[Moneyguy1]

Shep:

You make a good point. When I had a young family, my wife, two kids, grandma and the family dog plus provisions for a week in the mountains fit in a Pinto Wagon with a rooftop carrier. Our second car was a 1965 Corvair turbo convertable. Later I got a Ford midsize station wagon in 1986 and used that sucker for haulng just about everything including 4 x 8 sheets of plywood and plasterboard. The "need" for huge vehicles is difficult for me to understand, and even more difficult to justify. It is not a "need", it is a "want", fueled in many cases by a selfish attitude that says "I got mine, to Hell with you". Granted, if I had an actual need for something that weighed 5,700 pounds and got 15 MPG for work, could say that is justified. My sone-in-law is a master electrician and does require a cargo hauler. What does he get? Used vans that are PARKED when no on the job. His regular vehicle? midsized crossover. He has the required two kids, wife and dog. How can he possibly live with such restrictions?

Sooner or later, folks will start to understand (reluctantly) that their income will limit optional purchases and priorities will have to be made. Barring a miracle discovery of a huge reserve of oil in the western hemisphere, the next 5 to 10 years will be interesting. There will always be those who can afford to waste resources at a cost to others. For the rest of us, I wonder if the efforts some of us place on conservation isn't looked at by those at the top with derision and laughter. "More for us", they say.

Our elected officials ignore the wolf at the door and waste their time and our treasure on meaningless issues.