[kstrauser]

I mean, that seems like peak Big Government Overreach, but to each their own. Alternatively, people could quit buying wholly inappropriate vehicles. If your job requires you to carry lots of cargo around, then a pickup makes a lot of sense. If you drive a spotless Ram 2500 that never leaves the suburb, then I don't want to hear a damn thing about the price of gasoline.

And even if you personally don't drive an idiotically wasteful vehicle, a huge portion of Americans do, and their gas guzzlers drive up demand for the same fuel that you and I want to purchase, causing its price to skyrocket.

We don't all need to be driving something like a Nissan Versa, but a lot of people whose real requirements would be met perfectly by something like that are driving Yukons and whining about gas prices.

[willcipriano]

Those cars produce less carbon than your vacation halfway across the globe and aren't used purely for recreational purposes.

It seems like carbon really isn't your issue here.

[kstrauser]

I haven't gone on a distant vacation in many years, so not I'm not sure why you're bringing that up. But yes, a suburban-dwelling, daily commuter Expedition is absolutely a recreational choice, and an irresponsible one at that.

[willcipriano]

> But yes, a suburban-dwelling, daily commuter Expedition is absolutely a recreational choice, and an irresponsible one at that.

Just like air travel. If making one unaffordable is positive, why not the other?

[pessimizer]

Who said cheap airfares were good?