When did owning a SUV become a crime?

[Lured In]

Lately it seems like any conversation on radio/TV/newspaper regarding the environment or 'the rich' (basically anyone who can afford one) makes it sound like if you own a SUV you are a snob or do not care about the environment.

Anyone remember when minivans came out? What was that like 1985-ish? Before that you only the Econolines of the world with the halfmoon window in the back. Those had huge engines and the minivans of today, have more horsepower than some SUV's. What about mid-sized station wagon's? Before those you had the land yacht with wood siding and the seat that faced backward and again big engines.

My point is this, given the nature of humans to better meet their needs, our products tend to evolve into something that is more 'fit' for the purpose. With both minivans and midsized station wagons, people were finding something that was a better fit for their lifestyle. When SUV's became known as such, same story. (Prior to the rage there was the Suburban, the Bronco, the Blazer, and the Cherokee/Chief.) These things have been around for a long time. Why is it that now everyone who owns one is evil?

I look at it this way. I own a Jeep Gnd Cherokee with 4.0L 6 cyl engine. I am looking to get into a 1/2 ton Suburban. If you can give me a vehicle that seats more than 5, can tow a 2500# boat, hold all my familys luggage, the dog crate, fishing/hunting stuff, still go uphill and that gets better gas mileage....I'll take one.

Anyone else have an issue with being classified as 'rich' or as not being environmentally sensative?

FYI if you own a truck, i'd bet your next on the list!

[Whopper Stopper]

It became a crime last weekend in Seaside. We went into the main public parking lot with my Suburban. They have a bunch of spaces labeled "compact" and others blank. They were doing construction taking up a bunch of the blank ones. So when I entered the lot there were no "blank" slpaces available and many "compact" spots. When I came back to my car there were still numerous "compact" spots and few if any "blank" spots. However, every SUV, Van or Truck in a compact spot had a fresh $8 parking ticket. [img]graemlins/icon_argue.gif[/img]

[Silver Hilton]

I don't when it became a crime, but the reason we all have SUVs is that they are classified as light trucks and are therefore exempt from the CAFE standards on fuel economy. Car manufacturers can therefore sell them without incurring the penalty that selling a station wagon that got equivalent fuel economy would give them. Therefore, no more station wagons, and lots of suburbans.

For the record, I drive an explorer and my wife drives an outback. And I want an F350

[CATCH AND EAT]

It became a crime when you pulled up to the gas pump. :shocked: I am kind of thinking that I may need to sell my Ford f350 Crew Cab and buy an electri Hybred Honda. Desiel fuel is getting more expensive each day. Of course with the impending water shortage this summer electricity is once again take a huge hike. Just can't win.

Maybe we need to start drilling for oil and uncapping our own oil wells so that we are not so dependant on our Arabian friends. [img]graemlins/idea.gif[/img]

[Miss B Haven]

So if an SUV owner is a criminal what am I? Lets see... 1 ton dually, 34 footer with twin diesels, 4 wd tractor and a chain saw in a pear tree! :shocked:

Maybe I'm exempt from prosecution since my wife drives a Volvo?

Oops - forgot the riding lawn mower [img]graemlins/berry.gif[/img]

[RvW]

99.9 % of the huge so called SUVs I see (more like buses) have ONE person in them. Been to California or Arizona lately? Same deal, 1 person in every suburban, navigator, escalade, yukon you see...ALL of 'em

Its not only the spendy suv's whos drivers feel as though there is some prejudice league of environmentalists after them, but Take a rip up to Alberta Canada any place north of Edmonton...60% of vehicles are 4x4 extended cab trucks with 350ci motors or bigger, all the way to Alaska! (or a suburban)
The united states uses what some believe to be 4X more fuel per person than any other country in the world. (some have said 10%)

Does it make any sense at all to see one person in an 8 passenger vehicle which will run about 20 miles on a gallon of the substance our soldiers are about to die to protect?

I hate to say it, but if theres no place to park, theres no place to park. I think the ticket was warranted and justifiable. Is a handicapped spot up for grabs if the lot is full?
The purpose for compact parking is not just to allow more cars to squeeze into the lot, but to discourage the use of these gas guzzling vehicles to run down to the store for a loaf of bread.

Ive had this discusion before, when my wife decided she was going to buy a yukon to accomidate for our second child. Considering we functioned just fine with a V6 extra cab truck, I found no need, as with most people Ive met with burbs and yukons, aside from the two kids and a dog having a difficult time in an economical vehicle, they just dont look as good as a suburban, and dont represent my status in the community as well as my escalade does.

[WaterDog]

Some folks just don’t live the lifestyle that some of us do where you need power for towing, seating capacity, and 4wd to get to those far away places.

It’s one of those instances where, “if you have to explain it, then they’ll never understand.” :tongue:

2001 Explorer
97 F-250 Powerstroke

[DanS]

Does it make any sense at all to see one person in an 8 passenger vehicle which will run about 20 miles on a gallon of the substance our soldiers are about to die to protect?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">No, it really doesn't make sense. But, gee, people do things that make no sense to me all the time and we don't label them as supporters of terrorists.

Labeling SUV drivers, or people who buy drugs for that matter, as supporters of terrorists is goofy. The US banking system is widely used to launder drug money. Are you a terrorist supporter if you have a checking account? A connection could be drawn between terrorists and any number of activities if you were to be desperate enough. Why stop with SUV owners? Do bicyclists have an argument that ANY auto driver is a terrorist supporter?

Hey, if SUV owners want to hose their money away by driving a big SUV alone......let them, it's their money. But categorizing them as a terrorist supporter is laughable.

[J.Slay]

This is America, where you can waste as much as you want. Space is no different from goods. Got too much stuff? Rent a storage shed...which are usually built on prime farm land. ....

Cirrhosis-of-the-river is right, too many one person SUV drivers. I bet most of them will never see anything but black top.

It is the SUV advertising that I feel is the crime. I am sick of seeing SUVs plowing through rivers. I saw one TV spot of an SUV driving DOWN STREAM! I saw a magazine ad of a firsherman fishing from his SUV IN the river! There is another of an SUV going under water to allow the girls to cross the water. Jeeps driving up the Statue of Liberty........Our environment will take the brunt of this "Fad", but it is great to see Ford, Nissan, Lexus, Toyota profiting form it, isn't it?

[Lured In]

I had a couple of intentions in starting this thread and a couple more have come to mind.

We live in a mostly free country. It used to be that seeing people with a house, a car (any car or truck) was a promise of what you can achieve (if you so desire) by getting an education and/or working hard. The same could be applied to houses or any other material good.

Now people who drive SUV's use too much gas and don't care about the environment. People who own large houses, use to much electricity and don't care about the environment. Most of the time these material goods are 'expensive' in some fashion. But what about the kid driving the '67 Camaro SS with 350cc engine in it? Is it somehow exempt from attack because it is a classic?

If you watch closely, many of these attacks are on the so called rich. (Apparently the IRS and the eco-wackos believe this is the case for me.) I don't believe this is nessecarily an attack on those who can afford certain things. I believe it is part (not a conspiracy) of a larger attack on capitalism.

Think about it, what ever happened to the american dream? That would be where you get an education and work hard to afford the material things you want in life.

The new american dream as I see it, is developing into...

Get a free education if you want to, but if you don't learn it is someone else's fault. If you don't get an education, it is okay because the government will take care of you. If you do get an education and learn, and get a good job, you will be classified as rich and taxed until you can't afford to send your kids to college. If you don't like what someone else is doing sue them/legislate them, to make sure that you get money or they loose what they have. If there is anything you need and you don't have the money (housing, healthcare, etc.) the government will get it for you. So why work for it.

Personally I still believe in the american dream. I work hard in this society so I can achieve things that are not possible anywhere else in this world. I wouldn't change it for anything.

[RvW]

Is it not hypocritical to assume we who disaproove of the use of single driver SUVs are attacking the "rich" and then label an environmentally concerned induvidual an (eco) "wacko"?

Please....Ive never been "rich" in my life (even when I drove my wifes yukon)

Lets say this kid with the camaro actually has a 73 chevy 4x4 with a built 396 fed by a 4bbl edlebrock carb.

Well, at the time this "kid" purchased this truck, he was going through a very expensive international custody suit and divorce which removed his economical V6 from his posesion.

Its all this "kid" could afford to get his butt to court to fight for his kids, and get himself to work to feed them.


I hear now tonight (coincidentaly) that Bush would like to initiate a tax break for businesses who purchase SUVs...
Want a $100,000 Hummer?
If bush gets his way, you can write off $80,000 of it!!
Want a $30,000 durango?
Bush says write off the whole damn thing.
A $45,000 yukon? heres a coupon for $35k off if your tax liabilty is that much.

I say impeach this idiot. Whos he working for? OPEC and GM?

No, it really doesn't make sense.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">Thats all I really needed to hear.

I cant begin to understand the relationship to terrorism, or the excuse "everyone else does it, so why not me" attitude

"laughable"?

The punchline has eluded me

[ 01-21-2003, 07:48 PM: Message edited by: cirrhosis-of-the-river ]

[FROGGY]

I agree 100% lured in

Who is Bush working for?
I have a business owners perspective. These tax cuts and write offs would help not only myself, but my business out, which in turn frees up some money for me to put some money back into local businesses purchasing goods, and for my business overhead being lowered, which coluld go towards business growth and employing a larger work force.
Example: Our business just sold some land we purchased 20 years ago. We paid $ 128,000 in capital gains and other rediculous taxes. That kept me from creating 2 posistions that our business could use.
Unemployment rate too high? Here is one reason.

When is the last time you got a job from a poor man?

[ 01-21-2003, 09:01 PM: Message edited by: FROGGY ]

[RvW]

Theres many justifiable reasons to seek/offer tax breaks, but to offer an $80,000 dollar break on a vehicle that I see no justifiable need for vs a $20.000 used pickup which by all means could do the same "work" is absurd. The disturbing thing is, the proposal is for gas guzzling SUVs!

Lets say you decide that I need the $100k vehicle to qualify for a job to work for you...
Wheres my tax break?

Middle and lower class America fortifies this countrys needs with tax dollars, I have no reason to think the wealthy, or the thriving business should pay more and middle america pay less, but wouldnt ten bucks an hour be more appealing to a person if they actually took home closer to ten bucks an hour vs sitting at home collecting an unemployment check and food stamps which is effortless and pans out to be more suitable to thier needs?

I say give the businessman who is struggling a break on a vehicle equal to the yearly salary of the new employee who is going to be driving it!

Is a gas hog 4x4 suv required though.

I worked for Charter communications for a while not long ago, I am also invested in the company.
I blew a gasket when 4th quarter numbers came in this past year, why?
Because although this company is 13 BILLION dollars in debt, they continue to purchase brand new fully loaded SUVs for thier new hires who drive them ALONE!

A write off for these vehicles is counter productive to the efforts of conserving fuel, environmental awareness, and curbing the general excesiveness of this capitalist conspiracy we call the american dream.
I'm paying for these trucks in more ways than one.

[ 01-21-2003, 10:07 PM: Message edited by: cirrhosis-of-the-river ]

[kenai]

COTR, I thought surely that cant be, a tax break for hummers, then I saw it on the news tonight myself. I heard this story, 2 guys in a bar, Bill Gates walks in and the conservative says, oh my god we're rich! the average income in here is now 25 million apiece, the lib says wait a minute it dont work that way, you and I dont have a dime more. conservative says " what are you starting class warfare for?" kinda like the spiel coming from DC about the average small business owner getting a 2500.00 tax break, of the 25 million small business 23 million get 500 bucks and a handful get megabucks but the average is $2500.

[kenai]

COTR, I thought surely that cant be, a tax break for hummers, then I saw it on the news tonight myself. I heard this story, 2 guys in a bar, Bill Gates walks in and the conservative says, oh my god we're rich! the average income in here is now 25 million apiece, the lib says wait a minute it dont work that way, you and I dont have a dime more. conservative says " what are you starting class warfare for?" kinda like the spiel coming from DC about the average small business owner getting a 2500.00 tax break, of the 25 million small business 23 million get 500 bucks and a handful get megabucks but the average is $2500.

[skein]

I'm with Waterdog. My truck is a Powerstroke F350 Crewcab, and, as I tell the PETA crowd, my other car is an SUV - with leather seats.

I use my truck to take me where I HUNT and then I use it to pull my boat so I can catch FISH.

SUV's are the most sought-after, popular vehicle on the road today. Why? Because they work. D'oh!
[img]graemlins/stupid.gif[/img]

Skein :grin:

[RvW]

Skein they "work"??

How do they work any better for the millions of people driving alone from the desert to LA and back every day?

They work real good at building a big green cloud over Phoenix every summer! But heck, They drag a boat or skis over to Shasta and Tahoe three times a year so they're a must-have!

I like to hear people rationalize thier behavior when confronted on the environmental impact of such. I'm curious, will the concern for the quality of life for future generations someday meet or exceed the poularity of a gas guzzling SUV? Is it even possible to genuinly care what happens when we are dead and gone, I happen to believe we will all see just what our mandatory comforts have lead to.

I'm sure many people think it hasnt effected thier own lives yet, and have an answer to that question ready to go. Did you know the average life expectancy of a healthy male in south america has declined by almost 30 years in the last century? Anyone have a guess as to why there are limits on how many fish and game animals a person is allowed to kill? they'd all be dead if there were no limits. Society is incapable of functioning for the better of the group if it is not mandatory!
Anyone ever seen what the chemicals used in tanning leather does to a person after a few years of exposure? who cares about a steer being born simply to die, we can grow more and add even more methane to the environment. If a person doesnt want zinc or chromium poisoning, they can just find a job outside the tannery, but as long as there is someone who needs to feed thier family, theres someone there to buy the product they kill themselves to make.

I guess as long as America is a free nation allowing its citizens to make whatever choices they see fit to please them, stupid selfish ones will continue to be made.

[Straydog]

Guess what folks..... in a free country people do have the right to buy what ever rig they choose or live in however large a home they choose.

In a free country people also have the right to complain about blatant waste of resources.

It is indeed a two way street. Your freedom to drive what you want has no more precedence than ones freedom to complain about it. That is what freedom for all is all about. [img]graemlins/idea.gif[/img]

The problem with SUV's is the single person driving them. Makes no sense to me. It is very irritating to see some of these people try to manuever them through bank drive up windows and such. They have become a status symble for many, pure and simple. ("Bad ass boys drive bad ass toys!..... where do I puke?) Unfortunately, that makes it harder for those of us that need and use them.

I own an 89 Suburban that eeks out about 11 miles to the gallon on a good day. Thing is, I don't drive it unless I am camping, taking friends fishing or have it full of a kids basketball team or something.

Another reason for all the fuss over SUV's in my mind is because Rush has made it a poster child for selling bad talk radio. Might seem a little backwards but I bet if Rush would shut up about them (and lot's of other things) a lot of the turmoil would subside. [img]graemlins/dork.gif[/img]

Lured in, I have to laugh when you talk about 'free education.' Turn on the radio, look at a newspaper, eves drop in the coffee shop...... there is a whole lot of talk about what education costs and it is surely nowhere near 'free'! There are approx. 6,000 kids in our school district, my estimate is that at least 95% of the patrons pay taxes, thus paying for education.

[ 01-22-2003, 07:42 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

[Lured In]

As far as single passenger SUVs. For those of you who own an SUV and are married with with kids. How many cars do you own? I can afford the Jeep Chke and our Toyota Corolla. If its mid week and I have to go to work and my wife has to go to work, that takes two cars. Which means one of us is driving the Jeep with just us in it during the week. While I agree there are many SUV's (and trucks for that matter) that never see dirt or a serious load, it is not reason enough (in my mind) to label them a careless with the environment.

The environmentalists would have you believe that the only eco-friendly power is wind and solar. No wood, no coal, no oil, and no NUCLEAR power in most cases. I personally believe that yes, we need to control the emmissions from burning fossil fuels as much as possible. The flip side is that auto manufacturers and the government will move in a way that meets market demand. If the cost of oil (gas) becomes so outrageous that only the 'rich' can afford it, you will see alternative energy methods developed in a hurry. Not just for the ecological reasons but for capitalistic reasons.

Cirrosis...I did see the report on Bush's tax cut. Who cares? Go start a business your self and get your Hummer. It is not illegal to own one (or two). That is how I see, yet another incentive to start a business that required a work duty vehicle. (back to the american dream) Do you thinik the blue collar workers in Detroit are complaining that they will have to build more SUV's and get paid more money and have more job security? I doubt it.

Kenai...its math...10% of $25,000 is a bigger number than 10% of $2500. Again, go start a business and you can get more back as you pay more.

Straydog, I totally agree with you about the cost of education. It is not free to tax payers. But there is no requirement for you to pay taxes in order to attend public school. Thus for some it is probably free. I exaggerated my point simply to underscore that education is essential for success in a capitalistic society(IMHO).

[WaterDog]

COTR says:

I guess as long as America is a free nation allowing its citizens to make whatever choices they see fit to please them, stupid selfish ones will continue to be made.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">Huh? So you saying someone else should make the decision for me?

I like driving something that has some weight to it, something that sits up higher than the those beer can cars. I buy what I like, want, and what WORKS for me because I have earned it. Guess I’m selfish then. :tongue: If any longhairedPETAtreehuggingliberals don’t like, tough.

I will agree that most never see the dirt. Mine do. I’ll also agree it’s a status symbol for some. COTR said

They work real good at building a big green cloud over Phoenix every summer! But heck, They drag a boat or skis over to Shasta and Tahoe three times a year so they're a must-have!

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">Yup. those that only use their boat a couple times a year are in it for the looks. :smile:

My understanding of the tax break is that it is a loop hole in the tax law. It pertains to vehicles that have a GVWR of 6600 or more. It was to allow builders, construction, etc. related small businesses to buy trucks for their business. Many of the larger SUV’s meet the required GVWR. I only wish I had some sort of small business. :tongue:

Skein, I knew I liked you. Leather seats all the way! :grin:

[lost_sailor]

[AuntyM]

Your big heavy SUV might be safer for you to drive, but it sure isn't safer for me if you plow into my car. It's OK. When I am done suing you, you won't be able to afford it anymore. :tongue:

Buy what you want, drive what you want, but don't you dare whine when you and 100,000 Single Occupancy Vehicles try to use the same highway to get to the same general area and it becomes gridlock. (Or, in Washington State, known as GridLocke)

I don't hate SUV's. I hate SOV's! [img]graemlins/berry.gif[/img]

[RvW]

------------Cirrosis...I did see the report on Bush's tax cut. Who cares? Go start a business your self and get your Hummer. It is not illegal to own one (or two). That is how I see, yet another incentive to start a business that required a work duty vehicle. (back to the american dream) ----------------

"who cares"? You cant possibly feel this way.

Why would Anyone have a compliant about tax breaks for businesses if it means putting more dollarsback into the business itself?
The issue is, gas guzzling SUVs are the discounted vehicle and this makes no sense at all. It totaly defies logic and is a blaitant assault on the efforts of IMPROVE environmental quality.
I am no tree huggin environmentalist thats for sure, but I am willing to accept that I have a responsibility to do something.
Do you? what exactly is it that each of you does to make a contribution? Is there any compromise you make at all, or does it go against the inaliable right as an american to ignore whats best for the whole and do whats best for you?

The environmental "wackos" go to an extreme because people dont listen otherwise, its not as if these people eat sleep and breath and drive a soybean, but compromise is made, an effort is made to be aware of what effects we as individuals have on OTHER individuals.

Ive met many of these extremists, and one thing I can totally agree with is a statement that the effort is "similar to teaching a dog not to relieve itself in the house, you need to grab it by the ears and push his face into the mess before they even recognize what the problem is"

Its a shame that the same concept applies to those who label a concerned person a "wacko"
I can show you the mess on the floor, but unless I do, it doesnt exsist eh?

As far as the benefit to a business, theres no doubt it would bea positive, the question is: why SUVs? I had faith in the system to make a reasonable decision with a little more concern for the effects of that decision. SUVs are wasteful, gas glutonous luxuries plain and simple.

Consider the actual business that might benefit form the purchase of a $100k hummer.
Well, I would guess that the funds need to be spent on the vehicle first, and then those funds need to be paired with the $80k tax liabilty to recieve the write off.

If a business has the money to buy this vehicle, and also has an $80k tax obligation, I'd say this business is well beyond the need for "a break" of this nature.
There are so many other shelters for tax liabilty out there that might take a little effort to find, they exsist.

I have started a business, three of them in fact. One was a general contracting construction company. I started this business with $2500 bucks, plain and simple, thats IT!
I found the loopholes for a comp policy, I looked for the least expensive methods of licensing, got a million dollar bond with $100 bucks up front, and drove a beat up old 4 cyl S10 to work every day.
How would a tax break on a $35000 dodge durango have helped me and my business in any way at all?
Heres what did help, a lot......
When your a contractor, you can also be considered a re-seller if you purchase your materials at a discount, and sell them to your customers.
Well, if you are registered, every supplier in this country is going to offer you a discount, but if you turn around and re-sell this product to your own customer, you are legally responsible to claim that sale as a profit, which is taxable.
With a little thought, I approached my suppliers, and simple stated that I did not want the sale discounted, I wanted the equivelant credited to my account for future purchases and the items I purchased were sold back to the customer at the very same price.

3 years later, I framed a 3500 sq ft home with no out of pocket expenses other than permits and labor. Hmm, maybe I should have taken the money and purchased a gas guzzling ford expedition instead.
The point is, theres a million different ways a business can shelter itself from tax liability, I see no reason at all for a break on a $100k vehicles that compound environmental issues, ignores the complete waste of nonrenewable resources, and adds one more vehicle and employee to a company that ill sooner or later bury the little guy whos struggling to make it into the same tax bracket!

[Whopper Stopper]

Listen to this stuff! It's like I said in the other thread. People see what they want to see. When the small business people get a reasonable tax break to encourage them to invest in their business by adding new vehicles COTR jumps to the extreme conclusion it's so they all can go out and buy Hummers? This whole Liberal side of thinking will never be satisfied until everyone earns $40,000 per year. If they make poor choices in their education, procreation, are lazy or can't get along with others somehow it's somebody elses fault and the Government is the great righter of wrongs and should confiscate the hard earned income of those who make good choices, stay in school, only have children they can afford to support and have the ***** to start a small business. This "Robinhood" mentality didn't work in the USSR and doesn't work in Cuba, China or anyplace else it is tried. This class envy stuff makes it sound that everyone who is "successful" inheirited it. Most peole who would fall into what the Dem's would describe as "rich" earned it through making the right choices mentioned above. COTR sees what he wants to see. If he expects "Rich" small business people to be driving $100,000 Hummers on the backs of poor people that is what he will see in any thng he reads or hears. If I expect to see Democrats look for any excuse to attack Bush that's what I will see. My Suburban has leather and gets 11 MPG downhill. It's safe on dry roads or slick and hauls all my kids, stuff and camper. If you don[t want to drive one-- don't.

[WaterDog]

Aunty M says:

Your big heavy SUV might be safer for you to drive, but it sure isn't safer for me if you plow into my car. It's OK. When I am done suing you, you won't be able to afford it anymore.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">So if some idiot driving a beer can car cuts in front of me, runs a light, or whatever and they get killed or injured its my fault because I drive something bigger than them. Give me a break! [img]graemlins/stupid.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/dork.gif[/img] Just goes to prove that no one is responsible for anything anymore. Love that mentality. I'll sue you because I'm a moron.

[Pete]

OK, so assuming I shouldn't drive my SUV except when I need it to pull my boat and carry several people, I guess that means I should buy a third car ... it doens't pollute to build another car, right? Or another set of tires?

[AuntyM]

So if some idiot

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">I have an impeccable driving record. Do you?

The law of gross tonnage applies. I don't "drive" a beer can car. I drive a Tbird (that gets 32 mpg hiway)

I have been plowed into by a drunken idiot with his huge chevy and his monster truck tires. I don't really think you want to go there!

It almost looks like some folks think the roads belong to them alone and they don't have to share "in common" with other motorists. You can all be as irresponsible as you like. I guess you have earned the right to hog resources and be selfish.

It explains a lot about our society though.

[Cool Texan]

Couple of points:

1) I drive a Dodge Durango, and frequently drive alone. However, I also frequently drive with an 80# dog in the back seat, my wife, and our hiking/camping/fishing gear and go to places where cars turn back.

2) I try not to drive my truck like an a-hole since its not nimble, and I dont want to wreck it (just paid it off, would like to enjoy that a bit).

3) SUV drivers are no worse than half the kids on the road, and 90% of the sports car drivers in terms of safety. Yes, the SUV will do more damage in an accident....but it will also keep me safer (not why I bought it, so dont start...but its a nice benefit).

4) If you are totally opposed to SUV's, does that mean you will vote against 28 since Oregon just bought (or approved the purchase of) 8 new SUV's and around 50 pickup's in 2002?

http://tpps.das.state.or.us/purchasi...hicle-2002.pdf

Just curious if you are serious about your beliefs. If SUV's and big trucks are evil, then stop paying for them and vote no on 28 like the rest of us smarties in the state.

[Lured In]

COTR...Keep in mind this is friendly bantering...but you provided a great example. (Congrats on being an entrepenuer!)

So instead of reselling products for cash profit to improve your businesses income, you 'hid' the profit in the form of credit with your suppliers. Great idea. You then take your beat up 4cyl s10 and which is great for the environment and you have your suppliers support taking out enough trees to frame 3500 sq ft house? Oh I can hear the trees screaming now! Your environmental concern seems to have a small hole in it. Do you really NEED a house that big? Do you really need to over-utilize the energy resources to heat/light your house?

If it is not evident I am being whole-heartedly sarcastic. I think what you have done for yourself is great. (seriously). You did what you wanted to do and have something you can enjoy! So what if I choose to live in a house half the size of yours and drive a vehicle that uses twice as much gas?

In all seriousness this is exactly what I am talking about. If you pursue your dreams and work hard at it, you should be allowed to build/buy what is legal. If you choose not to do so, great for you. But that does not put others in the wrong for having different priorities.

BTW current law allows some who are self employed to write a work truck off to a large extent. You probably could have been driving around in a new truck instead of your S10 and still been able to build your house.

Maybe another business owner already has the house and wants an SUV to sit next to his enviromnentally friendly BMW Z3.

[ 01-22-2003, 10:47 AM: Message edited by: Lured In ]

[RvW]

Whopper, try real hard not to blow this out of proportion ok.

If you have an idea that my disaproval of an SUV only tax break for businesses is somehow an attack on the "rich" by the "extreme"(ly) stupid, I think you need to clarify which group you fit into.

This is about SUVs not rich vs uneducated people who dont have the **** to start a business.

You may need to study the perameters of the debate here, maybe then you can present a reasonable point of view without the need to put words into my mouth or label me for the sake of taking a side.
Try it, and trust me, it is rewarding to have an idea what your talking about before you actually start talking.

[RvW]

Just to clarify Lured in, I built the house in Salishan for someone else.
And I did buy a new chevy V6 WT model and wrote a portion of it off.

Its difficult to distinguish the bantering sometimes, I'd hate to be categorized as an extreme environmentalist and it appears as though some people need to put my in that category to present an arguement.

All I am trying to say is, SUVs are wasteful and I see no way a tax break on a hummer will benefit anyone or anything when considering environmental issues, and tax dollars being used effectively to promote growth of businesses.

[WaterDog]

Aunty M says:

I have an impeccable driving record. Do you?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">Why yes I do thank you. Believe it or not, not one ticket for anything. :smile:

It almost looks like some folks think the roads belong to them alone and they don't have to share "in common" with other motorists. You can all be as irresponsible as you like. I guess you have earned the right to hog resources and be selfish.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">Another one that want to take away the right to choose. You can drive whatever *** you want as can I. That Sportjet in your boat sure isnt the most environmentally freindly engine around now is it? Why didnt you get honda OB instead? Just a matter of choice. If you want to drive a tbird fine but dont label those that drive SUV/Pickups as selffish resource hogs. Keep the "holy'er than tho" 'tude to yourself and dont tell me what I can and cant do. [img]graemlins/icon_argue.gif[/img]

[Cool Texan]

I'm with Water Dog on this one. If for no other reason than the Raiders suck. :grin:

[Lured In]

COTR...my apologies for assuming the house was for yourself.

The implications of making money off the lumber industry still applies. If your personal and professional ethics were in line, I don't see how you could support building huge houses at the expense of the environment and oppose those who drive SUV's at the expense of the environment. :whazzup: Am I missing something?

As far as how will buying a SUV help a business, it may be more applicable to some businesses than others. And while I can't say I see any reason for needing a Hummer for business, if they can afford it, so be it.

I am considering starting my own business and one of the challenges I see is finding suitable transportation to operate that business. Trucks are nice, but an SUV adds a level of service that trucks don't necessarily meet. For example, if I need cargo room and passenger room for taking out customers while carrying stuff in the back, a truck may not be the best fit. Also, if I am in a high tech business and need to have weather proof and secure storage an SUV makes a much better option than a truck. Same gas mileage in most cases so the environmental impact of having an SUV vs. a truck is a non-issue.

[WaterDog]

Aunty M, :grin: I have a SJ and I do a bunch of anchor fishing too. Something in common. :shocked:

other than to acknowledge a very small social conscience.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">But I do have conscience, sort of. I bought a Diesel truck for the sole reason of better mileage. 20mpg on the highway and 15mpg boat draggin. No gasser on this planet can do that PLUS I got more power than I know what to do with. Do you know diesel takes a lot less energy to refine than gas? How about the fact a diesel will out live a gasser buy 2 or 3 times if properly maintained. Resource hog? Now I know your gonna say, “but diesels put out more harmful emissions.” Not really since most of the #2 diesel is low sulfur. Hell, I can even run on bio-diesel. Fuel made from soy beans! And I can do it without any modifications. Can a car do that?

My wife who drives the explorer only drives it halfway to her work. She takes tri-met the rest of the way. In the summer I ride a bike work. So you see I do have conscience. :tongue: I do my part as best as I can. :smile:

[AuntyM]

Something ELSE in common? How the heck do you think MY boat gets to the river. :tongue:

97 F350 Powerstroke. It isn't used for commutes though. Occasional errands and boat towing only.

Alas, my mind has been poisoned by working for mass transit!

Really though, up here in the Puget Sound region, we get enough oil, gas etc, landing on our roads that when it rains, the ugly scummy oil slicks are everywhere. Congestion gets worse daily and the solution is to build more roads. I sure hope not! [img]graemlins/program.gif[/img]

My frustration is directed at those who think they should drive an SUV as a SOV for commutes. It is NOT directed towards folks who use them in a business for goods and services where necessary.

Most folks who can afford these SUV's for commuting should join carpools, or use transit. Saves wear and tear too.

Remember, the planet you save may be your own!

[STGRule]

I drive an 1984 K5 diesel Blazer. I get 25 mpg. I drive most of my 6 mile round trip to work by myself. The last couple miles are with my grandson in the truck. I also have an inpecable driving record. Never had a ticket. I prefer to be up higher than the other cars as I can see the potential "accidents" further away and avoid them. God forbid, I can't avoid one, I and my grandson will be safer. Since I live in a small house, live close to my work, recycle, compost, drive a vehicle that gets 25 mpg practice active "reduce, re-use and recycle", choose not to use insecticides or chemical fertilizers, conserve water and electricity, and keep my heat set at 65-68 degrees in the winter, I don't even remotely feel guilty about wanting to be higher and safer.

[WaterDog]

Dang, now were runnin’ out of things to argue about. :grin:


Go Tampa Bay!!! :tongue:

[AuntyM]

STGRule,

Actually, your reasoning is sound. You care enough to think about your impacts on others as well as yourself. I don't see anything in your post that I can nit pick at all!

Waterdog, surely we can find SOMETHING to disagree on. Let me see...

Vision hooks? Allstar Rods? Wait, I know.... C&R of wild steelhead?

Oh, yeah, I almost forgot,

GO RAIDERS! [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img]

[Kruechief]

I drive one big bad highly modified Lincoln Navigator

(well when my honey lets me)

The remainder of the time I drive a 1990 Yota. So, I split it up. However, I am glad MY family rides in the gas guzzling SUV for their safety.

I would like to tell everyone in the whole world who don't like it to bite me!

Yes, I know it is not a sophisticated argument but any valid arguments would be lost on the likes of Trophy, Straydog, AuntyM, Lost Sailor, COTR, the entire left and 2 billion Muslims.

Krue

[ 01-22-2003, 09:00 PM: Message edited by: kruechief ]

[Trophy]

COTR, I applaud your succinctly stated posts. Your example on why we have laws limiting the number of fish we can harvest clearly points to the fact that there are limits to our freedom. There is a reason why we have CAFE standards, recycling laws, emission laws, etc. Someone raised Mt. St. Helens as an example, but we should never confuse what we can control and what controls us. We must accept the fact that we live in an inter-dependent world, and we do need to make conscientious decisions not to harm the environment unnecessarily.

Originally posted by Lured In:
We live in a mostly free country. It used to be that seeing people with a house, a car (any car or truck) was a promise of what you can achieve (if you so desire) by getting an education and/or working hard. The same could be applied to houses or any other material good.
Think about it, what ever happened to the American dream? That would be where you get an education and work hard to afford the material things you want in life.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">While I agree that this is a part of what makes America great and drives many people to be materialistic, this doesn't fully account for other aspects of what truly makes America great. We also need to be aware of social and environmental consequences, thus your broad "I'll do whatever feels good to me as long as it's legal because I've earned it" attitude is very short sighted and an arrogant viewpoint.

I think I can safely say that no one wants our government or someone else telling us what kind of vehicle to drive or where to live, etc. But we all agree that we have the responsibility to make a contribution to the society for its greater good, and refrain from acting in selfish behavior. Thus I think COTR brings up an excellent argument against tax-breaks for luxury SUVs. This proposal cannot be justified as business related, but rather I see it as a disturbing trend by Mr. Bush to be environmentally irresponsible.

"Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws."
- Plato (427-347 B.C.)

[ 01-22-2003, 08:35 PM: Message edited by: Trophy ]

[TheRogue]

I have a 2002 1-ton Crewcab V-10 4x4. It gets 12.5mpg running around, and 14mpg cruising the freeway at 72mph. It was driven approximately 10K the first year. At the time my wife bought it, we had a travel trailer and a boat. I felt it was justified.

We no longer have the trailer or the boat, and don't see anything replacing them in the near future. If I could get out of the rig today without taking a nasty beating, I would. I personally can't justify the rig as a family-hauler on the weekends, considering the tires, bumpy ride, and, (considering we're going to war at least PARTLY for crude-oil reasons) the gas that it burns.

But, hey, it's America. Drive flat-out down the freeway in second gear with the windows down and the AC on in a gas-guzzling rig if you want. If you want to run 20K+ per year commuting to work at 10-15mpg, be my guest. If you've got the money, more power to you. Not my personal choice anymore, but, that's what America's always been about, and hopefully always will be.

But I do agree, if it's your right to own a gas-hog, it's someone else's right to try and get you to NOT own one (within legal means, of course)

TR

[AuntyM]

Looks like I hit a nerve.

dont tell me what I can and cant do.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">Like I said, you EARNED the right to hog resources and be selfish. I don't recall telling you what you could or could not do.

Glad to see that you too are a good driver!


Picking on my poor sportjet are we? Well..... it doesn't get used much. Seems rather silly and hard to steer using a big motor to boondog when the 4 stroke 9.9 does it better. We tend to cut the motor and drift in the salt too for things like halibut and ling cod, and yeah, even salmon. We also have been known to anchor and fish. Seems my hubby has an aversion to using exessive amounts of fuel.

If you don't care about resources, pollution, congestion, your own impact on the planet, etc, not much I can do about it, other than to acknowledge a very small social conscience.

This message brought to you by your local Transit Agency. :tongue:

Oh yeah, GO RAIDERS! :tongue:

I've been trying to avoid posting in this thread but......

Most people don't need a 4x4 for commuting to work. Most people can't afford to own more than one or two vehicles.
I don't see the need for a SUV for myself, I need a truck (more than one), but my wife could use one for transporting her photography equiptment from her shop to the jobs. She is curently using a '85 Volvo wagon that has over 180,000 miles on it and will have to be replaced soon. I will attempt to convince here to get an Expedition.

I'd like a fuel efficient car for running to town and trips but there is no way I can afford to have one.

[5-Cents]

I drive a 1 ton, crew cab, 4wd GMC truck with leather seats and it gets about 10 MPG. My wife drives a Denali XL with leather seats and it even has a TV and VCR and at least it gets about 16 MPG. My truck is for my boat which I pull to go fishing 2X-3X a week. I have my wife drive the Denali because it is SAFE and I want my kids and my wife in the safe vehicle. My sled has a 350hp V-8 and who knows how many MPG it gets but let me tell you it is not a lot.

For those of you that think I am wasteful let me tell you something, I can afford the gas. If gas was $5.00 per gallon I could afford it. To me it is not wasteful as I can justify the price because MY leisure time is worth it.

For those of you that think I am destroying the earth find a different target! I mean really! How many millions of tons of greenhouse gasses did the eruption of Mt. St. Helens put in the world’s atmosphere? If my memory serves me right (sketchy at best and I am sure someone will correct me) when the volcano blew there was a news story that said the eruption put 10X the greenhouses gases in the atmosphere than ALL industry in the United States since the beginning of the industrial revolution until the eruption. I don’t see any environmental-wackos saying down with the volcanoes. [img]graemlins/stupid.gif[/img]

Maybe we should all go back to the horse and buggy days, well wait a minute when a horse passes gas they contribute to global warming. Hmmm, I guess I should walk every where I go. When I want to go fishing I should grab my pole made out of a tree branch because I am sure that graphite somehow hurts the environment too, but I would not cut the tree down I would just cut a branch, or maybe I should wait until a branch falls off a tree. Then I would have to spin my fishing line out of wool because fishing line is bad for the environment. Then I could carry my homemade canoe to the river. [img]graemlins/dork.gif[/img] No I don’t like that idea. I guess I will get my boat tonight, fill it up with gas, drive my gas guzzling truck to the river and fire my boat up and catch some sturgeon tomorrow.

To each his own and please don’t push your beliefs on me [img]graemlins/icon_argue.gif[/img] because I wont push mine on you!

[lost_sailor]

oh thanks for including me (with my SUV) in that distinguished list.

The SAFETY of sport utilities is not what it is perceived to be. OK for ramming stuff I guess, but they roll over like nothing else.

LS,
No more than a pickup. They aren't made to do high speed turns.

[WaterDog]

Oh please don’t start talking about rollovers. It is NOT the vehicle, it is the DRIVER! Put down the consumer reports and the biased testing results.


[ 01-23-2003, 08:26 AM: Message edited by: WaterDog ]

[FallRiverGuy]

I commute between LaPine and Bend on HWY 97 every day. In the winter with snow and ice on the roads I see more SUVs upside down on the side of the road than any the vehicle. Have not read anything about how easy they roll, but base on what I see out my truck window, I would not choose a SUV for my wife to drive to work with in the snow and ice.

[RvW]

Its a shame that the "guns dont kill, people do" mentality is used here with the rollover issue.

I guess its true, if the "driver" wasnt in the SUV to begin with, it wouldnt roll over, but if the NTSB is blowing smoke up our butts when they claim that SUVs are a high rollover risk in practical applications, I guess we need to find an "unbiased" source such as a "bite me if you dont like it" SUV owner yeah?

Those of you who use the "its safe for my wife and kids" defense, consider this, of the 14000 +/- rollover SUV accidents in 2002, close to 9000 of those accidents resulted in the death of an SUV occupant. Driver error?
Who cares!, If it rolls, odds are, someone is going to die.
The muslim comment crossed a line, and I have no interest in this debate any longer if its going to incorporate a demeaning hateful nature. Krue, your way out of line.

[lost_sailor]

Granted, all vehicles are safer without a driver!

I'm just saying the safety thing is overrated. SUVs roll over 2 to 3 times more than passenger cars, that's no biased study, just accident stats. Maybe because there's so many! (or ... so many ... women driving them ? [img]graemlins/1zhelp.gif[/img] )

I've never even tipped mine up on two wheels.

[WaterDog]

You guys crack me up. So it’s the manufacture’s fault that the SUV rolled over? It’s the manufacture’s fault that the gun killed someone? It’s not the fault of the person who is controlling it. Just goes to show NO ONE is responsible for their actions anymore. It’s always someone else’s fault isn’t it? Obviously its not enough that the stupid warning on the sun visor says,” WARNING: this vehicle is made for offroad use and therefore does not handle like a normal passenger vehicle”. I’m sure glad your out there to protect us from ourselves.

What the hell happen to common sense? [img]graemlins/idea.gif[/img]

[Cool Texan]

Dog, its like the recently filed lawsuit against McDonalds charging them with causing obesity. It just got thrown out, thank goodness!

Who wants to get involved in a class action against the brewing companies for making us fat and stupid.

[GutshotApe]

Unless hydrogen or other replacement fuel technology is perfected, we are going to continue using up the world's oil reserves until all economically-recoverable supplies are gone - about 75-100 years at current consumption. Some time before that happens people are going to wise up and stop wasting non-renewable resources like petroleum. They are also going to look back at the last half of the 20th Century and the early 21st century and approriately curse us for wasting so much petroleum-based fuel and other non-renewable resources.

You don't need that F-350 powerstroke to pull your boat. I got by for years with a 6-cyl. Bronco to pull my boats........yeah, I couldn't take Willamette Pass in high gear at 55 mph - had to use 2nd gear for about 4 miles. But that Bronco got 22 mpg (15 pulling the boat) and was perfectly adequate.

My present truck and car both have V-8s but small ones that get reasonable mileage (17 and 27 mpg respectively). I do miss my '88 Pontiac LeMans that got 46 mpg - drove it until it had 265,000 miles then sold it to the neighbor kid and it's still running strong - and cheap.

Yes, this is America and, if you can afford it, you have a "right" to wastefully use oil, steel, and other non-replaceable resources.

But don't we also have a responsibility to use non-renewables wisely & efficiently (the dictionary definition of "conservation") so our grandchildren will be able to drive cars & trucks, too? :whazzup:

[RvW]

Dog...my common sense told me not to buy one. [img]graemlins/idea.gif[/img]

[WaterDog]

I guess if your common sense tells you can’t handle driving one then that is a good thing.

[RvW]

So the 9000 people who died in one last year lacked the common sense to drive something more befitting thier abilities?

Hmm, last time I checked, there were no special requirements for a drivers license when you own one. Should there be? I mean theres got to be people out there who misjudge thier own common sense yeah?
like maybe all 9000 people who are now dead as a result of 14000 rollovers last year?

Hmm, by this logic, I would think everyone would question the government encouraging the sale of these units not for the sake of environmental concerns, or safety issues, but for the simple reason that there is no way to keep a person with no common sense out of them.


My choice not to drive one extends far beyond the insecurities of being able to "handle" it.
14 thousand people last year couldnt handle it for one reason or another, and of them 9000 died as a result.
What idiot would be convinced that they COULD "handle" one?
The same idiot that passes my V6 on the hiway 15 miles over the speed limit, and believes for some odd reason that they have complete control over 5 thousand pounds of steel with a 30 gallon liquid bomb on board.

[ 01-23-2003, 02:18 PM: Message edited by: cirrhosis-of-the-river ]

[Cool Texan]

Wow....this thread is dying. We're down to rollover statistics, attacking each other, etc.

I drive an SUV because I like to have the room, the ability to get to certain places, etc. I admit, its a gas pig....but its a trade off. I wont always drive one, and I wont fee guilty for driving one now.


Can we all just get along, discuss fishing, the superbowl and voting No on 28?

[RvW]

Originally posted by Keta:
Who wants to get involved in a class action against the brewing companies for making us fat and stupid.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">Keta, I think thats why they market lite beer, to avoid this type of lawsuit.
I cant think of any other reason they would :grin:

[ 01-23-2003, 02:00 PM: Message edited by: cirrhosis-of-the-river ]