Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jeffsquire
_______________________________________________
Errr, actually I do get it. My point is in your definition of "bad." There are plenty of people who think bigger, faster, stronger, roomier, smoother, safer vehicles at the cost of 1 mpg over 20 years is a damn fine improvement indeed. Many people believe that this is progress, not regression. After all, nobody really "needs" a car when there's public transportation, horses, shoes, bicycles, rollerblades, skateboards. In fact, I've seen an increase of at least %1000 of people using non-fossil fuel modes of transportation at rush hour every day. They''re everywhere. They don't want to pay high gas prices so they dont.
I "want" my cars and motorcyles and I'm willing to pay the gas to drive them. Which is why I drive my motorcyle 10 months out of the year (IN MICHIGAN!!) to save on gas.
|
Hi,
Nowhere did I say anything was
bad, just what is. Also, while people using alternative means may be more
noticeable, their numbers aren't currently accounting for much at all. Look at any Major Municipality and
Urban Crawl is an increasing, not a declining issue.
But, you do raise an interesting point. If significant numbers do move away from fossil fuel dependence for personal transportation, that would leave fewer of us to support the Oil & Gas Industry infrastructure, and of course margins. Seems to me that this will, at least in a short term micro-economic sense, have a negative effect on prices for the consumer as well. Sounds like there's just no winning...
Happy Motoring!... Jim'99