good analysis. Yes there are MANY things that just a $$ view doesn't get in the economics equation. What is the in-place value of clean air, clean water, etc. ? How much is a child "worth" when killed by armed conflict that has underlying energy issues? I can't even begin to quantify these things but I know they are there.<br>
<br>Other factors such as the continued use of an older, higher consumption vehicle vs. total consumption of creating a new one plus reclamation of the old one. I wish I had these numbers so I could make better choices.<br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 12:07 PM, Tom Freeman <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:tfreeman@intel.digichem.net">tfreeman@intel.digichem.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Well, the majority of the race seems to lack the desire/ability/<br>
education (pick one or more blame points, or add one) to make much of<br>
any choice except on the basis of upfront cost.<br>
<br>
How often have you had the conversation with somebody about to, or<br>
justifying the purchase of a SUV where the _only_ cost that they<br>
consider is the cost of the fuel to drive it somewhere? Funny thing is,<br>
fuel cost is a fraction of the total cost of driving, yet the cost of<br>
fuel drives the whole dynamic because it is visible.<br>
<br>
My Mazda 6 is getting about 30 mpg overall at the moment. With fuel<br>
running about $2.70/gal, that works out to about $0.09/mile. Capital<br>
cost happens to run about, wait for it, $0.09/mile (I was able to pay<br>
cash - it will be higher if you have to finance). I haven't figured the<br>
maintanace on this car, but the last one worked out to perhaps $0.06/<br>
mile over 270,000 miles. Add in insurance at something near or better<br>
than $0.05/mile (in my case - YMWV), and you might see the cost of<br>
driving is at least three, probably four times the cost of fuel -<br>
assuming that all the costs are accounted for. Plus the cost of<br>
maintaining the roadway is almost impossible to account for here, as<br>
there are multiple sources of funding (including but not limited to the<br>
road use tax on fuel.)<br>
<br>
What I'm trying to suggest is that "price saver" mentality isn't the<br>
only force in play here. There is also the hiding of costs through<br>
various mechanisms The bright people around here can probably add two<br>
or three more cost hiding/transfer mechanisms in further discussion.<br>
<br>
Jim - I do so agree that we need to own up to our participation in the<br>
whole process, and not foist the responisiblity off onto somebody or<br>
something else. My driving habits drive the need for more oil wells,<br>
oil wells will leak/spill oil even if handled with the highest degree<br>
of professionalism, so part of the "fault" of the catastrophe in the<br>
gulf is mine. The owners/stockholders of record at the time of the<br>
blowout have a larger, more direct responsibility since they own the<br>
entity which acted in a less than perfectly professional manner. (If<br>
you want the profits - you should take responsibilty for the oopes<br>
also. IMHO)<br>
<div class="im"><br>
On 06/18/2010 11:25:55 AM, Jim Kinney wrote:<br>
> I am willing to pay MUCH more on my plane tickets if the extra $$<br>
> goes<br>
> to<br>
> improve service and reliability and safety, etc.<br>
><br>
> We have developed too much of the walmart mentality for my tastes.<br>
> cut<br>
> costs<br>
> to save $ with no regard for the quality (or lack) or damage it does<br>
> to the<br>
> surrounding.<br>
><br>
> We _so_ need to start evaluating our own individual participation in<br>
> the<br>
> process around us.<br>
><br>
> On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 10:37 AM, Greg Freemyer<br>
> <<a href="mailto:greg.freemyer@gmail.com">greg.freemyer@gmail.com</a>>wrote:<br>
><br>
> > Damn,<br>
> ><br>
> > I guess we should blame the passengers if a commercial airplane<br>
> > crashes due to poor maintenance and pilot error.<br>
> ><br>
> > Greg<br>
> ><br>
> > On 6/18/10, Jim Kinney <<a href="mailto:jim.kinney@gmail.com">jim.kinney@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> > ><br>
> > <a href="http://blogs.ajc.com/mike-luckovich/2010/05/31/mike-luckovich-" target="_blank">http://blogs.ajc.com/mike-luckovich/2010/05/31/mike-luckovich-</a><br>
> june-1-cartoon/<br>
> > ><br>
</div><<snip for brevity>><br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Ale mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Ale@ale.org">Ale@ale.org</a><br>
<a href="http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale" target="_blank">http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale</a><br>
See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at<br>
<a href="http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo" target="_blank">http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>-- <br>James P. Kinney III<br>Actively in pursuit of Life, Liberty and Happiness <br>Doing pretty well on all 3 pursuits <br><br> Faith is a cop-out. If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can’t be taken on its own merits.<br>
Dan Barker, "Losing Faith in Faith", 1992 <br><br>