Gas Price Has Drivers Fuming

Dawgphood001 said:
I recently heard about one guy in Southern California who makes a 376 mile round trip commute to work, 5 days a week.

The source said that he spends $1000 a month on gas.

That dude will be the first to get reamed by these gas prices.
It's called being a trucker. :joke:

I'd like to know what he drives and what he does. That guy must have cash gushing out of his a$$ to be able to do that.
 
VoodooAce said:
If $3 a gallon is starting to hit those in the 50K+ range of income, imagine how it is, and has been for a while now, hitting the 50K- groups.

We get what we deserve. We elected republicans to congress and oilmen to the WH. Liberals predicted this years ago. Don't b!tch at me for pointing out the truth. This is the result I've expected since we elected the moron.

Perhaps you should consider using your brain in concurrence with your mouth next time. What you just said clearly indicates a lack in cognition.

Moderator Action: Flaming - warned.

Stop flaming (you did it earlier in the thread as well), and start reporting.

@ALL: Please don't turn this into a bush-bashing thread.

Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
 
I view rising gas prices as a good thing. Slight personal inconvenience in exchange for better global environmental protection doesn't sound like a bad deal to me.
But I don't own a car, so my view might be a bit biased.
 
In case you haven't seen the news, the reason gas prices are rising is because the big oil companies in the US and in the middle east are taking advantage of the fact that they can up the prices and not have to do anything about it. In tonight's CNN, they were talking about the use of ethanol and why we don't use it more in our fuel than just 10%. From what I heard, Brazil has ceased to import most, if not all, expensive foreign oil. They've also started using E-85. In my city, I remember back sometime last year when gas cost $.99 per gallon. It seems almost inconceivable now that gas costs $2.79 p/g.

I think if we started using E-85, the farmers would make the profits instead of the big oil companies. And that, if anything, could not hurt the economy or the environment any more than it hurts now.
 
As long as you don't use corn.

The corn subsidy system is already hurting everyone. I don't know what switch grass is, but it's gotta be better.
 
CivCynic said:
I think if we started using E-85, the farmers would make the profits instead of the big oil companies.

Don't you mean "Monsanto would make the profits"? Also, most folks don't yet drive FFV vehicles capable of using E85.
 
I heard that a lot of our cars are rated to include ethanol, we're just not told they are.

I heard a professor drone on and one about how methanol was actually an excellent choice ... but he was so boring and vague, I pulled no quotable data.
 
Well, you have to be careful about that. Most cars can probably handle the 10% ethanol blends okay because those aren't sold with different octane ratings. You still get 87/89/92 with those. E85 is something like a 112 octane rating, which cannot be used in vehicles that are not designed for it. FFV (flex fuel vehicles) can handle gas, E85, or any blend in between.

EDIT: I'm personally using 10% Ethanol 89 octane. Simply because my car's manual says 89 is preferred, though it also says it will run fine on 87 octane. Casey's around here sells their 89 octane 10% ethanol blend at the same price everything else sells their 87 octane 100% gasoline. Oddly, Casey's 87 octane 100% gasoline is the more expensive because of this.
 
Since I have no idea what all those numbers really mean, I pretty well should take the bus more, hey?

I don't really understand the numbers. I buy the 'high-grade' stuff when I feel like treating my car, and the cheap stuff normally. You're saying that a car has a preference? I should check the manual, then.
 
Supposedly (I haven't verified it), even at three dollars a gallon, gas prices when adjusted for inflation are lower that they were in the seventies when we had our last big gas crisis.

Around here, the folks who complain the most are the ones driving the 5 mpg land yachts.

Personally, I retired recently so my 100 mile daily round trips came to an end. Nowaday, we don't do enough driving for the price hikes to make much of a difference to us.
 
warpus said:
Yeah, yeah, quit your whining, citizens of the country with the cheapest gas in the developed world!

The US is also the 2nd biggest developed country in the world. Canada has less people than the state of California, and much oil to boot. Our 3$ price is just as bad as an 8$ one in Britain or the Netherlands.
 
El_Machinae said:
I don't really understand the numbers. I buy the 'high-grade' stuff when I feel like treating my car, and the cheap stuff normally. You're saying that a car has a preference? I should check the manual, then.

Absolutely check your manual! That's a myth (at least with the newer vehicles) about a higher octane being a treat for it. You're best off running your vehicle with exactly what the manual says it is designed for. If it isn't specifically designed for 92 octane (premium), all you're doing is wasting money.
 
VRWCAgent said:
Don't you mean "Monsanto would make the profits"? Also, most folks don't yet drive FFV vehicles capable of using E85.
Darn better than basically giving your money to the oil companies. Those bad boys need to go down, if you will. Additionally, I don't see them trying to improve the agricultural technology for farmers or the efficiency of herbicides and pesticides.

My point was that E85 is at least a goal.
 
Sobieski II said:
No one is talking about true and acceptable.

But if people are complaining about gas prices and are acting like it isn't their fault they have a long commute, because America is huge, then I would say their point is void.

You can live close to where you work, but people choose not to.

There isn't a value judgement on my part, I am just saying don't whine about gas if you are silly enough to live 100 miles from work.

I think we can all agree that a 100 mile communte one way is awfully stupid...but it isnt always practical to live in the urban areas, or even a good idea. Massive cities have it much harder when it comes to distributing services (there's a reason why police departments and public school systems are usually worse in the major cities). Goverment becomes congested, etc etc.

If one is going to move to the suburbs, you have to make a value judgement as to what is more important to you. Saving on fuel due to lack of commute time/use of public transportation (and the higher quality of living that comes with that), against a greater political voice and better local goverment services.

Its a pity...those in America with the abilty to use things like public transport likely live closer to work anyways. Back home, I'm screwed...I live so far out of Columbus that I'm not even a suburb, I'm bona fide rural. With no Bus to take (and a pesky highway to prevent me from biking), as far as gas prices go, I'd be screwed.

There could be better smartgrowth plans for certain US cities (and several, like Chicago and DC, are working on them), but in other places, it just isn't practical.
 
VoodooAce said:
We get what we deserve. We elected republicans to congress and oilmen to the WH. Liberals predicted this years ago. Don't b!tch at me for pointing out the truth. This is the result I've expected since we elected the moron.
I might just be a silly small town bumpkin, but how the expletive does electing a Republican have anything to do with the price of crude oil?

The global demand for oil is up, so the price goes up. Is the point that a Democrat would have been able to undermine the expanding economies of foreign countries? :crazyeye:
 
I live 5 minutes ride by bike from my workplace. Don't own a car.
 
Back
Top Bottom