6 ms·

Which for the most part is true. Outside farming and certain professionals nobody really needs a truck, including families with kids (which e.g. in Europe mana

Which for the most part is true. Outside farming and certain professionals nobody really needs a truck, including families with kids (which e.g. in Europe manage to get just fine with a regular car, not even a SUV).

roenxi 2y ago
As far as I recall the most expensive two purchases a family makes are the house and car. So while nobody needs a truck, that statistic might reflect the relatively lower disposable incomes in the EU. Trucks could plausibly be the better mode of human transport but the EU doesn't quite have the finances to make it happen. I don't think we can be confident that social signalling is the major factor here.
- pieresqi 2y ago
  [dead]
- jltsiren 2y ago
  I think the biggest reason is that trucks are less practical in Europe. European streets are often narrower and parking spaces smaller. Many trucks that are popular in the US are so heavy that you may not be allowed to drive them with a standard license. You need a truck license, which may be valid only for a few years and have stricter standards. And due to the climate, you are more likely to have to protect the cargo from the elements, which shifts the balance towards vans. But vans are not very convenient in daily use.
- coldtea 2y ago
  >So while nobody needs a truck, that statistic might reflect the relatively lower disposable incomes in the EU Nah, people with higher disposable incomes don't buy trucks either. Not to mention in the US tons of regular working class people buy tracks, when people with 2x to 10x their income in Europe don't. >Trucks could plausibly be the better mode of human transport but the EU doesn't quite have the finances to make it happen. LOL, what people would believe!
  - roenxi 2y ago
    > Nah, people with higher disposable incomes don't buy trucks either. Sorry I've missed a step. In your first comment I thought you meant buying a truck was people status signalling that they were affluent. If you don't think that, what do you think is being signalled?
    - darthrupert 2y ago
      That they do real work?
      - coldtea 2y ago
        We already excluded that group: "Outside farming and certain professionals nobody really needs a truck"
    - coldtea 2y ago
      Above I'm answering to the propose explanation that basically "Europeans don't buy them because they can't afford them", so my comment should be read as: "nah, it's not that, as people with higher disposable incomes *in the EU* don't buy such trucks either". I just left out the "in the EU" there, to be implied by the context I was replying to. That said, I didn't mean to imply that "buying a truck was people status signalling that they were affluent" in the US. Just that they think (or made to think) they need it, and that they culturally like the extravaganza - same way many in the US think they need bigger cars and sneer at European sized cars.
osigurdson 2y ago
Maybe they just like it. The assumption seems to be that if they didn't have anyone to impress they would buy a Honda Fit because it is better (by some definition of better). Even if they are just buying it to impress people, who cares? Let them do what they want.
- chimpanzee 2y ago
  > if they are just buying it to impress people, who cares? The buyer cares. And if the buying is detrimental to more than the buyer himself (eg wastes resources, harms the environment, overtaxes infrastructure), then it makes sense for others to let that buyer know how they actually feel. But I agree with your suggestion that it is entirely possible for a truck buyer to have reasons other than those supposed by the author.
  - osigurdson 2y ago
    You seem to suggest that the truck buyer is somehow causing you / others harm. By what metric?
    - kitkat_new 2y ago
      use of limited resources, air pollution, noise, higher infrastructure cost, global warming, more kills in traffic
      - osigurdson 2y ago
        So fine then with a huge, shiny, lifted F-350 that the owner drives 5km once per week to the ice cream shop? Or is your largest issue perhaps "redneck culture"?
        coldtea 2y ago
        Why would he be fine with a "huge, shiny, lifted F-350 that the owner drives 5km once per week to the ice cream shop"? Didn't he already explained he's against buying of trucks when there's no real need?
oooyay 2y ago
I'm a software engineer and I have a Tacoma. I've found it useful for hauling things to and from lumber stores (I also do wood working and most of my own house projects). It was incredibly useful during PNW winters when it snowed or iced over roads completely; one was so bad my partner got stranded on our metro train and I had to go get her. Going across the mountains in my truck has also been quite nice compared to when I had a hybrid sedan. The alternative is that for every delivery of goods I would need to pay an $80 fee (and I do these with pretty regular frequency; that's about 2x what it takes to fill up my tank). We'd need to be more careful of not going out during storms or when there's even moderate risk of winter storms. I would need to plan trips across the mountains much more in advance. There's a lot of other things that'd probably change too, including how we do road trips. I'm a bit judgy of people who have a truck that clearly don't do truck things with it, but of all my friends that have trucks I don't know anyone who isn't. All that to say, I roll my eyes when I see statements trying to steelman who should morally own a truck.
- osigurdson 2y ago
  I think most people are just reacting to "redneck" culture. I don't really like it either, but I think people should be able to do what they want. Including buying a truck they don't need or taking an unneeded trip to Paris to visit museums and art galleries.
  - oooyay 2y ago
    From my perspective, that's a good chunk of where this comes from. I wish people would just say that if that's the case.
  - kjeetgill 2y ago
    I'm not sure that's the case. I don't think people are responding to the "redneck in a pick-up" stereotypes as much as that "pavement princess" owner trying to "cosplay" truck culture stereotypes. Sidenote - I'm finding my vocabulary pretty lacking now that so much stereotyping is done in images and memes.
- brailsafe 2y ago
Slava_Propanei 2y ago
[dead]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
jaredhallen 2y ago
The world is a big place with billions of people each living their own unique life. Only one of those is yours. If you find no use for a truck, then by all means don't own one.
seoulmetro 2y ago
You're right. People get upset if you mention that the main use (percentage) of cars or houses is about status. People get upset at such blunt truths because it makes people look stupid, and we are, we humans are very stupid.
- osigurdson 2y ago
  >> we humans are very stupid Translation: "I am smarter than other humans"
  - seoulmetro 2y ago
    Last time I checked I was human too...
torginus 2y ago
Yup, 100% true. And anyway, US trucks are just a peculiar form of luxury car. Case in point the Toyota Hilux, which is Toyota's famously sturdy workhorse truck, is not even sold in the US. Instead they have the Tacoma, an entirely different construction. It is built around consumer comfort features and impressive specs instead of being rugged, easy to repair and inexpensive. Anecdotally the Tacoma is huge, and horrible off-road. There are other tradeoffs, like softer suspension, which you want in a passenger car for comfort, but not in a vehicle used for hauling and going on difficult terrain.
- five_lights 2y ago
  >US trucks are just a peculiar form of luxury car No, not really. You can get one fully loaded, or get a bare bones work truck. Thing is there are no "luxury" makes for trucks, but more often there are trims of different models. A F-150 Raptor is certainly a luxury model for status signaling (or just to have the nicer thing for those who can afford it). The XL Model is far from a luxury vehicle. https://www.ford.com/trucks/f150/models/ https://www.ford.com/trucks/f150/models/
five_lights 2y ago
I think this is an area that highlights one of the huge differences between Europe and the US that isn't obvious at first to most Europeans. Outside of commercial messaging that you may see in TV show, or Country Music vehicle, it's not that common for people who have a truck to use it as a status symbol any differently than they would with a car. In practice, a lot of working age Men own a light duty pickup (f-150, Silverado 1500 or smaller types like the Ranger or Colorado) when you get outside of the Cities for the utility. It's basically needed if you live in the country and want to be self-sufficient. While you may see these on a farm, more than likely a farmer would need something more heavy duty to pull anything serious. People with Boats can usually get away with hauling it with a light duty truck, whereas people with RV's usually will have something more heavy duty. They are far from status symbols, and often people will have old trucks (beaters) that are paid off and will use when it's practical.

roenxi 2y ago

As far as I recall the most expensive two purchases a family makes are the house and car. So while nobody needs a truck, that statistic might reflect the relatively lower disposable incomes in the EU. Trucks could plausibly be the better mode of human transport but the EU doesn't quite have the finances to make it happen. I don't think we can be confident that social signalling is the major factor here.

pieresqi 2y ago
[dead]
jltsiren 2y ago
I think the biggest reason is that trucks are less practical in Europe. European streets are often narrower and parking spaces smaller. Many trucks that are popular in the US are so heavy that you may not be allowed to drive them with a standard license. You need a truck license, which may be valid only for a few years and have stricter standards. And due to the climate, you are more likely to have to protect the cargo from the elements, which shifts the balance towards vans. But vans are not very convenient in daily use.
coldtea 2y ago
>So while nobody needs a truck, that statistic might reflect the relatively lower disposable incomes in the EU Nah, people with higher disposable incomes don't buy trucks either. Not to mention in the US tons of regular working class people buy tracks, when people with 2x to 10x their income in Europe don't. >Trucks could plausibly be the better mode of human transport but the EU doesn't quite have the finances to make it happen. LOL, what people would believe!
- roenxi 2y ago
  > Nah, people with higher disposable incomes don't buy trucks either. Sorry I've missed a step. In your first comment I thought you meant buying a truck was people status signalling that they were affluent. If you don't think that, what do you think is being signalled?
  - darthrupert 2y ago
    That they do real work?
    - coldtea 2y ago
      We already excluded that group: "Outside farming and certain professionals nobody really needs a truck"
  - coldtea 2y ago
    Above I'm answering to the propose explanation that basically "Europeans don't buy them because they can't afford them", so my comment should be read as: "nah, it's not that, as people with higher disposable incomes *in the EU* don't buy such trucks either". I just left out the "in the EU" there, to be implied by the context I was replying to. That said, I didn't mean to imply that "buying a truck was people status signalling that they were affluent" in the US. Just that they think (or made to think) they need it, and that they culturally like the extravaganza - same way many in the US think they need bigger cars and sneer at European sized cars.

osigurdson 2y ago

Maybe they just like it. The assumption seems to be that if they didn't have anyone to impress they would buy a Honda Fit because it is better (by some definition of better). Even if they are just buying it to impress people, who cares? Let them do what they want.

chimpanzee 2y ago
> if they are just buying it to impress people, who cares? The buyer cares. And if the buying is detrimental to more than the buyer himself (eg wastes resources, harms the environment, overtaxes infrastructure), then it makes sense for others to let that buyer know how they actually feel. But I agree with your suggestion that it is entirely possible for a truck buyer to have reasons other than those supposed by the author.
- osigurdson 2y ago
  You seem to suggest that the truck buyer is somehow causing you / others harm. By what metric?
  - kitkat_new 2y ago
    use of limited resources, air pollution, noise, higher infrastructure cost, global warming, more kills in traffic
    - osigurdson 2y ago
      So fine then with a huge, shiny, lifted F-350 that the owner drives 5km once per week to the ice cream shop? Or is your largest issue perhaps "redneck culture"?
      - coldtea 2y ago
        Why would he be fine with a "huge, shiny, lifted F-350 that the owner drives 5km once per week to the ice cream shop"? Didn't he already explained he's against buying of trucks when there's no real need?

oooyay 2y ago

I'm a software engineer and I have a Tacoma. I've found it useful for hauling things to and from lumber stores (I also do wood working and most of my own house projects). It was incredibly useful during PNW winters when it snowed or iced over roads completely; one was so bad my partner got stranded on our metro train and I had to go get her. Going across the mountains in my truck has also been quite nice compared to when I had a hybrid sedan. The alternative is that for every delivery of goods I would need to pay an $80 fee (and I do these with pretty regular frequency; that's about 2x what it takes to fill up my tank). We'd need to be more careful of not going out during storms or when there's even moderate risk of winter storms. I would need to plan trips across the mountains much more in advance. There's a lot of other things that'd probably change too, including how we do road trips. I'm a bit judgy of people who have a truck that clearly don't do truck things with it, but of all my friends that have trucks I don't know anyone who isn't. All that to say, I roll my eyes when I see statements trying to steelman who should morally own a truck.

osigurdson 2y ago
I think most people are just reacting to "redneck" culture. I don't really like it either, but I think people should be able to do what they want. Including buying a truck they don't need or taking an unneeded trip to Paris to visit museums and art galleries.
- oooyay 2y ago
  From my perspective, that's a good chunk of where this comes from. I wish people would just say that if that's the case.
- kjeetgill 2y ago
  I'm not sure that's the case. I don't think people are responding to the "redneck in a pick-up" stereotypes as much as that "pavement princess" owner trying to "cosplay" truck culture stereotypes. Sidenote - I'm finding my vocabulary pretty lacking now that so much stereotyping is done in images and memes.
brailsafe 2y ago

Slava_Propanei 2y ago

[dead]

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

jaredhallen 2y ago

The world is a big place with billions of people each living their own unique life. Only one of those is yours. If you find no use for a truck, then by all means don't own one.

seoulmetro 2y ago

You're right. People get upset if you mention that the main use (percentage) of cars or houses is about status. People get upset at such blunt truths because it makes people look stupid, and we are, we humans are very stupid.

osigurdson 2y ago
>> we humans are very stupid Translation: "I am smarter than other humans"
- seoulmetro 2y ago
  Last time I checked I was human too...

torginus 2y ago

Yup, 100% true. And anyway, US trucks are just a peculiar form of luxury car. Case in point the Toyota Hilux, which is Toyota's famously sturdy workhorse truck, is not even sold in the US. Instead they have the Tacoma, an entirely different construction. It is built around consumer comfort features and impressive specs instead of being rugged, easy to repair and inexpensive. Anecdotally the Tacoma is huge, and horrible off-road. There are other tradeoffs, like softer suspension, which you want in a passenger car for comfort, but not in a vehicle used for hauling and going on difficult terrain.

five_lights 2y ago
>US trucks are just a peculiar form of luxury car No, not really. You can get one fully loaded, or get a bare bones work truck. Thing is there are no "luxury" makes for trucks, but more often there are trims of different models. A F-150 Raptor is certainly a luxury model for status signaling (or just to have the nicer thing for those who can afford it). The XL Model is far from a luxury vehicle. https://www.ford.com/trucks/f150/models/ https://www.ford.com/trucks/f150/models/

five_lights 2y ago

I think this is an area that highlights one of the huge differences between Europe and the US that isn't obvious at first to most Europeans. Outside of commercial messaging that you may see in TV show, or Country Music vehicle, it's not that common for people who have a truck to use it as a status symbol any differently than they would with a car. In practice, a lot of working age Men own a light duty pickup (f-150, Silverado 1500 or smaller types like the Ranger or Colorado) when you get outside of the Cities for the utility. It's basically needed if you live in the country and want to be self-sufficient. While you may see these on a farm, more than likely a farmer would need something more heavy duty to pull anything serious. People with Boats can usually get away with hauling it with a light duty truck, whereas people with RV's usually will have something more heavy duty. They are far from status symbols, and often people will have old trucks (beaters) that are paid off and will use when it's practical.