Politics

[wesheltonj]

As it happens I'll be in Fort Worth for all of June and July. Perhaps we can meet for a beer and you can try and educate me on the benefits of trucks. It's certainly one American obsession that continues to baffle me!

Not that many years ago, when you could still drink beer while driving as it was really necessary in the summers in Texas to keep a cold beer between your leg to keep your boys cool in the summer, the empties were thrown back into the bed of the truck. Of course it’s still done, it’s just not legal anymore. And that’s why pickups are so popular in Texas.

 

[Altitude sickness]

Allister Crowley,

On the boat with a cigar, my fishing buddy and I prefer the coolness. And it's cool!
View attachment 604989

I think I'll dive into this one as it's a topic close to my heart, what with being one of those 'commie Europeans' now living in the states...

America is different to most other places in a few ways when it comes to cars.

Firstly, unlike most first world nations, Americans see driving as a right, not a privilege. In most nations, citizens don't see themselves as having a 'right' to drive any more than they have a 'right' to fly a light aircraft. It's a privilege that one must demonstrate competence to exercise.

America is different. In America, driving is seen as 'essential', and so any barriers to that are vigorously resisted. The US driving test is an utter joke compared to other first world countries. As such, basically everybody can drive, but the overall standard of driving is the lowest I have ever witnessed in any civilized nation. By far.

There are few restrictions on things like vehicle standards. The overall standard for 'roadworthiness' of vehicles is the lowest I have ever witnessed in a first world country (no safety testing requirement at all in most states).

Enforcement of driving laws is incredibly lax. Habitual offenses for things like drink driving are more accepted than any other first world nation I have ever been in, whilst most cops don't seem to even understand why things like tailgating or lane hogging should be ticketed, let alone bother doing so. Vehicle related deaths are correspondingly high, being closer to Russia, Pakistan or Egypt on a per 100,000 people basis than any first world country (https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/road-deaths-by-country).

There are knock on effects too. If everyone is 'expected' to drive, those who do not, must not do so as they're too poor. It carries a stigma.

If everyone is expected to drive, then little investment is made in alternative transport arrangements. After all, everyone chooses to drive anyway. This is a vicious cycle. Everyone driving means no public transport. It means parking is needed. That means designing residential areas around cars. This makes it harder to get around any other way... and on it goes. Almost all American infrastructure is all contemporary with cars (except maybe some bits of NY, CHI and Philly) and is designed around it. European cities are not. The difference is incredibly obvious. Just visit London vs LA for the demonstration.

This also leads to a situation where most Americans don't even see any alternatives, let alone consider them. As an example, I was in Dallas last week for a work trip with a couple of colleagues. We wanted to go to a bar near the hotel after work one evening. Immediately they all started volunteering to drive. It was literally 300 yards away. They hadn't even considered just walking there... I wandered over, paid nothing for parking and I could have a couple beers. They seemed genuinely confused. So it seems was the city. There were no sidewalks in sight and no pedestrian crossings...

There's also the cars. This is a funny lesson in unintended consequences on the part of the EPA.

Back in the 80's CAFE ratings were introduced imposing stringent emissions ratings on passenger cars. BUT certain 'working' vehicles such as pick ups and SUVs were exempt. After all, farmers or contractors probably do need a big V8 to move their 3 tons of mulch or their stock trailer, so it's hardly fair to make them less competitive, especially as only those types of people bought such impractical vehicles anyway...

In the 2000's this was made worse when a further graduation was introduced to the regs linking them to footprint. After all, bigger cars probably do need a bigger engine with more power to make them practical.

Manufacturers had a choice. Either spend lots of money making small, efficient cars with lots of tech to hit the emissions regs... or, just make cars bigger every year whilst moving advertising spend to higher margin pick ups and SUVs which enjoyed laxer standards which were cheaper to meet.

The net result?

The F-150 is now America's most popular passenger vehicle. Cars grow larger every year.

The fuel economy of these vehicles may be awful, they may be totally impractical for 80%+ of buyers, sure, they're an objectively terrible vehicle for the average suburbanite to commute to the office in. But that doesn't matter. The advertising spend and product planning made them cool, they attract plenty of government incentives (I paid a couple grand in gas guzzler tax on my Challenger, yet a RAM 1500 gets worse mpg and pays none at all), and now everyone wants one. A triumph of marketing and poor policy over common sense. A country where 80% of the population lives in urban areas picks a full size truck as their most popular vehicle as a result of... emissions regulations. You've gotta laugh.

Source: https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/24139147/suvs-trucks-popularity-federal-policy-pollution

It would be easy to take offense from your post. If you were wrong. Unfortunately you are right.

The major urban areas in the US have embarrassing mass transit. It’s also embarrassing that we do not have long distance bullet trains yet.

If the urban areas had a viable modern transit system. The rural areas of our country could continue to use personal transportation as needed and would still drastically lower our fuel use. Many of us drive long distance into the city to work. But the majority of our population lives in a handful of large cities.

Another embarrassment is our infrastructure. Besides the legacy infrastructure. We should have large water reservoirs east of the Mississippi then pipe that water west where it’s needed. A good business opportunity for someone. The fossil fuel companies should move into water pipes instead of piping oil nation wide.

 

[Flipper Dude]

It would be easy to take offense from your post. If you were wrong. Unfortunately you are right.

Just cuz he’s right doesn’t mean I can’t take offense at it. I mean, a fella can have an ugly ol’ lady, and he knows it, but that don’t mean he needs someone pointing it out. That would be cause for a tussle.

 

[WAB]

You need to come down to Texas while you are here. In spite of metastasizing Californians, we love our trucks almost as much as our wives and our firearms.

There is nothing quite so useful as a pickup truck. Of course, I live on a farm so the thought of not having a pickup is untenable.

A little refining background to throw into this discussion. In North America refineries are configured to produce roughly a 70/30 split of gasoline to diesel. In the rest of the world this is exactly reversed to 30/70. We do love our gasoline engines!

 

[WAB]

Another point on driving habits is distance. In Europe you travel very short distances and have very well developed mass transit. Your mass transit is simply not possible in NA outside of heavily populated urban centers.

On an anecdotal note, I drive pretty extensively in Europe. It seems to me that your traffic is just as heavy, or possibly heavier than anything in the USA. It’s not that Europeans are not driving.

 

[flying sailor]

The area I moved into some time back was farm and vineyards, with some stores. Now everyone decided to move here and it is crazy. Saying that, always felt the need for a truck. Just moved down to smaller trucks for fuel and easier to get around in traffic. Used to tell friends I have two rules, Don't touch my wife and don't touch my truck and we will be ok. Oh yeah, used to throw the empties in the back when living down south!

 

[PARA45]

So, what was done differently when Trump was in the seat, and we had low gas prices?

 

[ActionBob]

As it happens I'll be in Fort Worth for all of June and July. Perhaps we can meet for a beer and you can try and educate me on the benefits of trucks. It's certainly one American obsession that continues to baffle me!

Because a Prius can't do shit when it comes to hauling stuff

Sometimes you need your truck to haul your truck.

Or your house.

Or haul shit with your house.... or manure pumps anyway

Or just take your house and go to the tractor show

 

[Alistair]

Because a Prius can't do shit when it comes to hauling stuff
View attachment 606189View attachment 606190View attachment 606191View attachment 606192

Sometimes you need your truck to haul your truck.

View attachment 606193

Or your house.

View attachment 606194

Or haul shit with your house.... or manure pumps anyway

View attachment 606195
Or just take your house and go to the tractor show

View attachment 606196

Seems like you have a real need for a truck. All the ones I see in these parts have no tow hook and a single occupant. They're usually parked at the office, or outside Walmart, or on urban streets...

I suspect that this use case is far, far more common than people who do actual 'truck things' with their truck. But how else would middle class urbanites and soccer moms signal that they're 'rugged and outdoorsy'?

 

[WAB]

So, what was done differently when Trump was in the seat, and we had low gas prices?

Economic certainty encourages investment. That is overly simplistic, and granted a longer term impact.

The president actually has very little impact on the pricing of global commodities in the short term.

 

[WAB]

Seems like you have a real need for a truck. All the ones I see in these parts have no tow hook and a single occupant. They're usually parked at the office, or outside Walmart, or on urban streets...

I suspect that this use case is far, far more common than people who do actual 'truck things' with their truck. But how else would middle class urbanites and soccer moms signal that they're 'rugged and outdoorsy'?

My F-150 has 14,000 pounds towing capacity and gets better mileage than my wife’s Lexus.

 

[ActionBob]

Seems like you have a real need for a truck. All the ones I see in these parts have no tow hook and a single occupant. They're usually parked at the office, or outside Walmart, or on urban streets...

I suspect that this use case is far, far more common than people who do actual 'truck things' with their truck. But how else would middle class urbanites and soccer moms signal that they're 'rugged and outdoorsy'?

Well I'm sure they haul a bag of dog food home occasionally

But the point is, in America we do NEED our trucks. And our pickup trucks are AMAZING nowadays. That slate colored Ram 3500 Dually we have is rated at 42,000 pounds CGVWR! And with 1000 foot pounds of torque, it will walk away from a stoplight and haul that load 80 MPH down the freeway.

I also have a little half ton Ram 1500 that came with air suspension and rides like a Cadillac but will pump up the airbags and haul like a 3/4 ton. You should understand there is a whole different World outside those big cities. We are the ones who make it possible for big cities to exist by producing everything required by people to live in those clusterf#&%$. And we been our trucks! I have often driven a truck 1000 miles by myself not hauling anything other than a briefcase and duffle bag.... but along the way pick up hundreds or thousands of pounds of parts or whatever. Or found a deal on something to pull home. Or gotten where I'm going and needing 4x4 to do what needs doing.

I understand your point. But what do you propose? Some requirements to be licensed and justify a need to own a truck? We have too much regulation already Obama.

 

[PARA45]

Economic certainty encourages investment. That is overly simplistic, and granted a longer term impact.

The president actually has very little impact on the pricing of global commodities in the short term.

So, being energy independent was BS, or did it have something to do with the prices being so low? Not trying to argue, or dispute your knowledge, I truthfully don't know and I'm trying to understand all of this and why we are paying higher gas prices now vs. when Trump was Pres.

 

[WAB]

No you are right. Trump took away regulatory impediments and provided economic certainty. This isn’t an overnight effect, but over the course of a couple of years it is huge.

Biden came in and on day one gave the industry a black eye and a serious case of the jitters. The impact wasn’t immediate, but it was inevitable over the course of a few years.

My comment earlier on about oil price stability speaks to this. Create certainty for investors and the economy will grow. Create uncertainty and money goes to the sidelines.

 

[375 Ruger Fan]

A lot to like and laugh at here

 

[ActionBob]

Another embarrassment is our infrastructure. Besides the legacy infrastructure. We should have large water reservoirs east of the Mississippi then pipe that water west where it’s needed. A good business opportunity for someone. The fossil fuel companies should move into water pipes instead of piping oil nation wide.

You are so correct!

There is actually a massive need to pipe water to large parts of the West. West Texas has pretty much dried up. As has Oklahoma, and as will Kansas and eventually Nebraska. The Ogallala aquifer does not recharge at anywhere near a sustainable rate. There is a natural barrier at the bottom of it (or so it has been explained to me by water regulation folks) along about the Southern border of Kansas. Liberal KS still has usable water, Turpin OK really does not (I'm talking about water to irrigate crops and feed livestock).

Kansas actually has a plan on the shelf. Kansas cannot afford it, nor can the country afford to continue to ignore this long term....

The Kansas plan can be accomplished all within the state, but it should be expanded into a National program. The Kansas plan captures water in the NE corner of the state from the Missouri River and I forget the exact details but there are river and canal routes to get it most of the way to South Western KS. But of course it will require pumping uphill at some point.

We do need large reservoirs. Huge pipelines, lots of canals, and some huge electric pumps powered by nuclear power plants.

This will eventually be needed to feed people.

But instead of doing this. We are taking out crops and forests to put up solar panels and wind generators.

The money and resources could be put to so much better use with a little fore thought, a little common sense. And a look into the future with some intelligent thoughts added in.

 

[Doubleplay]

Actually you are the one that's misinformed. I am well aware that oil production is up, now. It was cut in half during Brandon's first week. This raised the price and made it more profitable to extract oil from more difficult properties. Where have you been?

I’m sorry to say you have no idea what you’re talking about and probably in an echo chamber.

 

[JOHN GRENZ]

 

[PARA45]

No you are right. Trump took away regulatory impediments and provided economic certainty. This isn’t an overnight effect, but over the course of a couple of years it is huge.

Biden came in and on day one gave the industry a black eye and a serious case of the jitters. The impact wasn’t immediate, but it was inevitable over the course of a few years.

My comment earlier on about oil price stability speaks to this. Create certainty for investors and the economy will grow. Create uncertainty and money goes to the sidelines.

Thank you, I appreciate you taking the time to explain this. I got it now.

 

[Doug Hamilton]

The chart is from EIA, US Energy Information Administration site. I guess it being a government site it is not that accurate?

Killing the Canadian pipeline (which has nothing to do with oil production) or banning new drilling would not immediately cut production by half in a week by the way.

Now, I'll give you that Biden administration has been hostile to the oil industry. The effects of his policies, if not reversed, will be years down the line, not immediate. As pointed out earlier we are producing more oil now than when Biden took over.

Have you ever worked in any kind of sales? It does not matter if a supply is good today. If there is a perception that the supply is being pinched the price goes up immediately. Doesn't much matter what they have been paying or what the product is. No one is going to sell anything for less than what they think they will be paying in the future.