|
High gas prices... (pg. 8)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| OurManFlint |
I blame urban planning. By spreading everything out and not building an infrastructure around public transportation, urban planning have created a nightmare. I don't think enough people thought about the consequences of high energy/gas prices. Many people made a lot of money off spreading everything out very quickly, if they care what's happening right now.
In many suburban areas, it's not practical to use public transportation. No consideration was given into this scenario. To get out of a my parents house in a suburb, you have to weave through a maze of houses and cul de sacs to get out. Nothing is on a square grid, and everything is miles apart. And it's not like they live in the country, they live right outside of the city. It's ing ridiculous.
I feel sorry for people who live in the suburbs of places like Dallas or Denver. At some point, it's not going to be practical to live in these places. The investment from that mortgage is going to be swallowed up by the amount going to gas. |
|
|
| gehzumteufel |
| quote: | Originally posted by OurManFlint
I blame urban planning. By spreading everything out and not building an infrastructure around public transportation, urban planning have created a nightmare. I don't think enough people thought about the consequences of high energy/gas prices. Many people made a lot of money off spreading everything out very quickly, if they care what's happening right now.
In many suburban areas, it's not practical to use public transportation. No consideration was given into this scenario. To get out of a my parents house in a suburb, you have to weave through a maze of houses and cul de sacs to get out. Nothing is on a square grid, and everything is miles apart. And it's not like they live in the country, they live right outside of the city. It's ing ridiculous.
I feel sorry for people who live in the suburbs of places like Dallas or Denver. At some point, it's not going to be practical to live in these places. The investment from that mortgage is going to be swallowed up by the amount going to gas. |
Europe wasn't planned around it either. So your reasoning is flawed. The problem is that people don't want to invest in public transport. We spend too much money trying to decide if it will be a smart decision to really invest in a real public transportation system, and never actually take any action. There can't be any committees to determine if it is worth it. It just has to be done. Also, they have no plan, just a thought. They need to just make a plan, and go with it. Even if it is over the top, at least they will have a plan. A phased development would obviously be how it would start, but at least it is a start. The crock of the US has now is nothing. |
|
|
| Arbiter |
| quote: | Originally posted by KiNeTiC ENeRgY
Only a handful of the major cities is where most people can use the transit system and still be practical. That leaves about 90% or more of the rest of the U.S. (as the example) dead in the water. people in Florida for example are screwed for sure without cars. The entire state is so spread apart and theres no transit system that can handle covering all the areas. Actually this would apply to all of the states except in the major cities. This whole issue will have some serious problems and its only getting worse each day. Moving closer to a city is not an option either, as theres not enough housing for the millions who live outside of them to do this, as well as the transit system itself not being able to keep up with the influx of more bodies. If that was even an option, what about the economic issues of all the renters leaving the apartment buildings, car manufactures closing down leaving thousands of people jobless, and all other companies that aren't located in a big city shutting down? Improving the transit system would take decades and billions of dollars to even make a dent to extend to the outside areas...wheres this money going to come from? We need to make a shift away from cars and use mopeds/motorcycles, hybrids and other small vehicles. This really is the only option in being able to pay for fuel and still be able to get around. Does anyone know what the projected oil amount left on earth is? Its clear we are approaching the end at our current consumption rate. |
Any projections regarding the supply or demand of oil would do well to consider that most of the world's population still lives in regions where the energy consumption per capita is dramatically lower than that in the west. But this is changing -- many of these regions are nearing the threshold at which their energy demands per capita will rise greatly in a relatively short period of time. Others are still further off, but we should be anticipating their eventual dramatic increase in demand as well.
The point is that if you think things are bad now, then I have some bad news for you: the increases we've seen in the price of oil in the past few years are going to be completely insignificant compared to much greater increases that we can expect in subsequent decades as demand skyrockets (and of course supply declines commensurately.) This predicament calls for three kinds of strategies.
In the first place, we should be stockpiling oil. It really goes without saying that if you know you're going to use something and know the price of that thing is going to increase by a great deal in the near future, then you should buy as much as possible as soon as possible. Therefore, one of our goals should be to expand the strategic petroleum reserve as much as possible. Granted, we might not be buying it at its lowest point by buying now, since there is a lot of speculative investment in oil that may have produced a somewhat inflated cost relative to current supply and demand -- but even so, it would be better to buy at a slightly inflated price than wait too long, or, in other words, it's still a good investment on the type of timeline that we're looking at even if the price is not at its lowest point. I would suggest financing this through higher taxes on gasoline, despite the kicking and screaming that would no doubt result. I'm sure this will eat into the ability of many Americans to rack up huge cell phone bills, eat out almost every night, and fill their closets which are larger than the typical home in parts of the world. I'm sure for some people, the consequences would be even worse -- even so, we have to consider the alternatives. What oil we do not purchase now, we will simply have to purchase later at a higher price, demanding an even greater sacrifice which will affect more people and to a greater degree. Since the alternatives are clearly worse, we should simply make the sacrifices now, no matter how undesirable they may appear.
The second element of our strategy should be to greatly improve our transportation infrastructure with an eye towards energy efficiency. This includes expanding public transportation infrastructure where it exists and developing public transportation where it doesn't exist (or barely exists). The size of the USA is no reason why we can't all live and work in communities with adequate public transportation; it is nowhere written, for example, that we must spread out inefficiently across all the land that we have available to us. It is certainly true that this project will cost a considerable amount and it will not be finished overnight, or even within ten years. In the short run, individuals may elect to use more fuel-efficient vehicles in order to reduce their personal burden. In the long run, though, such vehicles still require too much fuel to produce the level of efficiency that we may well require. Despite the drawbacks, it is once again a case where the alternative requires us to spend more and get less in return. Consequently, it is the most informed course of action. Personally, I see a few hundred billion dollars in defense spending per year that would be better spent on something like this. It's not as if the rest of the world is going to catch up with our military anytime soon regardless, and in the long run we will save money by this plan which will allow us to allocate more to military spending in the future, if necessary.
The third and final strategy is that we should be encouraging the development of alternative fuels. Personally, I believe that private financing is sufficient for this purpose, but in order to encourage investment it might still be prudent to provide some tax advantage to those who do so at a possible small loss in revenue. The details are not terribly important, and this is likely to be happening regardless of our specific intent. The important thing to realize is that there is no guarantee it will yield results, and if it does, there is no guarantee how long it will take to do so.
These three strategies all support each other. By stockpiling oil whilst simultaneously investing in the transportation infrastructure that we can use to reduce our rate of consumption, we can give ourselves the longest possible amount of time in which to develop some alternative to petroleum. This plan gives us the greatest probable return for the least investment at the cost of demanding more money up front which requires significant short-term sacrifice. However, I don't expect it to be put into practice, since the nature of democracy discourages operational strategies that call for short-term sacrifice in order to yield significant long-term gains and instead favors those that call for long-term sacrifice in order to produce short-term gains. Therefore, I anticipate a strategy which makes not one bit of sense to be put in place instead, like taking fuel out of the strategic petroleum reserve (...)
The real good of the current increase in gas prices is that it provides us with a good opportunity to get organized before the really hits the fan. Of course, if we don't take that opportunity, then it's not much good... but at least we'll be getting what we deserve. |
|
|
| Clovis |
| quote: | Originally posted by Arbiter
The real good of the current increase in gas prices is that it provides us with a good opportunity to get organized before the really hits the fan. Of course, if we don't take that opportunity, then it's not much good... but at least we'll be getting what we deserve. |
Problem is, (as you can see) to most people this IS the hitting the fan. |
|
|
| idoru |
| quote: | Originally posted by Clovis
Problem is, (as you can see) to most people this IS the hitting the fan. |
Because people think that not having access to everything they want is a bad thing. And yes, I know I'm re-stating what has been said so many times throughout this thread. Forgive me. |
|
|
| noikeee |
Over here: 1.416 euros per litre
I've done my maths and in the US measure of dollars per gallon, that means we have it at 8.49$/gallon. I'm talking about diesel fuel, by the way. Gasoline is more expensive.
And it's increasing and increasing and increasing. Our whole society is completely ing ed. |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by Leon Trotsky
I can save you. Have you ever read, "Das Kapital" by Karl Marx? |
:stongue: |
|
|
| SkyHigh |
| quote: | Originally posted by ScuL
$10/gallon is what we pay in most Western European countries .. Americans would get a heart attack with that figure on the displays :) |
How far or how long does that last you ?//
Get a clue...:whip: |
|
|
| tubularbills |
| $3.79 average here in shreveport. for regular, not premium/silver/etc... |
|
|
| MR STROKE |
| quote: | Originally posted by KiNeTiC ENeRgY
The only benefit to these higher gas prices is a reduction in green house gases being released into the environment. Sorry Clovis, but theres no way public transit can replace our cars. Only a handful of the major cities is where most people can use the transit system and still be practical. That leaves about 90% or more of the rest of the U.S. (as the example) dead in the water. people in Florida for example are screwed for sure without cars. The entire state is so spread apart and theres no transit system that can handle covering all the areas. Actually this would apply to all of the states except in the major cities. This whole issue will have some serious problems and its only getting worse each day. Moving closer to a city is not an option either, as theres not enough housing for the millions who live outside of them to do this, as well as the transit system itself not being able to keep up with the influx of more bodies. If that was even an option, what about the economic issues of all the renters leaving the apartment buildings, car manufactures closing down leaving thousands of people jobless, and all other companies that aren't located in a big city shutting down? Improving the transit system would take decades and billions of dollars to even make a dent to extend to the outside areas...wheres this money going to come from? We need to make a shift away from cars and use mopeds/motorcycles, hybrids and other small vehicles. This really is the only option in being able to pay for fuel and still be able to get around. Does anyone know what the projected oil amount left on earth is? Its clear we are approaching the end at our current consumption rate. |
+1
While it might be easy for someone living in LA(mass transit everywhere) to laugh at high gas prices. What do you say to the single mother that has to commute 40-50 miles daily that lives pay check to paycheck? Or the truck driver that supports his entire family by driving truck everyday? the difference anually for the average driver is about 2300$, how does an average income family afford it?
and what happens when gas becomes 8$ a gallon? for these people and others like my self(60 mile commute) it is IMPOSIBLE to use mass trasit because there is none. This leaves thousands of average income Americans tapped out finacialy. Something needs to be done, and while I don't have the answer, I can tell you that raising gas prices even more is NOT the answer. |
|
|
| tubularbills |
| quote: | Originally posted by MR STROKE
What do you say to the single mother that has to commute 40-50 miles daily that lives pay check to paycheck? |
tell her to get a closer job? :conf: |
|
|
| RJT |
Warning: Spirit5 length rant to follow, skip to end for c0r version.
| quote: | Originally posted by tubularbills
tell her to get a closer job? :conf: |
Don't you think that's kind of a narrow view?
:conf:
The problem isn't that people have to commute, it's how they commute.
For example, when I was young, my father had a job in Fond Du Lac, approximately a 45 minute commute in the morning. It was a job that was easily better than any he could have gotten closer to home, and genuinely made our families' life better on the whole, and he was happy doing it. Financially and mentally, it was his best option - the problem, however, is that the school my mother has worked at for the past 30+ years was already a 20 minute commute for her in the morning, and my fathers job was in the opposite direction.
Obviously this was a different time, and so contextually it isn't the same scenario - but what if this single mother's best option to provide for her family was an inavoidable 40 minute commute every morning (given some extenuating circumstance or another - just consider this her best option)? Would it be wrong for her to take it and make the commute simply because in the future it may pose problems due to a complete lack of mass-transit infrastructure?
I suppose you could argue that in general, the fact that the general public over a long stretch of time hasn't supported mass transit could in some way cause you to find fault with her as a greater part of the whole - but it hardly seems appropriate to me for anyone to be faulted for what effectively amounts to circumstance.
What people need, as far as I'm concerned, is to start moving back to the cities - and then work out how we're going to get ourselves from point A to B when there are simply fewer points on the map. Mass transit is far easier to organize when there aren't all these little unincorporated burgs along the highway with populations smaller than my mothers side of my family.
c0r summary: Commuting isn't the problem, people putting 300 a miles a week on a single automobile to do it is. |
|
|
|
|
