it be that you are afraid of
the competition?

For example a bike path bridge over a major road or freeway is over $3M.
Bike paths are a fairly high percentage of transportation spending in the SF
Bay Area.

Bike use is down in the noise for commuting to and from work. It is not
real competition to anything. That is the problem with transportation
advocates. They seldom understand the tradeoff of money and usefulness.

wrote:

I've done hundreds of freeway miles on my bike. It's legal in much of
the American west.

No, I didn't hit 70 mph. I didn't need to. I rode the shoulder, or
when that was obstructed, the right lane. My wife and daughter rode
with me on that tour.

Wind blasts from tractor trailers were welcomed. The draft gave us a
slight boost in speed, and never caused a hint of stability
problems.

In fact, the truckers treated us a little _too_ courteously. The vast
majority of them shifted to the empty left lane, even when we were on
the shoulder. That meant the beneficial draft was less than it might
have been.

I rode a freeway (not Interstate, but four lane divided highway)
while touring in Minnesota.

Certainly no real safety issues given the broad breakdown lane
(and the fact that outside the northeast, there don't appear to
be the knuckleheads that drive in that lane to move along a
congested highway a little faster [and end up often killing
someone making proper use of the lane]).

On and off ramps can be a bit of a problem on a congested highway,
though not the highway I pedaled.

However, I did not find it enjoyable riding. The constant whoosh
of cars and roaring truck engines just didn't mix well in my mind
with a bike ride! Furthermore, no shade on really hot days.

I'd much prefer a narrower road with a shoulder to a highway for
riding my bike.


SMH