You know your product is in trouble when the housing analogies come out:
The market for sport utility vehicles is starting to look a lot like the housing market, spreading pain to consumers, automakers and dealers ...
I am not sure this post qualifies as schadenfreude -- since that has been defined as "largely unanticipated delight in the suffering of another which is cognized as trivial and/or appropriate." There is nothing unanticipated about high oil prices.
That is, the death of SUVs isn't like, say, Martha Stewart going to jail. What has happened to SUVs -- "Sales of SUVs are down 32 percent so far this year, and were off 43 percent for July" -- was inevitable.
Well, in July, General Motors dealers had a 174-day supply of the Yukon XL/Suburban on hand, on average, up from a 92-day supply a year earlier. Inventory of the Chevrolet C/K Suburban nearly doubled over the same period, to 116 days from 63 days.
Just like hapless homeowners, countless car owners are now "underwater," driving vehicles that are worth less than the balance on their car loans. And just like desperate homeowners, the sellers of SUVs are having to painfully cut asking prices.
How bad is it?
Automakers are offering discounts of $10,000 or more on some SUVs just to get rid of them, so dealers have space to stock more of the fuel-efficient cars consumers are clamoring for. On average, new sport utility vehicles sold for 20 percent below sticker price in July ...
That, in turn, has decimated prices for used SUVs ...
Last month, Automotive Lease Guide ... made unprecedented downward adjustments to many sport utility vehicles' residual values. The company now says a Ford Expedition will retain 32 percent of its value after three years and that a Chevrolet Suburban will be worth just 30 percent of its original price. A few years ago, such vehicles were estimated to keep about half their value after three years.
"These big trucks and SUVs are really dinosaurs at this point," said John Blair, chief executive of Automotive Lease Guide.
Note to Blair: They were always dinosaurs.
"Consumers like SUVs. They haven't fallen out of love with the things that made them popular, but it's just become an issue of economics. When you look at paying several hundred dollars a month more in fuel, that becomes a big deal for most households."
High gas prices have hurt SUVs more than pickup trucks because a large proportion of the people who have been driving SUVs were more attracted to their style than their capabilities, whereas pickups are popular among contractors and other workers who haul supplies. Many commuters and couples without young children have abandoned SUVs for vehicles that are less costly to drive.
Additionally, many shoppers interested in buying SUVs already own an SUV, and end up walking away from dealerships after learning how little their current vehicles are worth.
"Everybody thinks you're lying to them," said Mr. Fortman, the Chevrolet sales manager in Illinois. "Nobody wants to take that big of a hit."
What of the future?
Because the SUVs decline is largely owing to high gas prices, experts say the only way that the segment could rebound significantly is for gas prices to decline. Edmunds.com said the number of visitors researching SUVs has increased slightly in recent weeks as gas prices have retreated.
Yes, Americans have a notoriously short memory. But anyone who now thinks oil prices are going to be much lower, rather than higher, in a few years, deserves whatever (little) they get for buying an SUV at this point. We're going to $5+ a gallon over the next several years.
This post was created for ClimateProgress.org, a project of the Center for American Progress Action Fund.
The Informal Economy: Michael Jackson Edition
EPA affirms California’s right to set tougher automobile emissions standards
Comments
View as Flat
sindark Posted 3:36 am
20 Aug 2008
Electric SUVs?
How far off are battery electric SUVs? Advocates of electric vehicles often cite that filling one up will be relatively cheap. Furthermore, an SUV chassis could carry a whole lot more cells than a Prius.
a sibilant intake of breath
Permalink
justlou Posted 4:24 am
20 Aug 2008
Downsizing To What?
If some of the big SUV owners are downsizing it appears that many are downsizing to vehicles that are getting pretty crappy mileage. And it seems that the press is partly responsible in burnishing the image of many of these vehicles as being "Misers".
'Misers in Disguise: A Dozen Unlikely Fuel Sippers'
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/17/automobiles/17MISERS.ht ...
There are a few decent vehicles in this lot, but the majority fall into the 19 to 24 mpg range. Can anyone accurately characterize these as being "fuel sippers"?
Jeez, it is going to be a long time to get the US fleet to anything closely approaching fuel efficiency if people keep inching up the curve. $4.00 per gallon is not high enough.
Permalink
Wolverine Posted 6:44 am
20 Aug 2008
Misplaced Sympathy
We shouldn't be concerned with jerks who buy SUVs, but with the rest of the Earth that suffers because of them. I'm obviously not talking about the minority who buy SUVs for work, as doing that is just a choice of which truck to buy. But anyone who buys a hideous monstrosity like an SUV for personal transportation deserves no sympathy. And having children is no excuse for buying an SUV. Children easily fit into small cars like Toyotas and Hondas that get decent gas mileage and are reliable.
Permalink
GreenMom Posted 3:02 pm
20 Aug 2008
Yeah, the unlikeliest people...
...have been asking me about my Prius lately, and I have to admit, as I park my car easily in a tight spot at a soccer tournament and my daughter and two of her teammates pop out, feeling superior to the redneck in the monstrosity behind me in the parking lot...
....but in my moments of greater clarity, I realize I'm still driving way more than one would hope, and my carbon footprint is only relatively superior -- and only because so much of the populace needs SO much re-education...otherwise they wouldn't be idling those monstrosities for so long after practice, as they wait for their kids...
Still, it's getting better. Just the other day a gentleman in a big American car, from an unlikely background to be envying my Prius, offered with a smile to trade cars as we both filled up at the gas station. Will wonders never cease.
Permalink
MAD MAC Posted 3:09 pm
20 Aug 2008
I never understood the appeal of them
"Yes, Americans have a notoriously short memory. But anyone who now thinks oil prices are going to be much lower, rather than higher, in a few years, deserves whatever (little) they get for buying an SUV at this point. We're going to $5+ a gallon over the next several years."
It would not make me happy to see people lose their jobs, lose their investments, etc. But I agree, the handwriting is on the wall and this was inevitable. You have to wonder with so many smart people working in the auto industries, why they couldn't see this coming and plan for it - even exploit it. But Americans do love big cars - which is a total mystery to me as I do not like driving them. At any rate, the American and German auto industries are going to feel some real pain adjusting to new realities right now.
Victory in Pattani
Permalink
grumpyoldman Posted 5:39 pm
20 Aug 2008
Forbid SUVs
Hi,
I don't understand why one does still make such bulky cars. SUVs have no use whatsoever on concrete/asphalt roads. I'm driving > 20 years now and never encountered a single moment that I wished to drive an SUV. As mentioned in this blog, SUVs should be forbidden.
Eddy
Eddy
http://www.grumpyoldman.be
Permalink
MAD MAC Posted 5:57 pm
20 Aug 2008
Eddy, this is ridiclous
"As mentioned in this blog, SUVs should be forbidden."
I hope what you meant to say was that the government should set standards for minimum mileage for all new cars, and strengthen emission controls for same.
If the government wants to initiate a buy back program (probably not affordable) in which they buy SUVs off the market while prohibiting the sale of new ones, you might get away with that.
But "SUVs should be forbidden" means that a lot of people suddenly lose a rather large investment which in many cases they can't afford. The government should not be in the business of trying to impoverish it's citizens.
Victory in Pattani
Permalink
BiggusCattus Posted 9:44 pm
20 Aug 2008
Environmentalists Missing a Great Opportunity...
to buy a used SUV! As you said Joe, prices on these things are simply tumbling.
If you have already cut your driving to all but essential trips, you might get better value out of a two or three year old SUV than a Prius. It's easy to get one for around 7K these days; compare that to 25K+ for a Prius. And the SUV, for bad or better, is already here - you don't need to manufacture a new car.
You will also be paying real money for every mile you drive in an SUV - a lot more money than you would in a Prius. Assuming that environmentlists respond to price signals as well as everyone else, this will be a tremendous incentive not to drive. I know - I'm an environmentalist who bought an SUV.
It's surprising how many of the eco-conscious are ready to promote purchasing new transportation technology without considering the economics of the buy. To borrow a term from Jim Kunstler, ecos seems to be perpetuating the era of "Happy Motoring" as well or better than most other groups. Few want to to take the hard steps - stop driving, and pay dearly in your real, hard-earned cash for every mile driven.
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 10:19 pm
20 Aug 2008
Lovins' hypercar is not tiny
It is light and aerodynamic. Weight is the problem, to move (and quickly accelerate, for manly vroom performance) all that weight with all that air resistance, a huge motor is used. And that uses a huge amount of fuel.
It would be helpfull to get these facts across to dispell the image of efficient plugin hybrid hyper(light)cars as tiny, unsafe, or impractical.
Unfortunatly our green crowd is perpetuating that myth, another dopey wing nut talking point against plugin hybrids.
Racecars are generally half the weight of normal cars and drivers routinely walk away from 150+ mph crashes. Carbon fiber and ultrasafe racecar design will do that for these plugin hybrid passenger cars too.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 10:28 pm
20 Aug 2008
Actually
"...buy a used SUV!"
Converting one of these cheap monstrosities (get one with a blown engine and rust) to a carbon fiber plugin hybrid would be a pretty good idea.
Save the ID number plate, distinctive plastic parts, lights, running gear and suspension; then bolt it onto a carbon fiber body/frame made to match the old rust bucket. Install a plugin hybrid drivetrain. Eureka! Hehey.
How about a hummer converted? That would certainly prove the whole hypercar concept. Aerodynamic bumpers could vastly improve the efficiency and safety too.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin
Permalink
spaceshaper Posted 11:21 pm
20 Aug 2008
"drivers walk away from crashes"
Racecar drivers wear fireproof suits, helmets and other protective gear and sit inside a steel cage with the car door welded shut (they climb in through the window). Ready for that?
The true meaning of life is to plant trees, under whose shade you do not expect to sit.
Permalink
justlou Posted 3:38 am
21 Aug 2008
SUV Sales are Hot in China
'China's Cars, Accelerating A Global Demand for Fuel'
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008 ...
Permalink
Wolverine Posted 4:28 am
21 Aug 2008
I'm With Eddy
Life should be prioritized, not selfish human desires or economics. SUVs are one of many, many things that should be banned, but it would be a good start.
And John, I have to disagree about size. While you're correct that size is not necessarily a problem re fuel mileage, the larger a personal vehicle is, the more of a hideous monstrosity it is. Do you want a world where everyone has a huge monstrosity just because it gets better gas mileage or because it runs off electricity? I know I sure don't. What we need to be promoting is walking, biking, and public transit. Screw all private motor vehicles, especially the bigger ones.
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 6:09 am
21 Aug 2008
This was predicted by many
Next prediction. China still thinks SUVs are cool. Lots of Americans still do. There is a time lag involved with fads. There are still probably guys walking around in bell bottoms, wide lapel shirts with gold chains and mustaches ... wait, mustaches are OK.
They will eventually get the message and move on to the higher status displays, whatever they will be. Hopefully high mileage machines.
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 7:01 am
21 Aug 2008
Size
Read the design philolosphy behind Lovins' hypercar. he purposely made it big enough to carry more passenges than a tiny economy car. Anticipating carpooling, families, and family vacations. He even calls it an SUV.
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/09/04/video-rmis-hyperc ...
Really hybrid plugin bikes or velomobiles would be better for single commuters. A family could have both the hypercar and a velomobile.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velomobile
I know the perpetually urban would only need one for the ocasional trip to more rural areas. But they could rent one from their local transportation coop.
The fact is that unless things get so bad that people are forced to urbanize, many of us will much prefer to be closer to the natural world. Humans and their tendency towards mass/herd behaviour simply annoy many of us.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 7:09 am
21 Aug 2008
Well race ready would be too far for a hypercar
"...fireproof suits, helmets and other protective gear and sit inside a steel cage with the car door welded shut"
Actually the safest fastest vehicles use carbon fiber instead of steel. With a plugin hybrid there would be only a few gallons of fuel, and that ought to be in a racecar fuel cell.
Helmets and flame suits wouldn't be needed, but the seatbelt system in racecars would be a small extra inconvenience for the extra safety. And remember car crashes generally involve a lot less than 150 mph, so (carbon fiber) doors wouldn't be a problem.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin
Permalink
Jonas Posted 11:36 am
21 Aug 2008
Common, SUVs are just a normal artefact
SUVs are the ultimate expression of the American mind. There's nothing wrong with this. Americans are very primitive people, mainly protestant farmers from Germany, with very crude views on what it means to be successful in life. They have a simple method of expressing this - it all comes down to accumulating things - making big piles of stuff, be it money, metal, or fat - and use it as a defense against imaginary enemies and others - be it Indians, blacks, commies or other Taleban.
If they could buy a personal tank, Americans would buy it.
So let's not blame the American mind too quickly, simply because it happens to be a culture that can never be reconciled with a sensible approach to life and the environment.
It will take time to change the American mind and make it more refined and in tune with humanity. It will take time, because cultures do not easily give up their essence.
To beat the obesity pandemic, you will need generations.
To beat the pathological obsession to accumulate metal (in cars, aircraft carriers, what have you) for use as a weapon, it will tak generations.
To change the primitive protestant capitalist fetish, it will take generations.
One symbol, the SUV, is up for revision. But this doesn't in any way change the structure of the life-destroying American mind.
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 2:58 pm
21 Aug 2008
Never blog while drinking
"Americans are very primitive people, mainly protestant farmers from Germany, with very crude views on what it means to be successful in life ...hic!"
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 3:12 pm
21 Aug 2008
MADT
Mother Against Drunk Typing might have a chapter in his town that could intervene?
But face (hehey, I said but face) it, we americans are a form of very primitive evil. And proud of it, neeehaaaaww!
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin
Permalink
MAD MAC Posted 4:12 pm
21 Aug 2008
The Grist sinks to a new low
The lack of intellectual depth on this thread is astounding.
Victory in Pattani
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 4:25 pm
21 Aug 2008
You meant
To paraphrase "Elaine" on Seinfeld:
"Whenever I think this blog has sunk to the shallowest intellectual level it could ever reach, you somehow manage to drain a little more water out of the pool."
Thanks, coming from you that is truly a compliment.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin
Permalink
MAD MAC Posted 6:05 pm
21 Aug 2008
Come on Amazing, you have to admit....
... the level of commentary here has reached the ridiculous.
I really find it interesting that people here will make sweeping judgments about Americans, but were those same comments made about other nationalities they would instantly be pinned as racists. There is a certain self-loathing here that goes along with the cynicism that is omni present on Grist.
Victory in Pattani
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 9:21 pm
21 Aug 2008
excavating to new lows
Actually, as we see, all sorts of delightful creativity keeps getting inspired all the time, even as resources get narrower and the jellyfish multiply, such as BioD's "Never blog while drinking" -- ha!, quelle blague! As another wit once said: "Friends do not let friends drink and blog."
Never having watched "Seinfeld," I much appreciate Amazing's quote from Elaine. "Draining a little more water out of the pool" is a gorgeously grotesque image. No wonder Bill Gates is paying Seinfeld $10^7 to counterattack against that way-cool-and-cute kid Justin Long.
What a thrill, to think that Elaine might have uttered that comment in a Greek diner just around the corner from where I live!
Anyway:
- Herr Joseph Romm, who shares the same baptismal first name with the current Bishop of Rome, aka the Pope, Herr Kardinal Joseph Ratzinger of Beier/Bavaria, might be interested to know that German nouns are regularly capitalized: Schadenfreude.
- Drunk or not (and I do not think he was -- and if he was, good for him!), notre bon ami Jonas makes an interesting, vaguely revisionist suggestion, that popular American morality is founded in the value system of Protestant German farmers. Could be true! After the old story, that American morality is founded in the constipated sub-Augustinian ethics of English Puritans in New England, Jonas's idea is much more accommodating of the historical reality, the reception of many European immigrants from Southern (e.g. my folks) and Eastern Europe.
- He probably should not press the "Protestant" part, though. There were lots of German-speaking immigrants from Catholic regions, e.g. Bavaria and Austria, such as (in unusual circumstances, to be sure) the current governor of Ka-lee-faw-nee-a (the land of Sutter's Mill!, where a Swiss-German immigrant perhaps caused a greater event in North American history than any caused by any other German, i.e. the California Gold Rush of 1848).
- Also in defense of Monsieur Jonas's theory is the fact that in a recent survey, when a sizeable sample of American respondents were asked to identify all the ethnic groups of their ancestors, "German" was the group most often identified (and NOT English, Scottish or Irish). Many of these people with German ancestry do not have German surnames, presumably; and we should not stereotypically accuse a prominent unhappy figure with a German surname such as Donald Rumsfeld of innate German wickedness, any more than Alberto Gonzales's pathetic term as Attorney General should redound to the dishonor of Latinos.
- Anyway, it might be pointed out that more noteworthy, and magnificently praiseworthy, German-Americans are all over the place, opinion-wise. Just within our own Gristmill community, we include the excellent John Schneider (aka Amazing Dr X), Erik Hoffner and Kit Stolz, to say nothing of Joseph Romm himself (demselbst).
Whatever.But Monsieur Jonas also made the interesting assertion, which has more than a grain of truth in it, that "If they could buy a personal tank, Americans would buy it."
Well? Is that not so? Are not many Americans like that? Are they not obsessed with looking very tough, speaking to no one, even as thay are at heart very frightened?
And if Americans of that ilk do not want to buy personal tanks themselves, do they not consider it a grave threat to the republic, that sales of such vehicles should be carefully restricted? -- the "freedom" of our options as consumers being the principal expression of our patriotic Americanness. : (
Nevertheless, unspeakable conservatives of one kind or another will continue to say that marijuana, cocaine and heroin -- three illegal substances of very different natures -- should all be absolutely illegal, and that people associated with the sale and/or possession of those substances should be punished.
Why in the world do conservatives oppose the legalization of marijuana, cocaine and heroin? That is totally inconsistent with the way they think, otherwise, regarding free markets. Not only has the totally unnecessary and greatly unexplained opposition to those substances done no good, and in fact has done terrific social evil; but also, it has destroyed a fairly decent marketing opportunity, amounting to billions perhaps, along the lines of the way alcoholic beverages and tobacco products are sold.
Chickens deserve our true friendship! So do fish! So do other sentient beings! Let us learn to be kind.
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 2:18 am
22 Aug 2008
Ritalin
That's the real "gateway" drug Canis. And it's not only legal, but handed out like (mandatory, either accept it or get out of school) candy to many school children. Addicting many of them to methamphetamine for life, often a short harrowing one at that.
Anyway, yeah Jonas was just venting in an awkward, comical fashion. And of course many of us enjoy nationally and personally self-deprecating humor, especially of the Seinfeldian/Larry David variety. Add in some Colbert irony and there you have it.
I would imagine that living offshore for quite awhile and fighting the many enemies of US corporate imperialism, you would be offended by our humor MAC. No problem. We tend to take your dangerous service for granted. At least you volunteered, that mitigates the problem somewhat?
You should try to catch that episode Canis. It's a good one.
Nice to have you here MAC and Jonas. Without your points of view this virtual street corner could get boring.
Now where is Ron? We chased him off, too bad.
Good thing you guys and the rest of the opposition to us treehugging liberal idealists (hehey) are still subjecting yourselves to our bloggerel. Keep up the good work, please.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin
Permalink
MAD MAC Posted 2:39 am
22 Aug 2008
Canis, I am surprised you aren't as sharp as usual
"Are not many Americans like that? Are they not obsessed with looking very tough, speaking to no one, even as they are at heart very frightened?"
Actually the answer to this is no. Americans are very well known throughout the world for being extremely friendly people. They get bad grades by the ill informed for not understanding other cultures (when in fact almost every culture found on earth resides in America) but they are well known for being friendly and for having a friendly culture. I have never met a non-American anywhere who had visited America that was not impressed with how friendly Americans are. Now Germans, Japanese........ these are not warm cultures.
"Why in the world do conservatives oppose the legalization of marijuana, cocaine and heroin? That is totally inconsistent with the way they think, otherwise, regarding free markets. Not only has the totally unnecessary and greatly unexplained opposition to those substances done no good, and in fact has done terrific social evil; but also, it has destroyed a fairly decent marketing opportunity, amounting to billions perhaps, along the lines of the way alcoholic beverages and tobacco products are sold."
In a word - China.
Alcohol and Cigarettes are already kicking our collective asses. It's hard for me to fathom a rationale for adding more addictive fuel to the fire. We're stuck with the first two - why open the flood gates?
Victory in Pattani
Permalink
MAD MAC Posted 2:43 am
22 Aug 2008
I'm not much of an altruist I'm afraid
"I would imagine that living offshore for quite awhile and fighting the many enemies of US corporate imperialism, you would be offended by our humor MAC. No problem. We tend to take your dangerous service for granted. At least you volunteered, that mitigates the problem somewhat?"
I was well paid for a profession I enjoyed. My generous retirement has allowed me to live in provincial Thailand, and there are much worse fates than that!
Victory in Pattani
Permalink
John former Marine Posted 4:57 am
22 Aug 2008
SUV owners deserve what they're getting.
Whenever I pull my Civic up to the loading dock at a hardware store and proceed to load a couple dozen planks into it along with whatever else I'm buying, I routinely see an SUV pulled up next to me loading a single item like a bag of potting soil. Those people should be embarrassed and definitely deserve to reap what they sowed. I hope gas hits $10. I know more poor people will have to ride public transportation but at that point, the government won't be able to ignore the problem and will have to rebuild the public transportation infrastucture that we should already have. But the people who just keep buying SUVs in case they have to go pick up a loaf of bread definitely deserve to lose their shirts.
Il faut cultiver notre jardin.
Permalink
MAD MAC Posted 6:44 am
22 Aug 2008
Why John? Why do they "deserve" it?
You're judging what they deserve in life based on the fact that they bought SUVs at a time when gas was cheap? Sure, a lot of people predicted gas would go up. But nobody really knew when.
Now, we all make choices in our lives, and have to live with good and bad choices. On that we can agree (I think). But when someone else has misfortune, it shouldn't be making you happy.
When gas rises to 10 bucks a gallon, a lot of people are going to die. This isn't a question of some people being forced into public transportation, this is a question of those who now live on the fringe in Africa and other places not having enough money to buy food as the cost for same doubles. Are you going to be happy about that too?
It is one thing to be concerned about issues that are confronting us - like climate change and peak oil and what these issues mean to Joe Six Pack. It's another thing to be "happy" because someone made a choice you disagree with and think was foolish and now they lose a significant investment which might create personal hardship on them and their family. I don't understand why anyone would think "they deserve to lose their shirts".
Victory in Pattani
Permalink
MAD MAC Posted 6:48 am
22 Aug 2008
Why John? Why do they "deserve" it?
You're judging what they deserve in life based on the fact that they bought SUVs at a time when gas was cheap? Sure, a lot of people predicted gas would go up. But nobody really knew when.
Now, we all make choices in our lives, and have to live with good and bad choices. On that we can agree (I think). But when someone else has misfortune, it shouldn't be making you happy.
When gas rises to 10 bucks a gallon, a lot of people are going to die. This isn't a question of some people being forced into public transportation, this is a question of those who now live on the fringe in Africa and other places not having enough money to buy food as the cost for same doubles. Are you going to be happy about that too?
It is one thing to be concerned about issues that are confronting us - like climate change and peak oil and what these issues mean to Joe Six Pack. It's another thing to be "happy" because someone made a choice you disagree with and think was foolish and now they lose a significant investment which might create personal hardship on them and their family. I don't understand why anyone would think "they deserve to lose their shirts".
Victory in Pattani
Permalink
Jonas Posted 7:57 am
22 Aug 2008
But they are protestant Germans
Page 212 of "Max Weber in America" (about the links between protestantism, capitalism and Americanism), it says: "roughly three quarters of all white Americans have Anglosaxon roots. Of those, about half came from protestant parts of Germany, mainly rural areas. The German protestants now form the main group amongst white Anglosaxon protestants in the United States."
I always thought most Americans had their roots somewhere in Ireland or the posh parts of the UK. Apparently I was wrong.
Europe's main cultural TV station - ARTE TV - recently had a show about this German essence of the United States. A full two-series documentary:
Allemands d'Amérique.
(Don't mind the picture of the primitive German farmer - it's just marketing, not very subtle.)
Two largest groups of immigrants into the U.S.:
1840-1860: 32.2% of all immigrants into the U.S. came from Germany (39.3% from Ireland)
1860-1880: 29.4% from Germany (32.2% from Great Britain)
1880-1900: 23.3% from Germany (11.7% from Ireland)
1900-1920: 11.3% from Germany (11.3% from Italy)
1920-1940: 19.8% from Germany (9.2% from Great Britain)
Of all white protestant Anglosaxon groups in the U.S., those with German roots are the largest.
The Weberian theory about capitalism and protestantism is essential in order to understand the American mind as we see it at work today, in material culture and consumption.
Permalink
spaceshaper Posted 8:48 am
22 Aug 2008
Capital! Or not.
Mac, John FM is just indulging in a little schadenfreude. AKA epikairakakia. So male.
And by the way, Canis:
"In German, Schadenfreude is capitalized, as are all nouns in the German language. When used as a loanword in English, however, it is not, unless the origin of the word is meant to be emphasized." From the Wikipedia article JR referenced.
The true meaning of life is to plant trees, under whose shade you do not expect to sit.
Permalink
Wolverine Posted 9:13 am
22 Aug 2008
Why They Deserve It
People who bought SUVs deserve what they get because they were willing to consume more gasoline and pollute the Earth with a hideous monstrosity. It is irrelevant whether anyone knew gasoline prices would begin approaching the actual cost of gasoline, which they still haven't come close to. It is the attitude of even wanting something like this that's the problem, beyond the specific problems SUVs cause by their use and even just by their existence.
Permalink
mizfahey Posted 12:32 pm
23 Aug 2008
No pity...
No pity for SUV owners having to "painfully cut selling prices" - they made the ridiculous decisions to buy them in the first place. They never had SUVs when I was growing up and we still managed to get around. Use public transportation. Ride your bike. WALK. Get a ZipCar membership. Insist that all these options be available in your community if they are not. We are car-free in my family - we ride bikes to the grocery store and the 4 miles each way to work, get to know our neighbors and neighborhood by actually walking places, reserve a ZipCar for out-of-town trips, grab a cab home if it's a late night event, or take the bus nearly everywhere when inclement weather prevails, and we are happy as clams.
What I see most are spoiled attitudes and an unwillingness to adapt to what this earth needs to survive. What I mean is, being car-free means I have to think a bit more before I do things, maybe do some research before I go out to make sure I can efficiently get to where I need to go and complete all my tasks. I ride my bike and I multitask - i.e., I don't have to go to the gym, I get to where I need to go, and I feel wonderful afterwards. I take the bus and it allows me to catch up on my reading, save money on gas and parking, and still get to where I'm going. Being car-free has helped me remember what's most important and, like when we were kids, be a little more creative with my time rather than expecting instant gratification.
I am fortunate to live in a very green city, yet the biggest battle here going on is to build a $400M bridge to accommodate more cars, instead of spending that money on improving public and other greener forms of transportation.
$5 gas? $10 gas? We are still not paying the actual price, as the government continues to give billions in subsidies to the oil companies. In Europe they are paying over $12/gal for gas because they pay the true price of it instead of sucking up to the earth-killing, profit-driven oil companies. I have seen the benefit of the higher gas prices - less people are driving, more people are using alternate transportation, and some are even realizing that buying local has it's benefits!! Yes, there is a paradigm shift needed to make a positive transition during this interesting time, but if people open their minds and hearts to thinking a little differently, more creatively, and more community-based, we can have a stronger economy than we've ever imagined (check out what Iceland has done from being the poorest to one of the richest countries on earth...).
Once upon a time people stood up for what was right and affected change - we are in a critical place as the elections near, a place where we can really DO something. Environmentalism trumps all other issues - without the earth to give us air and water and food, other social and political issues become moot points.
Permalink
Wolverine Posted 2:32 pm
23 Aug 2008
Right On, Mizfahey
You are a true environmentalist. We need a lot more like you here and elsewhere.
Permalink
hapa Posted 3:44 pm
23 Aug 2008
the original hummer...
WAS a personal tank.
Permalink
MAD MAC Posted 4:17 pm
23 Aug 2008
Schadenfreude is not a positive thing
":Mac, John FM is just indulging in a little schadenfreude."
Wolverine, and you deserve to be eaten alive by wild animals, given your bent for same. That way you can appreciate natures mercy, or lack thereof, up close.
Perhaps a little compassion for those who made ill-informed decisions would be in order - everywhere except of course the Grist, where tolerance is at a minimum.
I am waiting for Wolverine here to advocate the establishment of extermination camps to get the human population back down to a tolerable number like 500 million.
Victory in Pattani
Permalink
MAD MAC Posted 4:22 pm
23 Aug 2008
This is a lie
"In Europe they are paying over $12/gal for gas because they pay the true price of it instead of sucking up to the earth-killing, profit-driven oil companies."
In SOME PLACES in Europe they tax gas at 100% of it's value. That's not true price, that's additional taxation. True price is the price an unfettered market sets.
Additionally (and I lived in Europe for 17 years so I think I'm qualified to comment) the high price of gas still hasn't kept cars off the road. Germany has the worst traffic jams I have ever experienced anywhere, and has them all over the country every day. Their radio "traffic report" is simply one long list of traffic jams. You can never drive anywhere in Germany (on the highway anyway) without hitting one. City traffic is horrible - you can never find places to park, the streets are clogged with traffic until after work hours.
Victory in Pattani
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 5:58 pm
23 Aug 2008
Entschuldigen Sie mich!
FYI, MadMac, BMW is currently running an ad on US TV, with the basic message, "We in our country know what sky-high fuel prices are like, and that is why we make spectacularly fuel-efficient cars -- which you would be well-advised to buy." The accompanying imagery features roadway conditions in Germany (allegedly): weary depressed commuters on bicycles and in trains; infrequent cars, whose presence prompts shock; a fuel pump price of over eight euros per litre.
I have never been to Germany, and have no idea what driving conditions there are like, really. (And of course I do not doubt your account.) In Italy, I have observed plenty of congestion -- but i do not know how much ancient urban planning, and the attitudes of contemporary Italian drivers, contribute.
Many Italians believe that German drivers visiting their country are so tight-assed and rules-bound that they will intentionally ram with their own car the car of someone whom they perceive to be breaking a traffic law.
On the subject of how Germans and Italians feel toward one another, an Italian wit recently observed: "The Germans love the Italians, but they do not admire them; the Italians admire the Germans, but they do not love them."
Chickens deserve our true friendship! So do fish! So do other sentient beings! Let us learn to be kind.
Permalink
MAD MAC Posted 6:16 pm
23 Aug 2008
This sums it up
"The Germans love the Italians, but they do not admire them; the Italians admire the Germans, but they do not love them."
Victory in Pattani
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 11:50 pm
23 Aug 2008
"Free" market fuel prices
Nowhere are fuel prices set by a "free" market.
They are taxed or subsidized, depending upon the country and its economic system.
Renewable electricity from your own solar, wind, or biogas system used in a plugin hybrid, that would be a "fuel" price set by a real free market.
So anyone really in favor of free markets ought to embrace this new technology.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin
Permalink
Wolverine Posted 3:41 am
24 Aug 2008
True Price
"True price is the price an unfettered market sets."
This is false. The true price must also include all environmental and ecological damage done by driving and all the infrastructure needed to support it, to the extent that the damage can be measured monetarily. That would price gasoline at at least $15/gallon, probably higher.
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 4:23 am
24 Aug 2008
Re "[s]chadenfreude"
Sure, SpaSh, it happens all the time to loan words from one language, as they are assimilated to the speech of the borrowers. Cf. how the Romans regularly (though not always) put their own case-endings onto the Greek nouns that they borrowed; and with some proper nouns, they went even further, so that "Odysseus" became "Ulixes," and "Persephone" became "Proserpina."
At this point in the history of the English language, I suppose it would be a thoroughly quixotic folly to try to insist on writing "Hamburger," "Frankfurter," "Sauerkraut," "Pumpernickel," "wiener Schnitzel"; and, leaving food-words, "Kapellmeister," "Heldentenor," even "Dachshund." (Look, by the way, at what we English-speakers have done to the Dachshund's sister-pup, the poor "Pudel"!)
Still, to have to write "zeitgeist," "sitz im leben," "weltanschauung," "goetterdaemmerung," and even "schadenfreude," would seem to miss the point: where is the fun in that? It loses the rollicking, Klink-mit-Schultz Gemuetlichkeit. Is life worth living, if we are not permitted to recall Cloris Leachman's glorious, mitteleuropaeisch Frau Bluecher, her of the wildly neighing horses, in "Young Frankenstein"?, or Madeline Kahn's sultry songstress Lili Von Shtupp, romancing Cleavon Little's far from little Schlange, in "Blazing Saddles"?
As for "eukairokakia" (there probably should be an "o" after the "r," not an "a"), which I never saw before, that seems to be a recently created term; it does not appear in ancient Greek. But it is formed quite correctly. It is not a perfect equivalent to "Schadenfreude," which is literally, "joy on the occasion of an injury," but is close enough: "the occasion of a misfortune which is appropriate or fitting."
Chickens deserve our true friendship! So do fish! So do other sentient beings! Let us learn to be kind.
Permalink
spaceshaper Posted 5:13 am
24 Aug 2008
It's not eu, it's epi
"In the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle used the term epikhairekakia (alternatively epikairekakia; ἐπιχαιρεκακία in Greek) as part of a triad of terms, in which epikhairekakia stands as the opposite of phthonos, and nemesis occupies the mean. Nemesis is "a painful response to another's undeserved good fortune," while phthonos is "a painful response to any good fortune," deserved or not. The epikhairekakos person actually takes pleasure in another's ill fortune."
The true meaning of life is to plant trees, under whose shade you do not expect to sit.
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 6:45 am
24 Aug 2008
oh, right, much better
The first reference is in Nicomachean Ethics, Book 2, Chapter 6; but the fuller discussion is toward the end of Chapter 7, which is translated thus by J.A.K. Thomson:
<<
Then there is 'righteous indignation' [nemesis]. This is felt by any one who strikes the mean between 'envy' [phthonos] and 'malice' [epichairekakia, literally "rejoicing at misfortune"; substituting a "k" for the "ch" should not strictly be permissible, because kairos, meaning "time" or "occasion," is totally different from chairein, meaning "to rejoice"], by which last word I mean a pleased feeling at the misfortunes of other people [which suggests that Aristotle coined it, and it was not already in common usage, as the other two words were]. These are emotions concerned with the pains and pleasures we feel at the fortunes of our neighbours. The man who feels righteous indignation is pained by undeserved good fortune; but the envious man goes beyond that and is pained at anybody's success. The malicious man, on the other hand, is so far from being pained by the misfortunes of another that he is actually tickled by them.
>>
Aristotle's actual text is not quite so full, in fact; Thomson supplied some words to complete the sense. Another translator, the venerable David Ross, added this footnote:
<<
Aristotle must mean that while the envious man is pained at the good fortune of others, whether deserved or not, the spiteful [Thomson's "malicious"] man is pleased at the bad fortune of others, whether deserved or not. But if he had stated this in full, he would have seen that there is no real opposition.
>>
It would be interesting if the German writer who first coined "Schadenfreude" was trying directly and consciously to translate "epichairekakia."
Anyway, what Joseph Romm, and other writers of great wisdom and mastery of the virtues, who throw around the term "Schadenfreude," might ask themselves in light of this is: Why should they be possibly accusing themselves (and us their friends and allies) of the rather disgraceful vice of Schadenfreude, when in fact what they feel is Nemesis, righteous indignation, which is far more honorable, and for which no apology needs to be made?
Chickens deserve our true friendship! So do fish! So do other sentient beings! Let us learn to be kind.
Permalink
MAD MAC Posted 3:05 pm
24 Aug 2008
Amazing, you are wrong AGAIN
Somalia has a completely free market economic system. There is no meaningful governance there. There is no taxation. You might get robbed, with the robbers calling it "taxes", but there are no real taxes.
But the point isn't whether or not a true free market purchasing of fuel exists, the point is that's how you would define true cost. On fuel, the US comes close, as fuel taxes are fairly low. Same where I live, Thailand. I'm paying about 3.75 a gallon right now.
Victory in Pattani
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 3:45 pm
24 Aug 2008
O really
"Somalia has a completely free market economic system"
Warlord rule is a feudal system, not a free market system. The local warlord owns and controls everything, including the people.
"the US comes close, as fuel taxes are fairly low"
Do tell. You might get an argument on that from any free marketarian. What about the 2 dollars per gallon in oil war expenditures borrowed from China? That will need to be payed either in tax dollars or currency degradation.
"I'm paying about 3.75 a gallon right now."
Didn't you claim to have gone solar? Why no electric car yet? Your mighty intellect is slipping oh wise one, hehey.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin
Permalink
MAD MAC Posted 6:11 pm
24 Aug 2008
You're rationalizing
"Warlord rule is a feudal system, not a free market system. The local warlord owns and controls everything, including the people."
Truly spoken like someone who hasn't been there and doesn't understand the environment.
'"the US comes close, as fuel taxes are fairly low"
Do tell. You might get an argument on that from any free marketarian. What about the 2 dollars per gallon in oil war expenditures borrowed from China? That will need to be payed either in tax dollars or currency degradation."
You are making a false linkage between the cost of fuel on the market and the war in Iraq impacting costs IN GENERAL (for all products) for AMERICANS.
'"I'm paying about 3.75 a gallon right now."
Didn't you claim to have gone solar? Why no electric car yet? Your mighty intellect is slipping oh wise one, hehey."
Because I like my chopper, it doesn't use MUCH fuel (I use about two to three gallons a month), and electric cars use a shitload of electricity, which would strain my capacity. When they make electric choppers that are chick magnets, I'll think about it.
Victory in Pattani
Permalink
John former Marine Posted 11:47 pm
25 Aug 2008
Why I'm happy....
Because the Earth will breathe better without all the SUVs around.
Sure, the SUV owners may have a hard time. But a lot of people living in coastal areas of Thailand, Bangladesh, Vietnam will have a much harder time because of the SUV owners having total disregard for their carbon footprints and impacts on poorer people around the world.
So yes, I'm happy that the SUV owners will have to go though some short-term pain and, hopefully, they'll come through this and be better and wiser for the experience.
Il faut cultiver notre jardin.
Permalink
wiscidea Posted 4:05 am
28 Aug 2008
Germans
I would like to point out that the Germans who settled Wisconsin brought over number of useful progressive values, as well as an interest in establishing a fine brewing industry.
German immigrants established Freethought societies in the midwest and in Texas. They were early leaders and supporters of anti-slavery efforts; an entire village of German immigrants in Texas was exterminated by pro-slavery locals. Germans were also leaders and supporters of early labor movements, especially the demand for a shorter work day and work week. They valued time with their families far more than material possessions. They valued human beings over gold.
(Can't say much about the Germans they left behind. Perhaps that's why they moved to America... tired of the aristocracy sending them to their deaths regularly. Oh... and American farmers flooded the world market with cheap wheat, putting a lot of European farmers out of business and forcing them to look elsewhere for work. Damn... same old same old.)
Permalink
wiscidea Posted 4:14 am
28 Aug 2008
useless anecdote
Oh... I hit a deer while traveling 60 mph. Didn't have time to even consider using the brake pedal. I was not injured. The deer, of course, was killed. Food for turkey vultures and coyotes... they need to eat too. If I had been driving my car that day, the animal probably would have gone through the windshield and killed me. Perhaps that would have been a good thing according to some people, but I'm glad I was driving an SUV... so are my parents and spouse.
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 4:41 am
28 Aug 2008
Wiscidea
Seat belts, air bags, crush zones, and shatter proof glass are more efficient ways to protect drivers than brute force mass and intertia. The giant eight cyclinder monsters driven by our parents (station wagons), which had none of those things, were meat grinders. Driving a massive car does give you an edge when you collide with a smaller car, but to the detriment of the other driver, making this a kind of escalating arms race.
Arms races typically end when one side or the other finacially exhausts themselves. The rising cost of energy will help end this one ;-)
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
MAD MAC Posted 5:08 am
28 Aug 2008
John, don't be a jarhead
That the time of the SUV is coming to an end is fine. That we are happy because people are going to suffer financial loss - that's ignorant.
Victory in Pattani
Permalink
wiscidea Posted 6:19 am
28 Aug 2008
I know.
Just want to communicate... I suppose... indirectly... the sort of mentality we're dealing with. Must be in our genes. Difficult to override.
Permalink
Pangolin Posted 7:35 am
28 Aug 2008
Pick-ups are eating it too.
Anything bigger than a mid-90's Toyota Tacoma has lost value recently. The bigger your truck the larger the hit you are going to take trying to sell the thing off. Some large used trucks sell locally for about $2,000 US for a ten year old truck.
The fact is that a lot of two-income, two-vehicle families are ditching the truck due to the increased cost of everything. The crash of the housing market in the US also means that there is a glut of trucks crowding the used car lots going nowhere. Nobody needs a truck to stock shelves at Wal-Mart.
Just try and find a used Geo Metro though. Oh my, how the worm has turned.
Put the Carbon Back
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 7:49 am
28 Aug 2008
Actually wisci
Deer will jump up at the last moment and come right through an SUV or pickup windshield. They tend to roll or jump over the top of a small car.
Really better deer protection is needed for all vehicles though, something to cushion the impact and deflect the deer away from the windshield.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin
Permalink
wiscidea Posted 8:16 am
28 Aug 2008
Interesting Point
I've resorted to rolling down the windows and cranking up the stereo when I'm in deer country and there is brush close to the road... pretty much 75% of the road I regularly travel. I'm hoping a little industrial goth music will send them scampering. I've also slowed down to about 45 mph at night.
I don't know why the DOT bothers putting up those "Deer Next 5 Miles" signs in Wisconsin. The critters are EVERYWHERE.
Anyway... can you direct me to any statistics on the car/deer collision issue? I'm not questioning BioD's point or your observation. I'm not planning on buying another SUV. But given the greatest hazard I encounter happens to be deer -- though I was once surprised when I encountered two cows standing in the middle of the road as I went around a curve -- I'd like to know which cars are relatively safe under such circumstances.
Publicizing more stats about SUVs, cars, safety, et cetera might push the gas-guzzling beasts closer toward extinction.
Permalink
wiscidea Posted 8:33 am
28 Aug 2008
bubbles
Oh... regarding the actual topic of this thread...
The housing bubble and SUV bubble -- just my opinion -- are completely different creatures. Folks expect their houses to retain some value so they can either sell them and move into a different house or pass it on to their heirs. Though I think it is obscene to expect one's house to go up in value faster than inflation so a person can sell it for an outrageous price and have tons of money to blow on a stuff they don't need. Houses are overpriced and I suppose we're due for a "market adjustment". Doesn't bother me personally, since I bought my home with the intent of staying there until I die. I think people move around to much. They never form a solid connection with the local community and ecology. Honestly, if the taxes goes down as well, I would mind if my house dropped in market value. I'm not selling it and I'm certainly not going to take out a loan against it. That would be stupid.
Anyway... cars and SUVs are designed to wear out. They lose value as soon as they leave the lot. I have absolutely no sympathy for someone who bought a vehicle and expected to trade it in a year or two later without losing much money. If that's the case, they bought more vehicle than they needed or could afford. A little pain might knock some sense into them. And I have no sympathy for corporations that knew, over THIRTY YEARS AGO, that the price of energy was going to go up and we would have no power to stop it. Very poor business decisions should not be rewarded. Perhaps they'll learn to engage a bit of long-term planning vs. looking at short-term gain... hahahahahahahahah.
Permalink
wiscidea Posted 8:37 am
28 Aug 2008
typo
If the property taxes went down as well, I WOULDN'T mind if the house dropped in value. Though I do generally support property taxes... we need schools and basic services and should be willing to pay for quality schools and quality basic services, as well as parks, libraries, et cetera. I'm just saying... when someone's house goes down in value, do states reassess and collect less taxes? Those people could probably use the money.
Permalink
angelala Posted 7:10 pm
30 Aug 2008
id still feel safer in one, here at least...
Oddly enough I ran across these hilariously entertaining comments while finishing a bit of research for a paper I was working on and could not help but get frustrated with the entire situation:
I now live in one of the most 'green' (or more appropriately-- pretentious) cities in the US and I cannot help but get annoyed at the amount of people that complain and protest and whine about how they hate all SUV drivers (no, I dont drive an SUV-- I actually do not drive at all anymore), as I watch them speed off in a brand new hybrid to their home 5 blocks away while drinking a latte and running through all the stop signs on the way home. Why would I be annoyed? a) If you are breaking the law and running through stop signs, you put my life in jeopardy therefore perpetuating the SUV market (comprised of those that wish to have a bit more armor around themselves for when you t-bone them), b) some recent studies have shown that in the lifetime of a vehicle, the amount of energy used by the hybrid has matched or exceeded that of many SUVs (due to many factors), c) deforestation for grazing land has been regarded as the largest contributor to our acceleration of global warming (or if you got a soy latte then possibly the ridiculous un-recyclable packaging...)...[and on a side note, wasn't the speed limit upped (to 65-75 mph I think, here in CA) as a result of a majority that supported it-- thereby NOT supporting that we drive at the more fuel efficient 55mph?] .... and I am sure that all of these points can be dismissed rather easily by my opposition, but if you are speeding around in a hybrid vehicle and insulting those with SUVs, isn't it time to take a better look at yourself and what you can do to be less selfish (too)? I think it is ignorant to assume all SUVs are unneeded-- or filled with ignorant and selfish people, it is as if we are trying to make ourselves less accountable for the many other actions that would point a finger right back at us. It isn't necessarily one's obvious actions or purchases but instead a frame of mind: if you are acting in a self-indulgent or selfish way for whatever reason, if you cannot be understanding and compassionate, are you truly passionate about the environment? (or saving/reducing our impact on it?)
Please someone tell me otherwise!!! I don't want to think this way, but after years and years of environmental research and conversations about the latest environmental problem/'hot topic'-- I have become very confused and indifferent to many issues lately.....
Permalink