Say Anything Blog

would that really make insurance companies money because of speeding tickets? or becuase 55 would reduce the accidents and save lives?

I’ve personally reduced my speeds to 60mph on interstate the past 1.5 years and my fuel spending has risen minimally. but my insurance still goes up

sometimes it’s nice to look at the sites at less than 80

I have also slowed down. 

The insurance companies raise premiums on people that get speeding tickets.  I guess that’s fine if you’re driving dangerously.  However paying more because you’re driving at a speed formally considered safe is a windfall to the insurance industry.  Back during the 55 mph Car and Driver did a lot of work on this issue.

Most accidents happen on roads that never were posted for higher speed limits.  If higher speeding limits were causing more accidents or injuries we’d see it in the accident rates in the last ten years or so.

How dumb can she be and still breath.

Worse than that, unless Republicans come up with a real candidate and that don’t mean Rudy or G. Allen we are going to be saying Madame Pres.

This is pandering and she doesn’t mean it.  But why even bring it up.  I think Speed Limits in the Dakotas should be 85.  At least when I’m there (Ias I will be in a couple weeks) it will be for me. 

Got to keep those Mullahs fat and happy somehow.

When gas went over $2.25, I slowed down to 60 mph and used cruise control as much as possible. I am getting 50 more miles per tank. That’s about 18% increase in efficiency.

If, as your boy says, we are addicted to oil, bush could ask us too finally make
a national sacrifice during a global war (his words) We save money and buy less foreign oil.

Got to keep those fat Mullahs from funding terrorist somehow.

rbb: A refreshingly good post from you.  Yes, we have choices.  Of course, it’s a ridiculous statement that we are addicted to oil. We use it to make money. I don’t like the pandering to the environmental ayatolahs, either.

That should be “ayatollahs”.

rbb: It appears you don’t have to wait for the President to tell you what to do.  Why do you think the rest of us can’t think for ourselves?

How is that going so far R?

Wait, I thought it was only Republicans who sold out to big business.

Robert108, it’s because government, and realitybasedbob, knows best, so they need to tell you how fast to drive.

Laura Ingraham mentioned that Texas may boost some roads up to 80 mph. I-80 in Nebraska is 75 mph.

If you want to go slow, go slow, just stay the heck out of the left lanes.

I slowed my pickup down to 60 mph and fingered-out that I was making $25/hour.

I managed to do that without Sillary’s help.

fingered-out

now thats funny

Coming from you that makes me happy.

Hillary Rodham Clinton is a cash whore. Both Clintons are only in politics for self serving promotion. Look into Billy’s recent business endevors sometime.

Politics can boost one’s financial status significantly if you play your cards right.
This generous donation from the insurance industry is only the tip of the iceburg when Clinton influence is available. Get it while it’s hot.

As far as Insurance companies are concerned…
I’ve never seen a corporate headquarters of a major insurance company that didn’t resemble a western Taj Mahal.

cash whore.

As opposed to....

LOL, good point. Jerry Springer is the only guy I know who ever wrote a check (that bounced) for that service.

Yes, I-80 is 75mph across Nebraska--and yes, I also notice about a 15% reduction in mileage at this speed vs. 55mph in both of my vehicles.  Sometimes I’ll slow down simply because the road isn’t quite designed for that kind of speed.

That said, 15% change in mileage is only 1 gallon per hour in a Hummer.  I don’t know where you’re getting $25/hour, Whistler.

But most importantly, once again Hillary forgets that people will change their behavior in return for money, even if it’s not from the government.

suppose the extra time amounts to 10 minutes.

that’d be around $30/hr

oops my bad $18/hr

oops my bad $18/hr

...but my thanks for the explanation.  Had never attempted that calculation in that form myself.

The other thing you have to figure is that if you slow down your top speed 10% it doesn’t affect your driving time that much. 

That’s because most of your time can be spent speeding up, slowing down, at stop lights etc.

Every politician I know of except for Ron Paul is a sell-out to money.  So why pick any of them out specifically?

We set the cruise at 65, husband would prefer 60 to save $$ as he says that’s optimum fuel efficient speed, but people whiz by me like I’m standing still, going 80-90 in huge SUV’s.

Bush telling people to conserve on oil (gas) is like the President of Panera telling people to watch their carbs.

Bush?

You know, our President.

Which quote, at which time would make you most happy?

Let’s see what the evil Democrats say about it:

Washington, DC - Since he first ran for President in 2000, President Bush has offered a number of different explanations for what he can and cannot do to help the millions of hard-working Americans deal with out-of-control gas prices. With gas prices topping $3 per gallon in many parts of the country, it is more important than ever that the Bush Administration show real leadership and help alleviate the growing economic strain on Americans.

“Unfortunately, we’ve heard differing stories from President Bush when it comes to what he can and can’t do to lower gas prices, apparently he just can’t get his story straight

...Bush In 2000: Bush Blamed Clinton Administration For High Gas Prices; Promised “Immediate Relief” By Using His “Capital” With Saudis And Kuwaitis

LOL

Bush In 2006: “No Magic Wand.” “‘I know gas prices are high,’ President Bush said. ‘There’s no magic wand to wave.

Bush in 2005: Bush Called On Americans To Be “Better Conservers.” “President Bush called on the Americans today to conserve gasoline and avoid non-essential driving

http://www.democrats.org/a/2006/04/bushs_ever-chan.php

There are other sources, if you don’t trust the Democrats.

Now Diane, the topic is about whether we ought to re-establish the “double nickel” speed limit.  Before you advocate this, do drive across Wyoming and Nebraska at 55mph, OK?

And how you keep Ron Paul and democrats.org in your mind without the two exploding in a fireball like matter + antimatter is beyond me!  :^)

In a free society with a free enterprise economic system, each driver gets to choose(within existing law) how fast to drive.  It’s strictly a cost/benefit decision.  If you want to drive fast, and are willing to pay the price, you should be able to make that decision.  If you want to save money more than you want to get there fast, drive more slowly.  The govt has no place in this area.  I get to cruise at 80, if I’m willing to pay the price.  If I don’t want to pay that price, I can slow down.  It’s a freedom deal, which is why Hillary doesn’t get it.  She wants us to live by her rules.

Hillary gets off bossing everyone around.

Robert Perry on May 24, 2006 at 4:48 PM

The trick is I don’t keep Democrats.org or Ron Paul in my mind at the same time. 
Actually I never keep democrats.org in my mind.  They just had a better and more complete Bush waffle record than the other sites I visited.

The trick is I don’t keep Democrats.org or Ron Paul in my mind at the same time.

For you spelling/grammar/FICA/abbreviations resident geniuses with IQ’s of 178 or above, that should be:

Democrats.org AND Ron Paul.

Ron Paul is a wonderful human being.  Too nice and smart and decent for politics.  That’s why he’ll probably never get to be President; there’s a certain scum factor that seems to be necessary for that in both parties.

It takes me 21 hours to drive from my house, in PA, to Ma’s house in MS at 65-70 miles an hour. At 55 it would take considerably longer, with a corresponding increase in consumption of gasoline. How is reducing the speed limit actually supposed to save any money or gas?

2Hotel9, the trick is this; at 70mph, it might take you 20 hours to drive to your mom’s (1400 miles), but it will take you 70 gallons of gas at 20mpg.

At 55mph, it’ll take you 25 hours, but you might get 24mpg, and you’ll burn only 58 gallons of gas.

So slowing down would (in this example) cost you five hours of time, but save you 12 gallons of gas.  At $3/gallon, your exchange of time for money is about $7/hour. 

Change that to 10mpg/12mpg for someone’s hypothetical beater truck with a big block 8 in it, and you’re talking $14/hour.

Does that make sense?

I have checked this on road trips, I get 20mpg at 70 and 55. So were is the savings?

Sounds like you’ve got a vehicle with excellent overdrive, then, and you’re correct that you won’t save a penny.  What do you drive?

Toyota 4Runner, 4cyl 5 speed stick. My mileage drops with heavier loads or cargo on top. This whole 55 issue is political crap. The majority of vehicles on the road today get consistant mileage whether you are driving 55 or 80. Weight and increased drag are what drops mileage. Also, it has much to do with your driving, cruise control makes a world of difference. Keeping your speed consistant will increase your mileage. And drafting, though a bit dangerous for unskilled drivers, also makes a difference, get behind an 18 wheeler and find the sweetspot. CB radio helps in this. I do 3 or 4 long distance road trips per year and always track my gas useage. Many people just don’t drive well, not their fault, no one ever taught them.

Doc--yes, about 5% or so.  I believe even the pro-ethanol people admit 2-3% mileage drop with E10.

2Hotel9, my experience has been different with whatever I’ve driven--mostly domestics, but some imports too.  As I go above 55, mileage drops from 10% to 30%, depending on conditions.  Don’t forget that about 70% of your fuel goes to fight wind drag, and that goes as the square of your speed.

Of course, this effect is decreased if you’re tailgating a semi!  That might explain what you’re seeing…

Doc,

Yeah, me too!  Once I switched to ethanol those videos downloaded slower and slower.  I figured it was just some impurity in the corn.

"For you spelling/grammar/FICA/abbreviations resident geniuses...” What does FICA stand for, again?  And what does that have to do with Hillary being a weasel?

That should read:  “...Hilary being a lying weasel?”

No, Hillary being a weasel works, don’t change a thing!

Don’t know what “FICA” stands for except for the unconstitutional confiscation of our wealth for the purposes of Socialist Insecurity and MediScare.  That’s at least what it pays for.