Did Oil Just Become Too Expensive?

[Wyldesoul]

Originally Posted by theclencher

On another note, look at bumpers from the '60s, prior to fed bumper regs. A shopping cart could damn near take em right out. They were little more than little chrome ornaments.

Bah!

I call your bluff!

I bring to the floor the 1968 GTO:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6QmYgpqLlsk

(For those of you with dial-up, they're using a big crowbar to literally beat on the bumper of a 68 GTO, without a scratch.)

And though the fact that it doesn't even receive a scratch is special for the Pontiac En-Dura bumper, the general durability of the bumper itself (not necessarily the paint) was very common.

I dare you to try that with any car made in the past 20 years.

You'd be looking at many hundreds of dollars of damage.

[theholycow]

On the bumpers/general heavy metal issue, I think the excessive lameness of design began with the oil crises (is that the correct way to make that word plural?) of the 1970s, and ended with the SUV/power/safety-through-being-the-biggest craze of the 1990s.

[bowtieguy]

back OT(sort of). from our own here at GS...
http://www.gassavers.org/showthread.php?t=8068
http://www.gassavers.org/showthread.php?t=7520

promoting clean energy and raising taxes do not have to be synonymous. i find it ironic that likely a large % of the poor voted for Obama(and a democratic congress) on the premise of lowering THEIR taxes, yet this cap and tax(trade) legislation will do the opposite.

granted, VERY slight income tax reductions and entitlements will continue(w/ democrats), BUT energy costs could cripple those lower earners financially. again, granted, we are a wasteful society, but this type of taxation will affect EVERYONE, even those that are responsible in regard to energy usage. and the cost of things beyond energy will subsequently increase in cost as well(food, services, goods, etc)

naturally this is not an epiphany, but those that want(and voted) democrats in power obviously have not thought about our future economically. republicans may not do better, but we must vote and put them(congress and the prez) on notice. besides this independent voter leans right in part on the "lesser taxation" issue!

[imzjustplayin]

I don't know what you guys are talking about but we don't have 5mph bumpers, we have 2.5mph bumpers after 1981 thanks to Reagan. Jimmy Carter is the one that implemented 5mph bumpers and Reagan repealed them.

[theclencher]

I think the bumper issue deserves it's own thread. But I will say that some of you are disregarding WHEN the 5mph standards were in effect. I have several cars from pre '71 and to claim those bumpers offer any meaningful protection vs post '71 bumpers is a joke.

theclencher, are your concerns about safety regulations at odds with your concerns about overpopulation? Wouldn't it help overpopulation if some cars weren't so safe?

The whole basis for all my ideals is quality of life. More accidents do not improve quality of life by any measure. And even if road fatalities were to double or triple they are such an insignificant percentage of total pop as to be statistically meaningless.

Also, everyone always says bumpers from decades ago were thick, solid steel that could bash stuff without a scratch, not that "A shopping cart could damn near take em right out."

As noted, one must consider "which years". Bumper effectiveness varies greatly depending on era.

I'm not gonna dig for it now, but y'all have probably seen the Insurance Institute's video clip of the '59 vs '09 Impalas head-on impact??? Yeah, the '59 is all steel and the '09 is all plastic... but the '59 got CLOBBERED.

(For those of you with dial-up, they're using a big crowbar to literally beat on the bumper of a 68 GTO, without a scratch.)

And though the fact that it doesn't even receive a scratch is special for the Pontiac En-Dura bumper, the general durability of the bumper itself (not necessarily the paint) was very common.

I dare you to try that with any car made in the past 20 years.

You'd be looking at many hundreds of dollars of damage.

Ooooo, a big crowbar! That packs what, .000001% of the force of even a 5 mph impact?

I submit my '59 Chevy, '60 Microbus, '64 Triumph Spitfire, and '66 Corvair as exhibits in the "ornamental" bumper category, and my '74 Nova and especially early '80s Fords like Escort and Tempo as examples of vehicles who's bumpers really offered up some protection. Yes of course the brand new stuff is inferior as we've regressed to the 2.5 mph standard.

[theclencher]

Originally Posted by bowtieguy

back OT(sort of). from our own here at GS...
http://www.gassavers.org/showthread.php?t=8068
http://www.gassavers.org/showthread.php?t=7520

promoting clean energy and raising taxes do not have to be synonymous. i find it ironic that likely a large % of the poor voted for Obama(and a democratic congress) on the premise of lowering THEIR taxes, yet this cap and tax(trade) legislation will do the opposite.

granted, VERY slight income tax reductions and entitlements will continue(w/ democrats), BUT energy costs could cripple those lower earners financially. again, granted, we are a wasteful society, but this type of taxation will affect EVERYONE, even those that are responsible in regard to energy usage. and the cost of things beyond energy will subsequently increase in cost as well(food, services, goods, etc)

naturally this is not an epiphany, but those that want(and voted) democrats in power obviously have not thought about our future economically. republicans may not do better, but we must vote and put them(congress and the prez) on notice. besides this independent voter leans right in part on the "lesser taxation" issue!

Can't resist making it a political thing eh? Do things get any better or worse when we have a D or an R or even an I on the throne? If you want to address the problem(s), address the problem(s). Talking politics pretty much ensures that nothing will ever be accomplished besides an endless debate.

Krauthammer... OMG Civic's Krauthammer rant brings up ANWR, which is barely worth obsessing over since it contains such a puny, insignificant reserve vs our ever increasing demand. Whenever ANWR is held up as some sort of "solution" my A.D.D. kicks in big time.

Energy costs could cripple the poor eh? Here's my front line observation of "the poor": the ones in the local trailer courts seem to have a greater need for monster mudder daily driver trucks (and they somehow manage to put on about 300 miles/day within city limits...? ) than anyone else. What is up with that? Their idea of "tuning" is to rev their engines for what seems an eternity- I've never seen that technique described in my repair manuals. Especially when they don't have to directly foot the utility bills, they will heat their domiciles to 85 in the winter and cool them to 60 in the summer. Go figure. Oh, they seldom forget to open one or more windows "for fresh air" too. When they are out and about (always in a car; never on foot or bike) and they see a kindred spirit to b.s. with, do you think they pull over and shut their engines off? Nooooo, they sit right in the middle of the street and idle away until all vital information has been transferred.

I submit there's a good reason why "the poor" are poor, and it has nothing to do with govt...

I just looked at your 2nd link... to paraphrase Ferris Beuller: "isms of any kind are bad". I'm not going to waste my time categorizing who thinks what, and then what that supposedly means. And FWIW I don't track what Gore says/writes.

[bowtieguy]

you're spot on 'bout the poor. right on politics as well. i would add tho that nothing will ever get done so long as we allow politicians to serve themselves rather than the public. and republicans, tho guilty as well, at least allow us to hold onto more of our money and give away fewer entitlements. voting in people of integrity, keeping them accountable, and (the promise of) voting them out are the answers.

many(most?) on the left are sooooooooo lost in BP, GW(or climate change), finite resources, etc, that they have forgotten that the US govt is spending at a rate that WILL sacrifice our future. i fully understand you support neither democrack nor republican't, however the right matches up more to my principles(and i will vote out anyone that i vote in, if need be). i respect the tea partiers--call them what you will, but they are from ALL political parties and they understand what's at stake.

china and india will gladly take our "polluting" industry. which brings up another angle to energy independence. no matter this size of the deposit we should extract what ever resources we can here at home and consider the legislation we pass. we must ask if there will be a level playing field in respect to jobs available under tougher emissions laws as such. maybe the UN could be of assistance...oh, never mind, forgot that they have their own agenda as well.
____________________________________
brother this could go on forever. let me just say that i agree w/ you for the most part. govt is just as, if not more, negligible than many consumers. if we could control govt spending and waste, i believe we could better work towards getting consumers to conserve. if you could control spending to cut taxes in one area, you could raise them in another--like non essential energy usage(or give tax breaks). and God forbid if more $$$ was put into welfare fraud investigation!

[FrugalFloyd]

You have a higher tolerance level for dealing with non-thinkers than I do, clencher. Thanks. Once they've shot their credibility in a thread, I'm done with them. They're not enemies. They're just not worth my time.

[theclencher]

That's because I'm all about compassion and understanding!!! LOL

Re: even more politics: anything more I say on that will be pretty much repetition of what I've already said.

[Jay2TheRescue]

The guy that rear-ended my 81 Buick was doing about 30 MPH when he hit me... The bumper worked extremely well.