Ford is a little behind

Ford envisions its company could utilize technological breakthroughs in battery technology not yet invented in order to bring a plug-in hybrid Ford to the market within 5-10 years.

Mulally said the rollout of Ford plug-in hybrids is dependent on advancements to lithium ion batteries that will be charged by the car's owners using regular household electrical outlets.

Consumers have been waiting a long time for an automaker to offer the next generation of ultra-fuel-efficient, gasoline-optional cars

Which is why another company already did it.

Can we live without SUVs?

This article was certainly sponsored by GM, "Why we need big hybrid SUVs". For me, putting a hybrid engine in an SUV just looks like another way to inflate the price of these overpriced monstrosities even more. What amazes me (well, not so much) is how perfectly justified the owners of these vehicles are that they need a 3 row SUV.

Fact is, these large gas guzzling high-tech tanks have spoiled us all. We just can't imagine sitting in a car without plenty of arm and leg room around us with a personal television screen and cup holder and a dog in the back in his own fenced off play area.

Unlike the 'green' crowd, I have no problem with SUVs. You want a big expensive gas sucking tank? Fine. But don't complain when you're paying $35,000 for a vehicle and breaking your budget at the gas station. Getting 14mpg is hurting you at the pump? Boo hoo. You wanted convenience in the form of your own personal bus, you got it.

The problem with the article is that it fails to report how much this hybrid feature in a Yukon will cost. For every dollar up front you spend to reduce your mileage, you eat into your future gas savings. I'd be willing to bet most people would sell that Yukon for another model long before it ever offered them any real savings. The real problem is that people refuse to let go of their 4-wheeled boats.

Someone who switches from a non-hybrid GMC Yukon to a Toyota (Charts) Prius will save about 611 gallons of gas a year. That switch would make a huge difference.

But how many people do you think could actually do that?

I'll tell you who, just about everyone. Let's look at the example they give:

I didn't have to go very far to find a perfect test case: my sister. She lives in Cape Cod, Mass., where it snows heavily in the winter. She has three boys who all play hockey, a dog and a husband; and she usually has a couple of her kids' friends - and their hockey equipment - tagging along wherever they go. Try fitting that life into a Prius.

Guess what, you don't have to buy a Prius (although the Prius does offer pretty good interior room), you can buy a sedan that gets 30mpg, or a station wagon that gets about the same! But no, we're here to justify our luxurious spending so we can whine about the consequences.

Amazingly, people survived in snow before SUVs became popular. Incredibly, they managed to fit a family of 5 into a 5 passenger car. The dog? He usually went on the bigger kids lap - unheard of (although the dog was probably a lot happier than being alone in the cargo area). All that hockey equipment? There's some black metal things that can go on the top of cars, they're called roof racks.

No, your sister doesn't need an SUV. She wants an SUV because its convenient. Dog goes in the back, hockey stuff goes in the back, kids all comfy with plenty of space. Very nice. But please, stop complaining and acting like your own choices aren't your own fault just because you aren't willing to make any compromises.

High gas prices killing you? Buy a prom dress!

It seems like every year, as summer comes and gas prices go up, we end up with several articles about how gas prices are busting family's budgets.

Single mom Esther Guzman is used to juggling her family finances. But lately, it's gotten harder to make ends meet.

So says the article, with a picture of Ms Guzman climbing into an enormous vehicle. But who can blame her? She has 4 kids and makes $11/hr with $400/mo in child support (meaning her ex is probably not making much more than she is). Having 4 kids probably wasn't the smartest idea in the world, but its a little late for that. But not too late to continue a cycle of poor spending and backwards priorities.

Recently, to help pay for senior pictures and a prom dress for her 18-year-old daughter, Esther Bonilla, Guzman was forced to pay less than what she owed for utilities.

You read that right. She didn't pay her utility bill because she bought a prom dress for her daughter. Apparently a nice prom dress is more important than having electricity.

Now my concern is, am I going to be able to cover the utility bill or the rent?" she says. "I can't cover all my bills; I really can't.

Of course you can't. But don't blame high gas prices. Yes, the prices are up, but you can't pay your utility bills because you bought a prom dress. Or take the "facilities assistant" who was driving 66 miles each way for a job that paid $7.25 an hour.

"I'm spending almost half my paycheck every two weeks on gas," Davison says.

No kidding! You make barely minimum wage, a wage that you can get just about anywhere (she likely has around 20-30 retail stores within 5 miles of her home that would offer hourly wage like that), yet you choose to commute 132 miles a day. She also goes to alcoholics anonymous meetings, but I suspect rather than attend a local chapter, she drives to another city.

Poorer families tend to live in central cities, but the strongest job growth in recent years has been in the suburbs, according to UCLA professor Matthew Kahn. From 1994 to 2000, the latest data available, there was a 10% increase in jobs in ZIP codes within five miles of city centers in the USA. In that same period, there was a 23% jump in jobs more than five miles but less than 25 miles from city centers, Kahn says.

Agreed. But if you are low income minimum wage, there are jobs everywhere. Go apply at Target; you need no education, start off at $7/hr, they are everywhere in suburbs AND inner city and if you live in the city, which the article says most low income families do, public transportation IS available.

"Those commutes aren't really well-facilitated by public transit," Raphael says. "Owning a car can actually be quite important."

Well yes, when you choose to drive 130 miles a day for no apparent reason.

Tyrone Vincent of Donaldsonville, La., estimates his 1991 Cadillac DeVille gets about 16 miles a gallon. The 48-year-old disabled veteran, who lives in a FEMA-provided trailer, usually makes the 120-mile round trip to New Orleans about three times a week to see family and to volunteer. But the trip has become too expensive, and Vincent, who lives on $2,400 a month he gets from the government, doesn't have the money to buy a new, more fuel-efficient car. He's had to cut back on trips to New Orleans.

What I wouldn't give to go on a trip 3 times a week. 16 miles to the gallon on a 1991 Cadillac is pretty poor. Can't buy a new, more fuel-efficient car? Why not buy a 1991 GEO METRO. It gets 40mpg and you wouldn't have any more 'repair' costs than the Cadillac, since they are the same age and in fact the Metro is probably a heck of a lot cheaper to maintain. You could probably sell the Caddy for the same cost of the Metro. Skip a week of trips to New Orleans and you'll have enough saved up for the taxes right there. Why do you have to buy a new car to get more efficiency?

At the end we finally meet someone who is struggling with gas prices, a mother of 3 who has cut back all she can and is facing medical bills.

The point? Yes, gas prices are up, but when you are purposely avoiding paying bills to buy prom dresses, take trips out of town every other day in a gas guzzler, and needlessly commute 150 miles a day for a minimum wage job, why is changing your spending/driving habits such a ridiculous suggestion?