What does $5 gas mean to you? (w/poll)

Some friends and I recently went to Yosemite National Park to hike up Half-Dome (man is that a tough hike). When we left the Park the first Gas Station we saw had gas for over $5.50 a gallon. Eventually we found a cheaper station, but like many of you I am cutting back my gas usage. I'll go into what I'm doing after the jump.

One of the real jewels of Sacramento is its bicycle trails, in the Spring I went for a bike ride along the American River. I was riding my old (heavy) Mtn. bike while my brother rode his skinny tire road bike. We had a blast, but I got hooked on getting a better bike. I try to buy locally when I can, but the road bikes at my local bike shop started at $800, which was too much for my budget. I eventually bought a $350 bike from Costco.com. Lately I have been riding it to work. It takes me an extra 30 min each way but according to my bike computer I'm burning 500 calories each way (and I can use the exercise). I used to have a Toyota Echo (that got 40+ mpg) unfortunately it was destroyed in an accident (the other guy ran a red light). Now I usually drive our minivan (which gets about 20 mpg), I figure I spend about 50 cents per mile (about half of which is gas). One of the benefits my employer offers is discounted tickets for public transit. About half of the mileage I put on my vehicle is commuting to and from work (24 miles/day x ~20 work days per month = 480 miles).

Another area where I am cutting back has to do with shopping. We have several stores nearby, but unfortunately they are all overpriced, but with fuel costs so high it becomes less practical to drive an extra 10 miles to save a few bucks, so we now shop closer to home for many items. I am currently trying to figure out if it would be practical to get rid of our minivan.

So how is $5 gas affecting you?

•  Tip jar

  Will work for gasoline.

  by Sacramento Dem on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:17:34 PM PDT

  •  What it means to me is that I won't be able to

    pay my electric and gas bill at my apartment and still have gasoline to get to work.

    by ShadowSD on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:21:29 PM PDT

•  Makes me mad but

  it's forcing me to take the bike once a day, make a grocery list for my husband, and we sold one SUV. It's good for us. How about you?

  by MrMichaelMT on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:22:05 PM PDT

•  coping...

  (1) I walk whenever I can.  I can walk to groceries, movies, bookstores, and several restaurants.
  (2) When I'm not carpooling with my wife, I use the bus.
  (3) I am very careful to plan shopping trips.  I try to design the shortest route, and if I'm looking for something specific, I call first to find out who has what in stock.  I try to combine objectives so that I am driving to solve multiple problems in one trip.

  by bubbanomics on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:22:13 PM PDT

  •  Yup, all of the above ideas; plus on the

    highway, going less than 60 whenever feasible.

    by Phil S 33 on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:27:02 PM PDT

•  probably out of line w/most of....

  ...."Amurrika" for saying this, but part of me is actually glad for the high prices, because finally Americans just may start to consume gas a little more wisely, given that we're the worst gas gluttons on the planet, per capita.  Not that I personally enjoy paying high prices, but if this is what it takes to wake the nation up to its profligate consumption, so be it.

  by chingchongchinaman on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:22:13 PM PDT

  •  this is pain

    we have to endure, like pulling out a splinter or having a root canal.  The cheap driving way of life is an infection from which we'll have to recover.

    by bubbanomics on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:24:53 PM PDT

    •  Like that splinter that leaves a small scar--our

      lives are changed forever.  We will never again continue to waste (consume) like we did a year or so ago.

      by Phil S 33 on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:29:14 PM PDT

      •  i hope you're right

        that we will actually learn the lesson.  My experience suggests otherwise.

        by bubbanomics on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:35:07 PM PDT

        •  sadly agree with you

          Which is why I do not want gas prices to drop, as much as poorer and lower-income families get screwed the most, and the rich can guzzle as much as they still want.

          by chingchongchinaman on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:41:37 PM PDT

      •  Of course we will

        remember the sixties with the gas lines -- the small cars

        Now there are Hummers with 2 miles per gallon...

        People have a very short memory

        by sara seattle on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:36:52 PM PDT

        •  But gas was still cheap; now it is serious money

          to fill those tanks--i think people will change habits.

          by Phil S 33 on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:39:47 PM PDT

          •  tip for your optimism

            Unless people just get used to the higher prices, and slowly inch back to normal gluttony.

            by chingchongchinaman on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:42:15 PM PDT

          •  as I said

            when I see people stopping speeding like demons on the freeway -- then I will believe you

            people could save the increase in the cost of gas by going slower -- but so far I have seen nothing

            by sara seattle on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:44:51 PM PDT

            •  And the same trucks burn off

              from the stop lights on my daily commute.  Every day, every year.  Then they slam on the brakes at the next light and end up right next to me.  Again.

              by texasmom on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 02:15:44 PM PDT

          •  it's only this year that

            gas has beaten its peak in inflation adjusted dollars.

            by bubbanomics on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 03:01:35 PM PDT

    •  sidebar, sort of: what bugs me...

      ....is that so many Americans are whining about gas prices, while our troops are stuck in the quagmire that is "Mess-o-potamia", risking much more than us.  Compared to that, high gas prices are nothing.  Plus, if the moron-in-thief actually pursues an overt attack on Iran (as opposed to the covert stuff that Seymour Hersh has been reporting on), $5 will be nothing compared to what happens to gas prices after that.

      To be honest, I try to pretty abstemious in my gas driving as much as possible anyway, so that my driving habits haven't radically changed.  But then I have a less than 10 mile commute to work, and I live pretty close to my grocery and to the farmer's market for weekend shopping.

      by chingchongchinaman on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:30:03 PM PDT

  •  High gas prices in '08

    bad news for the repugs. High gas prices in 2010 very bad news for the Dems. Could be 1994 all over again.

    by VClib on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:27:23 PM PDT

    •  not if Obama were to adopt Clintons eco policy

      (she had a $10000 subsidy for EVs in her comprehensively detailed clean energy plan that would get us to a carbonfree future, with this and other ideas.)

      If this were implemented swiftly in 2009 and all these EVs in my signature were starting to get on the roads in 2010 because of it, there would be a groundswell for good Democratic legislation, and nobody would be wanting to go backwards to gasoline transport.

      by dotcommodity on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:39:33 PM PDT

      •  Speed is the answer

        If there is something that can be done with incentives that dramatically reduces the demand for gasoline it should also reduce the price. But if gas is north of $5 in Nov 2010 it will be 1994 all over again. The majority of American voters will not believe by 2010 the mandate for change enough to overcome the financial hardship of high energy prices. I believe in time they will, but the anger focused on the repugs this time will be magnified for the Dems in 2010 because they will control both houses of Congress and the WH.

        by VClib on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 02:03:25 PM PDT

    •  I don't see 2010 being a repeat of 1994.

      In 1994 there was a real battle over whether doing something about healthcare was better than doing nothing. I don't see sticking with the status quo as an option in our energy policy.

      by Sacramento Dem on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:56:30 PM PDT

      •  Status quo

        The reality is that in two years it is difficult to change the status quo. There is a large inventory of fuel inefficient cars in service and an installed base of old, inefficient heating and cooling systems in homes, offices and factories. In addition, there are two sides to the energy question, reduction of demand and increased supplies. The Dems need to work on both in a way that has an impact on prices in the next two years.

        by VClib on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 02:07:50 PM PDT

  •  Unfortunately it is the least fortunate who

    pay the biggest price during periods of change like this.
    Also its not as though this Fossil fuel based economy has been capitalistic...It enrages me the tax breaks/incentives given big Oil/coal.nuke/etc..and always the people bear the highest cost of change never the CEOs for years of producing gas guzzlers when they could have been producing SUVs that get 50mpgs

    by Rachel Griffiths on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:54:59 PM PDT

    •  And that includes those who depend

      on volunteer drivers for their needs.  The Meals on Wheels program in many cities is really hurting this summer.  I drive relief during the summer, but have to take an extra hour off work each time I do.  We delivered weekly for 14 years, but my job is too hectic now.  

      I've thought about getting together donations of gas cards to the MOW center to give to volunteers, but don't know if that would work.  Plus the cheapest gas in town is at the WalMart Murphy stations - ugh.

      by texasmom on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 02:20:13 PM PDT

    •  I was looking at my electric bill today

      the first Kwh costs me about 9 cents while the last one was about 17 cents. Maybe we need a similar program for gas.

      by Sacramento Dem on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 07:02:36 PM PDT

•  I sold my car in 1995.

  At that time, people thought I was a little nutty, but I moved to the city and public transit was available so I thought I'd just got rid of it for awhile and see how it goes. I've never looked back. I have a bike for exercise and light errands when weather permits. I walk to work. Auto rentals are always available if I MUST have a car to get out of the city (which I don't think I've used in over a year). I figure that if I can save the gas for a person in a rural area who will need it, maybe they can use it to grow some vegetables for me. What goes around will come around.

  (And thanks for taking the place on the Diary List that otherwise would be occupied by a troll today.)

  by highfive on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:28:29 PM PDT

•  it means

  seeing my kids and parents less...they live far away and i cant get there cheap anymore.

  it means less trips to trader joes because thats 3 times as far away as regular grocery stores.

  it means using my vibrator more because my boyfriend is 40 minutes away and we are driving to see each other less.

  it means less trips to the city for gallery shows and to dine at fancy restaurants. an hours drive plus parking makes the night too expensive and public trans doesnt run late enough out here to be usable.

  it means no trips to the beach this summer. or to the mountains. i guess i will see more movies on demand.

  it means the dog goes to the close park and has to stay on the leash instead of the dog park or the dog lake which are much further away.  

  it basically means more work, less fun, less family time.

  it sucks.

  by bumblebeeflorida on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:29:33 PM PDT

  •  We do see family less often

    at $35 to see my brother we aren't making that trip as much as we used to.

    by Sacramento Dem on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:50:29 PM PDT

  •  OMGTMI!

    Um, if it's a choice between sex and vibrator, I'd buy a scooter and get both :-)

    by jvance on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 04:51:01 PM PDT

•  it means nothing

  as long as people are speeding past me on the freeway when I am goin 65 --

  then no -- $5 gasoline means little to most -- when they start driving 50 miles on the freeway -- I will then finally believe it is hitting peoples wallet.

  by sara seattle on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:30:17 PM PDT

  •  Most people don't understand ...

    ... that there's a connection between the pedals on the floor and the gas gauge.  Seriously.  You put magic juice in the tank.  Stomp on the right pedal and it goes.  Stomp on the left pedal and it stops.  

    by jvance on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:52:57 PM PDT

  •  I know a lot of people haven't changed their

    habits, but I am seeing changes happening. Auto sales are down. I just think how much better prepared we could have been for this if we had made a real effort over the last 30 years.

    by Sacramento Dem on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:10:18 PM PDT

•  I have a crazy idea

  a general fast. Look, the oil companies have brought us to our knees. Let's emulate Gandhi and call for a day of fasting. No work, no one drives, flies, boats or uses any fossil fuel for 2 days. We don't call it a boycott or a general strike, but we do this twice a month. Nah, bad idea, we're too fucking greedy and addicted to oil to sacrifice like the Indians did against the British. I think we'd have to be at the crossroads of establishing our dignity and freedom. We're not there yet because we really either don't give a shit about our dignity and freedom or we're so brainwashed we think we already have them.

  by tazz on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:31:09 PM PDT

  •  "gasoline abstinence" - interesting idea

    The question is how to spread the idea around.  Clearly, it's impossible on one level, because airlines will continue to fly every day.  However, it's possible to steal right-wing rhetoric and maybe call for observing regular "gasoline abstience", a few days each month, or something like that.

    by chingchongchinaman on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:39:36 PM PDT

    •  Let them fly with empty seats

      it's on them because they are more responsible than even the auto industry for our predicament. We would have a national public transportation system that would rival all other nations if it wasn't for the airlines industry fighting against Amtrak and other forms of long mile transportation. Instead of spending billions and billions on highways, we could have invested that money in trains and other public transportation systems that do not rely on fuel guzzling monopolies.

      by tazz on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:44:29 PM PDT

      •  well, with flight cutbacks....

        ....they're feeling the pinch, and the reduced #'s of flights means that their contribution to global warming is going to shrink.  (Besides, think if all those people not flying drove instead.)  Not that I'm a fan of the airline industry, but they exist, for good or ill, so we have to deal with them.

        by chingchongchinaman on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:04:01 PM PDT

        •  Think about going by train

          you can fit a helluva lot more people on many cars of trains than you can fit on ten airplanes going the same place. It may take you longer, but it's more relaxing, more room, less fuel consumption, better scenery, more comfort, all traveling on electric which can be generated by something other than fossil fuel if we do it right. However, for the past 20 years, it costs more to go by train than by air. Go figure that one out. Actually, it's very easy, the airlines did everything in their power to destroy the railroad, and the politicians let them get away with it.

          by tazz on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:10:46 PM PDT

      •  Factually wrong...

        it's on them [airlines] because they are more responsible than even the auto industry for our predicament. We would have a national public transportation system that would rival all other nations if it wasn't for the airlines industry fighting against Amtrak and other forms of long mile transportation.

        1. Travel by air is MUCH more fuel efficient than travel by car.

        2. Public transit by rail, bus, trolley, etc. was systematically destroyed in the 1950s by the car company/oil company cabal.

        by kalmoth on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:58:32 PM PDT

        •  systematically destroyed by airlines as well

          and the airlines are much more responsible the past 30 years than even the auto/oil companies. I was actually an employee of PTC (now SEPTA) during the 50s. That's Philly's public transportation system. I never made the pitch cares are more fuel efficient than travel by car. I'm pitching 86 all travel for a day or 2 of fasting.

          by tazz on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 02:35:10 PM PDT

          •  Air travel is still pubic transit though, no? n/t

            by kalmoth on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 07:14:21 PM PDT

            •  well, not completely (unless in Europe)

              Since we don't have a state-centralized system, but lots of carriers competing, the analogy doesn't quite hold, although nominally the FAA does have to regulate the air flight paths.

              by chingchongchinaman on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 08:41:17 PM PDT

            •  ohnoes, I typed "PUBIC transit" n/t

              by kalmoth on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 12:10:25 PM PDT

    •  The EU won't let our planes land

      because we emit too much CO2. They have a real Democracy over there, they don't let our lobbyists mess with their good legislative ideas for reducing our risks from climate change.

      US officials have criticized the EU's new plan to set emission quotas for planes by 2011, saying that the move will undermine international efforts to limit the environmental damage caused by aviation.

      Under the bloc's emissions trading scheme industries can buy and sell emissions quotas. If they exceed their limit, they have to buy credits from other companies.

      the only US company making a low co2 plane, is boeing with this one: the low weight low co2 Dreamliner

      Lower weight is making Boeing's new 787 jetliner a hit, with 584 on order. Half the weight will be from carbon fiber and other composites in the fuselage, wings and tail that will cut fuel use by up to 20%.

      The European Commission on Wednesday revealed its plan, which will make flights within the union subject to compulsory carbon-dioxide (CO2) emissions trading from 2011. International flights arriving at or departing from EU airports would have to sign up to the scheme in 2012.

      by dotcommodity on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:57:06 PM PDT

  •  Austerity Days, twice a month

    I've been advocating this for quite a while. Not only would it train us to reduce consumption but it would be effective visible social protest, especially if we could get large numbers of people to coordinate their Austerity days. Can you imagine how effectively it would get the attention of business and the media if half or more of the nation's consumers abstained from buying anything every second Monday?

    by LanceBoyle on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 03:01:55 PM PDT

    •  Depends ...

      are we just going to buy twice as much on Tuesday?

      Also, what about the concept of trip efficiency. If I'm taking my son to piano lessons on Monday, does it really make sense to hold off on purchasing things that I could get on the way to or back? Last year, I tried very hard to time things so I could run to the nearby grocery store and not waste a separate trip. I can't be the only one who has that sort of consideration when deciding when to shop.

      I'll admit, though, my favorite thing during piano lessons, if I needed to buy nothing, was to put the little one to sleep by driving around for a half hour while I listened to Air America and scoped out campaign signs. That won't be happening again this fall.

      by Magenta on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 03:28:31 PM PDT

•  Other than going to work

  really, everything else in our lives is within walking-distance.  We live in an urban-suburban neighborhood outside D.C. and even have a metro station nearby.  My only complaint is getting the husband less automobile focused.

  by conlakappa on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:32:59 PM PDT

•  You should read this whole article

  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

  Oil subsidies

  The Cato Institute, a libertarian think-thank, did a study on the subject. What they found is simply mind-boggling. They calculated that the US spent between $30 to $60 billion (with a 'b') a year safeguarding oil supplies in the Middle East during the 1990s, even though its imports from that region totaled only about $10 billion a year during that period. A more comprehensive study that includes the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and other oil protection services (the coast guard is clearing shipping lanes and doing navigational support to oil tankers, etc) shows that actual subsidies to Big Oil are between $78 to $158 billion (again, with a 'b') per year.

  by sara seattle on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:35:21 PM PDT

  •  thats an amazing assertion

    and especially coming from the oiligarchy directly The CATO Institute, which is one of the Rethug orgs that exxon funded to lie about climate change...

    by dotcommodity on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:43:19 PM PDT

    •  Cato

      Cato is not a rethug institution, it is libertarian. In fact, it has been very harsh in its critisism of Bush and the repug Congress. It has a very large and deep group of contributors of which Exxon is but one. It is a free market think tank and is true to its charter. It is truely non-parisan although few Dems would embrace Cato's free market, very limited government view.

      by VClib on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 02:16:59 PM PDT

      •  well....to me Libertarians are just

        Republicans who also want legalised marijuana...
        they are as you say, much closer to Republicans than to Democrats policies... but you are right, I should not have called them Rs.

        by dotcommodity on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 02:24:34 PM PDT

  •  control of the middle east isn't only about

    consuming oil, it's about controlling everyone else's oil too.

    even if we get off oil completely, we'll be there, with our hands around the chokepoint of the global economy. in fact, energy independence might make us more belligerent, in the same way as SDI enables a clean nuclear first strike under cover of defensive capability.

    not that we shouldn't get the hell off of oil, but without renouncing the global empire and aspirations to unrivaled hegemony, we won't get out of the middle east.

    by wu ming on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:52:07 PM PDT

    •  And On that Note:

      It's about protecting the US Dollar and forcing its position as the world's Reserve Currency -- especially in regard to paying for oil.

      That's all it was ever about.

      If we lose our reserve currency status -- oil will be the least of our problems.

      by Pluto on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:00:52 PM PDT

•  and a simple, radical concept

  borrowed from the Swiss . . .

  every weekday there is government sponsored transportation that links every town in America

  everyday, at least once, a vehicle carrying mail, makes it way to every locale

  Why not convert this mail-carrying tasks into being a mail & people carrying task.  Public transit for every American, connecting our urban centers with all the rural areas.  Put the mail in the lower level, the people in the upper level . . . and go.  

  The Swiss already do it.  Some of Britain has it.  

  So simple, but so radical.  

  by RevRandy on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:37:18 PM PDT

  •  I have always said

    make public transportation FREE

    That will relieve the cost of having to build new roads continously -- the cost savings there will be enough to pay for the free public transportation.

    by sara seattle on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:39:34 PM PDT

    •  problem with that idea

      Admirable as it is, where does the money come from to pay the public transportation employees?

      by chingchongchinaman on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:43:49 PM PDT

    •  I read an article that some communities are

      contemplating cutting back on public trasit due to increased fuel costs. I worry when I see things like that. I'm hoping that increased transit usage will lead to more investment and service upgrades.

      by Sacramento Dem on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:44:06 PM PDT

      •  see your point, since they have to...

        .....pay for gas too.  There was an NPR story about police depts. getting hit by high fuel costs here a while back on Morning Edition.

        by chingchongchinaman on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:50:33 PM PDT

      •  In this county

        they're talking about less schoolbuses because the county is projected to spend nearly $8M on diesel next school year.  In communities where there are sidewalks and it's safe for children to walk, okay, fine.  Hey, at least it'll be some form of exercise.  But I wouldn't want to be the person tasked with the Solomonic decision on whose bus route gets curtailed and whose doesn't.  Also, kids could ride public transpo for free but I'm not sure of the status of that.

        by conlakappa on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:54:15 PM PDT

        •  Another issue

          new license laws. In my state kids can't have a passenger in the car until they've had a license for six months. That makes sense after dark-when stupid-teenage-party mindset rules, but it means that my daughter and 4 of her friends all have to drive seperately until next year. The school suspended the activity bus, so if they have afterschool stuff they have no ride home. They can't carpool to soccer or any activity-and it's tough for a teen to get a job when they have homework and sports after school.

          by Many Dogs Barking on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:20:28 PM PDT

          •  I see you point, however,

            I understand the caution.  In this county, one of the most heinous accidents happened when a teenager was driving from school after an activity.  I don't think it was dark yet, maybe dusk.  He had too many passengers, ignorance of road rules, and was speeding.  Several of his passengers died, as well as a man on the other side of the road whose lane the kid veered into.

            by conlakappa on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:38:23 PM PDT

            •  Rules only work

              if people follow them. It isn't a primary offense in this state, so the police won't automatically cite a kid for breaking this particular law. I admit that at a certain point-about 4 months after my kid got her license-I let her drive her golf teamates to the course after school. But I understand the inclination to create rules in response to tragedy.

              There is an upside that the school receives some extra $ for parking fees when every kid has to bring their own car to school.

              by Many Dogs Barking on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:44:39 PM PDT

      •  To Columbus Ohio's credit ...

        they have increased the direct lines that take people to and from downtown. My husband, a Detroiter who shunned busses for ages, has bitten the bullet and is shifting to public transportation. It's an experiment for this month, but it's been going well.

        by Magenta on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 03:11:11 PM PDT

•  It's not the gas...its the dollar

  When you consider that your dollar is worth 40% less than it was five years ago - real inflation is running at around 17% - the economy is so bad there aren't many good investment prospects, which causes a huge oil speculating casino to form; then....$5 a gallon ain't that bad.

  by DrKrbyLuv on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:37:45 PM PDT

  •  Unfortunately I can't convince my employer

    to pay me in Euros.

    by Sacramento Dem on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:46:17 PM PDT

    •  we have a stash of euros in the house

      but I'm not telling where they are ;-)

      by Plutonium Page on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:54:57 PM PDT

•  I clicked 'nothing' but only because

  I've never owned a car and don't know how to drive.

  by plf515 on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:38:51 PM PDT

  •  The same with me - and happy about it :)

    by Mariken on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:58:44 PM PDT

  •  I hope you have ID

    because so many urban people in this country don't have a driver's license, and therefore no picture ID. The Repubs are making this a barrier to vote-not to mention the difficulty of evacuating a city under water (see New Orleans..).

    by Many Dogs Barking on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:22:31 PM PDT

    •  Oh yeah

      I have NY State "non drivers ID" and a passport, too

      by plf515 on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:24:28 PM PDT

•  I bicycle to work 4 days a week

  On average - most weeks I ride every day.  We're replacing one car with the new Jetta TDI wagon, which should get 35 - 45 mpg and provide the potential to use biodiesel down the line.

  I've never liked SUVs.  I've always thought they were just jacked up, heavy and ugly wagons.

  by jvance on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:42:01 PM PDT

•  transmuting...

  bought new bikes for the boys last week; now we have to find a cargo trailer for groceries.  but we live in Burley town!  2 groceries, milk, the pool & branch library are all no further than about 2 miles!  

  ganging trips -- YES.  when we have to go further for groceries, we almost always are making 3-4 stops on a co-ordinated, regular loop.  "South Hills" (about every 2 weeks) gets us to 4 meat markets & specialty grocery stores; the "piano lesson" (weekly) conflates that with another 2 grocery branches and Costco if necessary.

  we all need the exercise, too, 8-).

  by chimene on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:45:13 PM PDT

•  I traded in the minivan for a civic hybrid

  It was my first new car puchase in almost 20 years ( i hate new cars)....but I decided to do it, I could not bear to pay over $75 to fill up at the pump...I would rather have the car payment than the gas payment.
  I wish I had the time and skill to manufacture my own biodiesel, then I would have bought an old mercedes or diesel truck....
  Walking and public transportation are not vible options where we live/work/School

  by Rachel Griffiths on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:48:50 PM PDT

•  What it means to me

  I'm carless and on Social Security. What it means to me is expensive food.

  by slksfca on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:49:12 PM PDT

  •  That to me has been the most painful

    part.  When exactly did we become Switzerland with the basics being so expensive?

    by conlakappa on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:01:23 PM PDT

•  unfortunately the well off will get used to it

  of course poor and lower income people are suffering a lot from the price of gas.

  but the better off will eventually just get used to paying an extra $100-$200/mo for gas. unfortunately the upper middle class in the US is just really, really spoiled.

  by tassojunior on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:51:44 PM PDT

  •  You've got it

    Free market and all.  The poor fall out the bottom.

    by Plutonium Page on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:53:49 PM PDT

    •  Of course it was never really a "free market" for

      oil/energy companies with all the tax breaks and incentives.  
      The poor and middle fall out while we subsidize the rich with our tax dollars.

      by Rachel Griffiths on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:58:15 PM PDT

  •  may have to combine Botox & liposuction trips

    the sacrifices the upper middle class has to make !

    by tassojunior on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:09:57 PM PDT

•  I met an "environmentalist"...

  ... who perkily told me that she has a Ford Explorer and budgets her money so she only has to fill up the tank once a week.

  I smugly told her that I fill up the tank of our hybrid once a month.

  Hey, it's not smog, it's smug!

  < / South Park >

  Seriously, wtf?  I know that sometimes people need larger cars/trucks for hauling stuff or whatever, but this was an urban warrior self-labeled environmentalist.  She didn't need that car.

  So it pissed me off.

  Anyway, I guess we try to drive less regardless of the fuel economy of our car.  We're going to fix my bike and get my husband a bike, too, because it's stupid to drive to the grocery store when it's only a 10 min. bike ride away.

  by Plutonium Page on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:53:01 PM PDT

  •  Ah, yes, the people who try to

    convince you that they need a bigger vehicle for hauling and what-not yet you are most inclined to see them in that large vehicle alone on their morning commutes.  Also, they look like they'd do no greater "hauling" than their asses to Starbucks.

    by conlakappa on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:06:36 PM PDT

•  i'm lucky to live in davis

  where both biking and trains are pretty convenient, and the UCD student body runs a decent bus system. i grow a lot of veggies/fruit in my backyard, and get produce form local organic farms, which also cuts down on the gas inflation. so i'm pretty insulated, all things considered, and only fill the car up once or twice a month.

  plane travel's going to get hella expensive, tho. look for next year to be the end of short haul plane flights, and the beginning of the return to air travel as a business/luxury service.

  i've read recently that sac's got a growing bike culture.

  by wu ming on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 12:56:40 PM PDT

•  No choice for "poverty" or "financial ruin"

  It's clear where your priorities lie.

  The fact that it didn't even occur to you to include such a category means that you either don't drive or have so much money you don't have to worry about how much you spend on gas just to get to your job. Either way, this entire thread is out of touch with the millions of working poor. The environmental movement does not have to be anti-working class and it will never succeed unless and until it realizes that. Pitting pro-environment activism against the working class is not just a RW tactic. It is and has been a hallmark of the left. If you don't believe in wedge politics, then stop doing this and start thinking about non-exclusionary politics.

  by Mindtrain on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:00:37 PM PDT

  •  I do drive and I do worry about how much I spend

    on gas. Though I am not worried that I am headed for financial ruin (yet). I don't know why you would think that this diary is anti-working class. I am certainly looking for solutions that work for all Americans. One of the things that pains me very much is how out of balance our spending on private automobile transportation is compared to public transportation. Every successful campaign I've seen for increasing transit fund had to include tons of money for new roads in order to get majority support.

    by Sacramento Dem on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 02:06:01 PM PDT

•  I hope nobody is suckered into the free gas

  offers the auto dealers are offering to budge the giant fumefarters off the lot these days.

  If anyone is considering that foolish and shortsighted response to high gas prices now, please consider resale value.

  Gas will be $7 when your 3 year free gas period expires. That will be like a balloon payment on a junk mortgage. Who will buy a clunker then?

  There is much to suggest that we will all be driving electric by 2025, and virtually every shell of the remaining gascars will be converted to EVs by highschool shop classes. The overweight ones will not be as desirable as the less clunky shells.

  by dotcommodity on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:05:56 PM PDT

•  It's the effect on the economy

  that affects me - I drive very little and so am not very affected by what I pay when I fill up - once a month or so.

  But as with everyone else, all of my food and supplies arrive at the stores by truck - and that is where prices are going up and I feel it

  by tiponeill on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:07:59 PM PDT

•  You know, most people do not have a choice of the

  car they drive. I can't afford a hybrid. I can't afford a Honda even. I have a used car that cost me $500. That is the car that I can afford. I don't have enough money to buy a different kind of car. WTF is wrong with you people judging people's ethics based on the car they drive. It's asinine.

  To think, incorrectly, as so many on this thread do, that these kind of choices are "political" when they are clearly economic just shows how out of touch so many people on here are. A lot of people are just barely surviving. Have some empathy. Not everyone makes as much money as you do. Not everyone has the luxury of buying whatever kind of car they want.

  BTW: it is still cheaper for a working person to keep a gas guzzler that they own (outright) than it is for them to buy a new car (we are talking about the total cost of owning a car, including repairs, upkeep, etc.).

  People's lives, their existences, are not something excluded from politics, they are the heart of politics. I find many of these comments on here to be anti-existential: to be pitting life against some abstract concept of what politics is (i.e. to separate environmentalism from life itself . . . not very smart, and not very political, or rather, more of the same). Get with the program people. It's not about these small ideas in your head about car ownership. Sheesh!!

  by Mindtrain on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:08:25 PM PDT

  •  There Are More Fuel Efficient Used Cars

    than some of the gas guzzlers.

    We're driving a 33 mpg 94 Saturn. It's on its 2nd engine, and we're going to drive it into the dust, at least another 5 years and hopefully 10.

    There will also be a gradual moving away from low density and rural regions for many middle & lower class folks for sheer lack of affordability.

    We're doing that too.

    And lots of recession particularly below the top 30%.

    We tried conducting these arguments rationally and compassionately 30 years ago and our side ended up pummelled with the nation dedicated to making all these problems much worse much faster.

    So now it's going to be really ugly for a large number of people.

    I'm with you in terms of empathy for the impact. We hear from US urbanites and some foreigners about how we need the high prices to correct our way of living, but no really big correction is possible without buying out the worthless properties and relocating around as many people as live in France, if not more.

    The next 4 years are going to be a lot more painful and frustrating for many of us than the last 8 have been, because we're going to be forced to come to grips with the fact that very important things have been broken beyond repair and that we'll be paying a heavy toll for the rest of our lives.

    by Gooserock on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:24:54 PM PDT

    •  yes, some of the best are old now

      from the last oil shocks, like geo metros that get 40 mpg...right now the old oldies are the goodies.

      It is not true that the poor have to drive huge gasguzzlers. My daughter bought an old VW golf she bought for $400 that was very efficient.

      You can shop for efficient cars in the under $1000 price range because the best days of US efficiency were a while back.

      by dotcommodity on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:37:55 PM PDT

  •  you are 1000% correct

    Some people truly don't have the finacial means to change their fuel consumption. it isn't a moral failing, it's reality.
    Pretty soon gas guzzlers are going to be the only affordable choice in used cars, making gas efficient cars more valuable and further pushing affordable transportation out of the reach of those that need it the most.

    by Many Dogs Barking on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:27:09 PM PDT

    •  That's already happened ...

      ... in my East Coast area. I drive a paid off 10 year old Xterra. I get 17-19 mpg, working hard conserving as much as I can.

      I would love to have a new non gasguzzler; 'new' meaning not yet owned by me. But even the used car lots around here do not have smaller cars. A new low-end Honda Fit or Nissan Versa now costs 3000-5000 more than last year; a used one costs more than a new one did a year ago. Same car, more money.

      I am barely hanging in there; anything over 5.00/gal and I will be reduced to a full ramen diet. Life is sure gonna get interesting!

      by gracieloufreebush on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 02:38:20 PM PDT

      •  I sure hope it doesn't come to that.

        I am barely hanging in there; anything over 5.00/gal and I will be reduced to a full ramen diet. Life is sure gonna get interesting!

        This is an example of where some true compassion from our government is needed.

        by Sacramento Dem on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 08:21:07 PM PDT

  •  high school shop classes should teach conversions

    to EVs. Many students have done these on their own. If we recylcled cars with bad transmissions : remove the whole gasoline system, replacing it with an electric motor.

    We should include subsidies to those who buy conversions in the EV subsidies we are are pushing for in congress.

    The cost to run these on overnight charges in the garage is like 3 cents a mile, far less than gas, and off an increasingly cleaner grid than gas.

    by dotcommodity on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:32:10 PM PDT

  •  When I bought a Geo Metro (3 cyl)

    in the early 90's I had plenty of people who made more money than me tell me what a ridiculous vehicle it was. Enough Americans chose to buy Hummers/Expeditions/Suburbans to make it worthwhile for the car companies to keep making them. I doubt most Americans are unable choose to drive a more fuel efficient vehicle (but I don't blame those who are). Like everything else we can only do so much, but that doesn't mean we are blameless if we don't do what we can.

    by Sacramento Dem on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:46:14 PM PDT

•  Relocating to Rust Belt From Pac N Wet

  where we'll have much higher population density, hence cheaper obtaining of supplies and many more fuel-affordable travel destinations.

  I there are around 50 major cities within 500 mi. of, say, Cleveland.

  Cost of housing is the other factor.

  I think even at $4 a gallon, we're going to see a slow but significant exodus out of a great many low density regions of the country.

  by Gooserock on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:15:15 PM PDT

  •  Their are many New home

    developments in the Sacramento area that are quite distant from job centers. I doubt many people will be rushing to buy homes 60 miles from work now.

    by Sacramento Dem on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:20:31 PM PDT

  •  well, there is innovation in transport

    too. It is not beyond possibility that we can change what we drive.

    VW, for instance is dusting the cobwebs off this double occupancy small car that they developed in 2003 that gets 235 mpg.

    (it says 282 thats EU, US is 235 mpg)

    by dotcommodity on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:24:35 PM PDT

•  the outer exurbs are really getting hit

  i live downtown but i really feel for the lower income folks who bought way out to get affordable housing. between the housing crash and gas i'm thinking a lot of those folks are losing everything.

  by tassojunior on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:18:11 PM PDT

•  I'm flying less, though I'm making the most of it

  

  by science first on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:26:46 PM PDT

•  Buy a UK Ford Focus at 65 mpg?

  Yes, it's true:

  http://www.ford.co.uk/...

  Here in the states Ford has "improved" our version to get 35 mpg (I'm filled with gratitude, oh boy):

  http://www.fordvehicles.com/...

  Great excuse to do another London visit, tho.

  by eltee on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:29:46 PM PDT

•  There is an upside

  sort of...the developers that decided the best way to take advantage of the housing boom would be to build crap 3,000+ houses on 5,000sq ft lots aren't seeing a lot of sales.
  Of course, the downside is what this means to the already established community. I admit to a certain amount of smugness when the crap homes that were slammed up have dropped from 500k to 300k, but then I have to consider the impact of empty homes that will end up being ex-urb ghettos.
  anyway, at least it's a FU to greedy developers that were allowed to rape any suburb at will for the price of a tiny mitigation fee for increased traffic & school district increases. They never gave a second,s consideration to what this type of development would mean to the community-they just build and go away and the rest of us deal with the mess.

  by Many Dogs Barking on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:37:13 PM PDT

•  I used to drive a short distance on days off

  and have a coffee someplace and read the paper (one of my favorite things). But it was always right outside my own city so I could have that "out of town" feel. Now I'll have my coffee close by. And I have a job coming up that involves more driving for me and I dread it, even though it's temporary. Guess a little "expense padding" is in order.

  by Wildthumb on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:42:12 PM PDT

•  I rebuilt the carbs on my daily commute ride...

  mileage went from 45 to about 52-ish city c