Why Do Rich People In Cities Drive Gas Guzzling SUVs? | Ash Sarkar
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 25 ส.ค. 2024
- SUVs are polluting, tacky, and more likely to result in a fatal collision than any other kind of car. So why do rich people like them so much? Ash Sarkar goes to Kensington and Chelsea - home to more SUVs than any other part of the country - to find out whether posh people can be convinced to give up their gas guzzlers for a cleaner, greener planet.
_________________________________________________________
Subscribe to Novara Media on TH-cam ⇛ novara.media/yo...
Support our work ⇛ novaramedia.co...
Buy our merch ⇛ shop.novaramed...
![ง้อ (ALRIGHT) - FOURTH Prod. by URBOYTJ [ OFFICIAL MV ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Qs8ZeV6Dqj8/mqdefault.jpg)
![ฮักเทื่อสุดท้าย - บอย ศิริชัย [OFFICIAL MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/-1PoPoQ-B-k/mqdefault.jpg)
"I actually run a charity in South Africa, so that gives me a free pass to fuck shit up"
As if charities are always good as well.
Logic is not his strong point.
The funny thing is, he probably classes himself as really smart!
Arrrrrrrgggggggghhhhhhhhhhh made my sphincter spasm 💩💩💩
This will be over-consumers way of squaring things. Their bogus charities or planting a few trees will allow them to take many times their fair share of the planets resources.
Ash why not look into the percentage of UK cars sold on finance. Last time I checked it was like 85%. Virtually no one can afford to buy a SUV outright, but these finance deals make these SUV's available to larger numbers of people. Unfortunately in the UK for a lot of people what you drive is linked to social status and how well you are doing. So we need the Rich to stop driving these SUV's so the middle classes stop buying them too.
The funny thing is that, as a status vehicle, EVs are starting to take over as well. The manufacturers have mostly started at the top of the market so the Tesla X or the Audi Etron are are now better than their ICE SUV equivalents. Likewise the Tesla S and Mercedes EQS are better than their ICE equivalents.
People buying petrol or diesel now are either uninformed or just Luddites.
@@michaelrch Your point is valid but given that the EV equivalents are substantially more expensive, the likelyhood is that most will still opt for the ICE choice for many years to come.
@@apkk5594
Hmm, I am not sure about that.
The US is a bit unusual because gas prices are so low. Elsewhere, the fuel savings from an EV offset the higher sticker price within a few years. Also maintenance costs are way lower on EVs as they are inherently more reliable.
And even if you look at the sticker prices, these are converging very quickly. Ford just announced pricing for the F150 Lightning, and it's only slightly above the pricing for the equivalent ICEV version. And given it has a ton of really neat tricks, like being able to run tools, or even you house, from the truck, it is going to sell fast.
And if you think ahead, it won't be long before people buying an ICEV have to worry about the resale value of their car later on. Imagine it's 2025 and many segments now have near cost parity between EVs and ICEVs and EVs are still getting cheaper. Who is going to buy an ICEV when in 3-5 years a new EV is likely to be cheaper?
And when there is cost parity, who is going to walk into a dealer and buy a car that is no cheaper but is harder to drive, is more expensive to run, is noisy and dirty, is less fun to drive, has inferior overall performance AND will have almost no resale value in 5 years?
My expectation is that ICEV sales won't gradually decline. Once EVs have won the battle on price, then ICEV sales will go off a cliff. Like horses and carts did in the 1920s.
Actually the whole getting a new car every 4years is pretty unsustainable regardless of what you drive. These finance deals whether it be for electric, diesel or petrol are bad. Its just propping up the car industry and of course its great for the shareholders. It would be better for the environment if everyone just ran their existing cars into the ground and or bought fuel efficient second hand cars, but consumerism. I can't really talk as I have my work van on PCP finance, but I wouldn't have gotten a new one if it it wasn't so cheap to do so.
@@m_b4
You are not wrong that we can't just replace 100M ICEVs with EVs. We do need a large scale shift away from cars but that will need a lot of democratic pressure on governments that currently don't give a cr*p.
The calculation on emissions depends very much on how much you drive your car and where you are. If you drive 10,000 miles a year then, even on full lifecycle emissions including production and disposal, an EV will be overall lower on emissions after 3-4 years, based on the U.K. grid. And that grid is getting cleaner so that time is getting shorter.
But that does assume that you sell your old car to someone who doesn't drive much. So if you drive a lot, get an EV and if you drive very little, get an old ICEV.
It's really difficult to explain SUVs in the big city without getting Freudian about it.
That "I am doing my bit" attitude is our downfall, you can't pollute and destroy and then turn around and say: but I do a bit of charity work for x,y,z overseas... its the original "offsetting" mentality and it doesn't work.
It’s infuriating! My sister thinks because she recycles she’s doing her bit despite the fact recycling (plastic in particular) is a bit of scam.
It's literally virtue signalling, something I presume they'll rail against if it was a social issue.
Just another example of entitlement
Slavoj Zizek does a brilliant analysis of this thinking in his book "Violence".
It's the Jimmy Saville defence. He raised 60 million pounds for charity and he even said it bought his way into heaven... eugh.
'Would you ever buy a SUV?
No, because I have taste"
🤣🤣🤣🤣
That made me actually laugh out loud!!
No, he's just showed he has limited awareness of their utility. Possibly because he appears not to be a manual labourer type person.
Does he think their utility is mainly for their 'taste'?
for the same price of a Range rover you can get a Jaguar f type a much better car.
@@huwdavies-tallon3305 discovery 4cy diesel engine.... Crap, timing chain like a bicycle chain. I have heard of 4 of these breaking around 70k
Discovery V6. diesel breaks crankshafts.... So weak it can't take even mild remapping
crap
@@mb106429 Exactly they are useful, I will be buying mine to tackle the waitrose speed humps
@@mb106429 They are just lifted wagons(often with smaller passenger and cargo space) with robust 4x4 systems that will never get utilized.
The guy's "charity" is definitely a tax scam...
Or moral wash
@@markmooch Seems like it's both
"Arm A Boer" would be my guess
..and you just know that he has a little wee...
@@MissyGail4eva civilisation makes little wieners survive. Harsh conditions breed tough people, big genitalia, and other rare traits simply because only the extremely fit survives.
Electric cars won't solve climate crisis.
Kings and elites won't travel through trains and busses. Middle class people who acquire wealth see that and want to be that. Making a car emits more carbon than the car itself in its lifetime through combustion. Making a lithium battery for these modern cars make emissions 10x more. :)
Only real change would be cycling through neighborhoods and train through cities. Power all through nuclear grid.
But no one wants that.
After all that, "would you buy an SUV?" "No, 'cause I have taste" was a beautiful end to the interview
We have a saying in our house, "You can't buy good taste." and we see more evidence of it every day.
So good.
I know, right.
yeah but this video fails to point out single valid reason for owning such a vehicle. If you were an alien and watched this you'd think everyone that drives an suv has no reason for having one other than fashion. That is, all who own them are rather silly. But of course that's not true. Probably at least 20% own them because they provide a pragmatic value due to their size, and not because they're compensating for a small penis or just keeping up with the Jones' despite their harm to the environment.
His suit said otherwise
Perhaps rich people living in Kensington and Chelsea don't walk their kids to school, despite the short distance, because they are terrified they'll be run over by some SUV-driving maniac.
People always jump to the "companies do most of the damage globally so my SUV is fine" argument, but the reality is that within congested areas like London the majority of pollution is not from industry it's from cars. If you reduce the number of SUVs in places like London, yes there is still a lot of work to do globally, but you've have dramatically improved air quality locally! Given that so many people live in places like London, improving local air quality has massive health and environmental benefits in those areas.
@@neodym5809 you can get very, very different levels of pollution of Nitrous Oxides and other tailpipe pollutants fom a turbo diesel SUV than an Atkinson cycle hybrid.
I am sick to death of hearirng wealthy people complain about the disruption caused to the self entitled brigade of the wealthy by the likes of Extinction Rebellion, who are basically taking action to save all our lives, including those of the diabolical planet destroying self entitlement of the wealthy. Regardig the ownership of SUV's is a good point to research, because we MUST disenfranchise the wealthy. I agree that we have left dealing with climate change in order to have a smooth transition in our habits, particularly transport, but i was happy to hear that disruption is coming, whether the wealthy like it or want it. The wealthy are going to suffer the consequences of their self entitlement and arrogance, and unless we can persuade them of that reality, then we are on the road to the kind of disruption which leads to the darkest future which, I believe, most people are now concerned about and taking action to prevent. One question which is running around in my mind, given that the only party capable of challenging for government, the Labour Party is led by a fascist and racist, and with no sign of that changing, is it time for society to ignore the "laws" and "rules" legislated by the government, which are there only for the protection of the government from society, is it time for the people to ignore the "laws" and "rules" which the government pushes through Parliament, particularly given that the government does not obey its own laws and rules? Then I say to myself, but isn't that just us making ourselves the same as them, so what is the solution? One thing I am sure of, however, is that we have to be a lot more ruthless, in terms of taking the kind of peaceful disruption actions by the likes of Extinction Rebellion, and stop blaming them for inconveniencing people, including the wealthy.
@PGH Engineer I don't think you understand how it works.
Quite simply (& whatever cars they drive) people with very high incomes create more carbon emissions than those on low incomes. Fact.
@PGH Engineer... also those with a little bit of money should not be targeted. Those with extremely expensive & ostentatious lifestyles should.
assholes drive SUV, no need them the same ones that go on about saving the planet
Large cars, including electric ones will not solve our transport or environmental challenges. Seems like most electric cars being made are these huge SUVs. Continue to invest in public transport - Electric cars really are not the answer! It's really interesting that in France, cars don't seem to be the same status symbol they are in the UK. I wonder how we can get people to decouple status from an association with cars?
It depends on the milieu and the region in France really. In Paris, having a car is just a hassle compared to the metro or bike, so fewer and fewer households have one. If you need motorised private transportation, a motorcycle or scooter -preferrably electric- is much more convenient, cheaper and, let's face it, cooler! But in the countryside and in certain milieus even within Paris, big cars are still a huge thing.
Cars just takes up too much space in a city. Preferably we move to a society were you dont have to travel long distances every day of the week just to have money to eat at sleep. Were public transit is quick efficient and attractive.
Here in tiny Netherlands they have ploughed into electric vehicles. Or at least have subsidised rich people to buy Teslas and to have private charging posts in their gardens. Only just before Christmas they put about 20 new charging posts in 4 residential areas. To be fair the use of wind energy is high here (the claim is the entire train system runs on it), but there's no way this growth of personal vehicles is sustainable.
@@baronmeduse totally agree - its sending transport planning in the wrong direction - towards an even more privatised society. The UK has/is following a similar path.
I think we make it unacceptable for people to purchase one of these so called vehicles, and we do that by pointing out all the disadvantages of owning one of these vehicles. however, what about the idea of just not making them in the first place, given that most people do not support owning one of these so-called vehicles?
Every time I see a Porsche SUV, I think "why!""
If you're gonna buy a Porsche, get one with some pedigree, like a Carrera or a 911. (I appreciate this comment isn't in the spirit of this video :) )
Implying SUV drivers know anything about cars.
Because the type of person to buy an SUV in a city is shallow and obsessed with image - a Porsche SUV is a combination of 'wow, fancy car brand' and 'ooo, big cool SUV'.
Because they are nice and people like nice things
I used to farm, and SUV’s are nothing more than a status symbol for the vast majority of countryside drivers as well. Give me a light, high riding supermini for farm use any day of the week.
Where I used to work, rich farm owners used to drive their pavement princesses less than a mile down the road and visit the local pub. Rich people are just as distasteful anywhere you go tbh
@@Hartley_Hare Nicety =/= good taste unfortunately, I know some very nice people who would absolutely do the same if they had the money.
There's a need for SUVs. But all the people I know who need them have banged up one's from 2 decades ago. All the people who didn't need them had new shiny ones, funny that
Really, I thought in rural areas they'd actually have some utility at least.. Particularly range rovers...
@@Hartley_Hare Correct, just some people have more capital to act on it.
When it comes to SUVs in cities I think a key way to fight against it is to fight for public transport and minimise where private drivers can go in cities
Also I think the guys who said climate change is a front for communism does have a grain of truth because I don't think there is a solution to climate change under capatalisim
@@hcws6687 then he agrees with Marx that capital is its own grave digger 😉
@@neodym5809 There’s literally no communist countries in existence right now. So how can they be bigger polluters if they’re inexistent?
@@neodym5809 Except East Germany wasn’t communist…
I've said this many times. More than half the UK population live in urban environments with many more living in suburban areas. Replacing 30,000,000 fossil cars with 30,000,000 electric cars is still a profligate use of resources when those resources could be used for making electric buses or liquified air buses that require fewer resources and the heat from condensing air put onto district heating systems.
We have only around 40,000 buses in the UK. Nobody who lives in a major town or city needs a car when that public transport can be replaced with buses and much of our roads freed up for cycling.
For people to claim they are concerned about climate or do their bit therefore they drive a car / SUV is nothing more than ignorance or even arrogance.
If we were to cease all fossil use immediately we would still have over 2 Celsius of warming by 2050. That means even if we cease all flying, driving cars, stop eating meat and dairy and turn off all fossil energy use we would still reach around 2.2 to 2.3 Celsius.
The idea that we have any carbon budget left is pure bunkum dreamed up by fossil economists.
So far we have only 'commitments' that will allegedly see us only reach 1.8 Celsius. This bunkum continues while the government still allows:
- several airport expansions,
- still permits around £30 billion of road building
- over £100 billion committed to HS2 that will not break even on emissions
- still permits more North Sea Continental licences and new drilling
- still fails to ban fracking once and for all
- has no plans to curb car sales nor ban SUVs
- has no plan for banning cars in all city in favour of public transport and active travel
- has little in the way of energy efficiency and insulating homes and buildings
- has no plans to ban pensions investing in fossil fuels
- has no plans to ban banks and investors investing in fossil fuels
- has no plans for a tax on meat, fish and dairy
- continues with 40 plus incinerators around the UK
- has no real plans on making dramatic cuts to plastic pollution
- has no plans for sustainable farming such as permaculture or regenerative farming.
Other countries are no different with oil consumption increasing year on year. We will likely shoot through the 2.2 to 2.3 Celsius mark before 2050. This has serious implications for global food supply which sees an average15% decline with each 1 Celsius temperature rise. This is not a problem for future generations it is a problem for current generations and it is a problem now.
It should be clear to the average person the government has effectively no plans on tackling climate change but rather seeks to shut down protest by criminalising it.
I agree with you 100%, except for the HS2 point. How are you expecting for people to move around with insufficient public transport? In pre covid times West Coast mainline was running at capacity, which means they cannot expand service. Considering that people will have to ditch cars and planes they’ll likely choose trains. That means that we’ll have to expand service, which is only possible with construction of a new rail line.
We will have to redesign our transport networks if we want to fight the climate. It is not possible to rely on victorian era infrastructure to do so. If anything there should be more new rail lines getting build to add capacity that will be needed in the future.
Liquified air busses?
I would contend that my SUV isn’t going to make a difference. Whilst first world pampered pets can pretend that it matters: the truth is there are 6 billion people in the developing world who haven’t got a clue about this kind of nonsense. Chelsea or Tottenham, Hackney or Harrow it makes no difference. Why would anyone be pretending otherwise?
@@JayJordanJuly your SUV makes little difference but there's more than one person with an SUV
@@grassytramtracks : The problem comes when people who do not like or use a thing; have power over those that do.
Non drivers (or those that drive hairdryers) legislating for V8, V10 & V12 drivers. The non business owner legislating for merchants. The female legislating for male after thousands of years not even having a vote. It's a recipe for disaster because there is always a backlash.
A third wave society (like us today; Rome or Carthage in history) is weakened by idiots with opinions. What people do not understand is that eventually those with the power of violence will rise up Then every part of our society is destroyed (through forcible invasion where the idiots don't fight) or absorption into a society which is 2nd stage and idiots opinions don't matter.
If we can acknowledge history and arrest this third wave stage... we might be able to save our society.
"I actually run a charity in South Africa" so my guilt is offset, fnar, fnar.
Just rich people cosplaying as gentlemen farmers.
What is it with the increased usage of the word 'cosplay'? In recent weeks I'm suddenly seeing/hearing its use perhaps 4 or 5 times a day. 3 weeks ago it was a word rarely used and now it's everywhere. Wonder what the trigger was?
@@chrisjames1924 It's the first time I've come across it to be honest. I expect I shall see it everywhere now! Lol
@@chrisjames1924 Language evolves, words come and go.
Great balanced film. The SUV is all about social signalling for the vast majority of drivers, especially in the U.K .
except for people that actually need the larger cars, right.
@@mattmarkus4868 noone needs it though..
@@suides4810 _no one needs it_ Do you know how ridiculous that sounds? Many people need it. I don't know the %, but it's not zero that's for sure. If you need to carry large items for your work, you NEED it. If you drive people around for a living, like uber, you NEED it. In the latter case the more people you carry the better it is for the environment!
There are a million examples you can think of if you have an imagination.
Nobody in central London needs an SUV.
@@_permanence ok so it's just central london where it's not needed, ok. Are you sure? What if you're a musician and you have to drive to gigs with lots of equipment? You can't do that in a honda civic. What do you suggest? I'm fairly certain there are musicians in central london.
I wonder how much that guy makes from running a charity to drive an SUV?
Probably a director on Big bucks
It's a power move to drive gas guzzlers in a zone where you have to pay extra for pouring more emissions into the air. Its ironic that these same people will pretend to be bothered by emissions targets in India or China, countries which have a per capita emissions rate that's much lower than the UK. I'm not anti SUV, I'm anti SUV in the middle of a conjested city. This isn't Australia.
as someone in australia i would bet money that at least 70% of suvs are in suburban/metro areas here anyway
@@rirkkadunz9453 which just further exemplifies how pathetically symbol orientated Londoners with gas guzzlers truly are.
He says he likes his SUV because it's big and he feels safe. Bollocks. He likes it because it's a status symbol.
@@rirkkadunz9453 don’t you have utes ? In Australia I mean they seem less stupid than a Range Rover driven by dummies at any rate
@@alundavies8402 yeah some utes but more and more suvs these days
This is so obviously a case of snob value so prominent in UK. It all boils down to, "my car's bigger than your car"! A mentality most of us left in the 'kindergarten' ! As my Gt. Grandmother used to say; "put a beggar on horseback and he'll ride to the devil" !
99% of people who live in cities absolutely do NOT need SUV's. It's insanity.
"Would you buy an SUV" Ash asks a guy. "No, because I have taste".
Fantastic mini documentary. Ash Sarkar is stunningly talented and well informed. How she keeps her cool dealing with dunderhead deniers is beyond me.
I appreciate your alliteration. 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
Because shes Literally a communist
@@dorsetbigcats6292 sure, but there’s a difference between healthy skepticism and claiming climate change is all a communist conspiracy.
@@Hartley_Hare If this planet is to be saved as a place for humans to live, it must be done by people who are young and idealistic. Most of the oldies like me are depressingly lacking in what’s required.
@@dorsetbigcats6292 Communist supporters like all western governments including the UK and America? ..oh and 95% of the scientists who have studied the issue….
"are you compensating for something sir?" lol i died
He should have just said "Yes." in a deadpan manner.
The moment one has to resort to such cheap, frankly idiotic innuendos to make a point, they have literally lost the argument.
I like Chris Harris' view on SUV's, specifically _sports_ SUV's. He has said the driver would better off with an estate as they drive better, handle better, and have as much or more boot space and seats. They are bought or in fact on HP or similar as status symbols.
Got me a 2003 VRS Estate, used it to pick up a Wardrobe once. 10/10 would recommend to a friend 🤝
They're probably more likely tory
Small sports coupes for the win 🙌 My dream car would be an M2 CS or a Porsche Cayman GT4 but sadly due to SUVs being so popular cars like these are barely sold. Small cars are fun cars. Love the Toyota GR Yaris too.
It's worth pointing out that when SUV owners/drivers say that they feel safer in them (despite the statistics to the contrary) they’re hardly ever referring to the danger posed by other vehicles but the supposed risk emanating from the lowly pedestrian/cyclist/transit rider that comprises the “public” which exists just outside of their bubble of individual wealth/security/power. The SUV driver’s self-appraisal is itself a source of anxiety that they feel compelled to insulate themselves from (the poor/public/masses/other) by virtue of externalizing the risks onto everyone else. This sort of anxiety feedback loop only gets stronger as those very SUVs make the public sphere less and less habitable.
Ash Sarkar is an exceptionally smart person but convincing climate deniers to the dangers of pending climate disasters is a thankless task even for her .
@ No , I am not but I am concerned about your state of mind .
@ Why are you assuming she isn't free thinking soul just because her political views don't correspond with yours.
@ No I am
@@Wackaz
I think you probably are too much of a salty boomer Marxist Leninist; an academia position if ever there was one.
@@Wackaz Being a low income class and only educated equivalent to A - Level I don't class myself as educated but I guess being educated gives you a certain confident mannerism which can be construed as arrogance . I find above mentioned people opinionated yet courteous I guess we can arrive at different conclusions from the same information . Unlike Ash Sarkar I am not a Communist nor do I believe wealth creation should be punished by very high taxation which discourages investment consequently less tax revenue for social welfare programs yet I would class my self socialist who believes a state must strive to provide a reasonable living standard health , education housing etc. for all its citizen as their inalienable right .
I can’t tell you how refreshing it is to see content like this! You keep completely to the facts but you deliver in a charming and engaging way. Much love to you Ash!
We are all doomed, mainly due to our psychology and the limited amount of scientific scepticism and critical thinking awareness in our society.
I liked the way you stayed friendly and composed when dealing with the "climate change is a communist conspiracy" loon. I would have been tempted to ask him if he also thinks the communist conspiracy is able to amend, edit both the raw climate data, and the 1000's of scientific papers that have been produced over the past 3 decades, that all point to the same conclusion regarding anthropogenic climate change.
He'd probably say the scientists are all communists and made the data up tbh
It depresses me how many people hold similar opinions to that guy
@@Marvin-dg8vj It's definitely a huge epistemic challenge if we accept the demands on the scope, quality and veracity of any anthropogenic caused climate change conclusion. The thing is scientists have established the bar for causal relationships, but Joe public denier rejects it, for unjustifiable and non-science based reasons.
@@Marvin-dg8vj ..and you shouldn't accept an argument from authority as the basis for a conclusion. It's scientific consensus you should be concerned with, which justifies the authority.
A great watch. The exchange with those climate change deniers was telling. "Are you compensating for something, sir?"... "No" very quickly in response, but his later justification there's more than a hint of compensating. Thanks, Ash Sarkar, for challenging those conceited fossil fuel enthusiasts, both politely and strongly.
In London, a lot of people get the tube and the bus and only rich people have Range Rovers, Porsches, BMWs, Mercs etc. The real SUV problem is in America where everyone's got them and they're even bigger and more gas guzzling.
To the guy (who was at least honest) who said that he felt safer in his Chelsea tractor, I ask who or what is he feeling safer against? Other SUVs?
he should just have spent the money on a tractor of equal value, then the other SUVs would no more pose a threat :P
One huge cruise ship emits the equivalent of the entirety of every single car in the EU per year, so by removing just one ship is like taking over 400,000,000 cars off the road.
@PGH Engineer Most of the lower decks are tanks and they usually refuel when they stop in a port. Cruise ships are ridiculously inefficient if i'm remembering correctly.
Stepping into the crossfire a bit. I’m watching this from America, and it just made me do a mental inventory of SUV ownership in my urban, non-outdoorsy middle class family. I’m still driving the Sedan I bought in college. But most people in my close family have at least one SUV, even if they don’t have families.
That's because they have a lot of shit to carry around. That and fashion, yes, of course. But everyone here is lumping anyone that owns an SUV into the latter category, which is stupid. Are we going to make a video on every aspect of mimetic behavior? Now that might be interesting simply because of the sheer volume of the results. And everyone here would be embarrassed.
Well yeah the average person in the US has an excessive carbon footprint but many people there just seem to justify it as a normal because everyone around them is doing it
@@_permanence or... because they provide a pragmatic value like needed space.
@@mattmarkus4868 it’s curious how the average US citizen or Chelsea resident has different needs than the rest of humanity.
I wish all Range Rover drivers a very pleasant *break down*
Why are you all so jealous and spiteful?
@@zoedaisy1499 Because SUV's are one the biggest single polluters & more off the road is a good thing? Why are such a shill for strangers?
@@zoedaisy1499 there's no jealousy. When people, clearly with the means to make a choice in the matter, deliberately go out of their way and choose the most damaging for the rest of us, do you expect us to react happily to it?
If my dog shat in front of your house and i didn't pick it up, would you be happy?
@@PilliamWilliam how do you know that person doesn’t do a load of charity, doesn’t contribute a load of money to green emission offsetting sites, doesn’t pay a load of taxes to keep your negative freeloading ass in the give me everything for free game! You just see a car you’ll never be able to get and you see red that’s outright hardcore jealous and spite right there
@@zoedaisy1499 Ironic, because unlike 90% of Range drivers I actually own my vehicle and not some finance company
People who say they drive SUV's because they feel safe are talking rubbish.They drive SUV's mainly as a status symbol. It's also a herd thing.Same clothes.Same cars.Same areas.
True, they're primarily a status symbol for urban dwellers.
It's hilarious when, in the town I live in, the worst drivers are often the school-run mums in their SUVs.
Somehow don't believe safety is your priority when you're driving like a nutter w your kids in the back
“I’m doing my bit”. Amazingly you can do a job that assists society and carry out actions in your home life that assists society. I’m sure the people he is “helping “ in South Africa are please to know the twit is doing what he can outside work to make their country harder to live in.
Charity is a business too. Wanna bet on who paid for the SUV he's driving?
His charity is 100% used as a method for tax evasion.
great reporting ! sadly it’s not just rich people that buy SUVs anymore - even less well off people are buying them in droves, mostly bc they’re tricked into thinking SUVs are more safe, more comfortable and even more efficient
I'm not convinced most people buy them because they genuinely think they're better or more appropriate for their situation - it's primarily around social status. Unfortunately the notion of 'flashy car = successful, happy person' is far too embedded in our culture.
If you want to talk to the vile sort of people who drive SUVs, go to a petrol station forecourt. They visit them a lot!
Maybe the solution is to limit petrol sales to 5L within the M25.
@@davidlazarus67 Tnat would just cause massive queues at petrol stations and mor profit for the oil companies. The M25 is a vast area and many petrol stations outside of it are more expensive.
@@PORRRIDGE_GUN 5L would be fine for many London residents especially if they use public transport.
I love that Asian guy in the suit. I don't think I'd necessarily agree with him on everything, but he's eloquent and charismatic and would be interesting to hear more of his views. He should have his own podcast.
@@vipeton.8927 Yes, true. But I don't need to surround myself with only those that I agree with. In any case, politics always involves compromise to varying degrees.
@@vipeton.8927 Bold of you to call me a libertarian haha
Ash Sarkar is a national treasure
We need to move sharply away from cars in general dominating our urban landscape. I would prefer improved pedestrianisation, cycling infrastructure, and mass public transport by a LONG way
but that takes government investment and the last few government's the UK has had are allergic to investing in anything that doesn't line their own pockets. Or weapons. Or both.
How you going to improve pedestrianisation, give everyone heelies?
@@jamesg1769 there are plenty of ways to make towns and cities more pedestrian friendly; have more streets be pedestrian only, either full or part-time; have more parks and public squares; reduce traffic speed; reduce the number of cars on the road by designing mixed use, walkable urban environments and providing good quality public transport; increase pedestrian safety etc.
Agreed
@@robertwinslade3104 these are all great but for various reasons most of these ideas are not practical - they definitely SHOULD be done, but they can't be done mostly due to how council funding is structured and how transport funding is structured. What you're saying is absolutely NOT wrong but when a council has a funding shortfall and needs more citizens within its area to tax and try to break even, they can't set land aside for parks and padestrianisation, instead they have to build more houses. And this is just one aspect of those you list; maybe NM can do a video about why each of these topics are not possible without distinct and difficult financial strucutral overhauls.... which as I mention above, government(S) simply won't do.
My favourite communist was once labelled a hypocrite for owning and driving a Porsche. He replied, “My vision of communism is that everyone gets a Porsche“.
I like champagne
Socialist Utility Vehicle
Which communist are you referring to?
This is really interesting. 'The bigger the better' and 'the bigger the safer' is predictable and unimaginative but I realise now I see it's a thing. As an anxious, double amputee (lost my legs in a vehicle accident) who is naturally very short I really do feel like I am safer because I can see more of the road. I hadn't considered that that's why I chose a Hybrid SUV for my motability vehicle on top of the size of the boot for my wheelchair.
Well lots of people with disabilities or mobility issues choose crossovers/SUVs because they are easier to get in and out of. There's nothing wrong with needing a tall vehicle and there are lots of legitimate reasons to own one.
@@markr2616 I just bought a second hand small/crossover SUV for exactly that reason. It is so much better than my hatchback and I’m no longer avoiding going out because of the pain it will cause. My mum also has one and before my grandmother went into aged care, my mum and auntie were both caring for her at home. She was able to get in and out of Mum’s car, but not my auntie’s which was a Barina. It makes a big difference. Having said that, I think a big Range Rover type thing is overkill and if you need a step to get into it that means it’s too big, but certainly the smaller SUVs are very necessary for many people. If governments do somehow make it harder for people to buy SUVs, they really need to split them into 2 categories and not punish the people who genuinely need a taller car.
I haven’t been out in mine often enough yet to really experience feeling safer due to being up higher. Once I’m used to the size I’m sure I’ll appreciate that though. The hatchback wasn’t too bad around town but on the highway it could get quite scary at times. Actually the dealer delivered my new car to me and then drove my hatchback that I traded in home, and when I spoke to him the next day he said he got a bit nervous at one point when there was a truck on either side of him. I know the feeling well 😂😂 If I did regular highway trips I probably would’ve upgraded sooner.
@@moniquem783 True. I also think a lot of the problem around this dialogue on "SUVs" Is that a lot of people on the left are poorly educated on the subject of cars, making the discussion open to ridicule from the right. A Ford KuGa bought on motobility is not an "SUV" for the same reason a Mitsubisi L200 bought by a fisherman isn't an "SUV" as many imagine it, no matterwhat the companysays in the brochure. A crossover isn't meant to go off road and a pickup truck isn't meant to be sporty or luxurious. When Puritans start decrying either group they create opposition where they could be creating allies. The lefts ostracisation of the old, the disabled and working rural communities is the stupidist shot to the foot I have ever seen.
@@markr2616 interesting thought. That really hadn’t occurred to me. I had just thought they were so focused on the goal of reducing emissions that they simply don’t stop and think that there are people out there who have needs other than what they have. Kinda like the car versions of vegans saying that nobody needs to eat meat, whereas I know from experience that if I don’t, my fatigue levels increase dramatically. It doesn’t work for everyone. But they don’t or won’t see that. Like they’re not seeing that different people have different needs for cars, whether that be due to mobility issues or job requirements.
I wonder though, is it a lack of education or a lack of common sense? I was never “educated” about cars. My dad was a bit of a car buff though so perhaps I picked up a lot from just being around him, but he never really taught me. To me it’s just common sense that a fisherman that needs to tow his boat needs a big car, and a tradie that needs to lug around his tools and pick up building supplies that are awkwardly large needs a ute/pickup. I’m in Australia and if we have the models you mentioned they are called something different, but I can picture what they must be based on the task they do. It’s pretty much common sense. And just for fun I looked them up. Yep, that’s what I pictured.
Having said all of that, a Land Rover in the city is unnecessary. Where it gets tricky though is if the city slicker goes off road once or twice a year in that Land Rover, or they have a big caravan that they tow to a holiday spot every summer. Then they have a need for that SUV. Perhaps the very rich could afford to also buy a hatchback for city driving, but the average person can’t afford to buy and maintain 2 cars just to save some emissions.
I don’t think limiting people from buying a certain type of car is the solution. I think the solution is in changing all vehicles to zero emissions. Land Rovers have an electric range now. Plug in hybrid and all electric. Insanely expensive, but available. Governments need to make it cost effective to buy an electric car, provide the infrastructure for charging but also make sure the electricity grid can handle charging all of these cars and make sure that enough green energy is being produced so you don’t end up burning coal to charge your car (a problem here in Australia). They need to change the narrative so electric cars are the smarter choice for pretty much everyone, not just environmentalists. They also need to make it worthwhile for car companies making electric cars to send them to each country, another problem in Australia. I looked at electric cars before I bought my small SUV and there wasn’t one in the country that was the right height for me, had enough range to enable me to drive from the country into town and back without a charge stop, and was affordable. And that didn’t have a waiting list of a year or longer, as I was in pain. So I bought my second hand diesel SUV and my next car will be electric. Australia has far less options of EVs than the UK though. We are way behind. There’s some really exciting stuff happening with battery technology though, and I do think all electric cars will be the solution.
@@markr2616 Yes there is a lack of understanding. 'SUVs are safer' or 'SUVs are more dangerous' both are wrong. Looking at safety of vehicle categories is much less useful than looking at individual vehicle models. You look at the Euro NCAP rating for the specific year of the specific model, then you look at the year the safety test was conducted - as safety standards become stricter over time - that's how you find out safety objectively.
Good example, Land Rover Defender. The old ones are death traps. No crumple zones, no airbags, no pretensioners etc. The new ones, love them or hate them, have a 5 star safety rating.
Funny thing is, in my area where I live you do not need an SUV. But there are so many. I think for some people there a status symbol because not everyone who has got one is rich.
or really almost anywhere unless you run a farm and you need a proper off-road capability. 30 years ago, the flashy luxury large SUVs barely existed, and people in rural areas managed, and many still do.
@PGH Engineer I guess it depends on what you value spending your money on isn't it. I for one don't really care about cars so I can't say much about it or how others choose to spend their money. I guess sometimes it just seems out of place that's all, I'm being a judgemental bastard! 😅
@PGH Engineer Sounds like your old friends aren't missing out on much judging by the dozens of unhinged replies you've left on this video.
To be fair, alot of modern SUVs are quite economical
Apparently charities, regardless of the vagueness of their work, are all carbon negative.
Petition to name this series/segment 'Asks Sarkar'
Nice piece Ash! :) More stuff like this please Novara Media!
This issue is so deep and potentially conflated that it's difficult to have a real world discussion with many people. It would take literally hours of forced education.
Those people driving around in SUVs in London do so because they can. They have the money so they can. Have money = No consequences. I drive a low emission car 80g c02, £0 tax per year, and yet, London Mayor says I have to pay a ULEZ pollution charge to visit my childhood area now because the car is categorized as euro 5, not euro 6. Money is a huge consideration so, I never go. I'm furious with the policy for alienating and targetting me directly. They target the incorrect groups, do NOTHING about an issue they pretend to care about. They are simply after a reason to manufacture consent to create a situation where they are allowed to extract the contents of your wallet. Those who do the majority of polluting are by and large still allowed to. Disaster capitalism in a nutshell.
My issue with this video is that pointing at cars in context to the destruction of the environment is rather smug, annoying and not spotlighting the right issue. Projecting the destruction of the environment onto normal everyday citizens even though all the research and evidence points to large globalist entities being the cause will score you no points in the hearts of the people and certainly not me. Yes it would be better for the air quality if there were less SUVs, but those people are simply allowed to do so. If you want to see the true villain, look up.
Doing vox populi of randos from the street will illuminate nothing. That dude at 13:00 starts talking nonsense about the communist global agenda. Guy is hooked on information equivalent of poison and with a smile on his face proclaims his "truth". Take that guy, imagine crowds of people just like him hooked on poisoned information wells. That's the real issue. Year in year out, the UK elects disaster capitalists who manufacture parasitic policies and systems to cause disasters to profit from. How are we going to change anything when people walk around talking utter nonsense and virtue signalling, and then when they go to the polls they vote in some right-winger who enables the cycle of destruction on the environment every fucking election cycle.
Loved the earrings.
I’m about to buy my first new car, and it’s an SUV, however, it’s electric and two wheel drive. I would rather an MPV but there aren’t any electric ones in the UK at the moment, I’m trying to go electric as quick as I can and this is what I can afford. I’ve already got solar panels and a power wall. As I see it, if the government aren’t going to do it, it’s the obligation of those that can afford it decarbonise first to kickstart manufacturing to bring down the cost for others.
Love that guy's answer to her question would you buy an SUV? No because I have taste 🤣
SUVs are not the problem. Rich people are.
Not all of us are bad! Some of us got rich to be able to help more people with bigger charitable donations.
I disagree
The kind of people who drive them in cities are often not very good drivers, which may account for the higher fatality rate.
Higher fatality rate is typically down to the fact that an SUV is more likely to roll than a conventional car. Also, again due to them being higher off the road with more ground clearance, pedestrians involved in impacts with SUVs are more likely to suffer life threatening injuries because they’re more likely to receive impacts higher up on the body and greater force of impacts (SUVs typically having significantly more mass than a regular car f=ma2)
@@arghjayem That's the mechanics of fatalities, I agree, but all accidents come down the failure of the nut behind the steering wheel.
Brilliant work Ash
Thank you 🙏🏻
Btw, it's Veganuary.
Time to skip the burgers :)
Brilliant, as always. Funny, energetic, visually dynamic,, but also downright analytical. Thanks, Ash!
This is all about leasing cars. These people don't own the SUV it's £300 a month. If they had to pay £50,000 up front that would solve the problem.
Yeh job done.
It gets another SUV on to the road though. We have to look at what happens to them when that lease ends. Road Tax is high, but what about used vehicle exports???
I can remember a time when the primary criteria for which car to get was economy. Sure, people still chose other cars but there was a time when the best seller was a Mini Metro. Yes, this was in a time of economic chaos (not so different to today) but that was one of the main drivers for car choice. Affluence is what has led to the SUV becoming so popular. If people couldn't afford to feed them, they wouldn't be sold.
70% of car journeys are under 2 miles, 80% are under 5 miles! ✊🏽🌎🌻
SUVs make sense if you live in Muirkirk or Llanberis, but not in London.
Electric cars are problematic as well because of damage done to countries where battery materials are extracted. Pollution in DR of Congo because of this is devastating.
Just wait a little… soon EV makers like Tesla will be recycling close to 100% of battery materials
Gullible people think futurism will save the world, it'll just doom it in new ways. Cars and the infrastructure built for them waste an immense amount of space. Li batteries are unsustainable. We already have the means to fix transport based emissions: cycling and public transit such as trains or buses. But noooo, they're not futuristic! I love my Elon Musk meme daddy! People are so gullible it's sad. Fuck cars.
@@mrrazfromnz Why don’t we just go back to the Middle Ages?
@@_permanence As I expected. You're presented with a much more efficient system that causes far fewer problems and you turn your nose up at it because it doesn't fit the "sci fi future" aesthetic that you gawk over every day like a little child who doesn't understand the world.
@@mrrazfromnz that’s a lot of assumptions right there. I don’t own a car as I don’t need one for my lifestyle. I take public transport and cycle everywhere in the city where I live, so I dislike cars much more than the average person as they’re dangerous to me and polluting. But I’m a realist and I know cars are not going anywhere soon. I would at least have electric ones so I’m not chocked to an early death on diesel fumes, and if they get self driving working then that takes bad drivers out of the equation less likely to run me over. Keep spreading your online hate though, it’s really wonderful xx
more pieces like this!!! great work
I would argue that nobody should have an SUV.
Part of the problem though is that there is nothing else you can drive anymore! The only new cars I see on the road are SUVs, and the only non-SUVs are over 10 years old!
I wasn't the only one to read "Hot To Blow Up A Pipeline" over Christmas it seems!
Ban engines over certain size from cities, the idea you need 3l engine idling away next to a child's lungs is absurd.
It's not the engine size per see. It's the size of the car. Modern engines idle a lot less already, with smart computers and stop-start system. And a good new engine, even big can still run very efficiently.
To reduce emissions, you need to reduce friction of the car. So reduce weights, improve aerodynamic shapes, smaller tires and reduce wind catching height.
SUVs do the opposite, on purpose. Driving an SUVs is holding up your middle finger to society.
I like my fast car but all these cars in londons 20mph zone as just posers
most importantly, they tacky af
I’m a San Francisco native, lived in London during law school - and you definitely don’t need an SUV in London. Other parts of the UK? Reasonable. But London? Heck no.
Let’s face it, most SUVs could actually be replace by a bike/cargo bike in London, rather then just another car.
best climate reporting I've seen in ages
We need to make electric cars more affordable, as the equivalent car using fossil fuels are still cheaper.
Govt also need to help drive down the cost of heat pumps. I know they're coming down, but not fast enough to be affordable to lower income families
Electric cars may be improving, but our electricity distribution network certainly is not, heat pumps fitted on older leaky houses will not be able to produce enough heat to heat them, they are more suited to new built, highly insulated sealed homes.
I live in the US. Often I cant find my little hatchback in a parking lot among the SUVs and giant pick-ups.
More please. The smartly dressed guy outside the Boss shop was really good
I lived in London till my late thirties and I never saw the need for a car, I used my bike for shopping, public transport for work and leisure. However, that’s simply not practical now that I have moved to a rural setting.
I own an SUV now, the reason? I live in a small village, I live on an unmade road (a dirt and gravel track) I have two kids and dogs and a small hatchback simply isn’t big enough for us. Try putting two child seats in a hatchback, a buggy and two dogs, honestly it’s not possible.
Do I worry about the environment? 100%, I compost, grow my own food where possible, I’ve got a renewable energy tariff, I recycle, I’m about to invest in a bike so that I can cut down on the use of my car, I don’t use single use plastic and my next car will be electric. In short I try, and I’d 100% vote for any party proposing to do more to help our environment even if that means my spending more money on taxes etc.
But for now I need an SUV / Estate sized car to live a realistic lifestyle, my local bus runs 6 times a day. And it makes little economic sense to increase that capacity because they’re simply isn’t the demand for it.
As for living in London and driving an SUV, it’s patently ludicrous, any journey in a car in London can be done quicker by bike or public transport, even if you did drive the cost would be prohibitive to the point it makes little financial sense.
Living up a dirt track isn't a reason to get an SUV.
How do I know this? Because I've lived up dirt tracks my whole 53 years.
I too own an old 4×4. Why?
Because I tow things across muddy fields. But I only use it for such times. The rest of the time we use an old Volvo. Half the engine size but still runs happily up the dirt track.
Move back to London.
Doing the lord’s work here Ash
Rich people make me laugh with how mediocre they are about everything, yet continue to believe that they are truly profound...
It's the same here in Cape Town
Camp's Bay was a mess this December.
Simple solution is post code based road tax charges - that way SUVs in Chelsea (and other unsuitable locations) could be made unviable. It could be done in a subtle way to allow people to make the choice. Start with the current road tax but start a multiplying raise every year - say 25%.
Another approach is to increase sytemmatically the number of parking spaces restricted to electric vehicles. Two positive consequences - reduction of SUVs and other petrol cars parked on the streets and in car parks and an increase in public infrastructure making eVs more desirable. Its one thing that has worked in Norway. It would also gradually have the effect of reducing demand for petrol fuel closing petrol stations and making petrol car ownership less desirable.
Petrol taxation could also be better targeted. I live in a rural area but generally our fuel costs are considerably higher than in town centres. The big difference is the destruction of rural public transport means we have to use cars but city centres have the best public transport but lowest fuel costs. It makes no sense. Nobody living in central London really needs a car, it makes more sense to hire on the occasions where they leave London. Most of my London based friends do this as standard.
it might end up though with vehicles that are the worst in fuel economy and emissions, if the higher VED were restricted to certain urban areas, end up second hand in poorer rural areas, making smaller towns face higher emissions levels
@PGH Engineer erm by reducing parking spaces and ultimately fuel for gas guzzlers it stops everyone.
Since you are happy to be snide about it what is your solution? FWIW the poor can't afford them now so it won't really affect them.
Great question 👌 For the same reason that some people don't wear masks: it's all about their own safety, appearances and desires. At least that's a hypothesis. And what accidents are concerned, you are likely to have big egos controlling big cars feeling very confident. I hypothesize that that has a greater influence on accidents than the SUVs themselves.
They're not called "Chelsea Tractors" around where I live for nothing.. We have enough problems with the real thing .😊
“No because I have taste…” 😂 Well done, sir
"You're 11% more likely to die in an SUV than any other kind of car" - Completely, categorically false. In general bigger vehicles have *better* survival rates in accidents, SUVs being no exception. Numerous studies in the US have shown this. You are correct that SUVs do tend to kill pedestrians at a higher rate per collision (as high at 2x !!). The overall effect on road deaths of reducing typical vehicle size would probably be neutral - slightly more vehicle occupant deaths, slightly fewer pedestrian deaths. To me this seems right and fair - a vehicle occupant choses to occupy a vehicle. A pedestrian does not choose to have to dodge 2 tonne lumps of metal just to walk places.
11% not 11 times. Best to listen to the thing you quote before you bash it, can make you look a bit daft.
@@hwood8001 you're right I'd missed that *but* it doesn't change my overall point. She is incorrect to state that SUVs have a higher death rate in collisions - the opposite is true.
@@henryrolt3747 „SUVs are a paradox: while many people buy them to feel safer, they are statistically less safe than regular cars, both for those inside and those outside the vehicle. A person is 11% more likely to die in a crash inside an SUV than a regular saloon. Studies show they lull drivers into a false sense of security, encouraging them to take greater risks. Their height makes them twice as likely to roll in crashes and twice as likely to kill pedestrians by inflicting greater upper body and head injuries“ via The Guardian
Any thoughts?
@@xoranginho I don't know where this 11% number comes from, but every major credible study has found higher accident survival rates in SUVs.
@@henryrolt3747 it comes from the NYT. show me those sources them, I am not married to that position, just stating what I have read (from multiple sources now).
Oh gawd, she’s worried for her son and I’m panicking for my grandchildren. I do drive a Kuga but purely because I can get in it with my disabilities, my mobility scooter and hoist fit in the back and it has an automatic boot. My hemiparuplegic wife can also drive it with a flip pedal accelerator, automatic light and wipers and for her paralysis heated seats. All her other controls are on her left hand side (thank you Ford). It’s only gone 4 thousand miles in 2.5 years and most of those are since we’ve gone down to one car.
I think this is a really good point - there is a real lack of good cars big enough to hold things like mobility scooters, wheelchairs and other similar equipment. I think a lot of car companies need to do better to provide larger (or importantly, taller) vehicles that work well for people who need them, whilst also not being hideous and horrible to drive!
KuGa isn't an SUV. It's a crossover. It's just a normal car wearing the make-up and dress of an SUV. A lot of people need a car where you can sit upright. Don't apologise for it.
Rlly excellent discussion at the end that despite the necessity of corporations needing to be changed, but also that individual/societal change shouldn't be dismissed
I lived in Chelsea in the 90s. I walked to school, and got the tube further afield.
I’m a vegan, composting, recycling, make do and mend type with aviophobia, a hybrid MPV who has my soles replaced often, I walk a lot….!
So, Ash recommending the next step for me, keying SUVs? _Just a little joke… they hope!_
No next step is not to drive an SUV.
@@1inchPunchBowl ha so it is, I missed the title! And after not doing that, 1inch, what’s next?
Do not key my Lamborghini SUV, give me your number so we can talk it through before you attempt this unlawful behaviour
It's so you know who the rich people are.
No, it is people pretending to be rich.
At the end of the day we live in a free society, people have the choice to drive whatever they like. People in rural areas drive Porsches so why shouldnt people in cities drive 'Chelsea Tractors' ?
New SUV's meet all the stipulated Euro emission requirements so they are no more harmful than any other car, in fact many of the latest models are Hybrid, which is a good thing and short, low speed, city journeys are where electric really wins, they also have to pay a hefty premium on their road tax because they are 4x4.
No wonder the Labour party has a 'Nanny State' image with a piece like this. If people choose to drive these cars and pay all the premiums that come with them because it makes them feel good / safe / important let them get on with it.
Because by driving a car like that they are lowering the quality of life for many others. Fuck the free market, if what you're doing harms others then you shouldn't be doing it.
@@max3446 how is driving a hybrid SUV harming others ? Why no whinging about all the Mercedes Sprinter vans being driven round our towns & cities belching out Diesel fumes ? That are actually harming people.
The silence is deafening
@@neilmccarty944 All of what you just mentioned are increasing unsustainable in the modern world due to population increase and environmental factors (including electric cars) - so no, I'm not just singling out 4x4 type cars.
"Look at ME, I've got more money than sense".
A single driver driving a SUV is not the problem. The 16 largest container ships pollute more than every car on earth COMBINED. This video is just pointless, hating on random people
Divide & conquer
We need container ships. Karen doesn't need a tank
@@cashw55 Then make the ships battery powered! It is just a myth that it is not possible. Just do the calculations...
@Jim J I think you ment to reply to Janemba
No because I have taste. That should be in the title. SUVs are pathetic.
It’s purely a status symbol. SUV = ‘Swank Tank’.
2:16 🤣 i could imagine him getting a positive terminal cancer diagnosis
and he say doctor your wrong!! cancer's not real 🤣
Gosh, I’d love to know the name of the South African charity that git runs. ‘I do my bit’, ffs! Unfortunately I do need my SUV, the again I need it for work in my operational area along the Zambia/Angola border. Mostly there are no real roads where I have to drive. In “normal life” I ride a bicycle, when in the UK I use the bus and/or train. I don’t see the need to rent a car.
Honestly! What a knob
Ash Askar, the self proclaimed communist, would go to a communist country and complain about everyone driving SUV's, but nobody in those countries can afford one. hey, at least they're all equal like she wants. equally broke..
"Size! Are you trying to make up for something?" Wish he had made equally curt sexist remark on her!
I'm a car enthusiast and I despise SUVs so much, since their popularity from the 90s they've been an absolute problem and bought by idiots needing to compensate for what they don't have. Also alot of SUV drivers lack self-awareness and are usually dangerous on the road
for older folk like my dad, getting into smaller cars is an issue for his hips and knees, so he has little to no option than to have an suv as they’re easier for him to get in and out of. i do agree however that suvs tend to be status symbols rather than a vehicle, as the gentleman in the video was implying about the size.
How did people survive before SUVs
Hi Ash, interesting piece and you were so close to a more worth while pursuit when you mention your meat burger consumption.
"Cows, pigs and other farm livestock in Europe are producing more greenhouse gases every year than all of the bloc’s cars and vans put together, when the impact of their feed is taken into account, according to a new analysis by Greenpeace." September 2020 article in the Guardian.
While I agree that focus on every issue is important and moving to electric cars is a vital change to get away from fossil fuels, there is truth (undeniably and unwelcomely) that everyone is able to take control now and change their dietary habits.
As we celebrate Veganuary throughout January (a month where many people pledge to eat vegan for a whole month and evaluate their lifestyle), I encourage anyone who cares about their impact and climate change to do their own research on veganism and with an open mind see what changes they can make right now to combat climate change, treat animals with kindness and respect, and improve their own health
🍃
It’s a shame veganuary is during January we’re all local fruit and veg is out of season meaning it’s imported from all over the world. Not convinced it’s the answer would rather support regenerative agriculture in the uk.
@PGH Engineer Well quinoa is already grown in the UK so not sure what point you're trying to make.
@PGH Engineer Hill farming (land that couldn't be used for human crops) is a small part of animal agriculture the biggest problems are the flat lands used for factory farming and feed crop. This example does very little to undermine the argument. According to World Animal Protection 70% of UK animals are raised on factory farms.
It's not an either or situation - at this point to have any chance of avoiding climate disaster we need to reduce meat consummation *and* cars.
Sadly she doesn't address, that 1.) electric vehicles are definitely not a solution either, as long the electricity ist most generated by fossil fuels.2.) AND it is almost impossible to create a sufficient electric grid to be able to supply enough electricity if all existing cars would be replaced by electric cars, the mount of electricity needed is enormous 3.) Further electric vehicles create a lot of waste in production, talking that into consideration, the carbon footprint auf electric vehicles is rather high. 4.) Free and well-designed public transport, banning private cars in the city centers, and somehow reduced consumption is the only thing that could help
Would you ever buy an SUV? “No, because I have taste”- not gonna lie, he won me over with that one haha