[roflwaffle]

Originally Posted by PA32R

The problem is, as detailed at http://hamiltonianfunction.blogspot....5/so-what.html and at http://hamiltonianfunction.blogspot....i-thought.html, the time expenditure of this type of driving this way is huge. It amounts to a week of vacation each year, and the avoided cost of fuel doesn't come near the amount my company pays me for the time lost.

The direct cost savings via fuel for driving slower aren't as attractive, if at all, when the individual in question makes ~10-20+/hour, however given that traffic accidents are the top when it comes down to accidental fatalities, that a vehicle traveling 75mph compared to 55mph needs nearly twice as much room to stop, and that a significant amount of traffic is caused by accidents, be them serious or fender benders, I wonder if on average, having people drive safely/slowly would really cost more in terms of time/money than what occurs daily on CA freeways.

For instance, the average driver supposedly spends an extra one to three days per year in traffic, most of which is allegedly caused by accidents. For every hour they spend in that traffic, they pay an extra ~$3 due to fuel cost increase. Course, this doesn't include the cost of accidents, so... Whether or not it still makes sense still depends on how much ya make. But for the average American at ~$10/hour it may be a losing proposition, especially for those in areas w/ lots of congestion.