backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 245 comment(s) - last by jconan.. on Jan 3 at 6:57 AM


The American public is turning to SUVs and trucks again, like the Ford F-150 XLT pictured here, although total vehicle sales are still plunging. This could spell trouble for GM, Ford, and Chrysler that plan on slashing large vehicle production for next year.

Sales of foreign and domestic sedans and hybrids, like the Ford Fusion Hybrid, pictured here, are plunging.

2010 Chevy Volt

2008 Honda Civic Si Sedan
Decline in hybrid and small car sales bad news for foreign, domestic automakers alike

Have a taste for big trucks or SUVs?  You're not alone. A new study indicates a reverse in a trend of declining SUV and truck sales.  Automotive website Edmunds.com is reporting that truck and SUV sales will surpass car sales in December.  That's something that hasn't happened since February 2008.

Additionally, hybrid sales are expected to dramatically plunge for December.

Three factors are driving the return to big vehicles, say experts.  The first is the bad winter weather, the second is hot deals thanks to a trouble the economy, and the third, and perhaps most significant, is the much lower gas prices.  Michelle Krebs, Senior Editor of Edmunds' AutoObserver.com describes, "Despite all the public discussion of fuel efficiency, SUVs and trucks are the industry's biggest sellers right now as a remarkable number of buyers seem to be compelled by three factors: great deals, low gas prices and winter weather."

While the report that 51 percent of vehicle sales in December will be SUVs or trucks certainly indicates that sales are up, they have a ways to go to reach their former peaks, which were even higher, according to market observers.  Reports Ms. Toprak, "We don't claim they're back to what they used to be, but it's a reversal of the trend."

The falling sales of trucks and SUVs were a major factor in the fiscal crisis at Chrysler, GM, and Ford.  After focusing on big vehicles for decades, the automakers were blasted by some in the government and the public for failing to follow what the public demands -- small cars.  Those same individuals noted that the domestic automakers foreign competitors like Honda and Toyota posted stronger sales thanks to the increasing demand for small, fuel-efficient cars.

Eventually the automakers secured a $13.4B USD loan, but it was only have government officials sharp scolded the domestic automakers.

While the impact of decreases in home construction and contracting is still pushing sales down, a combination of other factors is making large vehicles irresistible for some, according to researchers.  Edmunds.com reports that on average, trucks this month are coming with $5,200 USD in incentives, making them a hard offer to refuse.  And that's not even including at-dealership price cuts that most buyers negotiate.  States Ms. Toprak, "I can get about $10,000 off a large SUV, there's probably not going to be a better time."

Next year, however, incentives are expected to decline as the domestic automakers tighten up, and supply of big vehicles coming to market falls.

The rise in large vehicle sales could spell trouble in the long run for foreign and domestic automakers, alike.  Companies like Toyota, whose Prius is a best-seller, are expected to post lower hybrid sales for the month.  The Prius is considered by many as the barometer for public reception of hybrids, as it is by far the best selling hybrid in the country.  Now with gas prices falling from a summer peak of $4/gallon to around $1.67/gallon, Prius' are looking less attractive, and sales are expected to sharply drop off.

In previous months this year, there was a waiting list for the Prius.  In November alone, falling gas prices caused a 48 percent drop in sales, and this is expected to continue into December.  All this spells trouble for the hybrid heavy Toyota and Honda.

It also may spell trouble for domestic automakers.  After decades of going their own way, American automakers are now following their foreign competitors, focusing on small fuel efficient cars and hybrids.  With sales down, the domestic automakers may be back to where they started, with the majority of their production geared toward a product the public is not necessarily demanding.

This is evidenced by Edmunds.com's prediction that despite the rise in demand for trucks, GM, Ford, and Chrysler's combined market share is actually expected to fall one point to 51 percent.  Sales overall are likewise expected to be dismal both for the domestics and their foreign competitors.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Just think about all the people...
By Motoman on 12/26/2008 3:58:26 PM , Rating: 2
...who dumped their SUVs and such at huge losses to buy econo-box cars - which then would take 10 years at $4 gas to make up for the loss anyway.

As it is, my Dodge 3500 quad-cab 4x4 with the HO Cummins turbo diesel gets pretty much the same mileage as our Trailblazer with the 6-cylinder. Unfortunately, diesel being so much higher yet than unleaded, the truck doesn't get much daily use - but, like a very large number of Americans, I *need* a truck (pending wholesale lifestyle change). I race motorcycles...need to pull a big trailer and carry along a few buddies. That means a big pickup truck. My wife breeds, trains, and shows horses - which means we need to pull a big horse trailer, and be able to run and get large amounts of hay and feed in the truck too. We can't be without a truck - and a great many Americans are in the same boat (er, truck).

Soccer moms etc. need the bigger SUVs and such...especially if you're a hockey mom driving in crappy weather where you need 4 wheel drive. People have boats and need a large vehicle to haul them. So on and so forth. All these people are remembering why they needed a big truck/SUV in the first place, and are going out to buy them again.

So while I understand how my urban apartment-dwelling friends who have no need for anything other than a Cooper Mini can get by just fine without a large vehicle, it would really be nice if the rest of the world would stop pretending like it makes perfect sense for everyone to get rid of their large vehicles and drive electric boxes with wheels.




RE: Just think about all the people...
By Bateluer on 12/26/2008 4:49:16 PM , Rating: 1
You represent a very small slice of the American consumer. 99% of people do not need such a vehicle. They want such a vehicle because it's perceived as a status symbol.

The few times the average person needs a truck, they can rent a U-Haul truck for substantially less money than owning their own.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By Motoman on 12/26/08, Rating: 0
RE: Just think about all the people...
By bioorganic on 12/26/08, Rating: -1
RE: Just think about all the people...
By ayat101 on 12/26/08, Rating: -1
RE: Just think about all the people...
By masher2 (blog) on 12/26/2008 11:41:56 PM , Rating: 5
By that same logic, we should sell our cars and buy scooters. Sell our private homes and live in communal apartments. They're far more efficient in terms of energy usage-- and no one really needs their own private bedroom or bathroom anyway.

Certainly we don't need vacations either. Trips to concerts, movies, and sporting events are just "wants", not needs as well. So are televisions, MP3 players...and the very computer used to post these messages.

Beyond a cave to scratch our fleas in and a few scrounged roots to eat, everything in our lives is a want, not a need. That's what defines our standard of living, however, and our modern lifestyle.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By GTVic on 12/27/08, Rating: -1
RE: Just think about all the people...
By Motoman on 12/27/2008 12:02:43 PM , Rating: 2
Way to fundamentally ignore information that doesn't fit into your worldview...

quote:
Way to take it way too far, you fail at logic 101. The guy has an enormous truck to support a couple of recreational activities. There is no need to explain any further.


As noted, my Dodge truck gets about the same mileage as our 6-cylinder Trailblazer. So it makes essentially no difference which one gets driven.

quote:
An enormous percentage of these humongous truck owners barely need them. Most of the time they drive around with empty truck beds and zero passengers in a truck that 15 years ago would have qualified for a monster truck rally.


While there certainly are people who prefer to own a truck to a car simply because they'd rather have a truck, the vast majority of people I know who own trucks *need* them. Which is to say, they'd have to completely abandon their way of life without it. And you clearly have no idea what the hell a monster truck is, and are throwing that in there to imply that all truck owners are rednecks and/or white trash.

quote:
If a small-medium size truck (by today's standard) was good enough to haul a snowmobile 15 years ago, why does someone now need a truck that can't fit in most residential underground parking garages.


What makes more environmental sense...using one truck to haul one trailer with six snowmobiles on it, or six trucks to haul one sled each? Oh wait...forgot who I was talking to. It's better to use one truck. And the reason they don't fit in old garages has to do with the simple fact that over the years manufacturers kept increasing the travel in the suspension to give a better ride and allow for greater hauling capacity...nothing more. You know...so a single truck can haul six sleds at once.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By afkrotch on 12/27/08, Rating: 0
RE: Just think about all the people...
By Motoman on 12/27/2008 1:59:15 PM , Rating: 5
...since when does a Trailblazer count as a large vehicle? Do you live in Lilliputia?

...and what sense does it make to one 3 vehicles (and pay 3 payments and have 3 maintenance schedules etc.) to do what 2 vehicles can do?

...and I'm sorry, but the very fact that you think a photo of a VW pulling a camper is proof that it's a valid concept to haul anything with a car absolutely establishes your foolishness. Here's your sign.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By afkrotch on 12/27/08, Rating: -1
By FangedRabbit on 12/28/2008 11:39:24 AM , Rating: 2
The former Blazer and current TrailBlazer are both based on compact pickup truck platforms (s10 and Colorado respectively). They are in the same size class as a compact pickup truck and hardly count as a "large" vehicle. The only SUVs smaller are the "cute-utes"; which are generally nothing more than jacked up cars.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By whymeintrouble on 12/29/2008 3:49:37 AM , Rating: 3
so let me get this straight, you put 6000-8000 lbs. on a trailer being pulled by a wannabe mazda pickup. You sir, are not only the most reckless person this side of stupidty but everything you have said has now made everyone reading this that much more stupid. Did you think there might be tow ratings on vehicles? Ya know what, they might even have max weights too! But who cares, we will just weigh the crap out of the mini-pickup while the back of the pickup is sparking on the ground. Then see if we can't kill some people because of some freak accident due to being 4k lbs overweight...Just because you wanted to save a little money on insurance and/or gas. you keep your mini-car, I'll be warm, safe and happy with my Suburban, and so will my boat! :)


By afkrotch on 12/29/2008 6:18:15 AM , Rating: 2
Have you actual read any of these towing capacities? Majority of those using a truck to it's fullest are over their towing capacities.

Seriously, how many different types of trailers have you used? Some put quite a bit of weight onto the truck, while others don't even put 1/4 the weight onto the truck. A nice 4 wheeled flatbed trailer with the weight balanced around the 4 wheels will put lower amount of weight onto the truck.

There's things called trailer brakes too. Allows you to exceed the towing capacity without troubles.

Depending on where you live can also depends on how many ppl are even on the road. For me, it's unlikely that I'd get in an accident with another vehicle. Let alone see another person even on the roads. To put it into perspective, we might get 1 car to pass our house once every 8-12 hours.


By Tamale on 12/29/2008 4:41:11 AM , Rating: 2
has it ever occurred to anyone on this site that people are choosing to live in the countries they're in and the lifestyles associated with the respective place?

if someone wants big sprawling open country, horses, jet skis and a couple huge vehicles to go with it, America is a great place for them. if you like compactness and efficiency lots of places in europe will suit you just fine.. whoop-dee-do.

let's not lose sight of this simple but important distinction.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By Nfarce on 12/27/2008 7:59:33 PM , Rating: 5
Motoman, you have to remember that a lot of Europeans really do not understand the concept of living in non-urban areas in America. If you ever travel to Europe, or if you have already, you'll see that their non-urban vs. urban population is far, far lower than that of the US. This is irrespective of the fact that their urban areas and streets/buildings are far smaller than those of the US in general.

Europeans (and others) have an inherent misconception that America is a land of excessiveness. To some degree, that is true, as witnessed by our economic meltdown (which quickly spread globally to show just how important the US economy is to the world). However, a large percentage of Americans always have and always will live in non-urban areas because they can. The same goes with what kinds of vehicles they choose to purchase (keyword CHOOSE there).

People who want a truck/SUV will not change their minds, because Americans celebrate living in far vaster regions with unlimited recreational potential, whether they are a motorcycle racer or horsebreeder like another poster here or just a weekend boat tower like me. Anyone telling anyone else what they need and do not need is nothing less than a fascist, pure and simple. We did not come all this way in our relatively young 232 year history to let a bunch of fascists tell us how to live - whatever their motivation is, be it envy or class warfare.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By OneEng on 12/28/2008 8:43:14 PM , Rating: 2
Good post.

The fact that many Americans choose to drive large SUVs (socker mom's are a good example as is ANY mom having 3 or more kids) or trucks (boat owners, camper owners, horse owners, bike owners, etc, etc) does not mean that these individuals are doing something wrong.

People work hard all their life in order to enjoy these things. It is THE American dream. To belittle it, or demean it, kind of indicates a lack of understanding of the fundamentals of why America is such a great place to live.

I also find it interesting how many attacked the American auto companies for building these large vehicles. Until about 2 years ago, the Asian auto companies were furiously attempting to equal the American auto makers in this area BECAUSE it was the biggest sales segment.

Fuel prices doubled (or more) in under a year. How anyone thinks it is possible to re-engineer a vehicle product line in that amount of time is beyond understanding.

It isn't like Americans woke up one morning and decided "Hey, I want a green small car instead of my roomy, great driving in the snow SUV". Fuel prices prompted this mess.

I am reasonably sure that gas prices will continue to go down and will stay down for the next 5 years. The oil companies and the entire middle east will sell oil to attain 50 cents a gallon gas before they allow America to move to electric vehicles.

SUV's and Trucks will most surely be making a comeback. I personally wish it were not so. The best thing for America is to get off of oil ...... but we are stupid and selfish and greedy and lack foresight in America. Big oil companies and politics will conspire to keep anyone from making the changes needed. It will take a true catastrophe in America to remove big oil from our future.


By MadMan007 on 12/28/2008 9:25:48 PM , Rating: 2
Reading your 3rd and last paragraph back to back is interesting. On the one hand you defend the 'American dream' then you call the same people stupid and greedy.


By Chernobyl68 on 1/2/2009 5:50:13 PM , Rating: 2
Actually I've been seeing prices going back up recently, I seem to recall OPEC cutting production to preserve prices.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By Nfarce on 12/27/2008 7:36:57 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
WTF is there a need for 2 large vehicles?


Who TF's business is it of YOURS?


RE: Just think about all the people...
By afkrotch on 12/29/08, Rating: -1
By Nfarce on 12/30/2008 12:59:53 PM , Rating: 1
Wrong again, asshat. I could tell you in a thread that I own 4 big screen TVs an SUV and a pickup truck and it would STILL be none of your damned business why I choose to own such things.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By ayat101 on 12/27/08, Rating: -1
RE: Just think about all the people...
By Bruneauinfo on 12/27/2008 5:13:27 AM , Rating: 4
quality is subjective.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By Myg on 12/27/2008 7:02:06 AM , Rating: 1
Quality of life concerning humans comes down to efficiency.

If you have a "higher" quality of life, generally, your body works more efficiently, your brain works more efficiently, your belongings work more efficiently for you.

It means you can get more out of what you have.

Since we all only live once, that is why it is seen as morally wrong to sit idle and do nothing, or to be excessively wasteful in general.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By ayat101 on 12/27/2008 7:47:50 AM , Rating: 2
I agree in general. Plus, your body will work better if you look after it, and live in a clean and suitable environment.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By Bruneauinfo on 12/27/2008 9:15:47 AM , Rating: 5
so efficiency = quality? that's an absurd statement because one side of the equation is logic and the other is opinion.

part of being human and civilized is appreciating aesthetic. horses fall under that heading. i suppose next we'll be getting rid of sports teams/arenas, malls and shopping centers, private property, religion, computers, and everything else that doesn't live up to your opinion of what is and isn't efficient.

i don't own a firearm, and i'm not a republican, but i'd be converting to both if your opinion became the rule.

masher has a point.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By ayat101 on 12/27/08, Rating: 0
RE: Just think about all the people...
By N1 on 12/28/2008 2:51:02 PM , Rating: 3
Your wasting electricity writing the drivel is neither asthentic nor efficient . . . but since it's your money, if you enjoy doing it, you have every right to do it. Please extend the same courtesy to others with different personal values.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By DM0407 on 12/27/2008 1:54:27 PM , Rating: 5
Preaching about getting the most out of life, while sitting on Dailytech and bicker about other peoples lifestyle...

Priceless


RE: Just think about all the people...
By ayat101 on 12/27/2008 3:27:03 PM , Rating: 2
Don't judge everyone by one's or the same rules. Posting a little and reading these boards does not exclude doing other things in life.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By Jim28 on 12/29/2008 11:59:56 PM , Rating: 2
Read your own writing you bigot.

You judge others about there lifestyles and yet do not take valid critisim about yours.

By your logic maximiing effiency means a greater quality of life.
Since when did posting on an the Internet (Or browsing the Internet) become the measure of effieciency.

And lastly who do you think you are? Why do you think it is OK for you to decide what some one else may do with their own life and wealth? Would you like to be subject to someone else's whims and ideals? If not then don't be so quick to want to judge others by yours.

Of course this says it all

Don't judge everyone by one's or the same rules.

Last I heard the definition of a just law or ethic was one that evaulated everyone identically without bias.

Of course a more folksy way to say it is practice what you preach.


By teldar on 12/27/2008 8:20:50 AM , Rating: 1
That's not remotely what you said.
People who breed horses are typically not living beyond their means.

You said eat the horse and sell the trailer.

That's going beyond logic because you are assuming that people who breed horses cannot afford it.

masher's comments were NOT excessive based on your comments.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By Motoman on 12/27/2008 11:50:17 AM , Rating: 2
...you're a real piece of work, aren't you?

Come by our place and see how we are "fat and lazy" taking care of the 8 horses on our property. I seriously doubt you'll be able to keep up.

We don't live beyond our means...we live neatly within them.

Horses are not just a hobby...they are also my wife's profession. Motorcycles are my hobby...and that's what I referred to before as "pending wholesale lifestyle change" - Our entire lives would be turned upside-down if we didn't have trucks. Everything we value in life would be gone.

So thank you very much, you hateful pig. I can assure you my quality of life is infinitely better than yours just based on the fact that I don't feel the need to utterly dismiss what other people love because of my own luddite opinions. Please go die now, ass.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By ayat101 on 12/27/08, Rating: -1
By Chernobyl68 on 1/2/2009 5:58:08 PM , Rating: 1
You're right...I should have swum to Hawaii last time I visited there. Oh, wait, I had to take the aircraft carrier there.

You can't use "human power" to do everthing. I agree that energy efficiency is very important, but not everyone has the opportunity to live the life of a hippy.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By masher2 (blog) on 12/27/2008 3:38:14 PM , Rating: 5
> "My point is simple and totally logical and capitalistic: do not live beyond your means"

I imagine the average buyer of an Escalade or Hummer can more easily afford his purchase than the average owner of an Aveo or a Kia Rio.

> "My personal point: use your muscles instead whenever you can"

Human muscle power is what drove humanity throughout most of history. It was also responsible for a brutal, barbaric, dehumanizing lifestyle totally incomprehensible to most modern-day people. Do not hope for a return to it -- your wish may come true.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By foolsgambit11 on 12/28/2008 9:28:51 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
> "My point is simple and totally logical and capitalistic: do not live beyond your means"

I imagine the average buyer of an Escalade or Hummer can more easily afford his purchase than the average owner of an Aveo or a Kia Rio
Assuming that's true, it is nearly irrelevant. The key for tools (like a vehicle) is weighing the purchase price versus the increase in means it provides. At least, until you have the disposable income to purchase a vehicle as a luxury item. So if you work with horses, or do construction, or whatever, then a bare-bones truck makes sense. But if you get your truck repossessed, and it has leather seats, TV screens in the headrests, or whatever else, I have no pity. Same with any luxury car, too. But it is tragic to find a person who can't afford a Kia Rio getting it repossessed - that negatively affects their earning potential. Ditto for bare-bones trucks that get taken by the bank (assuming the 'owner' was using the truck to increase their means, and losing it will decrease their means).

There are plenty of counterarguments to be made to the principles I just outlined, I know. But I think it's fundamentally sound.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By N1 on 12/29/2008 7:03:20 PM , Rating: 2
Why is the owner of a barebones F-150 and a barebones Kia wagon, costing $30k combined any more pitiable than someone who planned ahead and combined the two purchases into one Explorer or a Highlander that is adequate for both his cargo and people transportation needs, plus ability to overcome snow, etc., for comparable amount of purchase money, and less in terms of insurance and tag fees.


By William Gaatjes on 12/27/2008 3:54:38 PM , Rating: 2
I found an interesting documentary about Liquid Fluoride Thorium reactors.
Quite interesting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHs2Ugxo7-8


By Major HooHaa on 12/30/2008 7:19:56 PM , Rating: 1
ayat101, can I politely enquire? What kind of vehicle, horse or scooter do you drive and what kind of family vehicle would you think is acceptable / practical in this day and age?


RE: Just think about all the people...
By TomZ on 12/27/2008 1:18:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
By that same logic, we should sell our cars and buy scooters....
Great post - but these days, DT is being overrun by libtards, which is why it got downrated. I think some folks around here would like to see humans living in caves.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By afkrotch on 12/27/2008 1:26:37 PM , Rating: 3
Yes, but those caves would have 1 gig fiber lines.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By masher2 (blog) on 12/27/2008 3:42:27 PM , Rating: 5
I am reminded of an old cartoon depicting a couple of cavemen squatting around a campfire. One turns to the other and says, "something is just not right here. Our air is clean, our water pure, we get plenty of exercise, everything we eat is organic and free range -- yet no one lives past age 30".

It's human nature to romanticize the past. The reality, however, was substantially different.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By icanhascpu on 12/29/2008 3:10:33 PM , Rating: 2
I don't think that's a good example at all, as pure water, food, air ect was highly unlikely in such a scenario.

If it truly clean water and air and the meat wasn't rancid, people would live much longer today due to medicines and common sense. Not to mention a touch of evolution. The lifestyle we live hardly is the most healthy one. To measure that by length of life alone is short sighted.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By N1 on 12/29/2008 7:28:09 PM , Rating: 2
Rapid evolution usually select for shorter life span, not longer. The gene for early reproductive maturity coincides with shorter life span. Early reproductive maturity allows the population respond to environmental stress more quickly. Longevity is not one of the things that evolution selects for, unless the population has a propensity to allocat young girls with healthy reproductive systems to reall really old men.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By djc208 on 12/27/2008 9:08:55 AM , Rating: 5
Oh please. Your "reckless consumption" is what drives most of the global economy. This person honestly makes enough money to pursue these hobbies (and the horses and racing can make money depending on how serious he is) then he is more than entitled to do so. He wasn't whining about all the money he has to spend, just that for things he does a truck is necessary.

But he puts more money into play in buying trailers for horses and motorcycles, buying horses and motorcycles, and all the support businesses that go along with those pursuits, than you and your "simple life" would. So no, he doesn't "need" them to live. But your employer might not "need" you or your job at all if people like him weren't out there with their "reckless consumption".

The basis of a lot of this global recession/depression is that people aren't buying things they don't "need", and therefore pulling huge amounts of money out of the economy. People may not need much of the stuff we have and use, but the world needs us to need stuff if we want to keep the world out of an even worse financial crisis.


By Motoman on 12/27/2008 12:04:04 PM , Rating: 3
...wait a minute. Someone just posted something that makes sense. Now I'm really confused...


By Motoman on 12/27/2008 11:53:31 AM , Rating: 2
You are an idiot. Among the reasons why America (and Canada and other first-world countries) are so great is the right to "pursue happiness." You are an absolute ass for declaring that people who ride snowmobiles, ATVs, motorcycles, horses, go boating, whatever, should not have the right to pursue that happiness.

Pol Pot just called. He thinks you're his long-lost brother.

Holy crap people...I think you'd all be happier in China. When did you all become so hateful?


RE: Just think about all the people...
By Guttersnipe on 12/28/2008 3:12:27 AM , Rating: 5
you know nothing. its not the size of the truck anyways, its missing the point. a soccer mom driving 2 children effectively triples her trip efficiency over a single yuppy driving a prius and end up emitting basically the same if not less carbon. if the yuppy decides to take a vacation overseas well, there goes any argument against the truck in a flash. concentrating on a demon vehicle really misses the point. esp if the truck lasts and lasts, and the prius or whatever the yuppy constantly upgrades to is basically in a short use cycle/replacement.

as for the know nothing talking about towing tons of stuff with cars or motorcycles, you can tow some stuff yes. but at the cost of putting massive wear on your transmission and other bits not made to endure loads of that type. as before if you do that and have to replace your car over and over, your total carbon output is once again, higher than a truck.

as for europe. if you consider for a moment the carrying capacity of the land and the biomass/carbonsink per person for a country, most european countries really are overpopulated and no matter how frugal they are they by default are over consuming just through overpopulation.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By boogle on 12/28/2008 5:08:56 AM , Rating: 2
While I appreciate the need for trucks, especially those who live in areas with bad terrain etc. 'Soccer Mom' is not a reason for getting a truck, I can only think of a few reasons one would want a truck for that reason:

1) Show off to other soccor moms how rich she is
2) More interior space to deal with screaming / wriggling kids

However, I fail to see why one is needed? A standard car (in the UK) has 5 seats including driver, assuming you've got (just role with this) fat kids that leaves 3 seats that can be comfortably used. The boot (trunk) has plenty of room for balls, kit, etc. Soccer is a very popular sport in the UK, and the vast majority of people use standard cars. The people with large 4x4s are in group 1 and get derided for it. The people in group 2 usually use an 'enlarged' car, like the Megane Scenic.

'if the yuppy decides to take a vacation overseas well, there goes any argument against the truck in a flash.' What? Are you just trying to jump on the emissions bandwagon? Or fuel consumption bandwagon? Either way, its a poor point since you can easily turn around and say 'the truck driver with all his excess consumption is then added to the consumption of the aircraft, its a double-whammy!'. On a related note, as long as the plane is mostly full, its much more efficient than any car, per-person to a massive degree. You travel hundreds / thousands of miles for a (per capita) very small amount of fuel.

As for the last argument, that's a poor argument. I've never seen people stick with the same truck for a very long time. Same with cars. You get exception in both camps, so there are some very old cars and very old trucks out there - but not a common occurance.

We are heavily overpopulated in much of Europe :( Especially the UK.

Going to extremes is fun, but lets have a little more balance here shall we? No name calling, no direct assaults on people. There are people who need trucks - only a fool would argue against them. But there are people who have trucks who don't need them and are therefore an unneccesary drain on resources - those are the people many have a problem with.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By mindless1 on 12/29/2008 2:47:45 PM , Rating: 2
I could see a family with more than one vehicle needing one truck or SUV, not 2 or 3, but you are correct that a soccer mom does not need an SUV at all. Even with the argument of needing more seats, that is why a van exists, a van the same size as the SUV has more seats!

However, let's stop pretending the majority of people are soccer moms as if this rare example of someone who actually hauls more than 4 kids at a time is commonplace, and I mention 4 since any midsized automobile can haul 4 kids around fine.

Bottom line, people don't ever "need" a truck or other gas guzzling vehicle, they choose to own and use one, choose to live a life where they waste more resources instead of finding activities that aren't so wasteful. Certainly there are plenty of other activities besides driving an automobile that this applies to, it's not that any one alone should be singled out, nor any one dismissed because "want" is not "need".


RE: Just think about all the people...
By N1 on 12/29/2008 7:38:28 PM , Rating: 2
Obviously you never had kids yourself. Where would the other parent sit in a family outing when you have 4 kids occupying all four passenger seats? What about the baby sitter or grand-parent doing the baby sitting? Try fit a double-stroller into the trunk of a car, any car.

The manufacturers have curtailed wagon production for over a decade, thanks to CAFE Standards, another brainchild of the cluless pro-regulation busybodies. It's been mostly either Minivan or SUV's, because they qualify as "trucks" under CAFE laws. Midsize SUV's are popular because they are shorter than full-size minivans, and easier to park. A lot of times, midsize SUV's actually consume less gas than minivans based on the same platform.

The pro-regulation crowd really need to grow up, and think of other people as adults capable of thinking for themselves, instead of living in a dream world where everyone else just take your orders instead of figuring out ways to get around your irrational orders.


By mindless1 on 12/29/2008 2:50:43 PM , Rating: 2
I can't speak for where you are, but everywhere I've ever been, people do keep trucks longer. They end up owning a truck and a car and the car gets replaced years sooner into it's lifespan. Perhaps you don't realize how old some trucks are out on the road? Around here it's common to see mid-80's to 90's trucks but not so much cars that old except in the poorer sections of town.


By RoberTx on 12/28/2008 11:36:35 AM , Rating: 2
Screw you. if I pay for the gas its mine to with as I damn well please. If you don't like it then stick your head back up Al Gore's butt.


By decapitator666 on 1/1/2009 9:46:08 AM , Rating: 2
I have no pity for those SUV fools.. they haven't learned a thing.. in half a year gas prices may be up again and the whining starts all over again.. Then they will be forced to sell them again.. and then they whine and complain even more when they get the pink slip and go bankrupt..


RE: Just think about all the people...
By oab on 12/26/2008 11:53:24 PM , Rating: 2
In Europe they manage to do all those things, and not have truck sales be as gigantic they are here in North America.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By headbox on 12/27/2008 2:03:21 AM , Rating: 3
no, they don't do "all" those things.

Travel Europe, travel the USA. There's a big difference: space. Most American cities boomed after the auto was invented. LA had subways, but they were bought up and closed down by auto makers. NYC sticks out as one of the few places with mass transit that sort of works, and is still clogged with cabs instead of bikes.

Americans travel great distances to get to work, visit friends, do activities, etc. There are also much greater resources for outdoor activities like exploring vast national parks, big game hunting, fishing in tens of thousands of lakes, massive states like Wyoming and Montana that have fewer people than a single European town. Lifestyles are very different. Population density is different. Resources are different. $ per capita and taxes are different.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By BZDTemp on 12/27/2008 8:39:04 AM , Rating: 2
Well we have more money and less space that is true. We also use half the amount of energy per capita than the US.

Sure the urban sprawl problem means you travel a lot of miles which again calls for cars that are like sofas on wheels. However it is not like there aren't great outdoor activities in Europe. We too climb mountains, go sailing (but sail boats are preferred rather than power boats), mountain biking, hunting, fishing.... however few of us can be bothered to drive trucks as cars are preferred. And if 4x4 is needed even the smallest cars come with that option.

I'm not sure what you mean about $ per capita but where I live someone working at MacD earns $17 an hour plus there is extra pay for evening, weekends and 5 weeks of payed vacation.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By masher2 (blog) on 12/27/2008 5:58:55 PM , Rating: 5
> "Well we have more money and less space that is true"

Per-capita wealth in Europe is still only a little more than half what it is in the USA. The gap used to be much larger, but many European nations have slowly grown more free-market, while the neo-socialism marches steadily onward in the US.

> "where I live someone working at MacD earns $17 an hour plus there is extra pay for evening, weekends and 5 weeks of payed vacation."

Which ensures that many people will be content working their entire lives there, and never aspire to anything greater. This is a good thing?


By BZDTemp on 12/28/2008 3:39:45 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Which ensures that many people will be content working their entire lives there, and never aspire to anything greater. This is a good thing?


You missed the point. Nobody over here want to work at MacD or do any of the similar jobs. MacD is paying just minimum wages.

My point is that $6 for Gas is not so much when even a lousy job pays $17 an hour.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By Gary Right On on 12/27/2008 1:45:31 PM , Rating: 2
"In Europe they manage to do all those things, and not have truck sales be as gigantic they are here in North America."

They also have averaged double digit inflation, double digit unemployment and recently elected a French conservative to change things!

If Europe is so great why is everyone busting our borders to get in?


RE: Just think about all the people...
By afkrotch on 12/27/2008 1:57:15 PM , Rating: 5
double digit unemployment. Big reason for that is their welfare system is much better than ours. You can live a fairly good life on welfare, but as soon as you get a job. That welfare is gone. So some ppl simply don't get jobs and leech off others.

I hate welfare systems...period.


By otispunkmeyer on 12/28/2008 9:00:49 AM , Rating: 2
yup, benefits here in the UK can be rediculous.

and for some, just having another kid makes more financial sense than getting a job. so long as they are unemployed and have kids to look after the council provide money and housing.

if you get a job, and lets face it its gonna be a bottom of the barrel minimum wager, then they expect you to start paying your way and you quickly find you cant pay rent, buy food and look after the kids. true you should maybe stick the job out and move up the ladder, but many cant be bothered and many see that in the short term, life will be harder so they dont wanna do it.

so yeah, makes more sense to just scrounge the benefits ... they'll be better off.


By William Gaatjes on 1/2/2009 7:05:49 PM , Rating: 2
We are stripping the welfare down to the point that you have to work. You can say no a few times but when you say no too often you will sooner or later have to accept a job cause your welfare will steadily be lowered to a serious minimum. Sooner or later you won't be able to pay all your luxury bills and you have to live a really spartan lifestyle. Something that has to be done because to much people in europe think that because of welfare you do not need to work. Welfare is for people who had some bad luck in life and need some help to crawl back on their feet. Not for lazy bastards. People who are permanently physical disabled or mentally handicaped and are who not able to work are judged on different sets of rules. They receive more welfare or as far as i know the mamimum account. Poor mom's witch fled a beating husband afcourse also more protected and are also a good example of someone that needs some help. Then we have the elderly that worked hard all their lives... Thing to take seriously...


RE: Just think about all the people...
By BZDTemp on 12/27/2008 2:46:00 PM , Rating: 2
? where did you dream up those stats?

The average annual inflation for the EU countries by November 2008 was 2.1% and in 6 years of data if found in a jiff using google never showed anything higher than 4% (which was this summer) and usually numbers are between 1.9% and 2.4%.

As for unemployment no EU countries have had above 10% for years with the exception of Poland and Slovakia which are both new members are also states which used to be behind the iron curtain. The average unemployment in the EU for March was 6.7% with two member states above 9.0%.

And as for the French conservative. Firstly a conservative in Europe is pretty much a socialist by US standards and secondly is it not natural that France has a French president? Surely you did not think he was the president of the EU! FYI the current President of the EU commission is from Portugal and the current President of the EU parliament is from Germany.

YOU NEED TO GET YOUR FACTS RIGHT!

Finally where do you get that everyone is busting in your borders? I guess by everyone you mean Mexico. In the EU it's people from Africa, the Middle East, the former soviet union...


RE: Just think about all the people...
By Merry on 12/27/2008 9:20:21 PM , Rating: 2
At last. Thank you for that. If you want more detailed figures head on over to eurostat. They'll support your findings.

As for the topic, I would presume new car sales are generally down, regardless of type. I still dont, nor will ever until I a) go to rural America or b) find a genuine need for one, understand the point of massive trucks. I was stood next to one the other day, here in the UK, and it just looked daft. As others have mentioned, we have farmers and thrill seekers too. They manage and they manage with rather ordinary cars or much smaller pickups. In this regard the guy who posted the pictures above has a point. My car is tiny, yet I still use it to transport my kart and assorted other stuff around, with the help of a trailer.

The question is, if I had the option to 'upgrade' or buy a big truck would I? My answer is no, however, I suspect, much in the same way as big houses are status symbols, that cars and these trucks will be too, so to many, if they could they would.

Whether they should is another question entirely and gets you into a whole world of ideological battle......


RE: Just think about all the people...
By Motoman on 12/27/2008 11:57:34 AM , Rating: 5
...it's amazing how stupid some people can be. Literally about half of the people I know would require major lifestyle changes if they couldn't have trucks...yet you rate my post down to zero, and the jackass who says only 1% of people need a truck gets up to 4?

Way to go, self-righteous asses. I'll be sure to check with you for permission before the next time I breathe.

And here I thought we lived in a country where people had the right to do the things that make them happy...like ride horses and/or motorcycles. Silly me - I thought that applied to me & my wife too - obviously it doesn't.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By SamuelW on 12/27/08, Rating: -1
RE: Just think about all the people...
By Motoman on 12/27/2008 4:54:56 PM , Rating: 2
...unless my dictionary is broken, the greater Twin Cities metro, where I live, is pretty much all "suburban area." And yes, there are people who have SUVs who haven't got much need for them, but the people *I* know live in the suburbs with everybody else, and they have their sleds and the ATVs and their boats and whatever. This isn't exactly the fringes of society...this is a very large proportion of suburban dwellers.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By SamuelW on 12/27/2008 5:24:39 PM , Rating: 2
Minnesota has a population of about five million. Take your pick: California, Texas, New York, Florida. All of these states have populations approaching 4x or more that of Minnesota.

Your suburban is my rural.


By Motoman on 12/27/2008 8:05:33 PM , Rating: 2
...once again into the dictionary. "Rural" and "Suburban" are not based on population...they are based on relative placement near major cities (like Minneapolis/St. Paul) and the "type" of community...i.e. one built around dependance on the services of the major metro, like suburbs, or one built to be independantly self-sufficient because it's in the middle of nowhere...like rural areas.

Keep working at it though. Some day you'll master English as a second language.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By masher2 (blog) on 12/27/2008 4:57:27 PM , Rating: 5
> "Most people who own these don't need these"

Most people don't need 99% of the things in their own homes, you yourself included. Should you be denied the freedom to buy them, simply because you lack the "need"?

> " They also increase the demand for gas more than other types of vehicles "

One of my neighbors own three small cars (one a Hybrid), yet he spends over twice as much a month on gas than I do. Which of us is increasing the demand for gasoline the most?

> "SUVs are only safer because not everyone drives them "

Untrue. Hit a moose or a deer in a subcompact and you'll understand why not. This isn't as rare as you might think...in a state like Maine, more people are killed from collisions with large animals than they are in multi-car collisions.

> "SUVs shouldn't even be sold"

Freedom is such an outmoded concept, isn't it?


By SamuelW on 12/27/2008 5:16:58 PM , Rating: 1
Point 1- About the only thing that is at all valid in this. But as I outlined the downsides should in any reasonable thought process outweigh the "want".

Point 2- Skewed comparison, driving more increases gas consumption regardless of the vehicle. Fact remains, if you drove as much as that person did you would be purchasing larger quantities of gas. It's the difference between running 15 CFLs and 2 incandescent light bulbs.

Point 3- BS. Such accidents are a tiny fraction of total fatalities, as in a couple of hundred to tens of thousands.

Point 4- They're a public health risk and suitable alternatives are readily available in the form of minivans. Large commercial vehicles are illegal to drive in many suburban areas for the additional road maintenance and safety risks they involve, as many or most SUVs are as heavy as these banned vehicles they shouldn't be sold since they're primarily personal use vehicles.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By MrX8503 on 12/28/2008 11:45:05 AM , Rating: 1
One of my neighbors own three small cars (one a Hybrid), yet he spends over twice as much a month on gas than I do. Which of us is increasing the demand for gasoline the most?

Maybe your neighbor owns small cars because he has to travel long distances, can you imagine how much he would spend if he was driving your SUV? Also I'm sure you and your neighbor is proof enough for the rest of America's driving habits.

Most people don't need 99% of the things in their own homes, you yourself included. Should you be denied the freedom to buy them, simply because you lack the "need"? Freedom is such an outmoded concept, isn't it?

How much freedom does America really need to be happy? We have followed a culture where we should have anything we want, whenever we want. Now we have become a gluttonous country that consumes every energy source in sight. It's true that most of the things we own are probably wants rather than needs if you want to get technical, but does owning large vehicles again really worth it only to have gas go from ~$1.50 back up to ~$4.00 again? Is it really worth it to consume whatever we want whenever we want now and then crap our pants later when our energy source runs out?

Yes, you have your freedom to own or have whatever you want just as do every American, which is what makes this country great. But just because you have the privilege of freedom where many countries do not, that does not mean you should abuse it.


RE: Just think about all the people...
By N1 on 12/28/2008 2:56:58 PM , Rating: 3
Wasting electricity spouting political opinions is not a freedom that many in the world have. That does not mean however Americans should muzzle themselves in the name of saving electricity. People want to live better lives, including those in parts of the world that can not yet afford the good life thanks to their over-regulating governments.