 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Dodge / Dodge Trucks / July 2007OT<<HybridS>>
Anybody have any good info on them? Which is better and so on. Would like opinion based on fact not supposition. tia Roy > Anybody have any good info on them? Which is better and so on. Would like > opinion based on fact not supposition. > tia > > Roy I know that Diesel Power had a comparision/write up about them, comparing them to diesels. I think I still have it, so if you want, I can get you some info out of there. From reading it though, Toyota has the market cornered with hybirds, with the Prius, Highlander and Camary. Not say there are not others, but the Toy's seem to have gotten the best comments, efficiency and are true hybrids, not flex fuel or "cross over" vehicles. > Anybody have any good info on them? Which is better and so on. Would like > opinion based on fact not supposition. > tia Toyota has the best reviews but Honda is cheaper and good quality. But I really do not see the purpose of the hybrids. They command a hefty premium in price that will never be recouped from gas savings. >> Anybody have any good info on them? Which is better and so on. Would like >> opinion based on fact not supposition. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > But I really do not see the purpose of the hybrids. They command a hefty > premium in price that will never be recouped from gas savings. And, resale will be absolutely horrid when they reach the end of the typical battery life. Based upon the current state of the art, I would avoid hybrids like the plague... Toyota will soon find that paybacks are hell.... JMHO Mike >>> Anybody have any good info on them? Which is better and so on. Would >>> like opinion based on fact not supposition. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > JMHO Seems like they are like a bic lighter. After the 100,000 miles or 8 year battery warranty runs out ya throw them away. > Mike >>>> Anybody have any good info on them? Which is better and so on. Would >>>> like opinion based on fact not supposition. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Seems like they are like a bic lighter. After the 100,000 miles or 8 year > battery warranty runs out ya throw them away. That would be an awful expensive Bic. That is purdy much what I've gathered too. When it's time to replace the batteries, you're gonna cry. I'm not sold on the hybrids quite yet but give them a few more years and they may be ok. Denny >>>>> Anybody have any good info on them? Which is better and so on. Would >>>>> like opinion based on fact not supposition. [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > I'm not sold on the hybrids quite yet but give them a few more years and > they may be ok. I've been doing a bunch of reading on them. Seems that the deal on the batteries isn't what it use to be. Under 2K for a replacement. Toyota warranty is for 100K or 8 years. 40mpg is nothing to sneeze at. For me, it would be a saving just to use regular gas. Took a Toyota Camry hybrid for a spin yesterday.it accelerated and changed lanes on the highway like the wifes Magnum V6. I was impressed with it. Roy > Denny > >>>>> Anybody have any good info on them? Which is better and so on. Would > >>>>> like opinion based on fact not supposition. [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > > - Show quoted text - So, does that mean we can start calling you a wabbit loving tree hugger!! <bg> >> >>>>> Anybody have any good info on them? Which is better and so on. >> >>>>> Would [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > So, does that mean we can start calling you a wabbit loving tree > hugger!! <bg> No, you can call me a guy that is having a hard time justifying a 425+ HP car to drive a couple of miles to the beach. I bought Charger with the thought that I'd be making the trip from FL to MA a few times a year for a number of years. Now with the wife deciding to move totally to FL that won't be happening. Also I like toys. If it isn't going to be driven a bunch the Charger ceases to be a toy. So a transportation type car is in order. As far as loving a rabbit and hugging a tree goes, well. the rabbit is something only a mother could love. I figure his wife is a frustrated social worker. <BFG> >>> >>>>> Anybody have any good info on them? Which is better and so on. >>> >>>>> Would [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] > something only a mother could love. I figure his wife is a frustrated > social worker. <BFG> Come on now Roy...Gimme a big ole hug......... <GBMFG> Denny >>>> >>>>> Anybody have any good info on them? Which is better and so on. >>>> >>>>> Would [quoted text clipped - 63 lines] > > Denny I couldn't get my arm's around ya! <VBG> Roy > >>>> "Denny" <wddo...@woh.rr.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 73 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Sounds like a group hug is needed! <g> >> >>>> "Denny" <wddo...@woh.rr.com> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 91 lines] > > Sounds like a group hug is needed! <g> You can hug the Idiot for us....... Not to mention your buddy Merylee..... <BG> Denny >>>>> >>>>> Anybody have any good info on them? Which is better and so on. >>>>> >>>>> Would [quoted text clipped - 67 lines] > > I couldn't get my arm's around ya! <VBG> I can't help you're only 4' 1" tall...... Denny >So, does that mean we can start calling you a wabbit loving tree >hugger!! <bg> I think the only tree Roy is gonna hug is the one the wabbit is hanging in, Larry... mac Please remove splinters before emailing >>So, does that mean we can start calling you a wabbit loving tree >>hugger!! <bg> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > mac Bro, it would take a chain fall to lift that fat assed rabbit of the ground Roy > I've been doing a bunch of reading on them. Seems that the deal on the > batteries isn't what it use to be. Under 2K for a replacement. Toyota > warranty is for 100K or 8 years. 40mpg is nothing to sneeze at. The cost savings just isn't there. A Honda Civic DX is $16000 and gets 30mpg city. A Honda Civic Hybrid is $23000 and gets 50mpg city. Lets say someone drives well over the national average at 20,000 miles per year. 20000/30 * $3/gallon = $2000 20000/50 * $3/gallon = $1200 A savings of $800/year. It would take 8.75 years to make up for the higher price of the hybrid. Thats not even counting the difference in tax on the two cars which where I live would be $7000 * 8% sales tax = $560 more. Furthermore most people don't drive 20,000 miles a year (I do) so it would be even worse for many. >> I've been doing a bunch of reading on them. Seems that the deal on the >> batteries isn't what it use to be. Under 2K for a replacement. Toyota [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > more. Furthermore most people don't drive 20,000 miles a year (I do) so > it would be even worse for many. Not to think of the couple of grand for new batteries if you keep it that long.... Denny >> I've been doing a bunch of reading on them. Seems that the deal on the >> batteries isn't what it use to be. Under 2K for a replacement. Toyota [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > more. Furthermore most people don't drive 20,000 miles a year (I do) so > it would be even worse for many. You may very well be correct. I guess it is how you look at it and what you are comfortable with. I'll be moving from a car that get's 17-19 on the highway and around 15 in the city. Also it requires premium fuel. So until the dust settles from the move and I know exactly where we are at, it looks pretty good. > You may very well be correct. I guess it is how you look at it and what you > are comfortable with. I'll be moving from a car that get's 17-19 on the > highway and around 15 in the city. Also it requires premium fuel. So until > the dust settles from the move and I know exactly where we are at, it looks > pretty good. People are interested in mpg for one reason. To save money. But if the higher mpg cars cost more than the gas savings then its simply not economical no matter how high the mpg of they hybrid. So far in almost all cases a 100% gas economy car is a better deal if the reason for buying is to save money. Hybrids don't save money. > People are interested in mpg for one reason. To save money. Some people ... not all people. > buying is to save money. Hybrids don't save money. They save some money depending on the manufacturer (cost of hybrid option varies) and how it is driven. However, (dare I open this can of worms?), MANY (forward thinking) people that purchase hybrids do so because it saves $$ on fuel. Less fuel is burned resulting in lower air/water pollution. This helps with *hidden* costs that you have not factored in like cleaning the water and air (tax dollars) that have been polluted by combustion engines. Another hidden cost is doctor visits (insurance/out-of-pocket) for allergies or respiratory illness (including cancer) irritated or *caused* by particulate matter in the air stirred up or created by combustion engines. These hidden costs increase every year. Also, hybrids require less maintenance. The engine doesn't run all of the time. This doubles sometimes triples the savings over the life of the vehicle. Fewer oil changes, filter (air/fuel/oil). Tires on hybrids are typically much smaller and cheaper than its regular full combustion counterpart. To save money AND the environment, in order: walk or bike, public transit, all electric vehicles, hybrids. Craig C. >> People are interested in mpg for one reason. To save money. > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > To save money AND the environment, in order: walk or bike, public > transit, all electric vehicles, hybrids. you make very valid points With the cars I've owned in the past I did more than my share of dirtying thing's up. Hell, on a couple of them I had to pay the friggin' gas guzzler tax. > Craig C. >> People are interested in mpg for one reason. To save money. > > Some people ... not all people. True, some want to be environmentally cleaner. But most don't have the luxury of extra money sitting around to afford a hybrid for that reason. > They save some money depending on the manufacturer (cost of hybrid > option varies) and how it is driven. The SUV Hybrids are around a $4500/difference and thus break even in gas savings over a 3-5 year period. But the Civic, Prius and Camry won't come close. > However, (dare I open this can of > worms?), MANY (forward thinking) people that purchase hybrids do so > because it saves $$ on fuel. Less fuel is burned resulting in lower > air/water pollution. Less fuel burned does not in itself equate to lower emissions. Look at the horrible emissions of motorcycles...averaging many times the pollution of typical cars yet getting 40-70mpg. Most people do not have the extra money to spend on a car for the purpose of cutting pollution. Savings in the wallet has got to be the driving force in order to get the masses to widely purchase hybrids. They sold well in their first few years but thats slowed. Honda is dropping the Civic Hybrid for the lack of demand. > This helps with *hidden* costs that you have not factored in like > cleaning the water and air (tax dollars) that have been polluted by > combustion engines. That is not a cost directly born by the consumer in their wallets. If the government were to give a large tax rebate for purchasers of hybrids then it could help. > Another hidden cost is doctor visits > (insurance/out-of-pocket) for allergies or respiratory illness > (including cancer) irritated or *caused* by particulate matter in the > air stirred up or created by combustion engines. These hidden costs > increase every year. True but thats across the board and not recognized on a per individual basis. A person can't cut their costs of Dr's bills by purchasing a hybrid. Only when almost everyone does so. > Also, hybrids require less maintenance. The engine doesn't run all of > the time. This doubles sometimes triples the savings over the life of > the vehicle. Electric motors wear out as well. They are far from maintenance free. Only time will tell what the expenses of a hybrid are. > Tires on hybrids are typically much smaller and cheaper than its regular full > combustion counterpart. Tires are the same size on the Civic, Highlander and Escape. Which vehicles are you referring to when you say typically? > Less fuel burned does not in itself equate to lower emissions. Look > at the horrible emissions of motorcycles...averaging many times the > pollution of typical cars yet getting 40-70mpg. I've never heard that before. I'm not saying I don't beleive you, but it just doesn't sound right to me. Are 2-cycle motorcycles included in this average?  SignatureKen > I've never heard that before. I'm not saying I don't beleive you, but it > just doesn't sound right to me. Are 2-cycle motorcycles included in this > average? It's very true. Motorcycles don't have the emission requirements that cars must adhere to. A typical motorcycle pollutes far more than an average car. Heck, even a lawnmower does. 2-cycles pollute even worse and are why their sales are now outlawed in some states. They're not included in most studies I've seen because they are generally not made for street use. I have heard figures of 10-20 times more pollution from a motorcycle but looking at a few reports suggest its closer to 2-3 times. I'll have to see if I can find a few studies from reputable sources. >> I've never heard that before. I'm not saying I don't beleive you, >> but it just doesn't sound right to me. Are 2-cycle motorcycles [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > but looking at a few reports suggest its closer to 2-3 times. I'll > have to see if I can find a few studies from reputable sources. I'd like to see the figures. I always thought a well-tuned motorcycle was very clean. I guess I was wrong about that. SignatureKen >> I've never heard that before. I'm not saying I don't beleive you, but >> it just doesn't sound right to me. Are 2-cycle motorcycles included in [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > looking at a few reports suggest its closer to 2-3 times. I'll have to > see if I can find a few studies from reputable sources. Some/All new 4 cycle mowers have catalytic converters integrated in the muffler. I picked up a v-shaft Tecumseh 6.5 off Ebay (electric start, $145ish shipped - starts great off a 4.5 ah sealed 12v battery, and has a generator) to replace a bent shaft B&S 3.5 on my push mower. Using Rotella T HD30 oil changed at 3 and 20 hours. After 25 hours of use the exhaust ports are *clean* like brand new. This leads me to believe the exhaust stream is significantly cleaner than it was in the past. More on topic, I believe its 10-20x more pollution based on maximum carrying ability of the vehicle. Most cars are driven by one person, carrying very darned little in the car. Something that could easily fit on a 100cc scooter. Of course, thats still 2-3x more pollution than a clean running 3Lish V6-powered car would get making the same route, despite that 3Lish v6 powered car using, say, 3x more fuel in the process (so lets say.... 10x more pollution per gasoline unit burned) Now, theres nothing saying this couldn't be fixed. Theres no rule saying small engines have to be dirty. Its up to the customer (or the customer's government, in today's society) to dictate the requirement for cleaner engines. > Some/All new 4 cycle mowers have catalytic converters integrated in the > muffler. I haven't heard any federal laws of such. I have heard of a few states that have recently started passing laws controlling small engine pollution. Now if only they would get rid of those dang leaf blowers that kick up tons of dust all over my car! > Now, theres nothing saying this couldn't be fixed. Theres no rule > saying small engines have to be dirty. Its up to the customer (or the > customer's government, in today's society) to dictate the requirement > for cleaner engines. Thats true and is happening on a state level for small engines in garden equipment. Still little seems to be going on with motorcycles. > >> People are interested in mpg for one reason. To save money. > > > > Some people ... not all people. > > True, some want to be environmentally cleaner. But most don't have the > luxury of extra money sitting around to afford a hybrid for that reason. Make up your mind Miles. First you say that the economy is doing fantastic and everyone is making much more money and now you are saying that most cannot afford a few thousand more for a hybrid. It's either one way or the other Miles. The sad part is that the majority believe as you sadly do, that if it doesn't put more money in their pocket, screw it and the future. > > They save some money depending on the manufacturer (cost of hybrid > > option varies) and how it is driven. > > The SUV Hybrids are around a $4500/difference and thus break even in gas > savings over a 3-5 year period. But the Civic, Prius and Camry won't > come close. Yea, I guess that fuel prices are where they will stay for the next 5 years, LOL! > > However, (dare I open this can of > > worms?), MANY (forward thinking) people that purchase hybrids do so [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > the horrible emissions of motorcycles...averaging many times the > pollution of typical cars yet getting 40-70mpg. Hahahahaha, more right wing spin. Sure, motorcycles currently do not have the emissions equipment that cars do and will have somewhat higher PPM counts than a car, they also (with the exception of the super bikes) put out way less volume than a typical car which also equates to less polution. This of course, means nothing because he was talking about hybrids and they have the same emissions equipment as any other car and put out way less volume so in this case, less fuel burned DOES directly equate to lower emissions. > Most people do not have the extra money to spend on a car for the > purpose of cutting pollution. Savings in the wallet has got to be the > driving force in order to get the masses to widely purchase hybrids. > They sold well in their first few years but thats slowed. Honda is > dropping the Civic Hybrid for the lack of demand. Typical short sighted thinking. Saving fuel now will equate to savings over the long term because reduced demand for oil will hold the price lower over the long term (supply and demand). > > This helps with *hidden* costs that you have not factored in like > > cleaning the water and air (tax dollars) that have been polluted by [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > the government were to give a large tax rebate for purchasers of hybrids > then it could help. Agreed but unlikely to happen. At least until it is way to late to do any good which is sadly the typical short sighted thinking method, much like global warming. > > Another hidden cost is doctor visits > > (insurance/out-of-pocket) for allergies or respiratory illness [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > basis. A person can't cut their costs of Dr's bills by purchasing a > hybrid. Only when almost everyone does so. And as long as everyone feels this way, it will never happen. > > Also, hybrids require less maintenance. The engine doesn't run all of > > the time. This doubles sometimes triples the savings over the life of > > the vehicle. > > Electric motors wear out as well. They are far from maintenance free. > Only time will tell what the expenses of a hybrid are. It depends on the type of electric motor Miles. Brushless motors have few wear parts (the bearings) and with sophisticated control system, can be protected from burnout due to lockup andf overheating as well. > > Tires on hybrids are typically much smaller and cheaper than its regular full > > combustion counterpart. > > Tires are the same size on the Civic, Highlander and Escape. Which > vehicles are you referring to when you say typically? SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > Make up your mind Miles. First you say that the economy is doing fantastic > and everyone is making much more money and now you are saying that most > cannot afford a few thousand more for a hybrid. Oh geez. You'll find a liberal reason to argue about anything!! The economy is doing very well. You can't show me a dang thing to prove otherwise can you? Oh ya, you know someones neighbors, brothers uncle that is having problems in your area...sorry, I forgot! Sorry TBone, the vast majority of people who buy hybrids do so thinking they will save money. Their sales have gone up as the price of gas has gone up which equated to higher demand for economy cars in general. So how many hybrid cars have you bought lately to do your part? Oh ya, you own a gas guzzler truck along with those hybrids!! > Hahahahaha, more right wing spin. Sure, motorcycles currently do not have > the emissions equipment that cars do and will have somewhat higher PPM > counts than a car, they also (with the exception of the super bikes) put out > way less volume than a typical car which also equates to less polution. WRONG TBone. Motorcycles put out more pollution per mile that a typical car. Not PPM. Do some research before making more un-researched off the top of your head guesses. > > Make up your mind Miles. First you say that the economy is doing fantastic > > and everyone is making much more money and now you are saying that most [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > otherwise can you? Oh ya, you know someones neighbors, brothers uncle > that is having problems in your area...sorry, I forgot! Sorry Miles, but the economy is doing well for those who already were doing well. Perhaps it is you that needs to do a little research. > Sorry TBone, the vast majority of people who buy hybrids do so thinking > they will save money. Their sales have gone up as the price of gas has > gone up which equated to higher demand for economy cars in general. So > how many hybrid cars have you bought lately to do your part? Oh ya, you > own a gas guzzler truck along with those hybrids!! Do you have proof to back this up? My wife wants one and her concern is the planet, not saving a few cents on fuel. > > Hahahahaha, more right wing spin. Sure, motorcycles currently do not have > > the emissions equipment that cars do and will have somewhat higher PPM [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > car. Not PPM. Do some research before making more un-researched off > the top of your head guesses. Lets see some factual data to back this load of crap up and even then, it still doesn't matter as it was in relation to a hybrid that has the same emissions equipment as a conventional car. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > Sorry Miles, but the economy is doing well for those who already were doing > well. Perhaps it is you that needs to do a little research. Which means what? Is the economy doing well for the vast majority or not? Unemployment is down, new jobs rate is increasing, the median income is rising which means the new jobs are not low end. So please tell me what data source you have that says the economy has worsened. Show me the numbers TBone. Put up, or shut up. > Do you have proof to back this up? My wife wants one and her concern is the > planet, not saving a few cents on fuel. Oh ya, just like your figures that say the economy is bad, unemployment is bad all based on a few people you know. Good grief! Now go buy that Hybrid. Why haven't you already since you talk about how we all need to help the environment. > > Sorry Miles, but the economy is doing well for those who already were doing > > well. Perhaps it is you that needs to do a little research. > > Which means what? Which means that while most of the rich are getting richer, the rest of us are either for the most part static or taking the hit. > Is the economy doing well for the vast majority or > not? NOT. > Unemployment is down, More smoke and mirrors. First of all, the unemployment figures are based on the number of people collecting so once they run out of time, they come off of the unemployed numbers as well. Second, the unemployment figure does not take into account how much the new job pays compared to the old one so if a person loses a $60,000 a year job due to outsourcing and takes another at Wallmart making $25,000, the unemployment number looks good but the lifestyle of that family is significantly reduced. > new jobs rate is increasing, Where Miles, in the lower paying service industry and even lower paying retail. > the median income is rising which means the new jobs are not low end. It means no such thing as you have yet to give me a link to single person income, just that family of four crap where all income is added, including childrens. For example, a person loses his $50,000 a year job due to outsourcing. He finds another job but due to the number of people with his skills looking for work due to the same outsourcing, he can only get $35,000. Now that is not enough money so the wife gets a job as well. She gets one at HD for around $25,000 a year (which is really high for HD) but they have two kids and one is to young to be left at home alone they now have to pay for day care which sucks about $12,000 in increased expenses not to mention the increased cost of living that comes from two people working. Of course, they can no longer afford to give their son Johnny his allowence anymore so he gets a part time job delivering papers and cutting lawns and makes around $3,000 a year. Now your bullshit median income will show this family with an increase of $13,000 a year and will attribute that to the "booming" economy which is complete bullshit when in reality it is due to a piss poor economy for most and while they are bringing in more money, their disposable income and quality of life is significantly reduced. > So please tell me what data source you have that says the economy has worsened. > Show me the numbers TBone. Put up, or shut up. Read above and I have said this before. Provide a link showing individual income which would be the only valid thing that would prove you right otherwise, STFU already. > > Do you have proof to back this up? My wife wants one and her concern is the > > planet, not saving a few cents on fuel. > > Oh ya, just like your figures that say the economy is bad, unemployment > is bad all based on a few people you know. Actually Miles, it has nothing to do with the people I know. Gubberment reports say that many of the service jobs that have appeared to replace the massive amount of factory jobs that have left are lower paying and have less or no benefits and as you like to say, go look it up. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > Which means that while most of the rich are getting richer, the rest of us > are either for the most part static or taking the hit. So the economic indicators only measure whats happening with the very small % of rich people? The same indicators used during Clintons era that you tout has having a great economy? Do you always pull ideas out of thin air or do you have some solid data to back up this 'only the rich are doing well' guess? >> Is the economy doing well for the vast majority or >> not? > > NOT. Hmm...the same indicators used by the liberals during Clintons era suggest otherwise. >> Unemployment is down, > > More smoke and mirrors. First of all, the unemployment figures are based on > the number of people collecting so once they run out of time, they come off > of the unemployed numbers as well. Smoke and mirrors is right TBone. If your statement were true then the new jobs created and total workforce numbers would not be going up. > Second, the unemployment figure does not > take into account how much the new job pays compared to the old one so if a > person loses a $60,000 a year job due to outsourcing and takes another at > Wallmart making $25,000, the unemployment number looks good but the > lifestyle of that family is significantly reduced. Then that would be reflected in the median income reports which clearly show an increase, not a decrease. Once again you pull concepts out of thin air to support your beliefs rather than reality. > Where Miles, in the lower paying service industry and even lower paying > retail. No Tom, the median income is rising, not falling. The only way for that to happen is if the new jobs or raises are rather high. The median income isn't a poor salary. It's middle class Tom. > It means no such thing as you have yet to give me a link to single person > income, just that family of four crap where all income is added, including > childrens. And that income is rising faster than inflation. > For example, a person loses his $50,000 a year job due to > outsourcing. He finds another job but due to the number of people with his > skills looking for work due to the same outsourcing, he can only get > $35,000. The number of new jobs while very good doesn't support your claim. Besides, you used the very same economic figures to say why the economy was so good under Clinton. Show comparable provable stats Tom. > Actually Miles, it has nothing to do with the people I know. Gubberment > reports say that many of the service jobs that have appeared to replace the > massive amount of factory jobs that have left are lower paying and have less > or no benefits and as you like to say, go look it up. No Tom they do no such thing. Show me the 'Government' reports and not a liberal commentary site. > > Which means that while most of the rich are getting richer, the rest of us > > are either for the most part static or taking the hit. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > of thin air or do you have some solid data to back up this 'only the > rich are doing well' guess? LOL, I never said that it only applies to the rich but it can only apply to the rich if they are the ones making all of the money. > >> Is the economy doing well for the vast majority or > >> not? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Hmm...the same indicators used by the liberals during Clintons era > suggest otherwise. Indicators are just that, indicators. These indicators only show gross values, not what is creating them and that's what makes them failrly worthless by themselves. > >> Unemployment is down, > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Smoke and mirrors is right TBone. If your statement were true then the > new jobs created and total workforce numbers would not be going up. LOL, more complete BULLSHIT! > > Second, the unemployment figure does not > > take into account how much the new job pays compared to the old one so if a [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > show an increase, not a decrease. Once again you pull concepts out of > thin air to support your beliefs rather than reality. I can see that you really don't understand the very reports that you quote. Since the report shows TOTAL INCOME FOR EVERYONE in a family of 4, if in the above example if the wife also got a $25,000 a year job and a 17 year old child also got a $15,000 part time job (while still going to school), then your madian income would show an increase of $5,000 which to an idiot like yourself, would also indicate an increase in salary and a great economy when in reality, it shows a stressed family. > > Where Miles, in the lower paying service industry and even lower paying > > retail. > > No Tom, the median income is rising, not falling. The only way for that > to happen is if the new jobs or raises are rather high. The median > income isn't a poor salary. It's middle class Tom. Sorry Miles, but you really don't know WTF you are talking about. It is a meaningless report as to the increase or decrease in salary. Only a single person salary report would indicate which way the salary for specific fields are going. > > It means no such thing as you have yet to give me a link to single person > > income, just that family of four crap where all income is added, including > > childrens. > > And that income is rising faster than inflation. Prove it. > > For example, a person loses his $50,000 a year job due to > > outsourcing. He finds another job but due to the number of people with his [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Besides, you used the very same economic figures to say why the economy > was so good under Clinton. Show comparable provable stats Tom. LOL, please show me where I used any of these bogus indicators to show anything. > > Actually Miles, it has nothing to do with the people I know. Gubberment > > reports say that many of the service jobs that have appeared to replace the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > No Tom they do no such thing. Show me the 'Government' reports and not > a liberal commentary site. Sure they do Miles, go and look. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving >>> Which means that while most of the rich are getting richer, the rest of > us >>> are either for the most part static or taking the hit. > LOL, I never said that it only applies to the rich but it can only apply to > the rich if they are the ones making all of the money. Just above you replied to my question about the economy doing well. You mentioned it means that the rich are getting richer and the rest are static or taking a hit (worse). I then asked if the market indicators that you liberals touted that showed a good economy under Clinton now suddenly only apply to the rich. Sounds like you pick and choose to fit your personal beliefs. > Indicators are just that, indicators. These indicators only show gross > values, not what is creating them and that's what makes them failrly > worthless by themselves. Then why did so many liberals use those very same indicators to tout the great economy under Clinton if now you're saying they're worthless. Pick and choose at will huh TBone? > Sorry Miles, but you really don't know WTF you are talking about. It is a > meaningless report as to the increase or decrease in salary. Only a single > person salary report would indicate which way the salary for specific fields > are going. Tom, the same reports show the number of people in the workforce. Do the math! > >>> Which means that while most of the rich are getting richer, the rest of > > us [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > suddenly only apply to the rich. Sounds like you pick and choose to fit > your personal beliefs. Now you are simply spinning yourself. As I asked before, I'll ask again, when did I ever use these bogus numbers to back up anything. The answer is I never did because they are meaningless without the data that created them. > > Indicators are just that, indicators. These indicators only show gross > > values, not what is creating them and that's what makes them failrly [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > great economy under Clinton if now you're saying they're worthless. > Pick and choose at will huh TBone? Yawn, the difference was in the other indicators that you fail to mention, imagine that. > > Sorry Miles, but you really don't know WTF you are talking about. It is a > > meaningless report as to the increase or decrease in salary. Only a single [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Tom, the same reports show the number of people in the workforce. Do > the math! LOL, that is also a meaningless number. If it goes up (which I'm sure that it did as it pretty much always does), it simply means that more people are working but even in my example that you deleted once again (imagine that) the number increased in part because more people needed to work due to reduced salaries and if it goes down, that could be indicating that people on unemployment have run out of time and are now considered no longer looking for work. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > Yawn, the difference was in the other indicators that you fail to mention, > imagine that. Oh? Do tell TBone. Tell us what published standard indicators are different. > True, some want to be environmentally cleaner. But most don't have the > luxury of extra money sitting around to afford a hybrid for that reason. Not far from where I live (in Dallas), is the poorest community in the area. It's called Pleasant Grove. People live in shacks. Yet, they have a set of 24" rims and other mods on their 10 mpg car which cost them at least $5000.00. So, miles, I *completely* disagree with your comment. It's simply not the case. Most people *do* have the money. It's a matter of priorities. Clean air and water take a back seat to big screen TV's, loud stereos and rims. > The SUV Hybrids are around a $4500/difference and thus break even in gas > savings over a 3-5 year period. But the Civic, Prius and Camry won't > come close. Now is the time for American car companies to take the market. If only they hadn't outsourced the talent and jobs to other countries ... > Less fuel burned does not in itself equate to lower emissions. Look at > the horrible emissions of motorcycles...averaging many times the > pollution of typical cars yet getting 40-70mpg. Well, we were discussing cars. Hybrid cars have the same emissions requirements as full combustion vehicles. Therefore, less fuel burned means fewer/lower emissions/pollution. In fact, I read in the Dallas paper some time ago that the exhaust emitted from the tailpipe of the Prius was cleaner than the air it took in. Therefore, I supposedly cleans air. Now, I don't know whether I fully believe that or not, but it is an interesting and alarming article. Interesting that the Prius is that clean. Alarming that Dallas air is that filthy. > purpose of cutting pollution. Savings in the wallet has got to be the > driving force in order to get the masses to widely purchase hybrids. Unfortunately, I agree. Most Americans are very short-sighted and selfish. This results in screwed up priorities. This is where our government can help make a difference. Offering higher tax breaks for cleaner vehicles, both to the consumer AND the automobile company could bridge the gap. > Honda is > dropping the Civic Hybrid for the lack of demand. I had not heard this. Where did you read it? > That is not a cost directly born by the consumer in their wallets. If > the government were to give a large tax rebate for purchasers of hybrids > then it could help. Well, there was an "okay" tax break in place. Bush has all but killed it at this point. However, I firmly believe that the next president, regardless of party affiliation, will be forced to kick up the tax incentives. > True but thats across the board and not recognized on a per individual > basis. A person can't cut their costs of Dr's bills by purchasing a > hybrid. Only when almost everyone does so. Right. It is the responsibility of those that know better to educate and be an example to those that do not. So ... when are buying your new hybrid? :-) > Electric motors wear out as well. They are far from maintenance free. > Only time will tell what the expenses of a hybrid are. True. However my point was that the reduced cost of maintenance added to the fuel savings and factoring in *something* for the hidden costs not only mitigates the extra cost of the hybrid option, but saves money. The unfortunate thing, as I mentioned earlier, is that most Americans are too distracted to notice or care. > Tires are the same size on the Civic, Highlander and Escape. Which > vehicles are you referring to when you say typically? I attended the car show a couple of months ago in Dallas. Hybrid Civic sitting next to a full combustion Civic had smaller tires. A Prius has *tiny* tires. Very cheap to replace. There really is nothing to compare it to except the Yarus. Craig C. >> True, some want to be environmentally cleaner. But most don't have the >> luxury of extra money sitting around to afford a hybrid for that reason. [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > > I had not heard this. Where did you read it? I understand they are dropping the accord and keeping the civic > I understand they are dropping the accord and keeping the civic I had read and heard that. I have only seen ONE Hybrid Accord on the road. My uncle owns it. In contrast, the Hybrid Civic is selling like hotcakes down here! I see them all over. Prius is still more popular, but that is a matter of marketing and could be remedied if Honda wanted. I also read that Honda plans to have a clean-diesel version of the Fit in 2009. Craig C. > So, miles, I *completely* disagree with your comment. It's simply not > the case. Most people *do* have the money. It's a matter of > priorities. Clean air and water take a back seat to big screen TV's, > loud stereos and rims. If they are poor they didn't buy a hybrid to save the environment. They mistakingly bought it thinking they'll save money on gas. People are in a frenzy about the cost of gas and just don't add up other expenses. > Now is the time for American car companies to take the market. If only > they hadn't outsourced the talent and jobs to other countries ... They didn't for the most part. The design teams are in the USA. So are the design teams for Nissan and Toyota. > Unfortunately, I agree. Most Americans are very short-sighted and > selfish. This results in screwed up priorities. This is where our > government can help make a difference. To an extent thats true. People have always tried to save money where they can. So lets see, $7000 towards a hybrid or $7000 towards the kids college fund for example. So to be 'Green' should Americans just pay the extra $7000 for a clean car? Hmm...that money goes to the greedy corporate auto manufactures. >> Honda is dropping the Civic Hybrid for the lack of demand. > > I had not heard this. Where did you read it? My mistake. Honda is dropping the Accord Hybrid. Toyota is talking about dropping the Camry hybrid as well. > Well, there was an "okay" tax break in place. Bush has all but killed it > at this point. However, I firmly believe that the next president, > regardless of party affiliation, will be forced to kick up the tax > incentives. True but if a Dem is elected you'll see that erased by higher taxes. Their very first action taken when they gained control of congress was to change the way taxes are raised. It now takes only a simple majority instead of 2/3's congress to pass a tax increase bill. > So ... when are buying your new hybrid? :-) I traded in my 2001 Ram QC for a Dodge Caliber. Went from 12mpg to 28mpg. Not as good as a hybrid but far lower cost. I'm doing my part!! >> People are interested in mpg for one reason. To save money. > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > Craig C. Well.... maybe..... before y'all jump on the hybrid bandwagon, a visit to this website might prove illuminating... http://www.cnwmr.com/nss-folder/automotiveenergy/ As in all the hype about global warming, things aren't always as they seem..... <tink> (sound of worm can opening) Mike > As in all the hype about global warming, things aren't always as they > seem..... > > <tink> (sound of worm can opening) I never mentioned global warming. You own that one. That subject is multi-faceted and under constant change. You debate it. I know what I believe and I'll leave it at that for now. :-) Craig C. >> As in all the hype about global warming, things aren't always as they >> seem..... [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > :-) > Craig C. nope, I ain't goin there either ;^). I just used that as an analogy... Mike In responce to Mike Simmons 's post. I thought everyone should know: >>> As in all the hype about global warming, things aren't always as they >>> seem..... [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Mike CHICKENS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BBBBBBBBBBBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK I've said it before and i'll say it again......of course we are in a state of global warming and have been since the last ice age....THERE! SignatureChris > In responce to Mike Simmons 's post. I thought everyone should know: > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > I've said it before and i'll say it again......of course we are in a state > of global warming and have been since the last ice age....THERE! Amen!! <tink> there's that sound again ;^) >> I've said it before and i'll say it again......of course we are in a state >> of global warming and have been since the last ice age....THERE! > > Amen!! > > <tink> there's that sound again ;^) Whether you believe that global warming is actually occurring or not (I do based on the data from experiments I have personally been involved in), one thing we can agree on is that we should leave the earth, at the very least, in as good or better shape as we found it. With the population booming, that means that we have to do better with emissions from cars and industry. Put whatever spin you want on it, whether it be global warming, lung cancer from bad air, neurological disorder from bad water, etc. ... the need to control the pollution is the key. Craig C. >>> I've said it before and i'll say it again......of course we are in a >>> state [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Craig C. I don't disagree in principle with any of the above..... however, (there's always a however, isn't there?).... I am not convinced that the global warming is entirely man induced, nor do I believe that global warming is necessarily bad. Several economic studies have shown that there may indeed be a net benefit from global warming. Nor do I sign on with the the crowd (Al Gore types mainly) that say that because of global warming the world will come to an end. If we subscribe to their panic and adopt their proposed solutions, we will create economic chaos that would make any negative effects from global warming look like a walk in the (albeit warm) park. Mike >>> I've said it before and i'll say it again......of course we are in a >>> state [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Craig C. Does this mean that all WC's have to shut down???? Bummer....... Denny > Does this mean that all WC's have to shut down???? Bummer....... Yes. Massive air pollution results from WC burgers. :-) Craig C. >> You may very well be correct. I guess it is how you look at it and what you >> are comfortable with. I'll be moving from a car that get's 17-19 on the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >all cases a 100% gas economy car is a better deal if the reason for >buying is to save money. Hybrids don't save money. But they do help not putting as much money in the ragheads pockets. beekeep > But they do help not putting as much money in the ragheads pockets. Perhaps but doubtful. Oil companies have heavy investments in most alternative energy R&D and production. > >> I've been doing a bunch of reading on them. Seems that the deal on the > >> batteries isn't what it use to be. Under 2K for a replacement. Toyota [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Roy, though I think that hybrids are a great idea, miles does have a point. My wife is thinking about a Toyota Highlander Hybrid, but I have gotten her to look at the Yaris also. They have a little 4 door sedan that is actually pretty nice looking, rather roomy and peppy too. As I recall it gets about 45 - 50 mpg and was only like 14k fully loaded. >> >> I've been doing a bunch of reading on them. Seems that the deal on the >> >> batteries isn't what it use to be. Under 2K for a replacement. Toyota [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > too. As I recall it gets about 45 - 50 mpg and was only like 14k > fully loaded. I looked at them. I'm leaning toward Toyota Camry 'cause they have been doing it for quite some time. They usually put out a very good product, they are a fairly decent size and they do real well if you have the misfortune to get involved in a accident. >>> >> I've been doing a bunch of reading on them. Seems that the deal on the >>> >> batteries isn't what it use to be. Under 2K for a replacement. Toyota [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] >are a fairly decent size and they do real well if you have the misfortune to >get involved in a accident. A real retired Yankee would go down there and build a car that ran on dead palm fronds! beekeep > A real retired Yankee would go down there and build a car that ran on > dead palm fronds! > > beekeep Those cars are already around sort of. Biodiesel is often made from palm oil, but that's made from the fruit, not the fronds. It's becoming a problem in the tropical rain-forests. The rain-forests are being cleared to make room for oil producing palm plantations. For this reason some consider biodiesel worse than fossil fuels. Interesting article here: http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2005/12/06/worse-than-fossil-fuel Note: I make biodiesel from /waste/ vegetable oil that has already been used in restaurant fryers and discarded. I don't use palm oil. SignatureKen >You may very well be correct. I guess it is how you look at it and what you >are comfortable with. I'll be moving from a car that get's 17-19 on the >highway and around 15 in the city. Also it requires premium fuel. So until >the dust settles from the move and I know exactly where we are at, it looks >pretty good. Another difference to me would be whether you finance it.. I'd be more inclined to go hybrid if I wasn't paying cash for it.. The payment difference on the more expensive car should be less than the fuel savings if the interest rate is decent... I'm a firm believer that cash on hand is nice, but cash FLOW is what decides how you live... mac Please remove splinters before emailing > Another difference to me would be whether you finance it.. I'd be more inclined > to go hybrid if I wasn't paying cash for it.. > > The payment difference on the more expensive car should be less than the fuel > savings if the interest rate is decent... Not sure I follow your logic there. If a car costs 7,000 more to get the hybrid version then you'll pay that much more plus the increased interest over the life of the loan. Your savings in gas over that time period will almost certainly not cover the increased cost whether paid monthly or in a lump sum. Back to my Honda Civic example! Gas Civic DX for $16000 @ 5%/5 years = $302/month Hybrid Civic for $23000 % 5%/5 years = $434/month Drive 20000 miles/year = 1667 miles/month 1667/30mpg Gas * $3/gallon = $167/month 1667/50mpg Hybrid * $3/gallon = $100 Gas cost difference $67/month Loan difference = $132/month No way to get there from here! Can't generate free money. lol >> I've been doing a bunch of reading on them. Seems that the deal on the >> batteries isn't what it use to be. Under 2K for a replacement. Toyota [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >$560 more. Furthermore most people don't drive 20,000 miles a year (I >do) so it would be even worse for many. But a 1200 Sporster would be economical and you can ride it year round down there. Mine Gets 50 mpg. beekeep > > I've been doing a bunch of reading on them. Seems that the deal on the > > batteries isn't what it use to be. Under 2K for a replacement. Toyota [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > $560 more. Furthermore most people don't drive 20,000 miles a year (I > do) so it would be even worse for many. LOL, you are not taking into account the continuing increase in the price of fuel. I would say that fuel will be over $4.00 in the next two years. 20000/30 * $4/gallon = $2666 20000/50 * $4/gallon = $1600 Now the savings are $1066 a year and as the price increases so do the savings. Now the time required to make up the savings have reduced significantly not to mention the added benefits of reduced pollution and reduced dependency on foreign oil which could also serve to keep the price of oil down. It would also further increase the development on hybrid and zero emissions vehicles if the demand exists but short sighted thinkers which sadly are the majority on this country as of now will flush this great country down the toilet. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > It would also further increase the development on hybrid and > zero emissions vehicles if the demand exists but short sighted thinkers > which sadly are the majority on this country as of now will flush this great > country down the toilet. How many Hybrids do you own Tom? How many gas guzzlers? You're all talk TBone. Typical liberal telling others what they should do but don't do themselves. Just like Kerry touting economy cars but drives his Dodge 300C (oh ya, its his wifes) or Al Gore who touts environmentalism and gets a speeding ticket in a gas guzzler 4 door lincoln. All talk about what others should do! > > It would also further increase the development on hybrid and > > zero emissions vehicles if the demand exists but short sighted thinkers > > which sadly are the majority on this country as of now will flush this great > > country down the toilet. > > How many Hybrids do you own Tom? None yet. > How many gas guzzlers? One but I don't have much choice right now. > You're all talk TBone. Typical liberal telling others what they should do but > don't do themselves. More spin and bullshit. While I don't currently own one, I'm not trying to talk people out of doing the right thing when they can, unlike you. When I need to purchase a new vehicle, fuel economy will be a big issue and not just for the few cents a week it might save me. What about you? > Just like Kerry touting economy cars but drives > his Dodge 300C (oh ya, its his wifes) or Al Gore who touts > environmentalism and gets a speeding ticket in a gas guzzler 4 door > lincoln. All talk about what others should do! What engine does his 300C have? As for Al, I have no idea what he own or how he lives his life but he does make every effort to let people know what can happen if nothing is done. I guess that its better to stick you head in the sand and pretend that it doesn't exist like others in the group. Yea, that's gonna help your kids in the future. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > "miles" <nope@nopers.com> wrote in message >> How many Hybrids do you own Tom? > None yet. Figures. >> How many gas guzzlers? > One but I don't have much choice right now. Not so. You made the choice in what you need. Nobody made the choice for you. You own a gas guzzler and no Hybrid but you whine that people need to buy hybrids to save the enviroment. Put up or shut up Tom! > More spin and bullshit. While I don't currently own one, I'm not trying to > talk people out of doing the right thing when they can, unlike you. I think people should buy economy cars. When buying cars in general people have always looked to get the most for their money. I bought a Dodge Caliber and got rid of my gas guzzler Ram. What have you done yourself? > When I > need to purchase a new vehicle, fuel economy will be a big issue and not > just for the few cents a week it might save me. What about you? I already did what you only talk about. My truck was paid for. My car has a payment. The gas savings won't pay for the cost of my Caliber. What about you Tom? All talk. > As for Al, I have no idea what he own or > how he lives his life but he does make every effort to let people know what > can happen if nothing is done. True he does say that. But he lives a high style polluting life, owns gas guzzler cars, lives in a huge mansion that sucks up power, uses a massive fuel guzzling polluting jet for much of his transportation needs...typical liberal, all talk about what others should do and not them. >> "miles" <nope@nopers.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > fuel guzzling polluting jet for much of his transportation needs...typical > liberal, all talk about what others should do and not them. Miles: I believe the technical term for that is hypocrisy. Mike >> "miles" <nope@nopers.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > fuel guzzling polluting jet for much of his transportation needs...typical > liberal, all talk about what others should do and not them. You two are amazing!! I doubt there has been a thread in the past couple of years that you guys have paticipated in that hasn't had a political slant tossed in by one of ya. <GBMFG> Oh, I think I'm going to opt for the Toyota hybrid. Because I want to. Also 'cause it is I heard it is union made. <VBG> > >> "miles" <nope@nopers.com> wrote in message > > [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > tossed in by one of ya. > <GBMFG> Well, at least this time the political BS had nothing to do with me. Miles brought up Kerry and Gore and I said nothing about the right at all. > Oh, I think I'm going to opt for the Toyota hybrid. Because I want to. Also > 'cause it is I heard it is union made. <VBG> Let us know how that works out as I said, my wife is looking in that direction as well. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > You two are amazing!! I doubt there has been a thread in the past couple of > years that you guys have paticipated in that hasn't had a political slant > tossed in by one of ya. It's all entertainment! > Oh, I think I'm going to opt for the Toyota hybrid. Because I want to. Also > 'cause it is I heard it is union made. <VBG> You should buy the car that fits your needs whatever that maybe! Which union, American or Japanese? lol. Are there any cars built in the USA that aren't union made? Yea, Toyota, and IIRC Honda SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > > You two are amazing!! I doubt there has been a thread in the past couple of > > years that you guys have paticipated in that hasn't had a political slant [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > union, American or Japanese? lol. Are there any cars built in the USA > that aren't union made? > Yea, Toyota, and IIRC Honda How do US Auto workers at Toyota plants compare with US Union workers as far as benefits go? How many non union auto workers have been layed off in recent years compared with US auto union workers? >> Yea, Toyota, and IIRC Honda > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > How many non union auto workers have been layed off in recent years > compared with US auto union workers? I do know that the UAW took a big hit with Delphi. >> You two are amazing!! I doubt there has been a thread in the past couple >> of years that you guys have paticipated in that hasn't had a political >> slant tossed in by one of ya. > > It's all entertainment! That's what I mean! >> Oh, I think I'm going to opt for the Toyota hybrid. Because I want to. >> Also 'cause it is I heard it is union made. <VBG> > > You should buy the car that fits your needs whatever that maybe! Which > union, American or Japanese? lol. Are there any cars built in the USA > that aren't union made? sh.t, I don't know anymore. I don't know if the hybrid's are made here or not > > "miles" <nope@nopers.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Figures. Yawn. > >> How many gas guzzlers? > > > One but I don't have much choice right now. > > Not so. You made the choice in what you need. That is correct and I needed the truck and still do but it is not my primary transportation. > Nobody made the choice > for you. You own a gas guzzler and no Hybrid but you whine that people > need to buy hybrids to save the enviroment. Put up or shut up Tom! More spin and BS. > > More spin and bullshit. While I don't currently own one, I'm not trying to > > talk people out of doing the right thing when they can, unlike you. > > I think people should buy economy cars. When buying cars in general > people have always looked to get the most for their money. Once again, complete BS. If that were true, there would be few if any high end luxury cars and no Hummers on the road. Those that have little money and are responsible try and get the most for their money but for many, it is a status symbol. > I bought a > Dodge Caliber and got rid of my gas guzzler Ram. What have you done > yourself? I don't use the truck as my primary transportation and will be looking for a new car next year. I don't know if it will be a hybrid but it will be economy oriented and possibly a convertable. > > When I > > need to purchase a new vehicle, fuel economy will be a big issue and not [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > has a payment. The gas savings won't pay for the cost of my Caliber. > What about you Tom? All talk. LOL, I'm sure that you didn't sell the truck because of environmental reasons. > > As for Al, I have no idea what he own or > > how he lives his life but he does make every effort to let people know what > > can happen if nothing is done. > > True he does say that. But he lives a high style polluting life, Please back this up and not with hard right leaning sources. > owns gas guzzler cars, lives in a huge mansion that sucks up power, uses a > massive fuel guzzling polluting jet for much of his transportation > needs...typical liberal, all talk about what others should do and not them. How exactly is he going to get around from one side of the country to the other, walk. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > Once again, complete BS. If that were true, there would be few if any high > end luxury cars and no Hummers on the road. For them those vehicles give them the most they want for their money. So yes Tom, it is true. > I don't use the truck as my primary transportation and will be looking for a > new car next year. I don't know if it will be a hybrid but it will be > economy oriented and possibly a convertable. Great. Let us know what you get. The PT Cruiser convertible is bargain priced after rebates. It was too small for my needs though. > LOL, I'm sure that you didn't sell the truck because of environmental > reasons. People buy what they need and those needs vary. You have a gas guzzling polluting truck and I don't think thats because of environmental reasons. > Please back this up and not with hard right leaning sources. Hard right leaning sources huh? Gore doesn't hide the fact he lives in a huge mansion nor is it a secret which car he drives, rents nor his preferred transportation mode of a fuel guzzling polluting jet. > How exactly is he going to get around from one side of the country to the > other, walk. How about not flying all over the country for his $100,000 speaking gigs about how we should all stop polluting? Until he does so he is no one to talk. > > Once again, complete BS. If that were true, there would be few if any high > > end luxury cars and no Hummers on the road. > > For them those vehicles give them the most they want for their money. > So yes Tom, it is true. I guess that in a distorted way it is. > > I don't use the truck as my primary transportation and will be looking for a > > new car next year. I don't know if it will be a hybrid but it will be > > economy oriented and possibly a convertable. > > Great. Let us know what you get. The PT Cruiser convertible is bargain > priced after rebates. It was too small for my needs though. I was looking more in the two seated roadster type but again, with reasonable performance and good economy. I am simply not impressed with DC's lineup this year and I want a standard shift which indicates Ford, GM or Toyota. > > LOL, I'm sure that you didn't sell the truck because of environmental > > reasons. > > People buy what they need and those needs vary. You have a gas guzzling > polluting truck and I don't think thats because of environmental reasons. I do indeed but as I said before, it is out of need and is not my primary transportation. > > Please back this up and not with hard right leaning sources. > > Hard right leaning sources huh? Gore doesn't hide the fact he lives in > a huge mansion nor is it a secret which car he drives, rents nor his > preferred transportation mode of a fuel guzzling polluting jet. Many people live in large houses but that doesn't mean that they are not efficient. Do you know what his utility bills are? Do you know what type of lights he has, where the temperature of his mansion is set to, how many zones the climate control system has??? If not then you are just making ASSumptions. Have you seen his movie yet and if not, perhaps you should. It may explain a few things to you. > > How exactly is he going to get around from one side of the country to the > > other, walk. > > How about not flying all over the country for his $100,000 speaking gigs > about how we should all stop polluting? Until he does so he is no one > to talk. LOL, if there were not so many idiots with their heads in the sand then he wouldn't have to. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message