"Modern Cars" today get no better gas milage than a 1958 Plymouth did!

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. There is a club for these massive
cars from the 50's called the Land Yacht Club. I would surely(don't
call me Shirley) prefer a 1959 Chrysler or even a 61 to a modern SUV
or Hummer.

These were cars indicative of an optimistic future. A future of
limitless petroleum and hope for a brighter future. An atomic future
where men walked in space and America was a shning example to contrast
against the dark warriors of the Iron Curtain.

Unlike the modern SUV which is a symptom of a society of fear and
pessimism; a chance for survival in a world collapsing.

While they may get similar CAFE numbers, they are actually bookends of
an era holding an arc of hope and despair within their confines.

Will anyone ever feel as passionate about their solar powered moped as
those who comsumated their high school romance on the massive, supple
vinyl of a late fifties land yacht?

I think not and there's the rub. It aint the cars, it's the empty
society we find ourselves in. Denial, always denial. What problem? What
energy crisis? Til every drop is wrung from the ground Bushco, Arbusto
Energy and Fuxxon won't be happy and we don't need no alternative
energy. Bush farts a few cents out of the Federal Budget in the general
direction of hydrogen and the press and the conservatives give him
continuous fellatio non-stop 24/7 cause he's such a great guy.

WTF?

Is anyone awake? Does anyone notice were virtually ****ed if the Arabs
decide they'd like to hold onto their oil for a future day when it is
even more valuable. Canada and Mexico have us by the shorthairs and
Chavez can wind up dictating our policy for South America by virtue of
the amount of oil they supply the U.S.

Jimmy Carter had an energy policy.

Ronald Reagan ( a god who walked this earth, or a catatonic zombie
depending on your political affiliation) cancelled it. Was it a wise
decision to do so?

We are living thru the ramifactions of his decision.


Tell me, did Ronnie do the right thing?

"True Blue" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. There is a club for these massive
> cars from the 50's called the Land Yacht Club. I would surely(don't
> call me Shirley) prefer a 1959 Chrysler or even a 61 to a modern SUV
> or Hummer.
>
> These were cars indicative of an optimistic future. A future of
> limitless petroleum and hope for a brighter future. An atomic future
> where men walked in space and America was a shning example to contrast
> against the dark warriors of the Iron Curtain.
>

A society that was lying to itself. It wasn't real fun being Black back in
1959, they were still lynching them. And only 15 years earlier a mad
dictator
on the other side of the world was cooking people alive in concentration
camps. The society in America during the 50's was desperately trying
to forget all of that by pretending it never happened and focusing on
the future. Why do you think that in the 70's and 80's
that so many people were amazed to learn of the Japanese internment
camps in the United States during WWII? And are you forgetting
Duck and Cover, and the McCarthy witchhunts?

And don't forget that during the 50's America set the seed for a population
spike that in a bit less than 10 years from now is all going to be hitting
Social Security and there's not money enough to pay for them. The baby
boomers, starting out with such promise, are all going to end up working
until they drop dead, they won't be able to afford to retire. And by the
time
they all die off in 2040 the American economy will be destroyed by it. I'll
be getting ready for my own retirement then and I'm not happy with
what I'm going to have to be dealing with.

I cannot imagine you lived through that era to be saying that. Hollywood
has whitewashed the 50's to the point that people have forgotten how
bad it was.

> Unlike the modern SUV which is a symptom of a society of fear and
> pessimism; a chance for survival in a world collapsing.
>

The modern SUV is no such thing. The modern SUV is simply a reincarnation
of the long wheelbase minivan of the 80's and 90's which itself was a
reincarnaion of the full sized station wagons of the 50's, 60's and 70s.
Apparently due to the
TV show The Brady Bunch, and the movie Vacation, nobody wants to own
a vehicle that is labeled "station wagon" so they simply renamed them
"minivan" and later on "sports utility vehicle"

> While they may get similar CAFE numbers, they are actually bookends of
> an era holding an arc of hope and despair within their confines.
>
> Will anyone ever feel as passionate about their solar powered moped as
> those who comsumated their high school romance on the massive, supple
> vinyl of a late fifties land yacht?
>
> I think not and there's the rub. It aint the cars, it's the empty
> society we find ourselves in.

I don't think so and here is why. People just don't get that passionate
about
something that they don't get their fingers in.

The cars in the 50's and 60's and earlier were still pretty simple, they had
to periodically
be 'tuned up' with a real live timing light and dwell meter. It's something
that
most high school boys had to learn back then if they wanted to keep their
chariots running. That and a lot of other repairs too.

This changed with emission controls in the 70's although there were still
a lot of die-hards who made a point of purchasing older cars "that I kan
work on" so the high school boy car experience was still pretty much the
same.

Sometime about the mid to late 80's the supply of 60's cars began to start
drying
up and only the really passionate people still managed to get ahold of them.

By the time the 90's rolled around, nobody was buying 60's cars for their
high-school kids to drive around. They might be buying them as toys for
themselves or as investments.

That left a whole collection of difficult-to-work on vehicles out there for
the high school kids to use, and it's no coincidence that in the 90's high
schools started pulling out their auto shos and such.

Today the average high school kid or 20-something treats the vehicle
engine and powertrain as a black box, and is helpless if something goes
wrong in it. These folks are spending their money on lights and doo-dads
to spiffy up their cars - because you can't really do much to soup up
or hot up a car other than hang expensive christmas tree lights on it.
This does not make for much of a passionate relationship. The car has
regressed to a tin can with an engine that you hang a bunch of lights on.

> Denial, always denial. What problem? What
> energy crisis? Til every drop is wrung from the ground Bushco, Arbusto
> Energy and Fuxxon won't be happy and we don't need no alternative
> energy. Bush farts a few cents out of the Federal Budget in the general
> direction of hydrogen and the press and the conservatives give him
> continuous fellatio non-stop 24/7 cause he's such a great guy.
>
> WTF?
>

How is this different than any past generation?

> Is anyone awake? Does anyone notice were virtually ****ed if the Arabs
> decide they'd like to hold onto their oil for a future day when it is
> even more valuable. Canada and Mexico have us by the shorthairs and
> Chavez can wind up dictating our policy for South America by virtue of
> the amount of oil they supply the U.S.
>

We know, but you need to read more. Try some periodicals with some
actual intelligently written articles in them like National Geographic. You
will
find that the Arabs now are as dependent on that jugular vein of money
coming in from the US as we are dependent on that jugular vein of
oil coming from them.

Today it would be impossible for OPEC to do an oil embargo like in 1973.
It would totally disrupt their own societies to the point we are talking
internal revolution/civil wars here. Saudi Arabia for example is a net
importer of food. They are mostly desert and it's expensive to run
desaltnation plants to create irrigation water to grow crops.

> Jimmy Carter had an energy policy.
>
> Ronald Reagan ( a god who walked this earth, or a catatonic zombie
> depending on your political affiliation) cancelled it. Was it a wise
> decision to do so?
>
> We are living thru the ramifactions of his decision.
>
>
> Tell me, did Ronnie do the right thing?
>

It has nothing to do with him. Carter's energy policy was to hammer
conservation
and solar. That works fine in the beginning because when you just start
doing it
conservation is a big win. Once all the easy to conserve stuff is done,
conservation
doesen't work that well. And solar now has developed to the point that you
can't
justify price supporting that industry anymore by the government - solar
energy
must stand on it's own economically to work. And mostly it can't because
even
with all the oil price increases, it's still cheaper to get energy from oil
than from
sunlight.

Ted

Yeah, let's think back to 1979 when the government did do something.
The Carter administration instituted price controls. What did we see?
We saw long gasoline lines, and that's if the gas station hadn't run
out of gas. It's estimated that Americans used about 150,000 barrels of
oil per day idling their cars while waiting in line. In an effort to
deal with long lines, the Carter administration introduced the
harebrained scheme of odd and even days, whereby a motorist whose
license tag started with an odd number could fill up on odd-numbered
days, and those with an even number on even-numbered days.

What about personal plates? I can't remember when they went.

--
"Now Phoebe Snow direct can go
from thirty-third to Buffalo.
From Broadway bright the tubes run right
Into the Road of Anthracite"
Erie - Lackawanna



"tomkanpa" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Yeah, let's think back to 1979 when the government did do something.
> The Carter administration instituted price controls. What did we see?
> We saw long gasoline lines, and that's if the gas station hadn't run
> out of gas. It's estimated that Americans used about 150,000 barrels of
> oil per day idling their cars while waiting in line. In an effort to
> deal with long lines, the Carter administration introduced the
> harebrained scheme of odd and even days, whereby a motorist whose
> license tag started with an odd number could fill up on odd-numbered
> days, and those with an even number on even-numbered days.
>

"tomkanpa" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Yeah, let's think back to 1979 when the government did do something.
> The Carter administration instituted price controls. What did we see?
> We saw long gasoline lines, and that's if the gas station hadn't run
> out of gas. It's estimated that Americans used about 150,000 barrels of
> oil per day idling their cars while waiting in line. In an effort to
> deal with long lines, the Carter administration introduced the
> harebrained scheme of odd and even days, whereby a motorist whose
> license tag started with an odd number could fill up on odd-numbered
> days, and those with an even number on even-numbered days.
>

What's that got to do with price controls?

When you were allowed to fill your tank. What day, odd or even?

--
"Now Phoebe Snow direct can go
from thirty-third to Buffalo.
From Broadway bright the tubes run right
Into the Road of Anthracite"
Erie - Lackawanna



"c-bee1" > wrote in message
news:U6eZe.160809$084.50042@attbi_s22...
>
> "tomkanpa" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> Yeah, let's think back to 1979 when the government did do something.
>> The Carter administration instituted price controls. What did we see?
>> We saw long gasoline lines, and that's if the gas station hadn't run
>> out of gas. It's estimated that Americans used about 150,000 barrels of
>> oil per day idling their cars while waiting in line. In an effort to
>> deal with long lines, the Carter administration introduced the
>> harebrained scheme of odd and even days, whereby a motorist whose
>> license tag started with an odd number could fill up on odd-numbered
>> days, and those with an even number on even-numbered days.
>>
>
> What's that got to do with price controls?
>
>