Why don’t we just agree that anyone who drives anything other than a Toyota Prius (however fuck you spell it) is an asshole?
:rolleyes:
Why don’t we just agree that anyone who drives anything other than a Toyota Prius (however fuck you spell it) is an asshole?
:rolleyes:
2 minutes for idling!
And who, excatly, is this “we” that will stroll around “catching” people? On second thought, I don’t think I want to know.
[QUOTE=World Eater]
Why don’t we just agree that anyone who drives anything other than a Toyota Prius (however fuck you spell it) is an asshole?
No, not an asshole, a conspicuous consumer of energy. Let the Prius owner buy his gas for $1 per gallon. And the SUV pays $10.
A tax like that would encourage energy conservation, that would be a good thing.
Toyota Prius has about 50-55 MPG. My SUV (Hyundai SantaFe) has 25 MPG.
If a Prius owner drives twice as much as I do, then he maches my pollution. That’s why I previously said 10$/gallon for ALL CARS.
I don’t really believe that such tax should exist, but my proposition is at least more fair.
[QUOTE=countyNo, not an asshole, a conspicuous consumer of energy. Let the Prius owner buy his gas for $1 per gallon. And the SUV pays $10.[/QUOTE]
What color is the sky in your world? Seriously.
A conspicuous consumer of energy? Someone drives by in a vehicle you don’t approve of, and from that 5 second event you judge that they are some environment destroying asshole?
You are truly a special kind of stupid.
What color is the sky in your world? Seriously.
A conspicuous consumer of energy? Someone drives by in a vehicle you don’t approve of, and from that 5 second event you judge that they are some environment destroying asshole?
You are truly a special kind of stupid.
So, let’s just say, hypothetically, that my family consists of two adults, two children, and two medium-sized dogs. We all want to go to grandmother’s house. In countyland, I am a conspicuous consumer of energy if I pile them into my Subaru Forester, which gets about 20 miles to the gallon. Instead, to avoid county’s condemnation and extra tax, jeevwoman and I should each two smaller cars, each of which gets, oh, let’s say 29 miles per gallon (the mileage of the Honda Civic according to Consumer Reports). How am I saving energy?
Oh, and did you know that two Honda Civics weigh over 5000 pounds, whereas a Subaru Forester weighs less than 3500? Driving two cars to get the carrying capacity that one SUV provides increases wear on the roadway and the traffic on our roads.
I’ll admit that I get annoyed with extremely large SUVs like Hummers as much as anyone. But I really hate it when people like county try to paint all SUV owners as tree chopping knuckle-dragging NASCAR-watching Coors-Lite drinking troglodytes who should be taxed into extinction when some of us just wanted to find one car that would fit our entire family.
Yes, county, and now you should add Persecuted Idealist to your curriculum vitae. As lovable as you are, it’s hard to take a guy seriously when his fly’s usually down.
For the record, I drive a Dodge Durango, and I think a modified version of your tax idea is actually quite good. Be careful with the “conspicuous consumption” stuff, though, because it sounds a bit like legislating thought crimes, and that way lies peril. I think the resistance you’re seeing here bears that out.
To the OP: After living in and around Boulder for about 7 years, I can say Colorado drivers are just about the worst I’ve ever seen, and it’s a good thing the winters are usually very mild. But despite the “crunch factor,” chalk me up as relieved that many shitty drivers gravitate to Sport Utility Vehicles. In wintry conditions, a lumbering SUV is easy to spot, and if one is moderately defensive, very simple to evade.
.
jeevmon wrote:
…as tree chopping knuckle-dragging NASCAR-watching Coors-Lite drinking troglodytes
Now you keep my family out of this.
I haven’t commented yet (mostly for fear of reprisal) but I have seen this rant boil down to four main points:
Well, here’s my take is this:
SUVs are bigger, and therefore, inherently more dangerous in an accident (to smaller cars, other SUVs and even their own passengers). Their high center of gravity makes them more likely to roll (see how your’s stacks up) and they also use more fuel when driving.
Their main advantages are towing capacity, interior space, though only the largest really outsize large sedans (or minivans), and to a lesser extent their off-road capabilities (yes, few are used this way but it is there). It might also be argued that they give a driver better visibility over smaller cars in heavy traffic.
Does any of this take into account the driver types? No, though you will probably find an expected distribution (similar to that of all “drivers”) within the SUV group (the above NHTSA site seems to corroborate this fact). However, SUVs drive differently than their car counterparts (handling, stopping and such), and one problem with this (and one difficult to asses) is that these drivers may not be accustomed to this so SUVs are driven as a car. These are the dangerous drivers.
Are they the majority? I doubt it, just like their car driver counterparts there are probably less of them than good drivers (though these will stick out in our minds more often). Does this same group exist in the car driving community? Absolutely, but back to the physics (or F-ing physics, as it were), an SUV’s mass makes it significantly more dangerous.
Do SUV drivers consciously choose to pollute and maim? I would like to think not, most probably think “bigger is safer” and leave it at that, some may simply need the larger vehicle. Right or wrong, we can all (usually) justify our actions.
So the problem isn’t so much the SUV owners as a group, but individual drivers and the SUV specifications. For their part, SUVs are becoming safer, more efficient (newer hybrid models) and maybe with time, we will all get better at driving them.
Ok, sorry that was long, I’ll take my share of hits now…
jeevmon wrote:
Now you keep my family out of this.
I haven’t commented yet (mostly for fear of reprisal) but I have seen this rant boil down to four main points:
- SUV drivers are pricks.
- People who claim SUV drivers are pricks, are pricks.
- You’re a prick.
- I’m a prick.
Well, here’s my take is this:
SUVs are bigger, and therefore, inherently more dangerous in an accident (to smaller cars, other SUVs and even their own passengers). Their high center of gravity makes them more likely to roll (see how your’s stacks up) and they also use more fuel when driving.Their main advantages are towing capacity, interior space, though only the largest really outsize large sedans (or minivans), and to a lesser extent their off-road capabilities (yes, few are used this way but it is there). It might also be argued that they give a driver better visibility over smaller cars in heavy traffic.
Does any of this take into account the driver types? No, though you will probably find an expected distribution (similar to that of all “drivers”) within the SUV group (the above NHTSA site seems to corroborate this fact). However, SUVs drive differently than their car counterparts (handling, stopping and such), and one problem with this (and one difficult to asses) is that these drivers may not be accustomed to this so SUVs are driven as a car. These are the dangerous drivers.
Are they the majority? I doubt it, just like their car driver counterparts there are probably less of them than good drivers (though these will stick out in our minds more often). Does this same group exist in the car driving community? Absolutely, but back to the physics (or F-ing physics, as it were), an SUV’s mass makes it significantly more dangerous.
Do SUV drivers consciously choose to pollute and maim? I would like to think not, most probably think “bigger is safer” and leave it at that, some may simply need the larger vehicle. Right or wrong, we can all (usually) justify our actions.
So the problem isn’t so much the SUV owners as a group, but individual drivers and the SUV specifications. For their part, SUVs are becoming safer, more efficient (newer hybrid models) and maybe with time, we will all get better at driving them.
Ok, sorry that was long, I’ll take my share of hits now…
Well at least that makes a modicum of sense, and I respect that you attempted to put forth a rational argument. I still put the onus on the driver, who shouldn’t be behind the wheel of a vehicle (any vehicle) they don’t know how to drive properly.