Gasoline Prices $$

*DP*

[ 26. March 2004, 01:10 PM: Message edited by: General der Infanterie Friedrich H ]

 

People using public transportation instead of cars is the best solution, no matter what you can think.

All of you live in 1st world countries with very good public transportation systems. I don't —I still wonder why...

If you have ever been to Mexico City you'll find that even if very nice it is extremely difficult to live in a city with 30.000.000 people four times the size of New York. The Subway system is used by 7 million people a-day and the city is crowded with some 5 million or more cars.

Fortunately, since 1998 strict regulations in petrol quality diminished air pollution and improved air quality. None of the people in this forum live in a city in which you have to breathe air with a140+ ozone index. I do. Doctors in all the world say that breathing air with more than 100 ozone level for more than two days a year is bad for health. Well, let me tell you that in 2003 Mexico City had three days of -100 ozone level and more than fifty days of 200+ ozone level.

Those 'socialist environmentalists' reduced 1995 figures in which Mexico City reached 10 days of 300+ ozone levels and more than 320 days of 250+ [A chemical terrorist attack in Mexico City would be harmless. People is used to so-high levels of air pollution that Sarin gas would be ineffective in them ]

If this city had an efficient and adequate public transportation system those figures would drop dramatically. Having a car here is awful. There's never place to park it, there are more traffic jams than you can count, it can be stolen at any moment —mone was stolen a year ago— and petrol and taxes are too-damn high! But it is much much better than using public transportation; that's why so many people own cars. It is not good at all to travell in a bus full with 100 people —more even if its capacity is for 40— half an hour or more in the middle of mid-day heath and traffic jams.

In Europe and the US public transportation is 1.000 times better than Mexican one and I love using it when I go there. You don't have to endure so bloody many traffic jams, too many people and you can be standing there, reading a book not-worring about your wallet, being pushed and you can forget about the horrible-stress of driving.

Fortunately for me, my boyfriend is my chauffeur and I don't have either to drive —which is the most stressing and dangerous activity of this city— nor using public transportation —which is the most unconfortable and annoying one. But still, my car —a BMW 323i— has eight bloody cylinders and consumes a litre per mile —much more in traffic jams—, the taxes you have to pay are: 20% of the total cost of the car when you buy it and 5% every six months!

And even if Mexico is a very rich country —speaking about oil— I have to pay $0,70 per litre —something like $2,5 per gallon. And I use a car which drinks as much petrol as a Russian shoemaker drinks vodka! 80% of Mexican oil is of poor quality and refining it to make petrol is too-expensive with the now-available infaestructure. That's why 70% of the petrol consumed in Mexico is actually bought from the US at $35 or so per barrel. Mexico sells its crude-oil for $20 a barrel. And yet with this situation, Mexican politicians don't want to invest in the Oil Industry...

All you you, my friends, have no moral authority to complain about public transportation and even less, blame it all on those 'red bastards', not until you've lived in this huge and horrible but incredibly, still very, very nice city.

Regards.

 

Freddie,
We'd all use public transport if it was actually safe or reliable mate.
A month ago, the papers in Scotland carried an interesting story about a Glasgow bus driver. He had asked to be taken off his usual run because of the danger of being attacked (Glasgow bus drivers have a steel cage around their driver's cab for protection). They gave him a "safe" job doing the run from Buchanan Street bus station to Central Station-about a mile round trip. On his first day, he was attacked and stabbed on this "safe" route!
I have a 60 mile daily round trip to University. I spent first year travelling by bus to Glasgow, then tube out to the West End. Half the time the bus was late arriving due to road works, or the tube was off for some spurious reason when I got there. I now drive through. I only occasionally get stuck in traffic jams, because I now have the freedom to divert round them-something I can't do on a bus.
Trains are about as reliable as the weather-literally. For the last decade, every train from my local depot is delayed and sometimes cancelled due to flooded signals/points etc.
My beef with the politicians I mentioned-David Begg and Ken livingstone-is that both of them are career NON-drivers. Yet THEY are the very ones with the power to dictate when, how or even if the rest of us can drive our cars into their precious cities. Both whinge about the benefits to the environment, but are quite happy to spend the hard-earned cash of car-driving ratepayers getting around in taxis. I hate hypocrites.
I also hate idiots. The local Green lobby campaigned for years to get a cycle track built along a busy main road in my home town. The council organised a public meeting, and the hall was jam packed full of "cyclists". Every single one of them was a middle-aged non-entity trying to pretend he was still 17 and fit to cycle daily.
Yet they won. The council spend thousands of MY cash narrowing a busy main road by incorporating a cycle track into it. So two years later, is it the Scottish version of Beijing with thousands of bicycles plying it daily? Is it hell-according to an official study, less than TEN cyclists use it per WEEK. And meantime, where this narrowed road crosses under a railway bridge has become an even worse traffic bottleneck.
I don't have any problem with saving/improving the environment Freddie-I'm a fanatical hillwalker myself. What I DO detest is empty, gesture politics by supposedly educated people like Livingstone and Begg.

Regards,

Gordon

[ 26. March 2004, 02:46 PM: Message edited by: The_Historian ]

 

Fried, if I lived in a bigger city--then public transportation would be the way to go. However, the busses run here every 30 minutes and, if I had to use a bus for transport--and had just bought some icecream--the stuff would have been liquid long before I could get home. Also--the busses do not run 24 hrs here and stop at 9 PM.

Now if I lived in San Antonio--there busses run 24 hrs 7 days a week--every 15 minutes.

 

People using public transportation instead of cars is the best solution, no matter what you can think GdI Fred.

This is patently untrue. Public transportation only works if and when you can create urban areas of extremely high density where residential, commercial and, industrial areas are located in 'nodes' that allow for easy movement between them. In the real world none of this is readily doable. In the Western US it is an absolute absurdity to think it can be done on the existing urban landscape.
In a rural setting (agriculturial or low density landscape) public transportation is highly ineffiecent and expensive in return for moving very few people.
So, the result is that public transportation should be the exception and done primarily in areas were population and node density is sufficent to support it. Elsewhere it should be rejected virtually out of hand.

 

People seem to ignore the real reason gasoline prices are so high here in the U.S.. SUV's. I have nothing against them. However, I get sick and tired of hearing people complain about gas prices when they have a 40 gallon tank to fill at $1.80 a gallon and they get 9 miles to the gallon on a good run. No wonder you all think it's steep. If the oil companies can get it they will and it is your fault!!!!!!!!!! Simple Economics!!!!!!!!!!!

Later

 

Well, were down to $1.48 per gallon at spots around the town today.

SUVs might have a part in the high prices but--if so--it is negligable.

If a person can afford an SUV--they can afford the high gas prices too. If they want to moAN AND GROAN ABOUT THE HIGH PRICES--THEN THEY EITHER NEED TO GET RID OF THEIR suv AND BUY A sEDAN ((Sorry for the caps)) or quit bitching.

Me, I love Sedans and smaller cars--and even with my car barely working as it is, I still get some decent gas milage.

 

It'll be a pretty good bet that 1/2 these people can't afford the SUVs they drive.That's why the payments are spread out 72-80 months now.And plastic money will pay for gas.That's why these "credit counsel" ads are on TV.I've no problem with $1.70/gal.gas.But its the American way to want everything at the cheapest price.Walmart comes to mind.

 

using the excuse that suv's are the problem is a bunch of crock. Remember the buzz when the first RV's hit the road ? .........let's face it ladies/gents it is pure greed and the boyz with the know how and powers to be are going to continue this trend with deceit.

♠

 

Dear Erich,

Please review my post again. Pay particular attention to the last sentence..

Later

 

read my post again sir. Bloody greed. economics yes from the standpoint it isn't going to get any better for any of us living on this planet

 

1 Deutschmark was buying 1.60 bucks?

A 323 Beemer with eight cylinders?

Guys,you're really trying to sell this to me here?

 

In 1993 when I was there the exchange rate was 1DM for $1.60US. No selling here. A fact. I did not say this was current exchange.

 

I own a Ranger Rover and it gets pitiful gas mileage and I knew that when getting it but whether it is a Range Rover or a Toyota Prius, Everybody has a right to complain when gas prices are all of a sudden rising for no apparent reason.

 

You're right, Andy! The thing has si¡x cylinders, not eight...



But as someone who doesn't drive it and even less, takes care of its maintenance, I have no idea about the technical data of the car.

The point was anyway, that it sucks a lot of petrol!

[ 29. March 2004, 12:34 PM: Message edited by: General der Infanterie Friedrich H ]

 

This is more my kind of BMW.... ( s*d the cost of fuel )

http://www.tuningpt.com/carrosemana/csl/BMWvCapris.jpg

- and there's even a WWII interest to this photo !

 

Martin, thought this was your kind of BMW.

 

Well, they've both got wings....

 

In 1993 when I was there the exchange rate was 1DM for $1.60US. </font>[/QUOTE]Vice versa, PzJgr:

For 1 USD you were getting around 1.60 Deutschmarks.

A Deutschmark was NEVER in her history buying more than a buck. NEVER.

Think about it: Today 1 USD is buying 0.82 EURO; As 1 EUR = 1.95583 DEM (fixed) the theoretical DEM prize for 1 USD would still be around 1.60 DEM.

Trust me or check it.

Cheers,

 

"bump"