From the Oregonian article:
Say you drive 10,000 miles a year, Pozdena said. With a car getting 20 miles per gallon, you would buy about 500 gallons of gas a year. If gas prices rise by $1, you’ll spend about $500 more in a year. “That pales in comparison with any other cost in owning a home.”
It’s not simply driving the extra 10 miles to get to work. If that were the only issue, then it wouldn’t be so much more difficult to live in the suburbs. But Pozdena doesn’t acknowledge that people living in an urban setting can choose not to have a car at all, which saves you several thousand dollars every year.
What many “in the city people without cars” don’t realize is that there are businesses/jobs in the suburbs. Not everyone commutes into “the city”. People will pay a considerable amount to avoid congestion in their life. Even sacrificing commuting time so as not to live the congestion 24 hours a day.
Most everyone understands that not everyone commutes into “the city”. But a lot of people outside the city don’t understand that it is even possible to live well, in the city, without a car. That is to say: not everybody is trapped by high gas prices — some people with flexibility have chosen to use that flexibility to avoid some of the pains of the suburbs.
I now live in inner Southeast (42nd and Powell area)
I now fill my car’s gas tank twice a month rather than once a week. However, I still have family in Salem that I would like to visit. TriMet doesn’t go there. AmTrak barely goes there, and I’d have to plan my entire day around their late trains that are more expensive than just driving – and it only gets me part way because someone would then have to pick me up and drive me another 20 miles to Silverton.
I also have season tickets for Oregon State Football games in Corvallis. AmTrak doesn’t go there – closest it comes is Albany.
For some people, ditching the car for the sake of living in “the city” is NOT an option. Just because it fits you, doesn’t mean it fits everyone else.
The point is that you can reduce the need to drive for many, many trips if you live close to work and services. In turn, you can save a significant amount of money by not filling up your tank as often.
Living in the city doesn’t mean that you’ll never need to drive again. But it can make a lot more sense both in regards to time and money than living in the suburbs and having to drive for most, if not all of life’s necessities.
Let’s look at this quote a different way. It’s all about assumptions:
Say you drive 10,000 miles a year, Pozdena said. With a car getting 20 miles per gallon, you would buy about 500 gallons of gas a year. If gas prices rise by $1, you’ll spend about $500 more in a year. “That pales in comparison with any other cost in owning a home.”
10,000 miles a year? Who drives that little? Certainly nobody who drove until they qualified — and certainly not in larger areas like Houston, L.A., Phoenix, SF Bay Area, Atlanta, etc. Let’s try 25,000 to 50,000 miles per year. (Hell, I put 10,000 miles a year on my cars, and I don’t use them even once a year for commuting — I have my bicycle for that. Those are all errands and road trips!)
At 20 mpg (that, at least, is a safe assumption for an average), that means 1250 to 2500 gallons a year, or 104-210 gallons a month. Also, I think it’s safe to say that in the past five years, prices have gone up more than a dollar a gallon. I think it’s closer to $2 a gallon. Let’s use that. That means that the average person is seeing a $100 to $200/month increase in fuel costs. Spread that across a 2-car family, and it’s easily $2-400 a month out of the household budget.
Do you think that $400 a month makes a difference when it comes to making the mortgage payments?
You BET it does!!!
Joe Cortright is definitely onto something here. I’d love to use some better data to break this down in more detail within each metropolitan area. I’m guessing that the spread is a lot more than 2 percentage points between the places that are car dependent (suburbs, for the most part) and the places where folks don’t actually need the car for every trip every day.
What many “in the city people without cars” don’t realize is that there are businesses/jobs in the suburbs.
Actually what it means is that people that don’t have the use of a car because they can’t afford one and/or cannot drive one for whatever reason sometimes end up working for less money then they could at a job that’s more stressful and with worse hours than they could if the employer that better fit them was either willing to hire them (in cases where the employer demands everyone hold a drivers license for no reason, even if the job doesn’t require on-call hours, driving for work purposes of any reason; and is located on a transit route that’s running every 15 minutes when the start/end times are), and/or wasn’t located where service isn’t viable based on transit hours of operation and shift begin/end hours.
Or, they have no job at all.
Then everyone pays for it in the form of additional public assistance for government human support services.
I now live in inner Southeast (42nd and Powell area). I now fill my car’s gas tank twice a month rather than once a week. However, I still have family in Salem that I would like to visit. TriMet doesn’t go there. AmTrak barely goes there, and I’d have to plan my entire day around their late trains that are more expensive than just driving – and it only gets me part way because someone would then have to pick me up and drive me another 20 miles to Silverton.
42nd and Powell to Silverton early (on a weekday I’m assuming)? That’s easy (I lived down the street from there for a period of time and have personally done a trip very similar to this.):
(Note to anyone reading this months/years after I’m posting this… the times and routes listed are based on current information on 4-30-08 and are subject to change.)
6:51 AM – Board TriMet 9 to downtown Portland (This is the 39th Ave timepoint.)
7:11 AM – bus reaches Salmon & 4th Ave.
Walk to SW Columbia St. and SW 5th Ave.
7:16 AM – Board TriMet 96 to Commerce Circle
7:52 AM – bus reaches Commerce Circle in Wilsonville
7:59 AM – Board SMART 201 to Wilsonville
8:14 AM – bus reaches Regal Cinema Park-n-Ride in Wilsonville
8:50 AM – Board SMART 1X to Salem
9:33 AM – bus reaches the Transit Center in Salem
9:40 AM – Board CARTS Route 20 to Silverton
10:11 AM – bus reaches Silverton Rite-Aid (also stops at Silverton Roth’s at 10:16 AM)
The way back in the afternoon/evening is similar and the reverse of what I’ve listed here.
BTW, this only costs $5.55 one-way:
$2.05 for TriMet (transfer that would be good on 9-Powell and 96)
$2 for SMART (1X only, the other route is free from Commerce Circle to the Park-n-Ride)
$1.50 for CARTS
Also, before anyone complains ‘that would take too long,’ IMO if more and more people use services that are already available, that would tell transit agencies and private operators that there is a demand for more service between one place and another and additional service and/or more direct service should be explored.
The idea that rising gasoline prices caused the housing bubble to pop is absolute baloney.
Podzena is absolutely right in stating that an increase in an ANNUAL expenditure of $500 for fuel would not even be noticed when compared to other costs associated with housing.
For example, there are literally 100,000s of homeowners that are in the process of having their option ARM mortgages reset to higher rates. The MONTHLY cost for some of these folks has increased $500! In addition, these loans carried expensive pre-payment penalties and the homeowners paid way too much for their houses in the first place. And this is occurring in all parts of cities, not just in suburban areas.
I hate to say it, but this paper is a yet another clear example of Cortright grabbing headlines with interesting soundbites, but there is little or no substance to his arguments. In fact, I feel that by attaching his name to this ‘research’, he is thoroughly discrediting himself.
Consider that:
Home prices have been on a completely unsustainable tear for years and years, with millions of borrowers purchasing overprices homes that they could little afford, all with new-fangled loans from completely overleveraged banks, which allowed them to get loans that are neg am (for example), with little or no income documentation, combined with the complete overbuilding by builders. All happening within a very loose credit environment where mortgage-backed securities were packaged as CMOs and CDOs, purchased by investment banks that in some cases were leveraged 27-1 (bear stearns) who had almost no idea how to properly price these new investments vehicles.
Hundreds of economists for almost 2 years have been warning of these serious issues, but wow – it was a $1.50 rise in gas that was the real problem all along? Well how does that explain the ongoing bursting of the housing bubbles in Spain and England, where cities are much denser and gas has not risen as much in price? Those countries (and other parts of Europe) are experiencing the same issues that the US is now dealing with.
How would high gas prices explain the hundreds of unsold condo units in inner Portland hoods? I live in Multnomah Village, and there are lots and lots of homes for sale here – a quick 20 minute bike ride downtown.
As a researcher myself, I am embarrassed to see such shoddy work being passed off as legitimate scholarship. Like Randall O’Toole’s nonsense, I’m using this paper to wrap my fish. Maybe the high gas prices is what is preventing salmon from returning to the Columbia??
May I please order a side of critical thinking, please?
Zachary, I don’t think anyone denies that weird loans have a big part to play in the housing bubble. However, there is no denying that the bubble is popping very hard on the suburban fringes and not in inner urban areas, which lead to the question of: Is there really a bubble in the inner urban areas? Keep in mind that both places had access to the same types of loans. And yes, some places, (San Diego,) overbuilt their condo market, but a lot of those are being absorbed back into the market as rentals, so even those are not crashing the same way that the suburban fringes are…
Is there a bubble in the inner areas? I’d say that is an unequivocal yes. As I said, I live in MV, and I can easily see that many houses on the market here have been listed for months, and are priced at least 10 higher than they should be. I know friends in an even more inner hood who have been trying to sell their home for months now, and have dropped the price more than 10%. these are anecdotal examples but they are happengin all over the city. I can’t tell you how many rehabbed homes in inner NE and N are just sitting there, unsold.
The suburban fringe is where overbuilding usually occurs, not in inner hoods. Of course prices are falling faster out there – it happens IN EVERY HOUSING DOWNTURN! It’s basic supply and demand. Why don’t you explain the soft as a noodle pdx condo market? those empty towers in Sowa? the condo – apt conversion in DOWNTOWN portland?
Besides, Portland and Seattle were late to the housing party – I think you will see prices begin to fall faster here, as the recession deepens, and unemployment rises. Take a look at the Case-Schiller housing index by city, and you will see that the inflection point on the PDX and SEA housing price curves happened at least 6 month – 1 yr after other US cities. Just wait, and watch…
I’m sorry, but the evidence of a gas price-housing bubble linkage is incredibly weak.
Yeah, it’s weird loans, but what about the dozen other factors I mentioned? I know you may
“42nd and Powell to Silverton early (on a weekday I’m assuming)? That’s easy (I lived down the street from there for a period of time and have personally done a trip very similar to this.):
(Note to anyone reading this months/years after I’m posting this… the times and routes listed are based on current information on 4-30-08 and are subject to change.)
6:51 AM – Board TriMet 9 to downtown Portland (This is the 39th Ave timepoint.)
7:11 AM – bus reaches Salmon & 4th Ave.
Walk to SW Columbia St. and SW 5th Ave.
7:16 AM – Board TriMet 96 to Commerce Circle
7:52 AM – bus reaches Commerce Circle in Wilsonville
7:59 AM – Board SMART 201 to Wilsonville
8:14 AM – bus reaches Regal Cinema Park-n-Ride in Wilsonville
8:50 AM – Board SMART 1X to Salem
9:33 AM – bus reaches the Transit Center in Salem
9:40 AM – Board CARTS Route 20 to Silverton
10:11 AM – bus reaches Silverton Rite-Aid (also stops at Silverton Roth’s at 10:16 AM)”
•••
So, 7 hours round trip to go 60 miles? And that’s on a weekday. What about on a sunday?
I can drive it in 50 minutes, without breaking any speed limits.
Oh, and $11 round trip too. At $3.65 a gallon, it’s about the same cost to drive it in my car, but less than a third of the time.
Sounds like the car is a much better proposition – less time, less hassle, same cost. And I can take my dog.
I’m with Fred on this — that trip makes sense by car. It’s the daily trips to and from work, or some shopping trips, or going out to the pub, etc. — those are the trips that are the low-hanging fruit to switch from cars to… walking, bicycling and/or transit.
Fred, if Amtrak were to run 12 trips a day between Union Station and Salem, would that make a difference in your calculation, or would it still make more sense to drive?
So, 7 hours round trip to go 60 miles? And that’s on a weekday. What about on a sunday?
Neither the TriMet 96 or the SMART/Cherriots 1X operates on Saturdays (or Sundays, or holidays).
This problem would be solved if Oregon would replace its current, inadequate twice-a-day-in-the-evenings-only Cascades service with seven day a week, hourly bus service between Portland and Eugene (with stops in Wilsonville, Woodburn, Salem, and Albany) – plus connecting transit service on the Highway 214 corridor between Woodburn, Silverton and Mt. Angel.
Yeah, that makes sense. Increase the frequency of an extremely low ridership train route because of demand.
Just drive. I manage to make it to Monmouth from Gresham twice a week to go to school and in less time then it would take for me to take a bus into downtown Portland. Only about $20 round trip in gas in a > 20mpg car, door to door service, listen to my radio, eat, talk on the phone, smoke, and etc.
Just face it. There is no such thing as an “alternative” to driving.
Anybody want to start a betting pool on when gas will hit $5 a gallon? I’ve heard it should be there by August, if oil keeps heading towards $200 a barrel.
How about $10 a gallon? I say, we’ll see $10 by 2010. Maybe 2012 at the outside, and no later than 2015.
If we started now, how long do you think it’d take to just upgrade the N/S railroad mainline in Oregon to 200mph standards? We’re talking just from Ashland to Portland. 7 years, with permits and funding obstacles?
Do you think that might be a good thing, if gas is $10 a gallon?
Maybe not. Who knows, maybe people would prefer to pay $200 in gas for a round trip from here to Medford, driving, rather than maybe $100 on the train to do it in 1/3 of the time, including stops.
After all, Americans are addicted to their cars. There is no such thing as an alternative to driving.
I drive about 7000-8000 per year, and commute daily in my car. Many leases are for 12000 miles per year, and people survive that just fine.
I think your inflated numbers are rather funny. Unless you’re driving for a living, 50000 miles a year is a ton. Most people don’t commute nearly 100 miles each way, and those who do have bigger problems than gas costs.
As oil prices soared to record levels in recent years, basic economics suggested that consumption would fall and supplies would rise as producers drilled for more oil.
But as prices flirt with $120 a barrel, many energy experts are becoming worried that neither seems to be happening. Higher prices have done little to suppress global demand or attract new production, and the resulting mismatch has sent oil prices ever higher.
A much more rational examination of high gas prices, in my opinion.
Anthony may have violated the Portland Transport rules by saying:
I highly doubt gas will reach $10 a gallon unless we don’t get our inflation in check, and if we don’t, $10 wont be worth much anyway.
Most people will still choose to drive till they become unwilling to pay—at that time the price will drop due to the lack of demand.
I recommend the introduction economics series [200, 201, and 202] offered at any community college year round.
Just because your simplistic economic evaluation leads you to one conclusion, doesn’t give you license to make comments like this one. Obviously, many people who took not only those three introductory classes (taught by community college hacks), but also the classes at the 400-level, then those at the 5/600-level — and who even wrote theses and received Ph.D.’s in the subject — disagree with your analysis.
Mark Faber would be one. He might point out that it really doesn’t matter much how much *you* drive, or anybody in Oregon, for that matter. Oil supply and demand is measured on a macro-economic, world level. And the single largest contributor to world demand increase is China, which has a long way to go before their rate of auto use per capita is even close to Mexico’s — much less the United States.
I don’t think that high gas prices are going to reduce the level of worldwide growth in demand that is due to newly-industrializing regions. It seems to be a pretty much worldwide phenomenae that, as soon as a family achieves anything near middle-class status, they purchase an automobile. Multiply this by the tens of millions of Chinese and Indians who newly achieve this status each year, and any kind of demand restraint in the United States becomes mostly irrelevant with regards to global supply and demand curves.
Anthony may have violated the Portland Transport rules
Garlynn, I’d say chill out and just tune Anthony out. His statements are consistenly ignorant and rarely show any intellectual depth. At least he’s going to school – perhaps it’s not too late for him.
Just because your simplistic economic evaluation leads you to one conclusion, doesn’t give you license to make comments like this one. Obviously, many people who took not only those three introductory classes (taught by community college hacks), but also the classes at the 400-level, then those at the 5/600-level — and who even wrote theses and received Ph.D.’s in the subject — disagree with your analysis.
“Community College Hack”? Do two negatives make a positive here?
Is it now a forum requirement to have a PhD to participate on this forum, and Community College students (and instructors/staff) are no longer welcome to participate as they apparently, in the eyes of Garlynn, do not possess a minimal educational level to understand the concepts discussed here???
http://www.pcc.edu/about/ Our Students
During the 2006-2007 school year over 86,164 students—58% female, 42% male—attended PCC (see Demographics for more details). Part of a vibrant, urban community, Portland Community College is a crossroads for people with many destinations. This diversity is vital to the PCC experience.
I could go on and count the rest of the colleges too (including Mt. Hood Community College and Clark College), but apparently “majority rules” is no longer acceptable in the eyes of transportation interest, just the narrow views of a select few that wish to force their opinion on others without accepting criticism of their own beliefs.
We seem to have drifted off topic here. I’m interested in knowing who among us think that high gas prices were what popped the housing bubble. As I’ve stated previously – I think that idea is complete baloney. In the Portland region, I’d guess that the average household drives about 25K miles per year. With an average of 20 mpg for a household fleet, and an increase of even $2 in the prices of gas, this household would pay and extra $2500 per year. That’s a lot, but it is hardly the kind of financial hardship that would cause so many hundreds of thousands of homeowners to move into foreclosure.
We seem to have drifted off topic here.
I agree, and I admit that I partially started this mess. Therefore, I apologize.
…this household would pay and extra $2500 per year. That’s a lot, but it is hardly the kind of financial hardship that would cause so many hundreds of thousands of homeowners to move into foreclosure.
Maybe, maybe not. If someone is living paycheck to paycheck with nothing to spare, after already cutting back to necessities, $2,500/yr. ($208.33/mo.) could be enough to push them over the breaking point.
JK: There may be some short term problems, but long term we are paying a lot less than other countries that still have expanding suburbs. Here is what a New Zealander said on an email list:
The US has had incredibly low gas prices since forever compared to what we pay in other countries. In NZ right now gas is 8$ a gallon.
Yet suburban living has dominated post war development in virtually every country in the New World and in many countries in the old world.
IT is hard to believe that the whole US lifestyle will change overnight because they are starting to pay as much for gas as we did many years ago.
Although the title of the article I’m referencing below seems to support the thesis of JK’s New Zealander (“Kiwis not keen on public transport”), the data presented does not:
The study found only 56% of Kiwis use public transport to get to work, ranking us 22nd out of 28 countries. Indonesians topped the list, with 93% using public transport, followed by Hong Kong on 88%. Bottom of the list were the US on 34% and Turkey on 29%
Bob R.:Although the title of the article I’m referencing below seems to support the thesis of JK’s New Zealander (“Kiwis not keen on public transport”), the data presented does not:
The study found only 56% of Kiwis use public transport to get to work,
Public transport in New Zealand exists in many of the country’s urban areas, and takes a number of forms. Bus transport is the main form of public transport in all cities. However two major cities, Auckland and Wellington, have suburban rail systems which have been gaining more patronage in recent years. Some cities also operate ferry services. Trams and long-distance rail have declined heavily in importance in the 20th century. According to the Ministry for the Environment, overall use of public transport in New Zealand is low, with only around 2.5% of trips making use of it.[1] This figure is for the whole of New Zealand and includes centres that may have limited public transport. New Zealand was rated only 22nd in a survey for public transport use amongst 28 countries worldwide, with only 56% always, or sometimes, using public transport to reach work. At the same time, this share was much higher than for example in the US, with only 34% usage Considering the regions like Auckland, where the overall share is about 5%.[3], this figure is comparable to numerous North American and Australian cities. According to the 2006 census, 17% of Wellingtonians took public transport to work, as did 7% of Aucklanders Buses are the most common form of public transport in New Zealand, making up the majority of trips in every city that has public transport (and often being the only public transport mode available). They are followed by trains, which are found in Wellington and Auckland. Ferries also play a role, mainly in Auckland but also in other cities. Trams in New Zealand, while once common in many cities and towns, now survive only as heritage displays. Cable cars have also been employed; the Dunedin cable tramway system was both the second and second-last to operate in the world, while the Wellington Cable Car is now a funicular.
It appears that using New Zealand as an example is questionable at best – while some areas of New Zealand have high public transport usage (so does the United States – New York City is well over 50%) that overall public transit usage at some 2.5% (Portland is only at 4%, IIRC). Further, the backbone of New Zealand’s public transit system is that dreaded old bus that is despised by so many “public transit advocates” here (and including trolleybusses, the type of bus that light rail advocates hate because it has every environmental benefit of light rail and almost every benefit of a bus – combined into one cost effective package), and New Zealand has all but eliminated its long distance rail system (what we call Amtrak, although “long distance” in New Zealand would be equivalent to a Cascades or other corridor style service.)
Despite this, New Zealanders appear to be flocking to their cars, despite gas prices far over what U.S. residents pay. There is a price for freedom to travel, and many choose to pay the price.
“I think that idea is complete baloney. In the Portland region, I’d guess that the average household drives about 25K miles per year. With an average of 20 mpg for a household fleet, and an increase of even $2 in the prices of gas, this household would pay and extra $2500 per year. That’s a lot, but it is hardly the kind of financial hardship that would cause so many hundreds of thousands of homeowners to move into foreclosure.”
The average households aren’t suffering very much, (at least in the Portland area,) you are absolutely right. But the people that are suffering are the ones on the fringes of the cities, the ones drive twice that many miles a year, and own an SUV that gets worse than average mileage. That is pretty much the point of the article, the people on the urban fringes that spend 38% of their money on transportation are fairing much worse than the people in the people in the inner city that spend 8%…
One other thing: The median US house price in the US is around $250k, and the US average loan to value ratio is around 50%, so (and this is bad math: Rich people probably tend to own more of their homes than poor, but we’ll ignore that for the moment,) that means the average loan is only $125k, and 6% on that is $7500/year or $625/month. So an extra $200/month in gas prices is significant for those people…
But the people that are suffering are the ones on the fringes of the cities, the ones drive twice that many miles a year, and own an SUV that gets worse than average mileage.
There seems to be a lot of people who live in, oh, Southeast Portland (i.e. Hawthorne, Sellwood, Westmoreland) who work in Beaverton. And drive a SUV.
Are these people somehow exempted from the laws of money and insulated simply because they live within five miles of downtown Portland?
Can anyone actually provide IRREFUTABLE data that shows that the housing “crisis” is affecting people in the “fringes of cities” – for example, Forest Grove/Cornelius/Gaston/North Plains/Banks, Columbia County, Yamhill County, Sherwood/Tualatin/Wilsonville, West Linn/Oregon City/Canby and that portion of Clackamas County, much of Clark County – at a higher than than those who live in Multnomah or close-in Washington County?
“Can anyone actually provide IRREFUTABLE data that shows that the housing “crisis” is affecting people in the “fringes of cities” – for example, Forest Grove/Cornelius/Gaston/North Plains/Banks, Columbia County, Yamhill County, Sherwood/Tualatin/Wilsonville, West Linn/Oregon City/Canby and that portion of Clackamas County, much of Clark County – at a higher than than those who live in Multnomah or close-in Washington County?”
“There seems to be a lot of people who live in, oh, Southeast Portland (i.e. Hawthorne, Sellwood, Westmoreland) who work in Beaverton. And drive a SUV.”
Of course there are. There are also a lot of people that live in Clark County and work in downtown Portland and drive an SUV. However, “a lot” isn’t very descriptive, so lets put some numbers on those: ~20% of inner SE Portland took the bus to work in 2000 according to the census, where as the number for Clark County is around 3%, so it looks like more people (as a percentage) in Clark County drove to work than people from SE Portland…
Suggests? Anyone can “suggest” anything. Where is the actual data? I see lots of those little pretty gray dots further to the right that are above 0%, too, and I see some pretty gray dots close to the left that are below 0%…
~20% of inner SE Portland took the bus to work in 2000 according to the census, where as the number for Clark County is around 3%
That statement completely misses the argument. So what if 20% of inner SE Portland residents take the bus to work – where are they going? The same for Clark County residents? Is public transit a realistic option for these folks? Or are we simply looking at public transit access to/from Downtown Portland?
Click on the multimedia map, the average Oregonian saves $12.50 or so per month with a gas tax. Woo freakin hoo. Twelve dollars or so.
If you don’t have a cell phone, car, apartment / condo / house or cable $12 sounds like a lot, I guess. Compared to what we spend per capita on other projects it’s nothing.
Really though, gas may be a big expense to some, but it shouldn’t be a shock like an ARM loan shouldn’t be a shock when it re-adjusts.
If the NYTimes multimedia chart is correct, the $12.67 spent on state gas taxes each month by Oregon drivers correlates to 52.79 gallons per month per driver (at a state gas tax rate of 24 cents per gallon.)
At $3.65 per gallon (retail price including taxes), that’s an average of $192 per month per driver for those gallons. That’s enough to be more than just an irritant in most people’s budgets.
0 responses to “Gas Prices and Housing Bust: Causality or Spurious Correlation?”
“Price Tags” just had a similar article:
Driving off the Edge
Lots of good points to think about.
From the Oregonian article:
Say you drive 10,000 miles a year, Pozdena said. With a car getting 20 miles per gallon, you would buy about 500 gallons of gas a year. If gas prices rise by $1, you’ll spend about $500 more in a year. “That pales in comparison with any other cost in owning a home.”
It’s not simply driving the extra 10 miles to get to work. If that were the only issue, then it wouldn’t be so much more difficult to live in the suburbs. But Pozdena doesn’t acknowledge that people living in an urban setting can choose not to have a car at all, which saves you several thousand dollars every year.
One can only hope.
The suburbs deserve to go away regardless of any environmental impacts. I won’t miss ’em.
What many “in the city people without cars” don’t realize is that there are businesses/jobs in the suburbs. Not everyone commutes into “the city”. People will pay a considerable amount to avoid congestion in their life. Even sacrificing commuting time so as not to live the congestion 24 hours a day.
Most everyone understands that not everyone commutes into “the city”. But a lot of people outside the city don’t understand that it is even possible to live well, in the city, without a car. That is to say: not everybody is trapped by high gas prices — some people with flexibility have chosen to use that flexibility to avoid some of the pains of the suburbs.
What are the “the pains of the suburbs”? Gas prices have very little to do with living in the suburbs.
I work in inner Southeast (22nd and Powell area).
I now live in inner Southeast (42nd and Powell area)
I now fill my car’s gas tank twice a month rather than once a week. However, I still have family in Salem that I would like to visit. TriMet doesn’t go there. AmTrak barely goes there, and I’d have to plan my entire day around their late trains that are more expensive than just driving – and it only gets me part way because someone would then have to pick me up and drive me another 20 miles to Silverton.
I also have season tickets for Oregon State Football games in Corvallis. AmTrak doesn’t go there – closest it comes is Albany.
For some people, ditching the car for the sake of living in “the city” is NOT an option. Just because it fits you, doesn’t mean it fits everyone else.
The point is that you can reduce the need to drive for many, many trips if you live close to work and services. In turn, you can save a significant amount of money by not filling up your tank as often.
Living in the city doesn’t mean that you’ll never need to drive again. But it can make a lot more sense both in regards to time and money than living in the suburbs and having to drive for most, if not all of life’s necessities.
Let’s look at this quote a different way. It’s all about assumptions:
10,000 miles a year? Who drives that little? Certainly nobody who drove until they qualified — and certainly not in larger areas like Houston, L.A., Phoenix, SF Bay Area, Atlanta, etc. Let’s try 25,000 to 50,000 miles per year. (Hell, I put 10,000 miles a year on my cars, and I don’t use them even once a year for commuting — I have my bicycle for that. Those are all errands and road trips!)
At 20 mpg (that, at least, is a safe assumption for an average), that means 1250 to 2500 gallons a year, or 104-210 gallons a month. Also, I think it’s safe to say that in the past five years, prices have gone up more than a dollar a gallon. I think it’s closer to $2 a gallon. Let’s use that. That means that the average person is seeing a $100 to $200/month increase in fuel costs. Spread that across a 2-car family, and it’s easily $2-400 a month out of the household budget.
Do you think that $400 a month makes a difference when it comes to making the mortgage payments?
You BET it does!!!
Joe Cortright is definitely onto something here. I’d love to use some better data to break this down in more detail within each metropolitan area. I’m guessing that the spread is a lot more than 2 percentage points between the places that are car dependent (suburbs, for the most part) and the places where folks don’t actually need the car for every trip every day.
What many “in the city people without cars” don’t realize is that there are businesses/jobs in the suburbs.
Actually what it means is that people that don’t have the use of a car because they can’t afford one and/or cannot drive one for whatever reason sometimes end up working for less money then they could at a job that’s more stressful and with worse hours than they could if the employer that better fit them was either willing to hire them (in cases where the employer demands everyone hold a drivers license for no reason, even if the job doesn’t require on-call hours, driving for work purposes of any reason; and is located on a transit route that’s running every 15 minutes when the start/end times are), and/or wasn’t located where service isn’t viable based on transit hours of operation and shift begin/end hours.
Or, they have no job at all.
Then everyone pays for it in the form of additional public assistance for government human support services.
I now live in inner Southeast (42nd and Powell area). I now fill my car’s gas tank twice a month rather than once a week. However, I still have family in Salem that I would like to visit. TriMet doesn’t go there. AmTrak barely goes there, and I’d have to plan my entire day around their late trains that are more expensive than just driving – and it only gets me part way because someone would then have to pick me up and drive me another 20 miles to Silverton.
42nd and Powell to Silverton early (on a weekday I’m assuming)? That’s easy (I lived down the street from there for a period of time and have personally done a trip very similar to this.):
(Note to anyone reading this months/years after I’m posting this… the times and routes listed are based on current information on 4-30-08 and are subject to change.)
6:51 AM – Board TriMet 9 to downtown Portland (This is the 39th Ave timepoint.)
7:11 AM – bus reaches Salmon & 4th Ave.
Walk to SW Columbia St. and SW 5th Ave.
7:16 AM – Board TriMet 96 to Commerce Circle
7:52 AM – bus reaches Commerce Circle in Wilsonville
7:59 AM – Board SMART 201 to Wilsonville
8:14 AM – bus reaches Regal Cinema Park-n-Ride in Wilsonville
8:50 AM – Board SMART 1X to Salem
9:33 AM – bus reaches the Transit Center in Salem
9:40 AM – Board CARTS Route 20 to Silverton
10:11 AM – bus reaches Silverton Rite-Aid (also stops at Silverton Roth’s at 10:16 AM)
The way back in the afternoon/evening is similar and the reverse of what I’ve listed here.
BTW, this only costs $5.55 one-way:
$2.05 for TriMet (transfer that would be good on 9-Powell and 96)
$2 for SMART (1X only, the other route is free from Commerce Circle to the Park-n-Ride)
$1.50 for CARTS
Also, before anyone complains ‘that would take too long,’ IMO if more and more people use services that are already available, that would tell transit agencies and private operators that there is a demand for more service between one place and another and additional service and/or more direct service should be explored.
The idea that rising gasoline prices caused the housing bubble to pop is absolute baloney.
Podzena is absolutely right in stating that an increase in an ANNUAL expenditure of $500 for fuel would not even be noticed when compared to other costs associated with housing.
For example, there are literally 100,000s of homeowners that are in the process of having their option ARM mortgages reset to higher rates. The MONTHLY cost for some of these folks has increased $500! In addition, these loans carried expensive pre-payment penalties and the homeowners paid way too much for their houses in the first place. And this is occurring in all parts of cities, not just in suburban areas.
I hate to say it, but this paper is a yet another clear example of Cortright grabbing headlines with interesting soundbites, but there is little or no substance to his arguments. In fact, I feel that by attaching his name to this ‘research’, he is thoroughly discrediting himself.
Consider that:
Home prices have been on a completely unsustainable tear for years and years, with millions of borrowers purchasing overprices homes that they could little afford, all with new-fangled loans from completely overleveraged banks, which allowed them to get loans that are neg am (for example), with little or no income documentation, combined with the complete overbuilding by builders. All happening within a very loose credit environment where mortgage-backed securities were packaged as CMOs and CDOs, purchased by investment banks that in some cases were leveraged 27-1 (bear stearns) who had almost no idea how to properly price these new investments vehicles.
Hundreds of economists for almost 2 years have been warning of these serious issues, but wow – it was a $1.50 rise in gas that was the real problem all along? Well how does that explain the ongoing bursting of the housing bubbles in Spain and England, where cities are much denser and gas has not risen as much in price? Those countries (and other parts of Europe) are experiencing the same issues that the US is now dealing with.
How would high gas prices explain the hundreds of unsold condo units in inner Portland hoods? I live in Multnomah Village, and there are lots and lots of homes for sale here – a quick 20 minute bike ride downtown.
As a researcher myself, I am embarrassed to see such shoddy work being passed off as legitimate scholarship. Like Randall O’Toole’s nonsense, I’m using this paper to wrap my fish. Maybe the high gas prices is what is preventing salmon from returning to the Columbia??
May I please order a side of critical thinking, please?
Zachary, I don’t think anyone denies that weird loans have a big part to play in the housing bubble. However, there is no denying that the bubble is popping very hard on the suburban fringes and not in inner urban areas, which lead to the question of: Is there really a bubble in the inner urban areas? Keep in mind that both places had access to the same types of loans. And yes, some places, (San Diego,) overbuilt their condo market, but a lot of those are being absorbed back into the market as rentals, so even those are not crashing the same way that the suburban fringes are…
Is there a bubble in the inner areas? I’d say that is an unequivocal yes. As I said, I live in MV, and I can easily see that many houses on the market here have been listed for months, and are priced at least 10 higher than they should be. I know friends in an even more inner hood who have been trying to sell their home for months now, and have dropped the price more than 10%. these are anecdotal examples but they are happengin all over the city. I can’t tell you how many rehabbed homes in inner NE and N are just sitting there, unsold.
The suburban fringe is where overbuilding usually occurs, not in inner hoods. Of course prices are falling faster out there – it happens IN EVERY HOUSING DOWNTURN! It’s basic supply and demand. Why don’t you explain the soft as a noodle pdx condo market? those empty towers in Sowa? the condo – apt conversion in DOWNTOWN portland?
Besides, Portland and Seattle were late to the housing party – I think you will see prices begin to fall faster here, as the recession deepens, and unemployment rises. Take a look at the Case-Schiller housing index by city, and you will see that the inflection point on the PDX and SEA housing price curves happened at least 6 month – 1 yr after other US cities. Just wait, and watch…
I’m sorry, but the evidence of a gas price-housing bubble linkage is incredibly weak.
Yeah, it’s weird loans, but what about the dozen other factors I mentioned? I know you may
“42nd and Powell to Silverton early (on a weekday I’m assuming)? That’s easy (I lived down the street from there for a period of time and have personally done a trip very similar to this.):
(Note to anyone reading this months/years after I’m posting this… the times and routes listed are based on current information on 4-30-08 and are subject to change.)
6:51 AM – Board TriMet 9 to downtown Portland (This is the 39th Ave timepoint.)
7:11 AM – bus reaches Salmon & 4th Ave.
Walk to SW Columbia St. and SW 5th Ave.
7:16 AM – Board TriMet 96 to Commerce Circle
7:52 AM – bus reaches Commerce Circle in Wilsonville
7:59 AM – Board SMART 201 to Wilsonville
8:14 AM – bus reaches Regal Cinema Park-n-Ride in Wilsonville
8:50 AM – Board SMART 1X to Salem
9:33 AM – bus reaches the Transit Center in Salem
9:40 AM – Board CARTS Route 20 to Silverton
10:11 AM – bus reaches Silverton Rite-Aid (also stops at Silverton Roth’s at 10:16 AM)”
•••
So, 7 hours round trip to go 60 miles? And that’s on a weekday. What about on a sunday?
I can drive it in 50 minutes, without breaking any speed limits.
Oh, and $11 round trip too. At $3.65 a gallon, it’s about the same cost to drive it in my car, but less than a third of the time.
Sounds like the car is a much better proposition – less time, less hassle, same cost. And I can take my dog.
I’m with Fred on this — that trip makes sense by car. It’s the daily trips to and from work, or some shopping trips, or going out to the pub, etc. — those are the trips that are the low-hanging fruit to switch from cars to… walking, bicycling and/or transit.
Fred, if Amtrak were to run 12 trips a day between Union Station and Salem, would that make a difference in your calculation, or would it still make more sense to drive?
So, 7 hours round trip to go 60 miles? And that’s on a weekday. What about on a sunday?
Neither the TriMet 96 or the SMART/Cherriots 1X operates on Saturdays (or Sundays, or holidays).
This problem would be solved if Oregon would replace its current, inadequate twice-a-day-in-the-evenings-only Cascades service with seven day a week, hourly bus service between Portland and Eugene (with stops in Wilsonville, Woodburn, Salem, and Albany) – plus connecting transit service on the Highway 214 corridor between Woodburn, Silverton and Mt. Angel.
Yeah, that makes sense. Increase the frequency of an extremely low ridership train route because of demand.
Just drive. I manage to make it to Monmouth from Gresham twice a week to go to school and in less time then it would take for me to take a bus into downtown Portland. Only about $20 round trip in gas in a > 20mpg car, door to door service, listen to my radio, eat, talk on the phone, smoke, and etc.
Just face it. There is no such thing as an “alternative” to driving.
Way to think ahead, Anthony.
Anybody want to start a betting pool on when gas will hit $5 a gallon? I’ve heard it should be there by August, if oil keeps heading towards $200 a barrel.
How about $10 a gallon? I say, we’ll see $10 by 2010. Maybe 2012 at the outside, and no later than 2015.
If we started now, how long do you think it’d take to just upgrade the N/S railroad mainline in Oregon to 200mph standards? We’re talking just from Ashland to Portland. 7 years, with permits and funding obstacles?
Do you think that might be a good thing, if gas is $10 a gallon?
Maybe not. Who knows, maybe people would prefer to pay $200 in gas for a round trip from here to Medford, driving, rather than maybe $100 on the train to do it in 1/3 of the time, including stops.
After all, Americans are addicted to their cars. There is no such thing as an alternative to driving.
I highly doubt gas will reach $10 a gallon unless we don’t get our inflation in check, and if we don’t, $10 wont be worth much anyway.
Most people will still choose to drive till they become unwilling to pay—at that time the price will drop due to the lack of demand.
I recommend the introduction economics series [200, 201, and 202] offered at any community college year round.
10,000 miles a year? Who drives that little?
I drive about 7000-8000 per year, and commute daily in my car. Many leases are for 12000 miles per year, and people survive that just fine.
I think your inflated numbers are rather funny. Unless you’re driving for a living, 50000 miles a year is a ton. Most people don’t commute nearly 100 miles each way, and those who do have bigger problems than gas costs.
Oh, this one also:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/29/business/worldbusiness/29oil.html
As oil prices soared to record levels in recent years, basic economics suggested that consumption would fall and supplies would rise as producers drilled for more oil.
But as prices flirt with $120 a barrel, many energy experts are becoming worried that neither seems to be happening. Higher prices have done little to suppress global demand or attract new production, and the resulting mismatch has sent oil prices ever higher.
A much more rational examination of high gas prices, in my opinion.
Anthony may have violated the Portland Transport rules by saying:
Just because your simplistic economic evaluation leads you to one conclusion, doesn’t give you license to make comments like this one. Obviously, many people who took not only those three introductory classes (taught by community college hacks), but also the classes at the 400-level, then those at the 5/600-level — and who even wrote theses and received Ph.D.’s in the subject — disagree with your analysis.
Mark Faber would be one. He might point out that it really doesn’t matter much how much *you* drive, or anybody in Oregon, for that matter. Oil supply and demand is measured on a macro-economic, world level. And the single largest contributor to world demand increase is China, which has a long way to go before their rate of auto use per capita is even close to Mexico’s — much less the United States.
I don’t think that high gas prices are going to reduce the level of worldwide growth in demand that is due to newly-industrializing regions. It seems to be a pretty much worldwide phenomenae that, as soon as a family achieves anything near middle-class status, they purchase an automobile. Multiply this by the tens of millions of Chinese and Indians who newly achieve this status each year, and any kind of demand restraint in the United States becomes mostly irrelevant with regards to global supply and demand curves.
Anthony may have violated the Portland Transport rules
Garlynn, I’d say chill out and just tune Anthony out. His statements are consistenly ignorant and rarely show any intellectual depth. At least he’s going to school – perhaps it’s not too late for him.
Just because your simplistic economic evaluation leads you to one conclusion, doesn’t give you license to make comments like this one. Obviously, many people who took not only those three introductory classes (taught by community college hacks), but also the classes at the 400-level, then those at the 5/600-level — and who even wrote theses and received Ph.D.’s in the subject — disagree with your analysis.
“Community College Hack”? Do two negatives make a positive here?
Is it now a forum requirement to have a PhD to participate on this forum, and Community College students (and instructors/staff) are no longer welcome to participate as they apparently, in the eyes of Garlynn, do not possess a minimal educational level to understand the concepts discussed here???
http://www.pcc.edu/about/
Our Students
During the 2006-2007 school year over 86,164 students—58% female, 42% male—attended PCC (see Demographics for more details). Part of a vibrant, urban community, Portland Community College is a crossroads for people with many destinations. This diversity is vital to the PCC experience.
http://www.pdx.edu/profiles/13427/
Enrollment 2006-2007 (Fall 2006, Fourth Week)
Total 24,284
I could go on and count the rest of the colleges too (including Mt. Hood Community College and Clark College), but apparently “majority rules” is no longer acceptable in the eyes of transportation interest, just the narrow views of a select few that wish to force their opinion on others without accepting criticism of their own beliefs.
We seem to have drifted off topic here. I’m interested in knowing who among us think that high gas prices were what popped the housing bubble. As I’ve stated previously – I think that idea is complete baloney. In the Portland region, I’d guess that the average household drives about 25K miles per year. With an average of 20 mpg for a household fleet, and an increase of even $2 in the prices of gas, this household would pay and extra $2500 per year. That’s a lot, but it is hardly the kind of financial hardship that would cause so many hundreds of thousands of homeowners to move into foreclosure.
We seem to have drifted off topic here.
I agree, and I admit that I partially started this mess. Therefore, I apologize.
…this household would pay and extra $2500 per year. That’s a lot, but it is hardly the kind of financial hardship that would cause so many hundreds of thousands of homeowners to move into foreclosure.
Maybe, maybe not. If someone is living paycheck to paycheck with nothing to spare, after already cutting back to necessities, $2,500/yr. ($208.33/mo.) could be enough to push them over the breaking point.
JK: There may be some short term problems, but long term we are paying a lot less than other countries that still have expanding suburbs. Here is what a New Zealander said on an email list:
The US has had incredibly low gas prices since forever compared to what we pay in other countries. In NZ right now gas is 8$ a gallon.
Yet suburban living has dominated post war development in virtually every country in the New World and in many countries in the old world.
IT is hard to believe that the whole US lifestyle will change overnight because they are starting to pay as much for gas as we did many years ago.
Thanks
JK
Although the title of the article I’m referencing below seems to support the thesis of JK’s New Zealander (“Kiwis not keen on public transport”), the data presented does not:
http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/423466/1084773
56% vs 34% is not insignificant.
Bob R.:Although the title of the article I’m referencing below seems to support the thesis of JK’s New Zealander (“Kiwis not keen on public transport”), the data presented does not:
The study found only 56% of Kiwis use public transport to get to work,
Wikipedia entry on “Public Transport in New Zealand”:
Public transport in New Zealand exists in many of the country’s urban areas, and takes a number of forms. Bus transport is the main form of public transport in all cities. However two major cities, Auckland and Wellington, have suburban rail systems which have been gaining more patronage in recent years. Some cities also operate ferry services. Trams and long-distance rail have declined heavily in importance in the 20th century.
According to the Ministry for the Environment, overall use of public transport in New Zealand is low, with only around 2.5% of trips making use of it.[1] This figure is for the whole of New Zealand and includes centres that may have limited public transport. New Zealand was rated only 22nd in a survey for public transport use amongst 28 countries worldwide, with only 56% always, or sometimes, using public transport to reach work. At the same time, this share was much higher than for example in the US, with only 34% usage
Considering the regions like Auckland, where the overall share is about 5%.[3], this figure is comparable to numerous North American and Australian cities.
According to the 2006 census, 17% of Wellingtonians took public transport to work, as did 7% of Aucklanders
Buses are the most common form of public transport in New Zealand, making up the majority of trips in every city that has public transport (and often being the only public transport mode available). They are followed by trains, which are found in Wellington and Auckland. Ferries also play a role, mainly in Auckland but also in other cities. Trams in New Zealand, while once common in many cities and towns, now survive only as heritage displays. Cable cars have also been employed; the Dunedin cable tramway system was both the second and second-last to operate in the world, while the Wellington Cable Car is now a funicular.
It appears that using New Zealand as an example is questionable at best – while some areas of New Zealand have high public transport usage (so does the United States – New York City is well over 50%) that overall public transit usage at some 2.5% (Portland is only at 4%, IIRC). Further, the backbone of New Zealand’s public transit system is that dreaded old bus that is despised by so many “public transit advocates” here (and including trolleybusses, the type of bus that light rail advocates hate because it has every environmental benefit of light rail and almost every benefit of a bus – combined into one cost effective package), and New Zealand has all but eliminated its long distance rail system (what we call Amtrak, although “long distance” in New Zealand would be equivalent to a Cascades or other corridor style service.)
Despite this, New Zealanders appear to be flocking to their cars, despite gas prices far over what U.S. residents pay. There is a price for freedom to travel, and many choose to pay the price.
“I think that idea is complete baloney. In the Portland region, I’d guess that the average household drives about 25K miles per year. With an average of 20 mpg for a household fleet, and an increase of even $2 in the prices of gas, this household would pay and extra $2500 per year. That’s a lot, but it is hardly the kind of financial hardship that would cause so many hundreds of thousands of homeowners to move into foreclosure.”
The average households aren’t suffering very much, (at least in the Portland area,) you are absolutely right. But the people that are suffering are the ones on the fringes of the cities, the ones drive twice that many miles a year, and own an SUV that gets worse than average mileage. That is pretty much the point of the article, the people on the urban fringes that spend 38% of their money on transportation are fairing much worse than the people in the people in the inner city that spend 8%…
One other thing: The median US house price in the US is around $250k, and the US average loan to value ratio is around 50%, so (and this is bad math: Rich people probably tend to own more of their homes than poor, but we’ll ignore that for the moment,) that means the average loan is only $125k, and 6% on that is $7500/year or $625/month. So an extra $200/month in gas prices is significant for those people…
But the people that are suffering are the ones on the fringes of the cities, the ones drive twice that many miles a year, and own an SUV that gets worse than average mileage.
There seems to be a lot of people who live in, oh, Southeast Portland (i.e. Hawthorne, Sellwood, Westmoreland) who work in Beaverton. And drive a SUV.
Are these people somehow exempted from the laws of money and insulated simply because they live within five miles of downtown Portland?
Can anyone actually provide IRREFUTABLE data that shows that the housing “crisis” is affecting people in the “fringes of cities” – for example, Forest Grove/Cornelius/Gaston/North Plains/Banks, Columbia County, Yamhill County, Sherwood/Tualatin/Wilsonville, West Linn/Oregon City/Canby and that portion of Clackamas County, much of Clark County – at a higher than than those who live in Multnomah or close-in Washington County?
“Can anyone actually provide IRREFUTABLE data that shows that the housing “crisis” is affecting people in the “fringes of cities” – for example, Forest Grove/Cornelius/Gaston/North Plains/Banks, Columbia County, Yamhill County, Sherwood/Tualatin/Wilsonville, West Linn/Oregon City/Canby and that portion of Clackamas County, much of Clark County – at a higher than than those who live in Multnomah or close-in Washington County?”
Did you read the pdf?
http://www.ceosforcities.org/newsroom/pr/files/Driven%20to%20the%20Brink%20FINAL.pdf
Did you look at the graphs on page 14? No, it isn’t a perfect trend, (if it was, then I’m fairly sure that nobody would build in the suburbs ever again,) but it does certainly suggest that point.
“There seems to be a lot of people who live in, oh, Southeast Portland (i.e. Hawthorne, Sellwood, Westmoreland) who work in Beaverton. And drive a SUV.”
Of course there are. There are also a lot of people that live in Clark County and work in downtown Portland and drive an SUV. However, “a lot” isn’t very descriptive, so lets put some numbers on those: ~20% of inner SE Portland took the bus to work in 2000 according to the census, where as the number for Clark County is around 3%, so it looks like more people (as a percentage) in Clark County drove to work than people from SE Portland…
but it does certainly suggest that point.
Suggests? Anyone can “suggest” anything. Where is the actual data? I see lots of those little pretty gray dots further to the right that are above 0%, too, and I see some pretty gray dots close to the left that are below 0%…
~20% of inner SE Portland took the bus to work in 2000 according to the census, where as the number for Clark County is around 3%
That statement completely misses the argument. So what if 20% of inner SE Portland residents take the bus to work – where are they going? The same for Clark County residents? Is public transit a realistic option for these folks? Or are we simply looking at public transit access to/from Downtown Portland?
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/06/us/06gas.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
Click on the multimedia map, the average Oregonian saves $12.50 or so per month with a gas tax. Woo freakin hoo. Twelve dollars or so.
If you don’t have a cell phone, car, apartment / condo / house or cable $12 sounds like a lot, I guess. Compared to what we spend per capita on other projects it’s nothing.
Really though, gas may be a big expense to some, but it shouldn’t be a shock like an ARM loan shouldn’t be a shock when it re-adjusts.
Correction:
with a gas tax holiday.
Sorry.
Dave –
If the NYTimes multimedia chart is correct, the $12.67 spent on state gas taxes each month by Oregon drivers correlates to 52.79 gallons per month per driver (at a state gas tax rate of 24 cents per gallon.)
At $3.65 per gallon (retail price including taxes), that’s an average of $192 per month per driver for those gallons. That’s enough to be more than just an irritant in most people’s budgets.