patrick.net

...get smart and make the right moves to build 20-story condo/apartment towers next to Caltrain... ...but we have to force it to happen.

Shaking my head...

Yes, it is all about pattern. If we want to accelerate our downfall, that is not a bad idea.

People want to live in safe, drug-free and gun-free communities.

Let's un-invent guns. If we cannot do that, let's allow every non-criminal to carry guns.

This has to change, by stick and by carrot. I guess that means the school system has to change as well.

The worst possible motivation for changes is smug. Some group in Germany tried that a few decades ago. History be the judge.

I posted about this celebrity flipper last year. Here's an update. Evidently experiencing some downward pricing pressure.

-- Real-estate-savvy Frankie Muniz, the Emmy-nominated star of the hit TV series "Malcolm in the Middle," has relisted his five-bedroom, four-bathroom Hollywood Hills home for $3,695,000, down from $3,875,000 last fall. Muniz, 22, purchased it in January 2006 for about $3.5 million. The 4,000-square-foot, two-story house, built in 1941 and completely remodeled in 2005, has hardwood floors, three fireplaces and an entertainment patio area with an outdoor fireplace and a pool. Muniz has been dabbling in Los Angeles real estate for a few years. When he was 19, he owned two houses on Los Angeles' Westside - one with a nifty fingerprint-recognition front door.

Justme,

I understand that your theory is that high gas prices will cause people to reconsider high density living, perhaps finding solutions to the real or imagined dangers of clustered residences.

We may see some other effects of high fuel prices, such as increased telecommuting, 4 day/10 hour work weeks, staggared shifts, and organized ride sharing. The irregular-route transit industry has already perfected algorithims for running dynamic routes (pickup adresses, dropoffs and times vary with each run). Maybe we will see a new service where a commuter, on his turn to drive, will download into his Garmin-like device the addresses and times of his pickups. This, along with other possible ride-share database methods would cut down on number of cars on the road as well as costs.

Justme,

You hit it right on the head. The pattern of thinking in California caters to the support of sprawl. That has come to a head in terms of dollar cost and time spent getting somewhere. Vertical infill is a great place to start. From a planning standpoint, you need high density population to make rail and other forms of public transit work properly. Low to medium density residential is not very efficient on so many levels. However, I must admit, I love my wasteful lawn and garden. Old habits will be hard to break.

We may see some other effects of high fuel prices, such as increased telecommuting, 4 day/10 hour work weeks, staggared shifts, and organized ride sharing.

I agree. Free Market can always find the best solutions.

I still think public transportation turns people into lemmings.

London has medium density in many areas yet they have a sprawling (pun intended) subway system. However, people don't look happy there. They drink and they puke everywhere. Happy people don't resort to alcoholism.

Something about living in a city and being able to survive without a car sounds very appealing to me, something that I would like to try for a while. Maybe not forever, but for a while.

With regards to the puking everywhere: what do you expect, the beer is warm.:)

About 36% of the people who tried to trade in a large SUV in May owed more on the truck than it was worth, according to data from the Power Information Network. That's up from just under 33% a year ago. (It's worse for large pickups. Recent PIN data suggests 40% of large pickups traded during May fetched less than the loan balance.)

A three-year-old large SUV today is worth about $2,000 to $3,000 less at trade-in than a three-year-old large SUV would have been in 2007, before gas prices began to soar, according to Marc Cannon of Inc., the largest U.S. auto retailer. A three-year-old Chevy Tahoe that might have fetched $19,700 in September 2007, he says. Today, a three-year-old Tahoe might be worth $16,400 at trade-in.

In other words, folks who bought a big SUV in 2005 are discovering that they were making a bet that oil prices would remain stable. They were wagering $30,000 to $40,000, not the billions certain U.S. auto makers stand to lose from making a similar wager. But the pain of losing that bet is still real. There hasn't been such a significant collapse in demand for a class of vehicles since the oil embargoes and inflation of the 1970s slaughtered muscle cars.

For the past several weeks, I have passed an increasingly common sign of the times: a Hummer H2 parked at the front of the owner's driveway with a "For Sale" sign in the window. I don't know the seller's motives, but it's doubtful they'll get what they want for the truck, given that Hummer dealers have a glut of unsold new vehicles that will probably leave their lots at fire-sale prices.

Within the past few days, a number of experts in the used-car market have recommended that owners of large SUVs should probably just hang on to their rigs rather than sell into the current collapse.

"If you've got one two- to three-years-old and you're working on a five-year loan, you will be upside down," says Jack Nerad of Kelley Blue Book/KBB.Com. "That's exacerbated by the fact the dealer doesn't want that vehicle right now. It's going to be an ugly scene."

Something about living in a city and being able to survive without a car sounds very appealing to me, something that I would like to try for a while.

You can. Millions of New Yorkers and DC residents have embraced the car-free lifestyle for years.

Perhaps it is time to get a used Land Cruiser. :)

Within the past few days, a number of experts in the used-car market have recommended that owners of large SUVs should probably just hang on to their rigs rather than sell into the current collapse.

Acoording to a local news report, many dealers in my area will not take an SUV as a trade in at all.

I always thought SUVs were more for fashion than utility. The best selling SUVs (Explorer, Darango, Trail Blazer) have no more room in them then thier respective company's minivans.

The new fashion statement is now Hybrid. But see how the Prius got it right? It will always outsell a Hybrid Camry, Hybrid Accord, or Hybrid Civic. That is because the Prius looks like a hybrid. What's the point of being fashionable if nobody can readilly see it? If GM is smart, they will make the Volt or other eco-car look distinctively different, and avoid hybrid variants of current models that are hard to distinguish from the non-hybrids.

Bap,

I wonder what the profit margins will end up being. High demand, less raw material, fewer parts in the hybrids. This could be a real ripper for the auto companies. This change will be a good one to study.

GM has had a fully developed electric car for years. Have you guys seen,' Who Killed the Electric Car'. Neet story. Slanted, but still good.

all that is going on is the sheeple are now being steered towards Pirus’. Nothing more, nothing less.

Are you speaking against the Pious? How dare you? ;)

I saw a whole truck-load of Smug Fortwo's while driving to work today. Sigh.

That is because the Prius looks like a hybrid.

And it sounds like "pious."

Headset,
Any hybrids in your fleet?

I want a diesel car instead. The environmental impact of batteries in hybrid cars can be a problem.

A friend of mine had an Audi 4000 diesel back in the 80's. I think it had the VW 1.6L. It was a fully loaded four door that got 55 MPG on the highway. You wouldn't win any races, but it cost nothing to run at the time. Great car. Another friend had a Chevy Sprint with the Suzuki 1L triple and got 50 MPG or better.

The car companies can give us milage with a normal four stroke engine. I wish that they would.

I heard the BMW 535d gives close to 40 mpg.

I am very adverse to large battery arrays.

My friend is going to put used vegetable oil in his diesel. We will see how that goes.

I afraid high gas price may *not* produce higher living densities. Thank God.

Yeah, I'm not at all thrilled about batteries either. The environmental impact far outweighs any gains.

40 MPG is pretty good. The 535's not a tiny car.

Too bad a 535d is going to cost a lot.

Perhaps Toyota will produce a large (2-ton) family sedan with a powerful diesel engine. Hopefully one with 300 lb-ft torque and 40 mpg.

EBGuy,

No hybrids in our taxi fleets. We are nearly 100% Impala, with a few Venture vans. However, I did see a gas problem years ago and conviced the owners to use Impalas instead of Ford Crown Vics.

I do know the owner of Discount Cabs in Phoenix, he recently put 200 Prius Hybrids in his fleet. He already had natural gas powered Crown Vics.

Perhaps Toyota will produce a large (2-ton) family sedan with a powerful diesel engine. Hopefully one with 300 lb-ft torque and 40 mpg.

Don't forget the tail fins!

Don’t forget the tail fins!

Huh? :)

Tail Fins, like on the late 50's early 60's cars. If you are going to be extravagant.......

I prefer conservative styling.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Century

I see from the article they had a hybrid version of the Century in 1975.

Too bad Jet-A ain't cheap either. ;)

The diesel car to get is the 2008 VW Jetta TDI Bluetec with a 2.0L 4-cyl clean diesel engine. Too bad the launch is delayed from May to September. This baby will get 50MPG, maybe more if driven carefully.

The word "smug" came up yet again. I haven't seen nor talked to any "smug" Prius drivers at all. I have however talked to several that are pleased that they are driving an efficient vehicle, and wish that more would follow their good example in their next (or even better, previous) vehicle purchase.

This practice of denouncing people who are doing the right thing as "smug" has got to stop. I suspect it is rooted in guilt and envy.

Anyone who does something because he feels good about being right is "guilty" of being smug. This includes me "exposing" the aforesaid motivation. :)

Besides, there is nothing wrong about being smug. One is certainly free to choose this path. In fact, if a lawmaker tries to outlaw smugness, I will be the first to get upset.

IF high gas prices are to stay, demand for oil will have to fall. There is no need to pay a premium for the sake of "conservation." Have faith in the market. All will be fine.

After oil, what is the next bubble?

>Anyone who does something because he feels good about being right is “guilty” of being smug.

Peter, how are you able to tell whether someone feels good about their choices "for the wrong reason", namely "being right", as opposed "the right reason", which is wanting to do something right simply because it IS the right thing to do?

Methinks you are errantly assigning the wrong motives to people who are doing the right thing.

In any case, why does this bug you and so many other people to such a large extent? It makes no sense at all to me. Just be happy that they did the right thing, feel free to do the same yourself, and otherwise leave them alone. Don't have such a big bug up your ass about the imagined motivation of people who do the right thing. Sheesh.

Peter, how are you able to tell whether someone feels good about their choices “for the wrong reason”, namely “being right”, as opposed “the right reason”, which is wanting to do something right simply because it IS the right thing to do?

Does it matter? :)

The last temptation is the greatest treason:
To do the right deed for the wrong reason.
-- T. S. Eliot

In any case, why does this bug you and so many other people to such a large extent?

It really doesn't. Honestly, I should be thrilled that smaller cars are making the road safer for me, right? ;)

If humanity insists on doing the "right" thing, the world will be in chaos as everybody exerts his own view of piety on the world.

If humanity remains selfish and delegate moral decisions to Free Market, at least we have hope.

Peter,

PWDTRT= People Who Do The Right Thing

You are changing the subject. The subject is why you label PWDTRT as smug. Now you are saying that it is ok to do so because PWDTRT are actually wrong (it will produce chaos) Then please concentrate on showing why and how they are wrong, rather than the lame "smug" label. And I will tell you my suspicion: PWDTRT are right, and you cannot prove them wrong to a general level of satisfaction, so you resort instead to the "smug" label. Am I WRONG about this?