Path: ...!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech
Subject: Re: BOLO pervert cyclist
Date: Sun, 08 Sep 2024 12:56:35 -0700
Lines: 131
Message-ID: <89urdjpe5p0t28t1g2adr815r0ak0mtm47@4ax.com>
References: <vbf1g1$r1ti$1@dont-email.me> <v26ndj5b4038brf60dhms4jqluln99fcq0@4ax.com> <vbga1p$10phu$6@dont-email.me> <5sindjpqbq0lks6kn3but34lsisqsf0ooo@4ax.com> <vbhq2m$1dkbr$1@dont-email.me> <vbhqdj$1dnp0$2@dont-email.me> <vbi2vi$1ev12$1@dont-email.me> <h9tpdj5rb1pkdq4mn4stg17jps7br03qkt@4ax.com> <vbj38n$1pico$1@dont-email.me> <qi4qdjlntjk9i0ogdr67ta8t3kh5onl82e@4ax.com> <vbj5t7$1pico$8@dont-email.me> <2ubqdjdof7vkbrcmijhnnm7gicoh1lajl3@4ax.com> <vbktb2$216mu$2@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net Bb5wMbEks/GYh4yq5fPaQg4rwEQsOFM85EkSM/ohqMW2jfBpiJ
Cancel-Lock: sha1:wlqHUX4GlOHietX05+jOOGo+JAg= sha256:eN4h20ATua3EVQVspCXnzXRZANxibAr8K3BTHhWu0Js=
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
Bytes: 7959

On Sun, 8 Sep 2024 15:18:57 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 9/8/2024 1:14 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 23:32:51 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> America is different. See
>>> https://www.thedrive.com/news/26907/you-dont-need-a-full-size-pickup-truck-you-need-a-cowboy-costume
>>>
>>> Among other points the author makes, "...a significant portion of truck
>>> owners never use their trucks for these capabilities. According to
>>> Edwards’ data, 75 percent of truck owners use their truck for towing one
>>> time a year or less (meaning, never). Nearly 70 percent of truck owners
>>> go off-road one time a year or less. And a full 35 percent of truck
>>> owners use their truck for hauling—putting something in the bed, its
>>> ostensible raison d’ętre—once a year or less."
>> 
>> Nope.  The reason Americans buy such trucks is that "light duty"
>> trucks are exempt from the "gas guzzler tax".
>> 
>> "Energy Tax Act"
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Tax_Act#Gas_Guzzler_Tax>
>> 
>> "Gas Guzzler Tax"
>> <https://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/gas-guzzler-tax>
>> "The Gas Guzzler Tax is assessed on new cars that do not meet required
>> fuel economy levels. These taxes apply only to passenger cars. Trucks,
>> minivans, and sport utility vehicles (SUV) are not covered because
>> these vehicle types were not widely available in 1978 and were rarely
>> used for non-commercial purposes."   (hah-hah-hah)
>> 
>> "Navigating the Gas Guzzler Tax"
>> <https://www.supermoney.com/encyclopedia/gas-guzzler-tax>
>> "The gas guzzler tax does not apply to trucks, SUVs, minivans, or
>> other vehicle types that were not prevalent as passenger vehicles when
>> the law was enacted in 1978. The exemption for “light-duty trucks” has
>> been exploited by manufacturers, impacting the overall tax collection.
>> This exemption has contributed to the continued popularity of these
>> vehicle types among consumers."
>> 
>> "Gas Guzzler Tax"
>> <https://www.investopedia.com/terms/g/gasguzzlertax.asp>
>> "Auto manufacturers were keen to take advantage of a loophole in the
>> gas guzzler tax and its interpretation through regulatory agencies
>> like the EPA that exempted "light-duty trucks" from the law.
>> Consequently, the amount of gas guzzler tax collected by the U.S. in
>> the fiscal year 2019 was under $43 million."
>
>The (absence of) the gas guzzler tax motivated the manufacturing 
>companies to make and promote the trucks.

True.  The manufacturers find a market and produce a machine that
sells in that market.  Promotion (mostly based on the image the buyer
is trying to emulate) is automatic for every type of vehicle.  You may
have bought an EV because you believe that you're environmentally
conscious and want everyone who sees you in your EV to know it.

>The buyers don't say "I'm 
>buying a grossly huge pickup because it bypasses the gas guzzler tax." 

Correct.  Nobody admits to hidden motivations.  You ran into that when
you repeatedly asked if owning a gun has a practical purpose in our
society.  You got silence for an answer.  Nobody replied.  I watched
it develop and finally got sick of your repetitious questions.  So, I
provided a real answer.  They want to have a gun in case something
goes wrong while praying they have to use it.  The gun buyer doesn't
know when or how he may eventually be forced into using a gun.  He
just doesn't want to be the only person in the room that can't defend
himself.  If that's paranoia or irrational fear, that fine.  This
country was founding on our (irrational) fear of British domination.
The problem is that's not an acceptable justification for owning a
gun, so you don't hear that from many gun owners.

Now, back to the monster trucks.  There are few rational reasons for
buying a monster truck.  One reason is money.  When they first started
to appear, the dealers were having problems clearing their inventory.
You could buy one of these trucks at a substantial discount on good
terms.  The prospective buyer was faced with a difficult choice.  He
could buy a more conventional and practical new car and pay the tax,
or he could buy a discounted gas guzzler for about the same price. The
monster truck seems like the best value (in the short run).  Add to
that the promotional advertising portraying the buyer as being very
macho, hard working, etc exactly like the now dead lumberjack look.
Perception is everything and for those who are perceived as lacking
they will do almost anything, including buying impractical pickup
trucks, to change how they are perceived.

>They certainly don't buy them to save money, given their inflated costs. 

I'm not sure, but I think that price inflation started after Covid
officially ended.  Prior to that, you could price such pickup trucks
by their price divided by their curb weight.  I'll need to do the math
before I'm claim that with certainty.

>They buy them because they're in fashion, and that fashion makes the 
>dudes buying them feel a bit more masculine. Or makes the relatively few 
>ladies that buy them feel either more "cool," or safer - by imposing the 
>danger externalities on others, in a size and mass arms race.

Yep.  That's a fair summary of what I wrote.  Saving a few thousand on
the tax was an added bonus, but also one of the few tangible bonus's.
If you want how it really works, read anything by Vance Packard:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vance_Packard>
Start here:
<https://www.amazon.com/Hidden-Persuaders-Vance-Packard/dp/097884310X>
Ouch, that's expensive.

>Note the survey results in the top paragraph. With rare exceptions, 
>people are not buying these trucks to do the special things that trucks 
>can do.

Duly noted.  Also note that most surveys do not even being to scratch
the surface of the buyers real motivations and through processes.  My
favorite example was running a survey of whomever I could convince to
answer my questions just after the Watergate mess became an
embarrassment.  Mixed into the questions was "Did you vote for Nixon
in the Nov 1972 election".  I asked about 60(?) people, mostly from
the neighborhood where I was living.  Everyone claimed that they voted
in that election and nobody admitted to voting for Nixon.  So much for
the validity of opinion polls.

If you also ask a random mob of monster truck buyers why they bought
such an impractical vehicle, I suspect you won't get any honest
answers.  Same with asking the same random mob why they own a gun.

-- 
Jeff Liebermann                 jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272      http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann      AE6KS    831-336-2558