Middle America Worker's Story
 

There is a man from the Rockford Area and for the sake of this story I will call him Mike. Mike spent approximately 20 years working at a factory making parts for appliances. He worked his way up the ladder and was eventually named the Lead Guy. Mike was wise with his money and did an excellent job supporting his family. His sacrifices gave his children many of the things he never had, but after nearly two decades the company he worked for was sold. Almost all the operations were moved to a town over 80 miles north. Fortunately, unlike many people hurt my the 2009 downturn he still had a job, but now it was a 1hr and 45 min drive away. With the unemployment in Rockford hovering around 19% at the time of his company's sale, he didn't have much of a choice.He had to take the job just to survive.

While the drive time affected his family life, the cost of driving hurt just as badly. It cost Mike about $30 dollars a day to drive to work, and while his pay was decent the $6260.80 a year was crippling. This battle between work and family thankfully came to an end after a 1 1/2 years. Mike recently accepted a great job a few minutes from home and His life has returned to some sort of normalcy.

Mike's story is typical of thousands of people around this country, but there seems to be even more individuals who's extreme commuting battle is just starting and isn't ending for the foreseeable future. The missed family time experienced by people like Mike is extremely stressful, but the financial burden can be even more stressful. Especially since many times these people, due to spouse layoffs, are already the sole bread winner . What these people need is the piece of mind that comes from the financial freedom brought by efficient transportation. In some areas this comes in the form of public transportation or ride-sharing, but for many of us this can only come in the form of a cheap, reliable, fuel efficient vehicle. These days car companies boast of 40 mpg, but the 1995 Honda Civic VX got over 50 mpg. So that being said 40 mpg isn't really that impressive. What is needed is a vehicle that returns the cost of driving to the days of 1 dollar gas. Do you agree? If so what are your suggestions? I know I have one.

No, I don't really agree. What's needed is for people to not rack up 40,000 mind-numbing miles/year.

The difference between 40 and 50 mpg for such a person is 200 gallons/year, or 3.8 g/week, or .76g/day, depending on how you want to look at it. "Mike" could have gotten a clue much sooner though, and not commuted in a 20 mpg rig.

Ending speculation would drop the price of fuel, or it seems like it would.

I think the issue is the miles this guy had to do to get to work. I don't know for sure, none of us do, but he probably couldn't afford to move and would have issues selling his house anyway if the area was in decline. Its a common problem.

A few months ago I had to listen to a World Wildlife Lunatic on the radio involved in a listener phone-in debate about high fuel costs and poor, rural communities. A lady called from Stornaway - which is an island off the west coast of Scotland. Because of job availability she had to work in the only main town there is there. But because of low pay and housing cost she had to live away from the town. No public transport available at her hours so she has no choice but to drive.

WWF luny solution ? Move and get another job. :rolleyes:

Of course he lives in West London where public transport is so frequent that you would not need to have a car, and where jobs are plentiful and very well paid.

Unfortunately for us most of the UK is run from West London, which is why they don't understand why the rest of us don't conform to their views on life.

The car based issue seems to be a lack of interest in high FE cars any more, at least ones that most folks can afford.

"Mike" was on the road 3 1/2 hours every day. As a "lead" he likely was the first one on site and possibly the last one to go. Say he only had to put in 8 hrs/day, from 8-5 (I never had a paid lunch hour); he'd probably have to leave the house about 6 a.m. and get home 6:45-7 p.m. only to grab some supper and collapse in front of the T.V.... right? Who's going to run around with the family unit after a full day of work AND almost four hours of mind-numbing driving? I'd suggest finding another way. There must have been several co-workers in the same bind- rideshare? Would there be a cheap sleeping room available near the work site for use during the weekdays? Change jobs- he did, but did he start looking right away or drone away at the old job for 1 year 5 months before deciding enough was enough?

Actually Mike started work at 5am and worked to 4pm 4days a week. It's hard to get rid of a car when you owe more than its worth (which is pretty much anybody who buys a new or used car at a dealership). My point isn't that we all should start driving 3hrs a day to work. It is that sometime we have no choice.

I know as Americans we all have many more choices than most people in this world, but the number of choices varies greatly on the line of work your in. Now of course a bartender can find a job anywhere, but in manufacturing there isn't a factory on every corner. Just think of construction workers, they rarely work in the same spot for more than a few months. Are they suppose to move to every job site?

The more things I go through in life the more I am able to emphasize with others. It is always easy to be critical of others until the same thing happens to you. I have no desire to judge anyone. What if Mike had roots in the community? Some people like where they live too much to move. I know that if I lost my job I would be alright. Because since its happen once I now plan for it. Industries like manufacturing, construction, sales, technical services,etc. are cyclical and require flexibility. So even if I was working from home I would still want the piece of mind that a 100mpg+ plus vehicle brings.

GoGogebic

bing bing bing - we have a winner
 

Like I said, at least "Mike" could have commuted in something that got better than 20 mpg; that doesn't cost anything, it PAYS.

Because the Gubernment, media and other critical elements of our society is owned by them and they are not going to go piss off their masters as long as the money is still flowing to them.

Nobodies fault but his own..

This can potentially get all long faced, but for someone who has been an OTR trucker, the problem will always go back to how quickly you make adjustments to the prevailing conditions. In other words, you gotta pay attention.

The warning signs for Mike have been around for more than a minute, but Mike felt that he could cover the spread. He got comfortable. He has 20 years in an industry where after that much time, he should be able to know enough to have his own, or at least be able to prepare for the new volatility that has been put in the labor market. Mike was already hearing things no doubt from others in the industry and co workers. He didn't move fast enough, so now he has to "do what he has to do".

Couldn't find a way to write off that fuel money on taxes? Need a good accountant.

The answer to getting things back in balance? I think we are all here trying to figure that one out, and, at least for me, it will take basically reengineering something to run like it needs to run for the current conditions.

Off-shoring, the re-establishment of monopolies, the complete capture of government by the ultra-rich (and their complete avoidance of taxes; i.e., there is no "deficit"), the lack of new middle-class wage jobs (none created since 1999), have all been going on for 30+ years. The average transportation expense is the highest now for Americans since WWII. Above 20% of net income for many.

"Mike" shoulda swilled a few less beers in front of the stupidtoob and worn out his library card. The info -- and what it portends -- is not news. Luck favors the prepared. All of us are trapped in this bind (for if not ourselves, then our family members, our community, etc). The way out -- a higher mpg vehicle -- is only a stopgap.

.

I really don't understand what going to the library has to do with anything. You can be the smartest person in the world, but that won't necessarily prevent you from losing your job. People just assume if someone loses their job they're lazy or stupid. I know it's hard for some of you to believe but the DOT states the average US driver only gets 17.2 mpg. So there are many people out there who are living on the edge when it comes to fuel mileage, and they are not all stupid and lazy. I guess my point was that we can argue all day long about the causes of high gas prices, but none of us can do anything about them. No one here is going to end fuel speculation or single handily create enough middle class jobs to save the country. The thing I have always admired about the people on this site is that they don't wait for the government to fix the problems, but they fix them themselves. I was just hoping that their would be a little more compassion for people like Mike who are new to the things many people have known here for a while. I think its up to us here to help them and create an easy way for them to get on board.

GoGogebic

People that have their heads up their butts are not receptive to information and facts. It is the year 2011 and anyone tooling around like that- high miles, low mpgs- is firmly in that category.

Glass Steagal
 

Mike was not wise with his money. He did the same thing that's gotten millions of Americans in trouble. He lived beyond his means, owing on a FSP when he should have been driving a paid-off econobox. All the people upside down on their mortgages also lived beyond their means, buying McMansions instead of affordable homes.

The sad part of the story is he apparently taught his children that living beyond their means is OK ("His sacrifices gave his children many of the things he never had"). Living well on borrowed money is what got got most of the housing meltdown victims in trouble, and it's what got the government in trouble. In short, it's what got the country in trouble.

Yes, they are stupid. What's stupidity, if not being able to learn? We've spent the last decade or so watching gas prices take big jumps every year or so. Anyone who's bothered to listen to news, or read newspapers & magazines, or in any way keep informed about what's going on in the world, has heard people who are supposed to know predict that prices are just going to keep going up over long term.

Now having ready access to all this information, they refused to learn that the cost of driving the same old guzzler - or even bigger & thirstier guzzlers - would keep going up. Not only that, in the face of much evidence of a changing job market, they kept on taking on mortgage & auto loan & credit card debt, so that a good chunk of their income was going to the banks as interest, rather than to savings.

On the other hand, and all modesty aside, I was smart. I bought a 70 mpg Honda Insight back in 2003, replacing a CRX that got a mere 40-45 mpg. While Mike and his fellows were living high on the hog, I spent the decade putting most of my spare cash into investments, and I organized my work so that I can do almost all of it by telecommuting. Only debt I have is a mortgage, and that's less than the rent on a decent apartment.

No choice? But Lewis is small enough that most places should be within fairly easy biking distance of Stornoway. And I think pretty flat, too.

Adding to the point of my earlier post, any American driving a car that averages <46 mpg is living beyond his/her means. The USA has to import oil because of all the Mikes who keep us in debt to the likes of Hugo Chavez and OPEC.

If not biking, a scooter. I didn't mean that as a joke.

We import oil and do other things that compromise our security because people here have brokered deals and have done things legislatively and politically to make it that way.

No one said that we HAD to buy OPEC or Chavez's oil.

We don't "have" to do anything. If it came down to just using our own resources, we would have a national fleet with an average that would eliminate the need for outside resources. That could have happened a long time ago, but greed has no bounds.

We can't blame China, India, or anyone else for what we're in. Blame people here that said "ok, let's make a deal". Nobody put a gun to anyone's head and said sign this agreement for these bonds, t bills, stocks or commodities.

Blame the OEMs that can do better, but don't.

But most importantly, blame the populace for their ignorance, arrogance, and apathy.

Bet a whole bunch of people said, "it could never happen here, that happens in other countries."

How did you come up with that?

Am I living beyond my means? Hardly!

It is flat, but pretty consistently windy. :turtle:

Biking as in pedal is not an alternative for everyone, but I take the point. Interestingly though that was not a suggested solution - just move, get another job. This ended up being the solution to everyone who called that program.

I did wonder why no representative of farming or transport or rural communities or even fuel companies or government - national or local.

Nope. Just this guy.

Cleanspeed1 got it. If our nationwide fleet got a 46 mpg average, we would be self-reliant. Instead, because of all you slackers who are living beyond your means by driving FSPs, we have to import as much oil as we produce.

If your income is x dollars annually, you shouldn't spend 2x dollars annually. If we produce 5 million barrels of oil per day, we shouldn't use 10 million bbls/day. Yet, that's exactly what we're doing. Congresses of both parties, and the average American, have net negative bank balances. Our oil thirst is double our oil production.

So, are you living beyond your means? I say yes, as far as your oil consumption goes.

I never expected such an ignorant reply from you. :(

Ha ha, I am the ANTITHESIS of living beyond my means!

Cuz MILES ACCRUED ANNUALLY is a critical component of this calculation! If I had a Hummer but put 20 miles on it/year your argument disintegrates.

Agreed about the rest of it though. Yes the FLEET needs to average that so to have
"an average" some will be below x amount of fe and some above; and some will be below x annual consumption and some above. Not everyone <46 is guilty of putting our country on the road to ruin.

I should have looked at your fuel logs ;). You aren't Joe Average by any measure, Frank. If we ever meet up, I'm buying dinner so you won't have to dumpster dive. I'll try to sneak a gallon of gas in your vehicle while you aren't looking, too ;).

LOL! But... I LIKE dumpster diving!

Anyway, I think it is about the carbon footprint so a lot of stuff comes into play.

Don't get me going on the economic benefit of tossing 300 billion in oil import money into the US banking system where it would basically be a 3 trillion influx of capital every year.
Thats how you fix the economy. As Sentra posted, get everyones family average to 46 MPG, then minimize unnecessary travel. Let the govt raise taxes on fuel and use the money to balance the budget and pay down the debt.

regards
Mech

Or get everyone's average to 23 and halve the annual miles driven... that seems eminently more doable to me cuz, well, 23 is easy to attain even with a stupid land barge. Judging by the sheer number of what appear to be ignorant single occupant joyrides, or actual legitimate runs but made with no consideration for multitasking the run, and ESPECIALLY the number of local runs that could be just as well accomplished on foot or bike, and perhaps dare to dream of people putting some consideration into arranging their lives around the notion of expensive energy rather than cheap as far as commutes and such, I would think it possible to halve the number of annual miles driven and if fuel cost more than lattes and bottled water perhaps there would be an incentive to move in that direction.

Its not just an oil problem.

In 2010 the us imported $337bn of oil (according to Mr Pickens).

At least some of that was used to generate economic activity which offsets this cost. Not all by any means and the efficiency of its use could (should) be improved - thats why we are here after all ;)

At the same time though the US sent $273bn more to China to pay for stuff than income from stuff sold by the US there.

I know we are segueing into other things, but AG brings up a very valid point when it comes to our trade policies with China and the world in general. You'd think with the high unemployment and severe trade deficits we would throw the walls up and do what we have to do to keep our dollars circulating in the US. But that doesn't seem to be the case. The US Chamber of Commerce actually ENCOURAGES as much outsourcing as possible, which is economic treason to me. I don't have a problem with doing business with other countries, but when it's at the expense of my own, erm, no.

Just getting things to where the trade policies are FAIR not FREE will also contribute to the treasury here in the US.

Funny that a few people on a forum about making vehicles run better can figure out economic and trade policy better than the folks who should be doing it in our respective governments.

That's cuz all they care about are executive compensation packages and short term stock prices.

Thats what happened in the 1930s, it just made the situation worse.

China is not just acting as a factory for US corporations, it is innovating itself. As an example they are scheduled to match and exceed the number of patents generated annually by the US, if they haven't already.

They have huge potential inflation problems because they have so much cash and nothing to buy, problems which are being "managed" by the government there - it seems Centrally Planned economies can't plan how much to produce of anything successfully but they certainly know how to handle any "surplus". ;)

How do you think they afford all those bullet trains, 30 mile long bridges, a massive military, an expanding space programme and all the VWs and Buicks they can get their hands on ?

This does lend itself to an interesting possibility - that a lot of production type work may actually move back to the West again because it may be cheaper here. Some innovation and development jobs as well as services already are.

It would take a long time though.

Haven't you guys in the UK been experiencing the same thing as the US?

What are the differences that you see?

Which part specifically, the economics or what workers experience ?

I'd like to know about both sides, economics and worker experience.

Our geography and size means that this "typical worker story" is probably not so applicable, but lots of people are having to take lower paid jobs. The rest is a big story but the highlights :

Negatives

- Most people have had no increase in pay (in numerical terms) for 2-3 years.

- At the same time inflation is 4.2% (or over 5% depending on which measure is used).

- VAT (sales tax) went up to 20% at the start of the year, from 17.5%.

- Domestic energy costs are more of a worry than petrol/diesel - risen 54% in 3-4 years.

- Unemployment is steadying and even falling in some areas, but jobs for people just leaving school or college are hard to get. We are in danger of a generation not getting into steady employment like we had in the 80s.

- Petrol prices have eased slightly to just under $8 a gallon, but we have an average of around 35-40 MPG (imperial) for most passenger cars.

- Public transport is running at capacity in a lot of places, and is very expensive. So transport policy is all stick and no carrot.

- We still manufacture a lot here but not as much as we did - we get our Christmas on a big boat from China like you do :D

- We even buy things we invented (e.g. trains) from abroad - places like Germany.

Positives :

- Interest rates are low, 0.5 - have been there since 2009

- We won't default.

- We aren't in the Euro :thumbup:

The real problem is the hidden cost - the young people mentioned above for example, or the fact that we have a large portion of our population which is more or less uneducated - like the US has. In the past these people found employment in basic manufacturing, which is no longer there, or the unskilled sector. In the latter case though those jobs have been taken by recent immigrants and temporary visitors from the rest of Europe (I have nothing against these people, they are in a lot of cases more hard working than the average uneducated Brit). Previous governments allowed these people to go onto sick benefits from where they never get back into work and us tax payers end up funding them forever - it got them off the unemployment figures though.

Oh and the current government only seems to have a policy for cutting spending (which they haven't done despite what they say) and nothing to actually get industry and jobs moving.

We are still a "smart" country - think of us as a slightly scruffy version of Japan with less good teeth ;) - and these smarts is what we will have to use to earn our living in the future.

Sounds a lot like what the "nutters" over here are doing ( your man Cable is a blast to listen to ). I can't understand why they are hellbent on cutting without increasing revenue, and the best way to do it is get people working and paying them well. This is not rocket science.

Old "Soothsayer Vince" has been dining off the "I told you the world was going to end" and "I have a brain the size of a planet" myths for quite a while - I'm not sure he should be in the government TBH, he is too much the free thinking political theorist for actual responsibility. Also I didn't think his "right wing nutters" statement was not in good taste coming just a day or so after Oslo.

AG, you know that he has a penchant for being verbose. But given the circumstances, he should have had his aides check his mouth at the door.

Or maybe a 7 second delay would have helped.:thumbup: