I understand that line of thinking. The mere fact of more metal surrounding you and a higher seating position renders the driver a false sense of security. People die in SUV’s quite a bit.
And the only real punishment for people like your friend’s wife, is suffering the increased costs along with the rest of us, but even moreso.
Shit, i drive a 40mpg car to work every day and I can still recall when a $5 gas purchase was a meaningful addition to your gas tank.
Feel free to call it something else. A tough image? An independent image? A single image? Whatever you want to call it, most people who drive SUV’s are not doing so because of the utility of the SUV.
I’m correcting you: You are wrong.
I don’t understand your point. Do you dispute that most American SUV drivers drive SUVs primarily unrelated to the utility of the vehicle?
I Love Me, Vol. I
Oh. Since in my opinion, I need my SUV, I’m not one of ‘those’ people. Since I have a need for a larger vehicle, it’s OK.
Gosh, thanks.
Where exactly do you draw the line? Is it your line to draw? You seem to think so.
And unless if you’re someone that I generally consider to be uninformed and hasn’t the first clue of what they are talking about I really didn’t mean to offend you either.
But most don’t.
That’s not the same thing as “needing” it. Anyone who really “needs” an SUV shouldn’t have a problem paying an extra $1000 per year for gas.
That’s true and we all take risks. But as I’ve said before, I really don’t like people who add to my risk just for the sake of image.
I don’t know how to make this any clearer:
(1) There are people who do silly things for the sake of image.
(2) There are people who inconvenience me.
When people do silly things for the sake of image; and those silly things don’t inconvenience me, I’m not particularly incensed.
Conversely, when people do things that inconvenience me, but they have a legitimate reason, I’m not particularly incensed.
It’s when you put those two things together that I get annoyed.
That’s why the example of the 18-wheeler or the motorcycle is irrelevant.
Next? No way. Minivans were hated way before SUVs became popular. For the reasons you mention, plus the large size and opacity. Try seeing around one of those @#$%ers.
And yet, no one ever said a thing about full-sized vans. Huh.
I’m saying it’s dumb and insulting to say that people drive SUVs only because they want to look macho. I’m saying that it’s dumb to buy into stereotypes about people you don’t even know and deciding for them why they do something and whether they need to do that thing or not.
I understand what you’re saying and generally agree. The tone of this thread, even though the OP was hilarious, bothers me amongst some of the members whom are slamming EVERY SUV and owner thereof as somehow a consumerist asshole more concerned about image than utility.
While that may be true of some, I’d venture they’re in the minority amongst SUV owners. Let’s not forget please that the term “SUV” applies to a wide range of vehicle sizes, although most are as large or larger than the average car. That’s great, but that’s precisely why they exist. Families. Towing. Adventuring, storing gear, hauling bikes, camping, not to mention the advantage of 4WD in inclement weather, while also providing some creature comforts and being “inside” rather than the pickup truck alternative.
There are probably a lot of people looking to get rid of their SUV’s because they can’t afford to keep gassing them up like they used to a couple years ago. There are also families like mine whereby we have reasonably sensible vehicles and can barely afford to keep gassing them up.
Many people still hold notes on their SUV’s. Their only real option is to keep driving them, but to find ways to reduce their unnecessary travel.
Fuck, this is America, we are built as a large country around our highways, and the goop that powers our personal vehicles was really cheap for a long time, and now it isn’t. It’s the same shite that happened in the 1970’s…muscle cars were no longer en vogue.
I don’t blame SUV owners for anything, withe the exception of getting one as a personal, uber-wealthy vehicle just to show off…in fact, I pity SUV owners that are struggling and bought them for valid reasons and are now hurting because of gas prices.
Like I said, things change pretty quick and many SUV owners are now left holding the bag for a purchase that at the time made economic sense. And by “at the time”, I mean within the last five years.
That was exactly the point of my OP. There is a glut of SUVs on the used-car market right now. Why? Because the almighty Invisible Hand called bullshit on all the posers pretending to be rugged individualists.
The Market basically said: how much are you willing to pay to maintain your lame-ass, contrived image–your smug feeling of superiority–your false sense of safety that leads you to drive like even more of a festering fuckhole than you already are?
And the fuckholes answered: “not THAT much!” and are now caving in.
We can argue about “need” all day but a reasonable rule of thumb is: if you need to haul bulky and/or heavy shit around or need the power/traction of 4-wheel drive in order to make a living, that is a definition of “need” that most reasonable people would not disagree with. If you “need” an SUV to carry your bicycle or in order to try to get laid by Ann Coulter or Ayn Rand’s ghost, that is a definition of need that many people would find ludicrous.
The ones that need (using a reasonable definition of that word) their SUVs are *not *the knob-gobblers currently flooding craigslist with their desperate ‘for sale’ ads (although I imagine that some of the deals are tempting: FOR SALE-- 2007 Cadillac Escalade-- Like new!! Only driven on freeway to and from work, gym and Starbucks! Extras include 35" HDTV, 4 cellphone chargers and wet bar-ALL on driver’s side!!! $5,000 OBO). No, the ones who need them are keeping them because–get this–they *need *them (the reality-based need, not the Objectivist self-indulgent need).
However, there undoubtedly are some unfortunate folks who need SUVs, pick-ups, 18-wheelers to do their jobs but are being forced to sell them (possibly along with their farms or other small businesses) because they can no longer afford them and must find new lines of work.
In other words-- if (for example) some family farmer is selling the Suburban he uses every day because fuel and feed have become so expensive that he is forced to declare bankruptcy then I have nothing but sympathy for him. OTOH, if some guy is selling his SUV because he could no longer afford to use it as some sort of small-dick compensation then I have nothing but contempt for him.
No doubt that guy is learning slowly but surely that a Swedish Vacuum Penis-Enhancement Pump is a LOT cheaper and every bit as effective.
Well then. It’s come down to this. You certainly have some issues. And while a few SUV owners buy them to make some sort of statement. You just made a bigger one about yourself.
They really are his bag, man?
Wait… I thought SUV drivers were all stupid rednecks with penis envy? Why would they travel? And why would you assume that? Couldn’t I just as easily say, “I’ll bet those assholes jetting around the world for yucks get off the plane and jump in their huge SUVs. If they can afford to fly to Europe, they can probably afford the gas for an SUV. Assholes.”
Okay, now THAT is a bullshit argument. It’s going there anyway? Hell, we might as well charter a Gulfstream! If we don’t, someone else will.
The fact is, if fewer people chose to fly to Europe on vacation, there would be fewer flights to Europe. If you think you get to fly on a clean conscience because the plane would go anyway, you’re just celebrating being a parasite.
Yeah? And you know what else is a luxury? Air conditioning. I hope you don’t have any. And a dishwasher. And a dryer. And a fast computer. And any number of other things that make your life better.
In case you haven’t gotten my point by now, let me use big letters. WE NORTH AMERICANS CONSUME VAST AMOUNTS OF ENERGY. WE COULD CONSUME MUCH, MUCH LESS IF WE WERE WILLING TO GIVE UP OUR HAPPY LIFESTYLES.
Again, take two individuals - one who drives a regular car, and one who drives an SUV. Add up their total energy consumption in a year. Do you think the SUV driver will always be higher?
Let’s once again put some numbers to it: in 2002, the average American used 341 GigaJoules of energy. That’s the energy equivalent of almost 10,000 Liters of gas. The difference between driving an Escalade for a typical year and a Honda Accord is about 1200 L - about 10% of the typical American’s energy consumption.
They average consumption for the G8 countries in the same year was 219 GigaJoules.
Clearly, if the G8 can get by with 130 gigajoules less than you can, you don’t NEED to burn all that energy. For that matter, the G8 probably doesn’t NEED to burn as much as they do. We’re also choosing to burn lots of extra energy to maintain more comfortable lifestyles. Yet you’re picking out one group who made a choice different than yours and calling them out for being wasteful. Look in a damned mirror.
You forgot hypocritical.
And in case anyone is STILL confused - I like airline travel. I’ve got nothing against people flying to Europe. I do all kinds of wasteful things with energy, and I know it. therefore, I think it would be hypocritical, assholish behaviour for me to call out people for driving SUVs and declare myself to be their moral superior. We’re all gluttons. Some are just gluttons in different ways. Learn some tolerance.
And there’s nothing wrong with convincing people to buy smaller vehicles or to make other lifestyle choices that cut down on energy use. Just don’t convince yourself that you are in any way morally superior to them if they choose not to, because there’s a whole lot of things you’ve chosen to do which use energy and which are totally optional to your existence.
Really? So what happened to these people 20 years ago when there were no SUVs? Did they die out?
I’ve been waiting for this one…
The SUV was invented in 1948, when Willys-Overland combined four-wheel drive with the popular all-steel station wagon body.
Edit timed out on me…
Interestingly, it was marketed primarily as a suburban vehicle – I have an ad on my wall from '48 or '49 showing a Jeep Station Wagon parked in front of a nice-looking house with a green lawn and a paved driveway; the apparent owner is a nicely-dressed lady with a little terrier. Another one shows a large group of businessmen stuffed inside a slightly different model of the station wagon. The Jeepster and (to some extent) the CJ were marketed in much the same way – lots of young, affluent people hanging out in the suburbs. (The CJ was also heavily marketed as a farm vehicle; the idea of off-roading for fun didn’t seem to show up until the early '50s.)
Yes, or it’s “Well, once a twice a year I have to haul a trailer in the snow.” Now sure, Snow does mean you might have to buy a Subaru Outback, but those get fairly decent Gas milage. And of course, they (the Outback) aren’t what the OP is talking about when he sez “SUV”- I am sure he means the super-sized 12 MPG dinosaurs.
They “need” a SUV maybe 5 days a year, but they commute with it 200. :rolleyes:
And, if an Outbac is just too samll- There are some decent choices in SUV in the midsized range- Toyota Highlander Hybrid, Ford Hybrid, Saturn Vue Hybrid, etc- all get very decent milage.
You know, our economy is booming right now and a lot of 40+ people who bought their houses in the 80’s or 90’s have seen the prices skyrocket (my moms condo doubled in price 'tween 05 and 07) and are able to get a very good loans, even interest free, with their property as collateral.
So I’m seeing more and more Hummers, Escalades, and yes, sales of Volvo’s premium vehicle, the XC90 V8 SUV was up 18 per cent last year. Directly imported American Gas Guzzlers are quite common on the streets here and I include sports cars (Corvettes and Mustangs), minivans, pickups. They all get louse mpg as compared to most European cars.
Also, thirsty Euro models are very common of course - big Beemers (Beamers?), Mercedes. All in all, my perception are that us Euro types are not more rational than Americans. It’s just that the higher gas price and the lower disposable income makes it less common that Joe Average can afford a big ass SUV, but you can bet that he would, could he afford one.
In short, we are able to pay double or triple the price, not because we’re helping the environment and feel good about it, it’s just that traditionally we have smaller cars, drive less (average in Sweden - which is big as compared to most other Euro countries - is about 10k miles per year) and that prices always have been higher, mostly because it was a great source of tax revenue (as with smokes and booze), not out of concern about the environment.
The recent jack in price (about 20 % in six months) are not taxes anyway, it’s the increased crude price that drives that) has people bitching and moaning and hurting. Because a lower disposable income and the highest gas prize ever make people pay a larger portion of their cash to use their cars the same amount.
Try and smile a little bit… it won’t hurt. Much.
They drove pickup trucks, station wagons, large cars or a Willys.