Bicycle Commuting Serge?
 

Weekend Edition Sunday, October 9, 2005 · As President Bush encourages Americans to conserve fuel, some speculate that the nation might see a renaissance in bike commuting. Andy Clark, executive director of the League of American Bicyclists, discusses the prospects with Liane Hansen.

The program can be listened to here.....
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=4951898

It's an old story, yes, but doods! I'd really like to hear what you think!

Well the increasing gas price may indeed motivate some folks to go two wheels vice four.

I know my son has expressed new found interesting in cycling.

While I don't think I'm seeing an uptick in bike commuters, this winter, I have had the odd feeling that drivers are being nicer to me. I have to cross a busy street on my commute, and I'm finding that cars are slowing more and sooner when they see me to make it a bit easier to get across. Maybe I've just been lucky, but I have wondered if the drivers were seeing me as someone actually doing something to reduce demand for gas, and so worthy of a break.

It would be nice if it was real and common.

Speedo

Who's Serge?






/slips away quietly like a ninja

Did they raise the question of why the president cycles around his private cycle track, yet refuses to help out any other cyclists not going to school? Because that would be a great way the president could have over the last seven years find a solid way to reduce demand.

Serge Savard - used to play for the Montreal Canadiens

A&S deserves its own Serge. Hmmmm....

At least it wasn't spelled "Sarge"... then I'd think it would be a cop or soldier trying to enforce bike commuter rules.

Wasn't there a Sergeant Lunker who used to post here at one time?

Although he may have been here to go fishing...and mistakenly thought a reel was a wheel.

East Hill

LOL

Best internet misspell ever!

Either that or the most adept play on words, especially for A&S. Woulda even been better in VC

-D

Well, of course, "serge" is phonetically correct, and it's likely to even pass a spellcheck (it does on my computer).

Plus, it's been a few years since the soda pop called Surge left the market (it's supposedly been repackaged and renamed Vault), so that example of correct spelling & usage is gone.

*edit* okay, NOW that I check the link, I see that NPR spelled it correctly.. ;)

Another story that was on the same page:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=5372121

"What Constitutes Price-Gouging in the Oil Industry?"

"With gas prices passing $3 a gallon, accusations of price-gouging are common. But what exactly is price-gouging? How is it defined? And are the oil companies guilty of it?"

I happened to be thinking about this last night and got to wondering... the oil companies are telling us that they have raised the price of gas to reflect the cost of buying high priced oil... yet they then post record high profits. Profits are what is left after you pay for the cost of raw materials from the revenue you bring in based on the goods sold.... If the price of gas reflects the high cost of oil, there should not be a "record profit" as the goods out price is only reflecting the change in materials cost... so there is no net change. But apparently that is NOT true for oil companies... as the result has been "record profits."

I lost all -- and I mean ALL -- trust in the legitimacy of pump prices when I saw them jump 20 cents in one day in the mid-1990's simply because of some bad news from Iraq.

I thought to myself, "There's no way in hell that the oil supply got that much tighter and affected the drillers and refineries and distribution channels and the gas station itself in less than 24 hours. There's a buffer zone somewhere, but these jackholes are just hoping to make a buck off of the panic."

Here I thought we were going to discuss new Commuter clothes made from Serge- a durable twilled fabric having a smooth clear face and a pronounced diagonal rib on the front and the back. :(

Not quite the same stuff. http://www.savesurge.org/ www.vaultkicks.org.

I think the price of fuel is not going to change much about the way Americans use motor vehicles. It will have some effect on the types of new vehicles purchased, but won't generate any new surge in bicycle commuting. Most people would rather pay more and kvetch, and kvetch with the nozzle in hand, than make any positive changes.

The free market economy depends on everyone charging as high a price as the market will bear for everything that is bought and sold.

It's true for everything from paper clips to New York real estate, from a pound of apples to a pound of gold. From an hour of a plumber's time to an hour of George Clooney's time to an hour of Bill Gates' time. Why should oil/gas be any different?

Seriously. Can someone please answer this question? I know you want to ignore it, but please don't. Give it some thought. Give me an answer. What's wrong, morally or economically, in oil companies, refineries, gas deliverers and gas stations from charging as much as they can possibly get at every step along the way?

How are pump prices any less "legitimate" when they reflect the highest price the market will bear?
If anything, if the pump prices are anything other than the highest price the market will bear is what would make them "illegitimate".

I think gas would have to get pretty expensive. To save money bike commuting you have to actually do it a lot, or already own suitable equipment. Most people have a bike, but they lack:
1. A way to carry their crap.
2. Clothing to deal with heat, rain, and cold.
3. Lights.

They quickly realize they need these things and that bike commuting is somewhat difficult (just like exercise), then decide they'd rather stay home on friday night than bike commute all week.

That's my guess about it. Of course, some small percentage will start bike commuting. Maybe even a quarter of a percent! So we'll pretty much double the number of bike commuters ;).

A discussion with HH:

"Yes it is."
"No it isn't."
"Yes it is."
"No it isn't."
"Yes it is."
"No it isn't."
"Yes it is."
"No it isn't."
"Yes it is."
"No it isn't."
"Yes it is."
"No it isn't."

:rolleyes:

No, it isn't. :p

I was wondering how you would dodge the questions.

I guess you don't like to be questioned about the assertions you make, no matter how ridiculous they are. Why do you even bother making them then?

Well sure it will. Because Serge is a real word, if you are talking about fabrics.

-D

Free market also means competition without collusion, manipulation, price fixing etc..., but in the case of certain industries we have natural monopoly or oligopoly in the case of the oil companies. In the past they have tried to collude with each other to limit the refining capacity to increase their profits which would be morally, ethically, and legally wrong to do... do a search.

If you look at their 10Q you'll notice the refining profit margin increased 50% when the oil price was actually going down in the past which was explained away by import of gasoline and lack of refining capacity. So basically we are getting higher gasoline prices no matter if oil goes up or down due to increased demand and artificial supply constraint.

"The global fundamentals of the refining industry remained strong during 2007. Continued demand growth in developing areas such as India and China and global political concerns supported high prices for crude oil and refined products. In the U.S., refining margins remained above historical levels during the first half of 2007 in part due to the following:

• continued gasoline and diesel demand growth coupled with limited production capacity;

• lower refinery utilization due to heavy industry turnaround activity and unplanned outages;

• low product inventories;

• a continuing reliance on gasoline imports; and

• new lower sulfur standards for non-road diesel, which went into effect on June 1, 2007. "

You only hear this stuff when prices are rising.

Yet oil/gas prices do drop from time to time. Why would those colluding *******s ever do that?

Look, the problem is the difference between "what the market will bear" and a company -- or worse, a collection of companies in the same industry -- taking advantage of a situation.

Saying "what the market will bear" had not a flippin' thing to do with that 20¢/gal overnight increase. That was a load of crap. You walk into any other store and see a price jump like that, and you'll ask the clerk WTF happened.

Oil companies ***** and moan about how they're screwed, how they can't do this or that, how they need to drill into your backyard to get to that last drop of oil, and yet they're reaping record profits. They're even able to throw away money for certain executives' retirement packages (what'd that Exxon pig get, $250 mil? *google* oh damn, $400+ million...).

They know that people will buy gas no matter what. They know that people can't shop around very easily; and even if they try, all the station owners are in cahoots anyway.

It's completely anti-consumer.

What hypothetical scenario can I use...

Okay, I own a bike helmet company. My other helmet company-owning buds -- "competing" companies, mind you -- get together for golf & beers every weekend. One day, we learn that every jurisdiction in the country has declared that all cyclists must wear a helmet.

We decide the next day that we'll raise our prices by 30%. But, we agree, it'll look suspicious if we all go up by the same amount. So, we play rock-paper-scissors, and the loser has to raise his prices the least -- he'll bump his by 28%. I luck out and get to raise mine by 35%.

Cyclists (especially the ones with names rhyming with "Helmet Head") whine. They say we're gouging them. We say that we have to increase production, .. um, we have to retool for new regulations, uh... we have to pay increased prices for raw materials... um... yeah, that's right. It's just going to cost more, so HTFU.

Our price increases, from then on, will work like the NFL draft. Next year, the guy who lost rock-paper-scissors gets to bump his prices by the largest amount, while I rotate down to second-largest. This way, we're all doing uneven jumps, although everybody still gets to make a ton more money.

You do remember Standard Oil, right?

To keep from looking like they're fixing prices, that's what.

Oh, gas dropped 4 cents a gallon this week, I heard... :rolleyes: