TimJ

This reminds me of a couple things. The first time I thought "something is really wrong" in regards to the Bush administration was when we were (supposedly) having an energy crunch here in CA and there were rolling blackouts that got a lot of national airtime. That summer was supposed to be real hot, and a reporter asked Dick Cheney if people should try to conserve their use of energy. He smirked a 'what a foolish thing to say' smirk and said. "No." She was kind of taken aback, obviously she expected some pleasant "we're all in this together" kind of platitude, so she stumbled "No? People shouldn't-" (paraphrasing, it was back in 2001 pre 9-11) "No. People don't need to conserve energy" and then something like- it's a supply problem, there's no reason to do anything different. Of course we now know the entire crisis was manufactured by energy trading companies that only existed thanks to massive deregulation... but I digress.

Another thing it reminds me of is when after 9-11, when the president could have asked anything from this country, any sacrifice, and noble pursuit for the common good and we would have given it to him, he asked us to "Go shopping."

It's awesome, super awesome that some of us- the uber-mensch that we are- have figured out a way to not drive much, if at all, but good lord... is it really surprising that not driving as a lifestyle choice doesn't occur to most people? The citizens of a nation who's president, in the face of a frightening, bewildering national crisis, asks everyone to go shopping? I mean... we elected this guy a whole 1 times, and it's surprising people think of life as job, house car? Come on...

TimJ

Can we just sort this out so you guys don't have to keep repeating the same thing over and over again?

We get it- people's lives are the product of their choices, they have no one to blame but themselves, they should stop whining... plus- look at me, I'm not like that, everyone could be like me, but they aren't (pssst- am I not special?).

We get it. Everyone gets it. You can find that same "argument" on every forum on every server in the universe. I've heard that repeated in bars, cars, buses, planes, trains, malls, river falls and mile-high skyscrapers. It exists everywhere and at every time and it has never changed and has never been original, it simply is. And just as it is on the planet Zizziplex so to here can no one can argue with said "argument" because... it isn't an argument. It's just a statement of personal opinion.

We get it. Let's call it: Standard Conservative/Libertarian Personal Responsibility Statement #1. You can call it SCLPRS 1 for short. As in, you come here on the forum, see someone give an example or offer data that you don't agree with and just reply by saying:

"SCLPRS 1 to that."

OK?

Platy

SLTHS 1!

workingbike

As a side issue, if you want to avoid this problem, see about joining a car sharing group. If you NEED a car, its there, for a low monthly fee (sometimes zero) to preserve your insurance record. YMMV. if there is a local group checkout the details.

bhtooefr

Unfortunately, there is not a local group. There's rideshares (read: carpooling), but those aren't going to do what I need.

pedex

lessons are repeated until learned, and apparently not everyone gets it, otherwise we wouldnt be discussing it and the OP's article never would have been written

sure its basic common sense, no doubt about that, however, facing the problems this country has, seems some basic common sense actions are in order instead of idiot sound bites from guys like Bush or Cheney suggesting we go shopping

rising gas prices have done way more than just ding some poor americans wallets, in some countries its prettymuch a life or death situation, does anyone think they didnt go thru the same personal responsibility discussions at some point? its part of the process, crisis brings this stuff out bigtime, heck this is just the beginning

all you can do is help those that will take it, and detach yourself from the others and watch them flounder, and step one is verbally whacking a few people in the head and making it abundantly clear some of the realities of life-------one of which is this little upward blip in prices may have stung a bit, but some people in poor places on the planet are now going without electricity, lesson here, its the same behavior that got all of them in the same predicament, and it WILL get much much worse

Wogster

Has nothing to do with whether your conservative, libertarian, liberal democrat, fascist, communist or even marxist-lenninist. I always find it funny, when people talk about needing to drive 60 miles for a job paying at least $8/hr, well, it means your either not looking hard enough locally, or you should move somewhere else. Then again, when gas gets expensive, one needs to use that thing above their neck for more then making their ball cap high enough off their shoulders.

There are four solutions, to not having enough money from your job:
1) get a different job that pays more.
2) cut expenses.
3) marry someone considerably richer then you are, or at least has a good paying job
4) any two or more of the above combined.

Okay, get a better job, 2/3rds of all jobs are never advertised, usually because the employer either knows someone or goes through the CV pile on the old filing cabinet, picks 2-3 people (usually out of first dozen or so), interviews those, picks one, and hires. Throws the rest of the stack in the recycling bin, and starts over, with the rest of the dozen. This means that friends (except work friends) and relatives should know your looking. Update your CV, and send it to anyone and everyone, pound the pavement.

For many people their biggest expense is housing, and not far behind, is transportation, although with higher gas prices, those two could soon reverse places. Not much you can do about housing, except maybe a room mate. Transportation, automobiles are expensive, to operate a late model, mid sized car, 12,000 miles a year is about $8,000/year (including payments, insurance, licence, fuel, maintenance, etc.) An older car like mine, doesn't have payments, but there are more maintenance costs, given the same distance, probably totals between $2000 and $4000/yr depending on the age and condition, distance driven, etc.

So, if we can eliminate the car, we can eliminate the car expense, alternatives are walking, cycling, a smaller motorized vehicle (motorcycle or scooter) and transit. Walking is the cheapest, a bicycle is next, transit probably comes next, a scooter comes next, and a motorcycle would be the most expensive. However each has limits to it's practical per-trip range (one way), walking about 1 mile, bicycle about 15 miles, scooter about 30 miles, and motorcycle (same as automobile), transit is limited to it's operating area.

acroy

lol!

Kudos to TimJ for his cleverness.

it amazes me how anyone could not agree that the SCLPRS is a bit more than an "opinion" -
it is a logical conclusion. It is self-evedent. It is an observation of the world around us. It is proven again and again, day after day, since the beginning of human history...

to deny the obvious is asinine. denial of the truth doesn't change the truth.

Now quit yer whining

ModoVincere

Wogsterca,

that was an excellent post.
I don't know about the validity of the costs of the automobiles, but that should not take away from the post.
I would change one thing. It is not that difficult to walk 2 miles. Most people can do that in about 30 minutes without much of a sweat, if any.

I-Like-To-Bike

Done much walking with several children, especially when one or more is sick, tired and/or cranky; or disabled people or with people with health problems; in inclement weather?

maddyfish

Please don't ask that, in his world they kill the old and crippled, it never snows, and nobody ever gets sick.

gwd

Years ago I was car free because of poverty, now I'm car free by choice. The primary way out of poverty was education. Formal education came second to education on what roads would lead me out. So I disagree with some facet of most of the posts on this thread. Yes I took personal responsibility but from other poor people I learned about public assistance. I had to hitch hike 30 miles to the food stamp office without knowing whether or not I qualified. When I expressed my shame at applying the woman said "Oh no, you're the kind of person we like to help. You're a good investment for the government. See, you're working nights and taking classes in the day, if the government can keep you in school you'll get a better job and pay way more in taxes than the government gives in assistance." She was right, I've paid way more in taxes than I got in food stamps. The government got a much better return on the food stamps than they would have gotten on student loans.

So people need accurate information on what their choices are, some people need a hand up, and they need the personal responsibility to follow through on one of the positive choices. I myself also needed faith that my choices would work for me.

I read the original post as complaining that some people haven't been informed of some of their options. Of course our current infrastructure makes the car-free option difficult.

When I was poor moving was easier because I didn't have much to move. One of the skills that poor people have to learn is to delay gratification. Somehow I could always save a little from my tiny paychecks. I could invest the money in tuition or use it for emergencies.

pedex

funny ILTB semed to miss the MOST qualifier in the above post

as in most people..........not the disabled, not the sick, not the crippled, not little kids

get a grip ILTB

people survived for thousands of years without cars or mass transit and havent evolved out of walking just yet, it still works

r8ingbull

I have someone working for me now that drives 78 miles roundtrip. This is for a low wage retail job. $7 an hour part time (6 hour shifts, 5 days per week). Mapquest it; Ionia, MI to Hastings, MI. I just counted and there are 21 direct competitors of mine within a closer driving distance, and probably thousands of other retailers. I can't think of one single large retailer that isn't constantly hiring at the same (or better) pay. Imagine $42 per day - taxes and driving expenses. I've even offered to call other stores in my co-op and buying groups to get a closer job. not even enough ambition to take a job offer...

How can anyone say this is a result of "The System" instead of a series of bad decisions by this individual?

___

SLTHS 1!

acroy

a coworker of mine (semi-professional, maybe $17/hr) drives 160mi round trip in her new Hummer H3. she bought it to "be safe". she told me she quit putting money in her 401k plan in order to pay for gas

but she's a grown woman, capable of making her own decisions

mhifoe

I regularly walk a couple of miles with my daughter in a pushchair and my wife does it at least twice a week because she doesn't drive. My sister has a triple buggy enabling her to take all 3 of her children for a walk at once.

I live in England so certainly know about inclement weather. A range of items such as coats and umbrellas are available to mitigate this problem.

KnhoJ

You forgot uphill, on gravel, without shoes, and everyone has a blister on their little toe except for one guy who's walking on his hands because he doesn't have any legs.

I know quite a few people who are unable to (or just don't!) drive a car for one reason or another. I'm about a 95% member of that group myself; my neck doesn't work well enough for me to drive safely without paying for a car trip with a week or two of traction. I get around just fine, happy or cranky, rain or shine. Cars aren't really necessary. In fact, the giant pavement moats filled with lunging steel rhinos surrounding anywhere someone who doesn't drive may need to go is a major inconvenience. I walk 1/3 of a mile to the store, through a parking lot, crosswalk, down the street, crosswalk, driveway, and another parking lot. The entire distance is comprised of driving space. And I'm lucky to live this close. Most people who are unable to drive are separated from simple day to day tasks by quite a bit more pavement. It's no wonder people think we need cars to get around, the whole world seems built for it.
But people who can't drive get around; to the doctor when they're sick, to work, when the weather's bad, even when they're cranky. Even children do just fine when parents let them give it a shot. What's wrong with fit, healthy adults doing the same?

maddyfish

Yes and people lived to be 35, 70% percent of children died before age 10, and a minor ailment could mean death. Do you want to go back? I don't.

scottyk

In my mind, this kind of blanket statement doesnt work. Yes, some things have gotten better. Some things have gotten worse too. We have invented automobiles which let us drive great distances, but they are also polluting our environment. Medicine has advanced to a great degree, but this is only good if you can pay for the medical treatment needed. Walking or biking, however, should not even be an argument. They are the simplest modes of transportation, and therefore, the cheapest and most reliable. I think that we should use the technologies that benefit us the most WITHOUT costing us more than they are worth in time, money, or both.

bhtooefr

And, the extreme population growth that was caused by life expectancies increasing has caused major issues - food issues, overcrowding, pollution, etc., etc.

However, I don't think walking or biking would reduce life expectancies. It would make people MORE physically fit, MORE immune to diseases, and it would INCREASE life expectancies.

HOWEVER, it would do it in a way that would reduce pollution (obviously) and food issues (people would be packed into a tighter space for easier commuting, so more farmland would be available.) It would, however, increase overcrowding.

TimJ

You know, I use qualifiers like "may" or "could"... I don't argue specifics but rather the general... and all anyone comes back with is "here's my specific example, you are therefore wrong." Subtlety is completely lost on you guys, it drives me nuts.

I've never argued the women in the article had problems because of the "system". I never argued all these sorts of problems are due to the "system". I don't get it, are you guys computers? Are you thinking in binary? Is anything outside of 1 and 0 just beyond your grasp?

In short I've basically been sayin, 'you don't know what their specifics are, a lot of these problems are institutional and systemic, you can't make the blanket statement that any poor person who drives is an idiot, because context is key. Also, thinking in such simple, easy terms inhibits understanding and if you don't understand how things work nothing will or can ever change.' Which is a broad challenge to your assumptions, and you guys come back with "see this specific example, your claim is wrong!"

No discussions ever happen here because you're not interested in thinking, you're interested in taking a stand and winning. I'm not even taking a stand.

ModoVincere

No...I rides me bike to work...8 miles, uphill, in the snow both ways...even in July

TimJ

What it is is a complete and utter lack of thinking on your part. It's a catchphrase, a bumper sticker. There's no reasoning behind it, no consideration, no thought at all. You think there is. You think it has a deep, resonant, universal meaning. It's a "truth". Because you think that, I don't think I have the skill to ever explain to you why it's meaningless.

"Personal responsibility" is an abstraction, it has no meaning outside of a context, yet you seem to think it's something definite and real, like a platonic idea or a stone. No. What it is is an catchphrase people pull out of their ass in lieu of actually thinking about something. There's a whole mythology surrounding it too. to such an extent anyone can pull it out and POOF!, problem solved, discussion over. It's like a magic trick. A politician can get in front of a TV and "personal responsibility" this and "personal responsibility" that all night, and suckers like you think it means something, think it answers some question. Frankly I think it's pathetic.

You're being played for a fool, led around with a simple catchphrase, thinking it's a powerful, liberating truth. The thing about abstract, meaningless catchphrases, especially ones that obtain a sort of mythcal cult status (your "truth"), is they make the perfect smokescreen. X is "personal responsibility" one week, the next week Y is "personal responsibility", a couple weeks later A, then B, etc., etc., etc. To a thinking person X is X and Y is Y, to you they're all part of this timeless truth. You're way, way down the rabbit hole, and I'm not nearly smart enough to talk you out of it.

Robert C

This seems to be an interesting exception to what I have seen. What I have observed in the past is that when an employer hears that someone is looking at other job offers, they will be fired (I have been threatened with being fired when potential employers have called current employers for reference checks [I was working at Imagistics, an office equipment company, and was applying for Social Worker positions]). The idea, of course, is to keep employees afraid to look at other jobs.