Gas at $4 a gallon is going to cause very serious changes in the US way of life

In My Humble Opinion
121

This is not meant as a smug rejoinder.

All I had to do was go through a stretch where we went from being comfortably +$3000 a month to -$500 a month when the wife was out on disability.

I was amazed at the notches in our belt we could pull in on when our life depended on it. I had three budgets. Normal, one with childcare, and the absolute hold-your-breath-as-long-as-possible, budget.

It frankly made $6/gallon gas seem like child’s play. It’s healthy to review your life. It’s healthy to play what-if.

Staying home with the family for a vacation? That’s kinda fun. Eating home made burgers instead of steak? Yeah, not so bad. Carpooling with the wife and getting another 40 minutes a day with her? That’s pretty cool too.

As far as the ‘You can’t possibly need such a big vehicle ALL The time!’

We had two small vehicles. It meant making two trips if you had to go to the grocery store and anywhere else. It’s not being very fuel efficient if you’ve gotta run all your errands in a hub-n-spoke fashion.

Don’t look at this with fear and anxiety. Look at it as a challenge. How CAN you cut corners to survive this? (as if survival was really at stake)

122

[QUOTE=Belrix]
More things missing from Denver, IMO, is efficient public transit system. RTD is designed to get people into and out-of downtown. Going cross-town or from mid-to-edge is not a good experience. I rode the bus for years when I worked in the tall buildings downtown. Now, working on the NW corner has made the bus impractical. Atlanta, I always thought, had a pretty good system. A rail core with buses running loops connecting to it. Start to finish was bus to rail to bus - often just two transfers. Not as fast as driving, but at least fairly usable. By the way, every try to shop for groceries using the bus? I have - not fun. Again, fine for one, not good for a family.
[/QUOTE]

I agree with this, and to expand a bit…

One thing this country needs desperately is a nationwide, economical and efficient rail network that can get travelers to their destinations quickly, and at a price comparable to the cost of driving. And Amtrak ain’t it (at least, not in its current state). I’d like to see a nationwide rail network modeled on the ones in Japan and Europe, with high-speed connections between major cities, and localized trains that leave at frequent intervals.

The cost will easily run into the hundreds of billions, but I say we need to start working on it NOW so the system will be up and running in, say, ten years.

123

[QUOTE=Belrix]
I guess what I’m saying here is that we don’t have all the pieces today to address this problem.
[/QUOTE]

Absolutely agreed. And probably the crux of what the OP is getting at is are we at that break point where those pieces need to start getting made? I really hope so. I think it’s going to be a painful change, but I think we really need to look at the way we live and commit to changing some things. At least, that’s MHO.

124

[QUOTE=enipla]
Don’t forget, the power DOES come from somewhere. Nothing is a free ride.
[/QUOTE]

But power plants on average make far more efficient use of fuel than individual cars. Even with transmissions losses through powerlines, overall, a rechargeable electric vehicle will use less energy than an internal combustion vehicle. Of course, we’ll have to revamp the electric grid to accomodate the drain of thousands of people recharging their cars at once, but it’s not an impractical solution.

125

[QUOTE=Throatwarbler Mangrove]
…or in other words, live like Americans.
[/QUOTE]

… and Canadians

126

I’ve discovered that if I stop driving like I usually do, I get enough increased gas milage that it off-sets quite a bit of the price increase. Add a little proper planning to shopping trips and the whole thing becomes a lot less painful.

127

[QUOTE=masterofnone]
Wow… that’s just… Stoopid! The hell with saving gas, who in their right mind would waste 2 hours a day stuck in traffic instead of moving from one suburb to another? It’s not like they can have some generations-old connection with the land!
[/QUOTE]

{My real last name is Murphy :slight_smile: }

One of Murphy’s laws:

If you move to be closer to work…you WILL lose your job. The job you find to replace it will be as long or longer commute than the one you had before you moved.

Corollary - No one is allowed to live near work for very long.

:smiley:

128

[QUOTE=BlinkingDuck]
{My real last name is Murphy :slight_smile: }

One of Murphy’s laws:

If you move to be closer to work…you WILL lose your job. The job you find to replace it will be as long or longer commute than the one you had before you moved.

Corollary - No one is allowed to live near work for very long.

:smiley:
[/QUOTE]

[tangent] BlinkingDuckMurphys would make a GREAT band name. [/tangent]

129

[QUOTE= masterofnone]

Wow… that’s just… Stoopid! The hell with saving gas, who in their right mind would waste 2 hours a day stuck in traffic instead of moving from one suburb to another? It’s not like they can have some generations-old connection with the land!
[/QUOTE]

In my case, my job is moving. I live less than a mile from my current office, and my husband’s office is about 1/2 mile from our house. My co-workers and I have just been informed that our office is relocating to a building about 30 miles away. It’s great for the people that are commuting from that direction, but it sucks for me. It doesn’t make sense to move when my husband’s job is here, so I’m going to end up paying about $4000 per year on commuting expenses.

130

[QUOTE=Unintentionally Blank]
[tangent] BlinkingDuckMurphys would make a GREAT band name. [/tangent]
[/QUOTE]

Blinking Ducks would make a great band name…no need for Murphies!

131

[QUOTE=WVmom]
In my case, my job is moving. I live less than a mile from my current office, and my husband’s office is about 1/2 mile from our house. My co-workers and I have just been informed that our office is relocating to a building about 30 miles away. It’s great for the people that are commuting from that direction, but it sucks for me. It doesn’t make sense to move when my husband’s job is here, so I’m going to end up paying about $4000 per year on commuting expenses.
[/QUOTE]

HA! The Law of Murfs strikes again!

So sad that your husband will lose his job soon.

{I keed I keed - D&R}

132

[QUOTE=WVmom]
In my case, my job is moving. I live less than a mile from my current office, and my husband’s office is about 1/2 mile from our house. My co-workers and I have just been informed that our office is relocating to a building about 30 miles away. It’s great for the people that are commuting from that direction, but it sucks for me. It doesn’t make sense to move when my husband’s job is here, so I’m going to end up paying about $4000 per year on commuting expenses.
[/QUOTE]

That sucks!

133

My wife’s daily commute is five miles round trip; that amounts to twenty-five miles per week. Her car gets an average of 28 MPG city driving; round it down to twenty-five. At $4.00 per gallon, she does a one gallon per week commute. Her job is within easy walking distance but she is required to dress “professionally” and to present a “professional” appearance. Anyone walking 2.5 miles in Florida, in the summer time, is going to be drenched with sweat and their appearance is NOT going to be “professional” at the end of her trip. It should be obvious that riding a bike is going to result in at least an equal sweat factor; what is the suggested solution in her case?

ETA: Forget the $4.00 per gallon quoted above; her commute would be a one gallon commute if it cost $50.00 per gallon. Which would necessitate another look at the sweat factor.

134

Here is something else to throw in the mix.

Pets.

As much as I loath the idea of moving into a multi-unit structure myself, I also want my dogs to have a yard to do their business in. We have a doggie door, so if I have to be away for 10 or 12 hours it’s not a problem. And I wouldn’t keep them cooped up inside for 8 hours any way (hence the doggie door).

I also take them for a walk down our gravel road every day.

I live 25 miles from work. My friend lives 11 miles from work. He has to go home at lunch to walk his dog. I drive 50 miles a day, he drives 44.

:shrug: There is a lot to consider.

135

[QUOTE=LouisB]
…what is the suggested solution in her case?

ETA: Forget the $4.00 per gallon quoted above; her commute would be a one gallon commute if it cost $50.00 per gallon. Which would necessitate another look at the sweat factor.
[/QUOTE]

I think, frankly, at $5 a week for commuting expenses, you don’t have much of a problem. My commute is $5 a day, $100 a month.

From $2 to $4 a gallon adds $50 a month to my expenses - pretty easily absorbed. Doubling again to $8 a gallon would be painful to find another $100 a month for gas, but it could be managed.

Compare that against the $3.50 to ride the bus daily (and quadruple my commute times) and it’s still a pretty good deal.

The gas-price pains are most painfully felt in my upcoming trip to see my family. $2 a gallon would save me $200 on this trip. We’re compensating by driving one leg all in one day (1000 miles) thus saving $70 on a hotel room and by packing sandwich making stuff, skipping the convenience of drive-through meals. It’s probably $100 savings overall.

A couple times a year our family takes a “big circle” trip to sight-see in Colorado, that’s an $80 day-trip now. Driving up to Rocky Mountain National Park for a picnic day is going to be a $50 just for gas.

It’s giving up the extras that hurt more.

Enipla, that’s one reason I have cats - as much as I like dogs, they require a lot more attention than cats do.

136

[QUOTE=LouisB]
what is the suggested solution in her case?
[/quote]
The solution already being used: live close to work.

137

[QUOTE=Belrix]
Oh - and a follow-up question to you UK dopers that don’t understand us “lazy” Americans: What’s the farthest you’ve driven for a trip? I’m pretty sure you can’t go more than a couple hundred miles an any direction without getting wet.

…

America (most UK-ers don’t seem to get this) is a very big place.

[/QUOTE]

I’m pretty sure most Europeans recognize how big America is, we do, after all, have schools this side of the Atlantic.

One thing’s for certain, though—American exceptionalism gets tiring quickly. It’s not as if British people never venture outside of their country (I did a 950 mile roundtrip from Edinburgh to Snowdonia last weekend, so you’re wrong about the size of the UK), as people regularly make road trips to France and the rest of the continent. However, the majority recognize a 1000 mile road-trip, even if visiting family, is a luxury, not a God-given right, in the same way that flying to Australia to see family is a luxury.

138

[QUOTE=Capt. Ridley’s Shooting Party]
I’m pretty sure most Europeans recognize how big America is, we do, after all, have schools this side of the Atlantic.

One thing’s for certain, though—American exceptionalism gets tiring quickly. It’s not as if British people never venture outside of their country (I did a 950 mile roundtrip from Edinburgh to Snowdonia last weekend, so you’re wrong about the size of the UK), as people regularly make road trips to France and the rest of the continent. However, the majority recognize a 1000 mile road-trip, even if visiting family, is a luxury, not a God-given right, in the same way that flying to Australia to see family is a luxury.
[/QUOTE]

There’s book knowledge and there’s visceral knowledge. The entirety of the UK could fit neatly into Texas, our second biggest state, for example. I think that some posters’ responses like “just move closer” are more likely to be based on an emotional, personal experience rather than a careful statistical, cost-benefit analysis of travel costs vs area costs vs a dozen other influences.

One thing about having a big, nearly homogeneous country is that families here are often widely distributed. While UK-ers may travel to France as a luxury, it’s, I’ll guess, far less likely they’re visiting family while they’re there. Luxuries are more easily given up than trips made so I can see my parents and my children can learn more about their grandparents.

My upcoming 2500 mile trip is more, for lack of a better word, obligatory than a luxury vacation would be. The distance, though, does make it more a semi-annual thing - less than I’d like but compensations have to be made.

An interesting statistic would be a by-country comparison of the average distances between parents and their adult children.

In fact, maybe it should be a poll.

ETA - looks like the UK could fit neatly into Michigan, our 11th biggest. I was comparing square kilometers vs square miles the first time.

139

I have to agree with Capt. Ridley on this - I’m getting tired of hearing Americans saying that Europeans just don’t understand how big this country is. I think that most of them do know, and some Americans are just using this to excuse this country’s attitude towards this car-loving society of ours.

Let’s face it, most of us don’t *have * to live so far away from our jobs, we just do it so we can have a bigger house or a pet or better access to parks or schools. Relatively cheap gas has enabled us to afford to do this and not demand better mass transit systems, up until now.

140

[QUOTE=Belrix]

One thing about having a big, nearly homogeneous country is that families here are often widely distributed. While UK-ers may travel to France as a luxury, it’s, I’ll guess, far less likely they’re visiting family while they’re there. Luxuries are more easily given up than trips made so I can see my parents and my children can learn more about their grandparents.
[/QUOTE]

I absolutely agree with this. No, you don’t have to fly home for Christmas every year, but when the alternative is going for years without seeing your family, it sucks. It’s not a necessity, but it’s not exactly the same as jetting off to Aruba for the week. I suspect that as a long-term trend, as gas prices remain high, we’ll see fewer people willing to move so far away from their families.