The American Spectator

Reader Mail

(Page 5 of 13)

Mark Shepler br> Jupiter, Florida /p> p> An interesting article but I was not impressed with the author's ability to amortize expenses. For one thing, two years is too short a period for a valid comparison. For another, the author forgot a major expense: the earnings potential lost on the more than $20,000 difference in cost of the vehicles. For example. a utility stock I am invested in has been paying over 4% in dividends for a number of years. Investing the $20,000 in this stock would gross over $800 a year, the net of which could be used to offset gasoline costs. But finally, what is the monetary value of the pleasure some people derive from owning a particular car? If one enjoys one's car, one has made a wise investment. br> -- Laurence Loudon /p> p> Glad to see you got a new dog and hope the empty space in your family's hearts have been filled. Hope you and your family enjoy many years with him. I assume he like likes to travel in the car and is comfortable! br> -- Diamon Sforza /p>

Get old guzzling clunkers off the road?

The NYT has editorialized in favor of removing all SUVs (new and old) from the road.

Aren't old cars disproportionately owned by the poor? Wouldn't banning them be akin to self-styled poverty advocates keeping the affordable wares of Wal-Mart out of poor urban neighborhoods?

I just procured a 1997 Chevy Suburban. It costs $120 to fill the tank. 12 mpg.

topics:
Education, Trade, Hillary Clinton, Economics, Business, Environment, Constitution, Law, Military, Iraq, NATO, Conservatism, Neoconservatism, Oil