Made in Alabama.....2006
Posted on 05/09/2005 6:52:14 AM PDT by MississippiMasterpiece
It's a Saturday morning on San Leandro's Marina Boulevard auto row, and the big SUVs have been sitting on the lots, waiting for someone to come in and start that dealer dollar dance that ends up with the customer slightly bewildered but paying a lot less for that vehicle than he thought he was going to.
Once in a while, there are takers, although the dealer has to discount the SUV heavily just to get it moving.
Salvador Sotello, for example, recently paid F.H. Dailey Chevrolet in San Leandro $41,000 for a new Chevy Tahoe LT (yes, with leather) SUV that had a sticker price of $58,000. The sale was an anomaly in what is otherwise a pretty dismal selling season. "It's been pretty quiet," saleswoman Crystal Gonzalez said the other day. "Been pretty slow."
At Broadway Ford in Oakland, the grilles of the Mustangs, SUVs and the lone Thunderbird smile at the passing traffic, but the showroom is empty, it appears, of customers; several salesmen are in sight. Up at Albany Ford-Subaru, salesman Myers Howard, sitting a few feet away from a big Ford pickup truck, says things on the Ford side of the showroom "are slow." That might be the understatement of the day.
Just this past week, General Motors Corp. and Ford Motor Co. underwent the humiliation of seeing their credit ratings reduced by Standard & Poor's Ratings Services to the status of junk. The reasons are becoming clear -- the two big companies can't sell much of what they produce.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
If you don't want your line of sight blocked by the giant vehicle in front of you, lay back. Let enough cars in front of you to restore your LOS.
If you want to tuck up in close behind a large vehicle, you take the risk you take. The responsibility is yours, not the SUV.
"I know of at least one fatal accident caused by blocked line-of-sight; the SUV in question suddenly changed lanes and the car behind him plowed into the vehicle stalled in the lane."
By definition, the 'car behind' was following too close and driving too fast. It's absurd to blame this accident on the SUV.
That's socialist thinking, whether you like to admit it or not. Either the market will decide, or the government will. The latter is socialist.
There are a lot of people who spend many hours behind the wheel, such as salesmen and computer consultants. Little things like improperly placed cupholders or badly designed turn signal controls can become a major irritant over time.
If you work in an office, imagine that there was no convenient place at your desk for you to put your coffee cup.
they do? then I am mistaken and apologize. I remember reading something last year saying that a bill requiring stricter regulation of fuel economy did not pass. I was under the impression that they had no set requirements, hence the wide range in fuel economy rates. some are as low as 8mpg, some as good as 25mpg. I would think that requiring a higher minimum (15MPG, for instance) would be a good idea, thats all.
The dealer near me has about 100 Avalanches sitting in a remote lot...and they are not a big dealer!
read my second post in this thread before replying. I said much the same as you just did. I realize that it is a personal choice thing, I wish that people made different personal choices.
"That's socialist thinking, whether you like to admit it or not. Either the market will decide, or the government will. The latter is socialist."
I'm aware. And in a philosophical debate, ignoring the nature of humans, socialism is superior to capitalism. However, people screw that all up! In most of us, the thirst for acquisition defines our drive to excel, (socialism discounts this).
However, pure capitalism is not without flaw. It is possible for the powerful to stifle innovation, and function as a monopoly, (see Microsoft).
So, there may well be room for shades of gray. I think so.
You should see the new G-Class....
bigger than an Excursion.
"The problem is that people who CHOOSE to drive SUVs use more gas, which in turn drives up the cost of fuel for everyone else. It's not like your choice only affects you."
Your argument is the ultimate argument in favor of socialism, if every one else had less you'd have more.
After all, those who buy 'big' house also drive up the costs of lumber, brick and all other building materials which in turn drives up the cost of building materials for everyone else.
What the hell is socialism without humans? What's the point of discussing a form of human involvement and organization while trying to exclude human behavior?
That's something like saying your oven or fridge will always stay clean if you never turn it on and especially if you never put any food in it.
Made in Alabama.....2006
I have 3 sons. Two are 6' 2.5". One is 6' 1". I need a 4X4 to get through heavy snow AND carry my family of 5 in crappy weather. The Ford Escape fit the bill. I also have an 1999 F150 4X4 with under 25,000 miles on it. Winter weather demands the 4X4 to avoid being trapped in a dangerous condition. The F150 gets used less than 1,000 miles per year.
I recently purchased an investment house about 3 miles from my residence. The F150 fits the bill to cart all my tools and yard care equipment. I don't have a commute to work. If that became necessary, I would pull the 1994 Saturn SL2 out of the garage. It has 103,000 miles on it. Less than 2,000 of those have been posted since April 2002.
"Ignoring the nature of humans, socialism is superior."
That pipe doesn't leak until you put fluid in it.
The short circuit is only a problem when you apply power.
"That's something like saying your oven or fridge will always stay clean if you never turn it on and especially if you never put any food in it."
Yes, it is. But, that's how socialism came to be. If you look at it: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs", I mean, that is how you design a system. That's logic. It's ideally how you'd design power distribution/traction control in an AWD SUV.
But, we've seen that doesn't work in practice.
Capitalism is much harsher. It is the law of the jungle. The strongest survive. We know that works. But I've also been raised to care about those not making it. That's where capitalism is somewhat weak, in my view.
Nope, there are two CAFE standards. One for passenger cars and the other for 'light trucks'. An SUV is a light truck. There was an attempt to raise the CAFE standards for light trucks last year that failed.
CAFE works by limiting the size and weight of the vehicle. (Sorry, there's no engineering way around that fact.) The only way to significantly increased gas mileage is decreased weight. Well, you can make the engine and transmission more efficient but there are costs associated with that as well.
The funny thing is, there were cars available that got very high mileage before CAFE was passed. They were unpopular and lots of folks chose to drive large less efficient vehicles. There are always 'do-gooders' who would force you to do the 'right thing' and are willing to limit your freedom of choice in order to do so. CAFE is a perfect example of that type of thinking.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.