Does anyone else hate Hummer owners?

"These gas hogs are causing you to pay more at the pump and these owners could give a crap."

-are you kidding? they pay 3 bucks a gallon just like you, stoolball. going and destroying someone else's car is just the kind of piss poor mentality you are desperately trying to show this message board you don't have. maybe you should take a look at your own self and holier than thou attitude?

stone phillips wrote:

These gas hogs are causing you to pay more at the pump and these owners could give a crap.

No they aren't. It's the explosion in consumption in India and China that's causing your gas prices to be LESS than they where in 1981.

Historical Gas Prices

Historical Oil Company profits.

Historic gas prices, adjusted for inflation

Lets be real honest. The rub isn't that they're gaudy monstrosities (though they are) or that they are wildly unsafe for the other person (they're nearly as bad for the Hummer driver too).

The rub is in the fact that they are totally disobeying any sort of sensical reaction to global affairs. But the fact is, these people, if Hummers didn't exist, would probably have bought Excursions and Escalades instead. So, that's no solution.

Gas below $2.50 is gone forever. And in a year, gas below $3.00 will have met the same fate. In two years we'll all be paying $4.00 for gas on a regular basis, and only then will we see SUV drivers ditching their rides.

My current car requires Premium, but gets 23/30 mpg. I gladly pay the .20 more a gallon now for the privledge. And with that kind of mileage I welcome $4.00 gas. Frankly, I think it's funny/sad that so many people are stretched to their limit when gas goes up a dollar a gallon.

[sarcasm]

And don't blame China for gas prices, the oil execs don't. [/sarcasm]

when all else fails, men turn to reason.

Hmmm, peaking marathon year for Americans was 1983, after a four year peak in gas prices. When gas prices fell, American marathon times got slower.

Go figure.

oog wrote:

[sarcasm]

And don't blame China for gas prices, the oil execs don't. [/sarcasm]

We wouldn't want to do that.

Excellent post.

Driving a hummer right now is something along the lines of stuffing yourself with a huge meal in front of hundreds of people who can barely afford food. Divvying up your meal among the hundreds would do nothing realistic for the hunrgy hundreds, but the guy who's stuffing himself is going to incur some wrath.

No, in "certain parts of the middle east" it is not socially accepatable to annihilate any living being not choosing to live the way you live.

However when invading armies come in to occupy your country, then it is socially acceptable to take out their hummers with a rocket propelled grenade. As it would be in any other country in this world.

In today's world, the top countries should be showing an example on environmental issues. Hauling a fat ass around in several tons of metal just to pick up kids from school and do the shopping whilst guzzling the world's diminishing petroleum resources is a disgraceful form of behaviour. Under such circumstances such behaviour should be punished.

Yes. I am surprised so many runners seem to fit the stereotype of the "fat ugly American"

There are limited resources in this world. Just because you feel you can afford them doesn't mean that you are right to waste them without regard to others.

All I have read are rationalizations trying to justify wasteful behavior.

If Hummer owners start to feel a bit more foolish because of their excesses and poor choices than I will be satisfied.

Shame is society's way to control inappropriate behavior. Its long overdue.

The reality wrote:

No, in "certain parts of the middle east" it is not socially accepatable to annihilate any living being not choosing to live the way you live.

However when invading armies come in to occupy your country, then it is socially acceptable to take out their hummers with a rocket propelled grenade. As it would be in any other country in this world.

In today's world, the top countries should be showing an example on environmental issues. Hauling a fat ass around in several tons of metal just to pick up kids from school and do the shopping whilst guzzling the world's diminishing petroleum resources is a disgraceful form of behaviour. Under such circumstances such behaviour should be punished.

Nevermind. I should have known better than to try and debate someone with such polluted views of the world.

stone wrote:

Yes. I am surprised so many runners seem to fit the stereotype of the "fat ugly American"

There are limited resources in this world. Just because you feel you can afford them doesn't mean that you are right to waste them without regard to others.

All I have read are rationalizations trying to justify wasteful behavior.

So what do you have to say about wasting the fossil fuel necessary to power your computer while you do stupid crap like post on a message board?

Look I just want to clarify. It's not that I think it's "right" to own one of these things. Like I said, I wouldn't, because this "shame" that some people have talked about has gotten to me, and being an engineer I tend to hold things like efficiency pretty high. It's just that I believe that if you really want one and you're able and willing to pay the price, then you should damn well be able to have one.

When people start using words like "hate" and saying that they should be shot with a rocket propelled grenade, I think it's outrageous and uncalled for; these people have found something they like for whatever reason (image, utility, whatever) and wish to pursue it, and there's nothing wrong with that in my opinion. Rise in gas prices will reduce their numbers soon, although possibly not as fast as some people think (I hear Tahoe sales are booming). Besides, as of yet, the market doesn't offer anything more efficient of a similar size (no hybrids and such).

It's just that I believe that if you really want one and you're able and willing to pay the price, then you should damn well be able to have one.

Question:

Do you think people have an obligation to others not to waste limited resources (regardless of how rich you are)?

reality check wrote:

It's just that I believe that if you really want one and you're able and willing to pay the price, then you should damn well be able to have one.

Question:

Do you think people have an obligation to others not to waste limited resources (regardless of how rich you are)?

I would argue that our culture is built around waste and the desire to consume in excess of what is needed for survival.

Let me ask you a question: If a would-be Hummer owner decided not to buy the Hummer, where do you think he/she would spend their money instead?

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that they'd probably spend it on something else that is watseful.

Whether they "waste" oil on a car or waste oil indirectly or waste other valueable resources through buying a different product, they are still watsing resources.

Californian wrote:

Whether they "waste" oil on a car or waste oil indirectly or waste other valueable resources through buying a different product, they are still wasting resources.

ah, yes, but there is an important difference between renewable and non-renewable resources (and between limited and not-so-limited resources).

i'm with reality check. the "you should be able to do whatever you want if you can afford it" argument has limits. (as does the "we know what's best for you so you can't do 'x'" argument; it's a balancing.) in my opinion, wasting oil relatively indiscriminately with world affairs as they currently are - namely most oil controlled by somewhat unstable and/or unfriendly dictators or near-dictators and evidence of human-caused global warming increasing - falls into the category of something that the broader society should seek to prevent individuals from doing. said perhaps more clearly, wasting oil has sufficient negative externalities in my mind to justify society limiting the freedom of individuals to do what they want w/r/t the use of oil.

the exact method and extent of limiting said freedom is less clear. for now, i'll say that i support higher taxes on gasoline and some sort of (peaceful and non-destructive) shaming.

I agree with your argument that people have a social responsibility not to waste resources and that limiting the freedom to waste resources is ideal.

However, I do feel that someone with the mentality to buy a Hummer would watse resources elsewhere if they didn't buy the Hummer, and most likely, they would be wasting non-renewable energy sources, since that is still the source of the bulk of society's energy consumption. Most of us in this society waste non-renewable resources in our every day lives. It is almost difficult not to do so without stepping back and seriously evaluating the energy cost of everything that you do throughout the course of a day.

LouSiffer wrote:

carry around a couple cans of brake fluid..

ever see what that stuff does to paint jobs?

have a nice day

From reading your quotes on this board, all I can say is you are a piece of work. You hate our President, America and hard working taxpayers and encourage destruction of personal property......you are a turd...sorry, make that a worthless piece of shit....

If we are really concerned about wasting limited resources, than the first thing we should do is limit an individuals commute to no more than, say, 30 miles each way. No unnecesary trips. Those people sitting on their duffs over the weekend are saving more of our 'limited' resources than you guys driving an hour or more away to race a local 5k or 10k.

What a crap argument.