Passing on this notice from a friend in Reno. Might be worth a try.



------------------





It was announced on the radio this morning that this summer gas prices are expected
to exceed $4.00 per gallon.
________________________________

NO GAS...On May 15, 2007

Don't pump gas on MAY 15Th

In April 1997, there was a "gas out" conducted nationwide in protest of gas prices.
Gasoline prices dropped 30 cents a gallon overnight.

On May 15Th 2007, all Internet users are urged to not go to a gas station in protest
of high gas prices. Gas is now over $3.00 a gallon in most places.

There are 73,000,000+ American members currently on the Internet network, and the
average car takes about 30 to 50 dollars to fill up.

If all users did not go to the pump on the 15Th, it would take $2,292,000,000 (that's
almost 3 BILLION) out of the oil companies' pockets for just one day, so please do
not go to the gas station on May 15Th and let's try to put a dent in the Middle
Eastern oil industry for at least one day.

If you agree, resend this to your contact list. ''Don't pump gas on May 15Th".

======================

Here in San Diego, gas is over $3.50 in some places. It cost me $79 to fill the other
day. Meanwhile, Exxon is posting hundreds of billions of dollars in profits...yet
claims they have to cut production because the profit margins have gotten too low?

kimberly

"Nexis" > wrote:
> NO GAS...On May 15, 2007

....

> Here in San Diego, gas is over $3.50 in some places. It cost me $79 to fill
> the other day. Meanwhile, Exxon is posting hundreds of billions of dollars in
> profits...yet claims they have to cut production because the profit margins
> have gotten too low?

Take a look at the following summary of the boycott idea on snopes.com:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/gasoline/nogas.asp

The problem is a one day event won't do a damn thing, in spite of that mythical
boycott in April 1997. People have to change their habits long term, and so far
there seems to be very little inclination to do that. Gas probably will have to
get to $4/gallon for people to make any effort.

Some of the things people could do are unbelievably simple, but they can't be
bothered. Maybe if they were only speeding by 5 mph over the limit instead of 10
mph over. Maybe if they bought the bread and picked up the dry cleaning on the
same outing. But it's easier to blame the oil companies, the Arabs, the
government... just about anyone other than themselves.

I find the current situation almost humorous, after living through the gas
crises of 1974 and 1979. People just don't know what sacrifice is anymore.

--
wff_ng_7 (at) verizon (dot) net

wff_ng_7 wrote:

> Take a look at the following summary of the boycott idea on
> snopes.com:
>
> http://www.snopes.com/politics/gasoline/nogas.asp
>
> The problem is a one day event won't do a damn thing, in spite of that
> mythical boycott in April 1997. People have to change their habits
> long term, and so far there seems to be very little inclination to do
> that. Gas probably will have to get to $4/gallon for people to make
> any effort.

We could probably find that being said not so long ago about two- and
three-buck gas. I suspect that shows that the Effort Threshhold
is always going to be just far enough out of reach that by the time
prices reach it a higher one will have replaced it. Paradoxically but
inaccurately, let's blame Zeno.


--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

"Blinky the Shark" > wrote in message
...
> wff_ng_7 wrote:
>
>> Take a look at the following summary of the boycott idea on
>> snopes.com:
>>
>> http://www.snopes.com/politics/gasoline/nogas.asp
>>
>> The problem is a one day event won't do a damn thing, in spite of that
>> mythical boycott in April 1997. People have to change their habits
>> long term, and so far there seems to be very little inclination to do
>> that. Gas probably will have to get to $4/gallon for people to make
>> any effort.
>
> We could probably find that being said not so long ago about two- and
> three-buck gas. I suspect that shows that the Effort Threshhold
> is always going to be just far enough out of reach that by the time
> prices reach it a higher one will have replaced it. Paradoxically but
> inaccurately, let's blame Zeno.

I definitely remember it being said that $2 gas and $3 gas would result in a
change. People only change their habits if the increase happens real fast so
that it is a shock... a real shock to their finances. Less than that, and the
only response is whining.

During the 1970s gas crises, habits did change fairly dramatically. It's hard to
say how much was motivated by the price and how much was motivated by the
shortages. If you literally have to park the car because of no gas stations
open, you tend to take some real action.

--
wff_ng_7 (at) verizon (dot) net

"Steve Wertz" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 6 May 2007 16:39:18 -0700, Nexis wrote:
>
>> Don't pump gas on MAY 15Th
>
> Wouldn't the real solution be "Don't drive your car on May 15th"?
>
> So you fill up the day before or day after. WTF difference would
> that make in the weeks' profits/sales? Zilch.
>
> Duh. What an asinine proposal. Who's the group(s) that came up
> with this brilliant idea?
>
> -sw

a.f.f-f. ;-)

wff_ng_7 wrote:
> "Blinky the Shark" > wrote in message
> ...
>> wff_ng_7 wrote:
>>
>>> Take a look at the following summary of the boycott idea on
>>> snopes.com:
>>>
>>> http://www.snopes.com/politics/gasoline/nogas.asp
>>>
>>> The problem is a one day event won't do a damn thing, in spite of that
>>> mythical boycott in April 1997. People have to change their habits
>>> long term, and so far there seems to be very little inclination to do
>>> that. Gas probably will have to get to $4/gallon for people to make
>>> any effort.
>>
>> We could probably find that being said not so long ago about two- and
>> three-buck gas. I suspect that shows that the Effort Threshhold
>> is always going to be just far enough out of reach that by the time
>> prices reach it a higher one will have replaced it. Paradoxically but
>> inaccurately, let's blame Zeno.
>
> I definitely remember it being said that $2 gas and $3 gas would result in a
> change. People only change their habits if the increase happens real fast so
> that it is a shock... a real shock to their finances. Less than that, and the
> only response is whining.
>
> During the 1970s gas crises, habits did change fairly dramatically. It's hard to
> say how much was motivated by the price and how much was motivated by the
> shortages. If you literally have to park the car because of no gas stations
> open, you tend to take some real action.

I'd say that the price increases were maddening and the shortages were
scary.


--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

Flounder wrote:
>
> "Steve Wertz" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Sun, 6 May 2007 16:39:18 -0700, Nexis wrote:
>>
>>> Don't pump gas on MAY 15Th
>>
>> Wouldn't the real solution be "Don't drive your car on May 15th"?
>>
>> So you fill up the day before or day after. WTF difference would
>> that make in the weeks' profits/sales? Zilch.
>>
>> Duh. What an asinine proposal. Who's the group(s) that came up
>> with this brilliant idea?
>>
>> -sw
>
> a.f.f-f. ;-)

Ah! alt.functionless.fuel-foolishness


--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

On May 6, 6:39?pm, "Nexis" > wrote:
> Passing on this notice from a friend in Reno. Might be worth a try.
>
> ------------------
>
> It was announced on the radio this morning that this summer gas prices are expected
> to exceed $4.00 per gallon.
> ________________________________
>
> NO GAS...On May 15, 2007
>
> Don't pump gas on MAY 15Th
>
> In April 1997, there was a "gas out" conducted nationwide in protest of gas prices.
> Gasoline prices dropped 30 cents a gallon overnight.
>
> On May 15Th 2007, all Internet users are urged to not go to a gas station in protest
> of high gas prices. Gas is now over $3.00 a gallon in most places.
>
> There are 73,000,000+ American members currently on the Internet network, and the
> average car takes about 30 to 50 dollars to fill up.
>
> If all users did not go to the pump on the 15Th, it would take $2,292,000,000 (that's
> almost 3 BILLION) out of the oil companies' pockets for just one day, so please do
> not go to the gas station on May 15Th and let's try to put a dent in the Middle
> Eastern oil industry for at least one day.
>
> If you agree, resend this to your contact list. ''Don't pump gas on May 15Th".
>
> ======================
>
> Here in San Diego, gas is over $3.50 in some places. It cost me $79 to fill the other
> day. Meanwhile, Exxon is posting hundreds of billions of dollars in profits...yet
> claims they have to cut production because the profit margins have gotten too low?
>
> kimberly

Don't think this will work at all, one thing to help with the gas
prices is to build more refinerys. We have had no new ones in many
years, the ones we have are often shut down at least partially to keep
up with the laws that different states have in effect.

Why are there no new ones under construction ? ( they take years to
build) No one wants a refinery in their back yard. Don't blame them I
don't either.
This is one of many things that can be done to help with the gas
prices, but it won't happen.

Rosie

In article >,
says...
> Passing on this notice from a friend in Reno. Might be worth a try.
>

The intention is good but it's a dumb idea. If people don't buy their
gas that day they will just buy it some other day.


--
Peter Aitken

Peter A wrote:
> In article >,
> says...
>> Passing on this notice from a friend in Reno. Might be worth a try.
>>
>
> The intention is good but it's a dumb idea. If people don't buy their
> gas that day they will just buy it some other day.
>
>
Sad, but true...

FWIW, we are paying the equivalent of USD1.00 per *liter* here in SA as
I type this. That's about $4.00 per gallon...
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

In article >,
says...
> > In article >,
> > says...
> >> Passing on this notice from a friend in Reno. Might be worth a try.
> >>
> >
> > The intention is good but it's a dumb idea. If people don't buy their
> > gas that day they will just buy it some other day.
> >
> >
> Sad, but true...
>
> FWIW, we are paying the equivalent of USD1.00 per *liter* here in SA as
> I type this. That's about $4.00 per gallon...
>

Also worth considering - in the US we pay lower gas prices than any
other industrialized nation. This is because taxes on gas are so low
here and do not cover most of the indirect costs of high gasoline usage,
such as pollution, dependence on foreign oil, etc. Americans seem to
think that low gas prices are a right and don't realize that they are,
in effect, being subsidized.

I like my big, powerful, not-too-efficient car as much as anyone, but
would welcome a change in government policy to tax gas in a manner that
accurately reflects its costs to society.

People complaining about $4 gas get no sympathy from me.

--
Peter Aitken

Peter A wrote:

>
> Also worth considering - in the US we pay lower gas prices than any
> other industrialized nation. This is because taxes on gas are so low
> here and do not cover most of the indirect costs of high gasoline usage,
> such as pollution, dependence on foreign oil, etc. Americans seem to
> think that low gas prices are a right and don't realize that they are,
> in effect, being subsidized.
>
> I like my big, powerful, not-too-efficient car as much as anyone, but
> would welcome a change in government policy to tax gas in a manner that
> accurately reflects its costs to society.
>
> People complaining about $4 gas get no sympathy from me.
>
I specifically bought an "economical" car - gas/petrol-wise about 5
years ago because our gas/petrol prices have been more expensive than in
the US (for at least the last 20 years)... I also "plan" my
outings/errand runs so that I can do as much as possible in one "round
trip". Sure, many people here drive "gas-guzzlers" too - but then they
can afford it - I can't.
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

Chatty Cathy wrote:
>
> FWIW, we are paying the equivalent of USD1.00 per *liter* here in SA as
> I type this. That's about $4.00 per gallon...


From the hints being given in news reports, we will be at $4 or more by
midsummer.

gloria p

Peter A wrote:

> In article >,
> says...
> > Passing on this notice from a friend in Reno. Might be worth a try.
> >
>
> The intention is good but it's a dumb idea. If people don't buy their
> gas that day they will just buy it some other day.

Right. Now, if everyone pledged to carpool or ride public transport
every day for a week, then maybe. But probably not.

While I'm not thrilled by $3+ gas, I also realize that it's not all
that bad on an inflation-adjusted basis.




Brian

--
If televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who
won't shut up.
-- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com)

"Chatty Cathy" > wrote

> Sure, many people here drive "gas-guzzlers" too - but then they can afford
> it - I can't.
> --

Why would anyone want to, is what I don't get, unless you have
a huge family. I dislike having to maneuver large vehicles. I love
my little car, it gets 38-40 mpg.

"Default User" > wrote:
> Peter A wrote:
>
>> In article >,
>> says...
>> > Passing on this notice from a friend in Reno. Might be worth a try.
>> >
>>
>> The intention is good but it's a dumb idea. If people don't buy their
>> gas that day they will just buy it some other day.
>
> Right. Now, if everyone pledged to carpool or ride public transport
> every day for a week, then maybe. But probably not.
>
> While I'm not thrilled by $3+ gas, I also realize that it's not all
> that bad on an inflation-adjusted basis.

The price of gas is right around where it was in 1981, the previous peak on an
inflation adjusted basis. I don't see all that many people clamoring for fuel
efficient cars yet, not compared to back then. Not too many people cutting their
driving miles or their speed either. There's a lot of whining, but not a lot of
actual changes in habits or purchases.

I made changes back then. Among the cars I owned were a Pinto, a Vega, an
Escort, a Topaz, and a Taurus, all 4 cylinder cars. The Taurus was the real
powerhouse of those cars, it had a whopping 90 horsepower. Today the Taurus
replacement, the Ford 500 has 203 horsepower. A comparable Nissan Altima has 175
horesepower today. Has there been some "inflation" in horsepower over the years?
And those are relatively low powered cars. A Chevy Tahoe has 295 or 320
horsepower, depending on model.

Needless to say, I don't have a whole lot of sympathy for people that are
driving big SUVs on 50 mile each way commutes. I might commiserate with a Honda
Fit driver who stays close to home though! ;-)

--
wff_ng_7 (at) verizon (dot) net

"Nexis" > wrote:
> Here in San Diego, gas is over $3.50 in some places. It cost me $79 to fill
> the other day. Meanwhile, Exxon is posting hundreds of billions of dollars in
> profits...yet claims they have to cut production because the profit margins
> have gotten too low?

Something was bugging me about those numbers. So I decided to do a little math.
$79 divided by $3.50 a gallon equals 22.6 gallons. Given the price paid might
have been less than $3.50 a gallon and the vehicle's gas tank was surely a bit
bigger capacity than what went into it, I'd say the gas in this vehicle is 25
gallons or over. That means one of two things: SUV or pickup truck. There aren't
any cars with gas tanks that big... unless you're driving a Rolls Royce or
Maybach.

I guess I'll leave it for others to comment on the propriety of an SUV driver
complaining about the price of gas.

--
wff_ng_7 (at) verizon (dot) net

cybercat wrote:

>
> "Chatty Cathy" > wrote
>
> > Sure, many people here drive "gas-guzzlers" too - but then they can
> > afford it - I can't.
> > --
>
> Why would anyone want to, is what I don't get, unless you have
> a huge family. I dislike having to maneuver large vehicles. I love
> my little car, it gets 38-40 mpg.

I've been driving the original SUVs, full-size Blazers, Broncos, etc.
since I was kid. I like them. I also live close to work. My 1995 Bronco
has 92K miles on it, it had 50K when I bought it late in 1999.

Even with the recent surge in prices, it's still less of an impact that
when I bought the first one in 1981, when gas was over a buck.




Brian

--
If televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who
won't shut up.
-- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com)

Default wrote on 7 May 2007 16:17:43 GMT:

??>> In article >,
??>> says...
??>>> Passing on this notice from a friend in Reno. Might be
??>>> worth a try.
??>>>
??>> The intention is good but it's a dumb idea. If people
??>> don't buy their gas that day they will just buy it some
??>> other day.

DU> Right. Now, if everyone pledged to carpool or ride public
DU> transport every day for a week, then maybe. But probably
DU> not.

DU> While I'm not thrilled by $3+ gas, I also realize that it's
DU> not all that bad on an inflation-adjusted basis.

Looking at the CPI figures and gas prices. When I first came to
Washington DC in 1963, gas was 30 cents a gallon; inflation
adjusted that is about $2 a gallon ($1.968 to be picky) so the
price has gone up but not too spectacularly.

DU> Brian


James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not

Peter A wrote:
> In article >,
> says...
>> Passing on this notice from a friend in Reno. Might be worth a try.
>>
>
> The intention is good but it's a dumb idea. If people don't buy their
> gas that day they will just buy it some other day.
>
>

I think its debatable about good intention. If you want to see a result
you buy less gasoline *everyday*. That might mean not driving a 5 ton
truck as a personal vehicle, planning to avoid unnecessary trips etc.

"Default User" > wrote in message
...
> cybercat wrote:
>
>>
>> "Chatty Cathy" > wrote
>>
>> > Sure, many people here drive "gas-guzzlers" too - but then they can
>> > afford it - I can't.
>> > --
>>
>> Why would anyone want to, is what I don't get, unless you have
>> a huge family. I dislike having to maneuver large vehicles. I love
>> my little car, it gets 38-40 mpg.
>
> I've been driving the original SUVs, full-size Blazers, Broncos, etc.
> since I was kid. I like them. I also live close to work. My 1995 Bronco
> has 92K miles on it, it had 50K when I bought it late in 1999.
>
> Even with the recent surge in prices, it's still less of an impact that
> when I bought the first one in 1981, when gas was over a buck.
>
>

So I guess cars, like food, are a matter of personal taste. I'll tell
you what large vehicles I like. The old boats. I drove a 1964
Pontiac for a while, in the 1980s. It was like a living room on
wheels. You could sleep three in the trunk if you wanted to. There
was not a piece of fiberglass or plastic on that car. It had no fins,
but the longest ass end in any given parking lot. I adored that car.

cybercat wrote:

>
> So I guess cars, like food, are a matter of personal taste. I'll tell
> you what large vehicles I like. The old boats. I drove a 1964
> Pontiac for a while, in the 1980s. It was like a living room on
> wheels. You could sleep three in the trunk if you wanted to. There
> was not a piece of fiberglass or plastic on that car. It had no fins,
> but the longest ass end in any given parking lot. I adored that car.
>
>
You do realize you are leaving yourself wide open here for a rude remark??

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy - who will leave that to Greg

"cybercat" > wrote:
> "Default User" > wrote in message
> ...
>> cybercat wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Chatty Cathy" > wrote
>>>
>>> > Sure, many people here drive "gas-guzzlers" too - but then they can
>>> > afford it - I can't.
>>> > --
>>>
>>> Why would anyone want to, is what I don't get, unless you have
>>> a huge family. I dislike having to maneuver large vehicles. I love
>>> my little car, it gets 38-40 mpg.
>>
>> I've been driving the original SUVs, full-size Blazers, Broncos, etc.
>> since I was kid. I like them. I also live close to work. My 1995 Bronco
>> has 92K miles on it, it had 50K when I bought it late in 1999.
>>
>> Even with the recent surge in prices, it's still less of an impact that
>> when I bought the first one in 1981, when gas was over a buck.
>
> So I guess cars, like food, are a matter of personal taste. I'll tell
> you what large vehicles I like. The old boats. I drove a 1964
> Pontiac for a while, in the 1980s. It was like a living room on
> wheels. You could sleep three in the trunk if you wanted to. There
> was not a piece of fiberglass or plastic on that car. It had no fins,
> but the longest ass end in any given parking lot. I adored that car.

I had a 1965 Imperial about a decade ago. It was a fraction of an inch under 19
feet, and weighed over 5,000 pounds. The living room on wheels characterization
is quite appropriate to those cars. Well, they didn't have "TV sets" like some
of today's minivans and SUVs, but otherwise they were like living rooms. My
Imperial had a signal seeker radio with a foot pedal you could tap to find the
next station. Real high tech! ;-)

But I wasn't driving 50 miles each way to work with this Imperial. I put on a
total of 17,000 miles in the 7 years I drove it. That's hardly using a lot of
gas even at the 7 mpg city, 15 mpg highway that the car got.

--
wff_ng_7 (at) verizon (dot) net

On Mon, 07 May 2007 00:21:21 GMT, "wff_ng_7" >
wrote:

>"Nexis" > wrote:
>> NO GAS...On May 15, 2007
>
>...
>
>> Here in San Diego, gas is over $3.50 in some places. It cost me $79 to fill
>> the other day. Meanwhile, Exxon is posting hundreds of billions of dollars in
>> profits...yet claims they have to cut production because the profit margins
>> have gotten too low?
>
>Take a look at the following summary of the boycott idea on snopes.com:
>
> http://www.snopes.com/politics/gasoline/nogas.asp
>
>The problem is a one day event won't do a damn thing, in spite of that mythical
>boycott in April 1997. People have to change their habits long term, and so far
>there seems to be very little inclination to do that. Gas probably will have to
>get to $4/gallon for people to make any effort.
>
>Some of the things people could do are unbelievably simple, but they can't be
>bothered. Maybe if they were only speeding by 5 mph over the limit instead of 10
>mph over. Maybe if they bought the bread and picked up the dry cleaning on the
>same outing. But it's easier to blame the oil companies, the Arabs, the
>government... just about anyone other than themselves.
>
>I find the current situation almost humorous, after living through the gas
>crises of 1974 and 1979. People just don't know what sacrifice is anymore.

perhaps if all 73,000,000 bought exactly one-half gallon, poured it
over themselves and lit a match, it would make a difference. but i
wouldn't bet on it.

might be fun to watch, though.

your pal,
blake

On Mon, 07 May 2007 01:26:51 GMT, "wff_ng_7" >
wrote:

>"Blinky the Shark" > wrote in message
t...
>> wff_ng_7 wrote:
>>
>>> Take a look at the following summary of the boycott idea on
>>> snopes.com:
>>>
>>> http://www.snopes.com/politics/gasoline/nogas.asp
>>>
>>> The problem is a one day event won't do a damn thing, in spite of that
>>> mythical boycott in April 1997. People have to change their habits
>>> long term, and so far there seems to be very little inclination to do
>>> that. Gas probably will have to get to $4/gallon for people to make
>>> any effort.
>>
>> We could probably find that being said not so long ago about two- and
>> three-buck gas. I suspect that shows that the Effort Threshhold
>> is always going to be just far enough out of reach that by the time
>> prices reach it a higher one will have replaced it. Paradoxically but
>> inaccurately, let's blame Zeno.
>
>I definitely remember it being said that $2 gas and $3 gas would result in a
>change. People only change their habits if the increase happens real fast so
>that it is a shock... a real shock to their finances. Less than that, and the
>only response is whining.
>

thank god whining is still free!

your pal,
blake

"blake murphy" > wrote:
> On Mon, 07 May 2007 01:26:51 GMT, "wff_ng_7" >
> wrote:
>>I definitely remember it being said that $2 gas and $3 gas would result in a
>>change. People only change their habits if the increase happens real fast so
>>that it is a shock... a real shock to their finances. Less than that, and the
>>only response is whining.
>>
>
> thank god whining is still free!

Whining may be free, but I still think they should have to pay to have someone
listen! ;-)

Yesterday there was a great cartoon in the Washington Post on the gas price
issue:

http://tinyurl.com/39ew3v

Very appropriate for this thread!

--
wff_ng_7 (at) verizon (dot) net

cybercat wrote:

> I drove a 1964
> Pontiac for a while, in the 1980s. It was like a living room on
> wheels. You could sleep three in the trunk if you wanted to. There
> was not a piece of fiberglass or plastic on that car. It had no fins,
> but the longest ass end in any given parking lot. I adored that car.
>


That's why they called you the "Glory Hole *** Queen"...

--
Best
Greg

"kilikini" > wrote:
> wff_ng_7 wrote:
>> "Default User" > wrote:
>>> Peter A wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article >,
>>>> says...
>
>> Needless to say, I don't have a whole lot of sympathy for people that
>> are driving big SUVs on 50 mile each way commutes. I might
>> commiserate with a Honda Fit driver who stays close to home though!
>> ;-)
>
> That may be, but my husband needs a larger vehicle because he is a carpenter
> and he has to haul generators, drills, saws, sawhorses, nails, etc. And he
> drives anywhere from over an hour to an hour and a half to a job. The thing
> is, he's employed and many carpenters in this area are not. We're grumbling
> about the gas increase because our budget is tight as it is, but again, he's
> working. On the plus side, I don't have a car so we only have to worry
> about one car payment, one insurance payment and gas for the one SUV.

Since it's actually being used for something that requires it, you are forgiven!

My dad was in construction and used to drive all over creation as a result. So I
know what you mean about needing it and driving long distances. I don't call
that "commuting" in the sense of someone working at a desk job at the same
location every day. Fortunately for my dad, he didn't have to carry anything
bigger than construction plans most of the time. He drove a Corvair for years (a
small economy car).

Unfortunately around here, a majority of the SUVs and pickup trucks seem to be
merely a "fashion statement" for their owners. And many are driven as single
passenger commuter vehicles for long distances. That pushes the price of gas up
for everyone.

--
wff_ng_7 (at) verizon (dot) net

wff_ng_7 wrote:
> "Default User" > wrote:
>> Peter A wrote:
>>
>>> In article >,
>>> says...

> Needless to say, I don't have a whole lot of sympathy for people that
> are driving big SUVs on 50 mile each way commutes. I might
> commiserate with a Honda Fit driver who stays close to home though!
> ;-)

That may be, but my husband needs a larger vehicle because he is a carpenter
and he has to haul generators, drills, saws, sawhorses, nails, etc. And he
drives anywhere from over an hour to an hour and a half to a job. The thing
is, he's employed and many carpenters in this area are not. We're grumbling
about the gas increase because our budget is tight as it is, but again, he's
working. On the plus side, I don't have a car so we only have to worry
about one car payment, one insurance payment and gas for the one SUV.

kili

wff_ng_7 wrote:
> "kilikini" > wrote:
>> wff_ng_7 wrote:
>>> "Default User" > wrote:
>>>> Peter A wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In article >,
>>>>> says...
>>
>>> Needless to say, I don't have a whole lot of sympathy for people
>>> that are driving big SUVs on 50 mile each way commutes. I might
>>> commiserate with a Honda Fit driver who stays close to home though!
>>> ;-)
>>
>> That may be, but my husband needs a larger vehicle because he is a
>> carpenter and he has to haul generators, drills, saws, sawhorses,
>> nails, etc. And he drives anywhere from over an hour to an hour and
>> a half to a job. The thing is, he's employed and many carpenters in
>> this area are not. We're grumbling about the gas increase because
>> our budget is tight as it is, but again, he's working. On the plus
>> side, I don't have a car so we only have to worry about one car
>> payment, one insurance payment and gas for the one SUV.
>
> Since it's actually being used for something that requires it, you
> are forgiven!
>
> My dad was in construction and used to drive all over creation as a
> result. So I know what you mean about needing it and driving long
> distances. I don't call that "commuting" in the sense of someone
> working at a desk job at the same location every day. Fortunately for
> my dad, he didn't have to carry anything bigger than construction
> plans most of the time. He drove a Corvair for years (a small economy
> car).
>
> Unfortunately around here, a majority of the SUVs and pickup trucks
> seem to be merely a "fashion statement" for their owners. And many
> are driven as single passenger commuter vehicles for long distances.
> That pushes the price of gas up for everyone.

Thanks! I wish we had a smaller car, but there's no way around it. He
needs it. We really suffer on our trips up to my doctor's office; he takes
a day off of work and what we spend in gas (because my doctor is 5 hours
away), he would have made up for at his job. It's like we doubly lose with
gas prices and loss of income. But, what are you going to do?

kili

On Mon, 07 May 2007 15:52:47 GMT, Puester >
wrote:

> From the hints being given in news reports, we will be at $4 or more by
>midsummer.


Is that for premium or regular?

--
See return address to reply by email

sf wrote:
> On Mon, 07 May 2007 15:52:47 GMT, Puester >
> wrote:
>
>> From the hints being given in news reports, we will be at $4 or more by
>> midsummer.
>
>
> Is that for premium or regular?
>


Regular.

Do you use premium? Do you listen to the Car Guys on NPR?
They say there's no reason to use premium unless you want
racetrack performance from a performance car.

gloria p

Puester wrote:
> sf wrote:
> > Puester wrote:
>
> >> From the hints being given in news reports, we will be at $4 or more by
> >> midsummer.
>
> > Is that for premium or regular?
>
> Regular.
>
> Do you use premium? *Do you listen to the Car Guys on NPR?
> They say there's no reason to use premium unless you want
> racetrack performance from a performance car.

That's not true... many engines require premium. Read your owner's
manual to learn which octane rating to use for your car. There are
many myths associated with how to maintain an automobile, octane
ratings is just one... if you use a lower octane rating than is
prescribed in the owner's manual you will damage your engine and void
your warranty... it's fairly easy for a trained mechanic to determine
if an engine has been damaged by using fuel with too low an octane
rating. But if the owners manual indicates to use regular than by all
means do so, to use premium in that engine is just a waste of money.
And in fact driving a high performance car at excessively low rpm for
protracted periods will damage that engine regardless using the
correct fuel... kinda stupid to buy a high performance six speed that
you're ascared to drive at speeds above third gear.

Sheldon

"kilikini" > wrote
> Thanks! I wish we had a smaller car, but there's no way around it. He
> needs it. We really suffer on our trips up to my doctor's office; he
> takes
> a day off of work and what we spend in gas (because my doctor is 5 hours
> away), he would have made up for at his job. It's like we doubly lose
> with
> gas prices and loss of income. But, what are you going to do?
>

You'll get better, get a job, buy a little car. Problem solved.

"cybercat" > wrote:
>
> "kilikini" > wrote
>> Thanks! I wish we had a smaller car, but there's no way around it. He
>> needs it. We really suffer on our trips up to my doctor's office; he takes
>> a day off of work and what we spend in gas (because my doctor is 5 hours
>> away), he would have made up for at his job. It's like we doubly lose with
>> gas prices and loss of income. But, what are you going to do?
>>
>
> You'll get better, get a job, buy a little car. Problem solved.

Well, maybe not solved. Her husband still needs the SUV and needs to drive it
long distances. I'm sure he'd still like cheaper gas. A little car would help on
the nonwork driving, as long as the costs don't exceed the savings in gas.
That's where the "but what are you going to do?" comes in.

I wish the people that really don't need to be burning a scarce commodity
didn't, so it wouldn't run up the price for those who do need it. Sometimes the
greatest burdens fall on those least able to cope with them.

--
wff_ng_7 (at) verizon (dot) net

"wff_ng_7" > wrote in message
news:_L30i.2506$vX4.1193@trnddc05...
> "cybercat" > wrote:
>>
>> "kilikini" > wrote
>>> Thanks! I wish we had a smaller car, but there's no way around it. He
>>> needs it. We really suffer on our trips up to my doctor's office; he
>>> takes
>>> a day off of work and what we spend in gas (because my doctor is 5 hours
>>> away), he would have made up for at his job. It's like we doubly lose
>>> with
>>> gas prices and loss of income. But, what are you going to do?
>>>
>>
>> You'll get better, get a job, buy a little car. Problem solved.
>
> Well, maybe not solved. Her husband still needs the SUV and needs to drive
> it long distances. I'm sure he'd still like cheaper gas. A little car
> would help on the nonwork driving, as long as the costs don't exceed the
> savings in gas. That's where the "but what are you going to do?" comes in.
>
> I wish the people that really don't need to be burning a scarce commodity
> didn't, so it wouldn't run up the price for those who do need it.
> Sometimes the greatest burdens fall on those least able to cope with them.
>

She'll get better, get a job, buy a little car, and that will help a great
deal.
Like that better?

"cybercat" > wrote:
>
> "wff_ng_7" > wrote in message
> news:_L30i.2506$vX4.1193@trnddc05...
>> "cybercat" > wrote:
>>>
>>> "kilikini" > wrote
>>>> Thanks! I wish we had a smaller car, but there's no way around it. He
>>>> needs it. We really suffer on our trips up to my doctor's office; he
>>>> takes
>>>> a day off of work and what we spend in gas (because my doctor is 5 hours
>>>> away), he would have made up for at his job. It's like we doubly lose
>>>> with
>>>> gas prices and loss of income. But, what are you going to do?
>>>>
>>>
>>> You'll get better, get a job, buy a little car. Problem solved.
>>
>> Well, maybe not solved. Her husband still needs the SUV and needs to drive
>> it long distances. I'm sure he'd still like cheaper gas. A little car
>> would help on the nonwork driving, as long as the costs don't exceed the
>> savings in gas. That's where the "but what are you going to do?" comes in.
>>
>> I wish the people that really don't need to be burning a scarce commodity
>> didn't, so it wouldn't run up the price for those who do need it.
>> Sometimes the greatest burdens fall on those least able to cope with them.
>>
>
> She'll get better, get a job, buy a little car, and that will help a great
> deal.
> Like that better?

Yes, I like that better! ;-)

--
wff_ng_7 (at) verizon (dot) net

"kilikini" > wrote
>
> Wish we could afford a little car. But I do hope I get better! Thanks
> for
> that! Monday is my next appointment and I go for another CT scan. Keep
> your fingers crossed for me! :~)
>

I am. Your condition is always in the back of my mind. Life is hard
enough without shit like that broadsiding you, especially when you are
so young.

As for the car stuff, and the money stuff, I am married to a "ooo nooo,
we don't have enough money, where can we cut baaaaaack" kinda
guy.

My solution is always, "Cut back hell, let's make more money." I
know it is not possible for everyone to do this, but it is for many.

I see you getting well. Your life has barely begun.

Re cars: I want a Prius! They are cute and weird looking hybrids!

"wff_ng_7" > wrote in message
news:Zy40i.2017$py5.184@trnddc06...
> "cybercat" > wrote:
>>
>> "wff_ng_7" > wrote in message
>> news:_L30i.2506$vX4.1193@trnddc05...
>>> "cybercat" > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "kilikini" > wrote
>>>>> Thanks! I wish we had a smaller car, but there's no way around it.
>>>>> He
>>>>> needs it. We really suffer on our trips up to my doctor's office; he
>>>>> takes
>>>>> a day off of work and what we spend in gas (because my doctor is 5
>>>>> hours
>>>>> away), he would have made up for at his job. It's like we doubly lose
>>>>> with
>>>>> gas prices and loss of income. But, what are you going to do?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You'll get better, get a job, buy a little car. Problem solved.
>>>
>>> Well, maybe not solved. Her husband still needs the SUV and needs to
>>> drive it long distances. I'm sure he'd still like cheaper gas. A little
>>> car would help on the nonwork driving, as long as the costs don't exceed
>>> the savings in gas. That's where the "but what are you going to do?"
>>> comes in.
>>>
>>> I wish the people that really don't need to be burning a scarce
>>> commodity didn't, so it wouldn't run up the price for those who do need
>>> it. Sometimes the greatest burdens fall on those least able to cope with
>>> them.
>>>
>>
>> She'll get better, get a job, buy a little car, and that will help a
>> great deal.
>> Like that better?
>
> Yes, I like that better! ;-)
>

Cool!

"kilikini" > wrote:
> Sheldon is correct. The engine in our car works much more efficiently and
> the vehicle gets more miles to the gallon when using premium gas. We
> learned that the hard way. Sigh. Since then, we've done the math on it.
> We put in regular and the vehicle is less peppy and uses up more fuel, so
> although premium is more expensive, we still save about $5 per tank of gas
> using premium.

It does depend on the car. I think most cars these days will run on any grade,
without damage. But they won't necessarily run the most efficiently on lower
grades. Engines often have sensors that detect "knock" that will damage the
engine, before it is even perceptible to the driver. When that happens, it
retards the engine's ignition timing, which will prevent damage. But retarding
the timing will also reduce fuel economy.

My father once did a test in his car that had the sensors on an extended trip.
The car got better gas mileage on midgrade than it did on regular, enough better
to more than pay for the price difference. His car was midgrade recommended, but
will run on regular, according to the owners manual.

I have the same model car with the same engine, but a few years earlier (the
first model year). They intended the car to be able to run on regular, but
changed their minds. The owners manual is printed with "premium recommended,
will run on regular". Slapped on top of that phrase is a sticker which reads
"premium recommended, will run on midgrade". My car was made in the first couple
months of production.

They reduced the compression ratio on later models like my father's car so that
they would run reliably on regular. They didn't really want to be selling a car
that wouldn't run on the cheapest, most available gas.

--
wff_ng_7 (at) verizon (dot) net