I second the others telling you to go fuck yourself. Go touch some grass instead of trolling on lemmy, or go back to Reddit.

This post isn’t criticizing trucks. It’s criticizing the oversized modern one’s that aren’t any better at work than the much smaller ones of the past.

I’ve had a home for 10 years and done all of these things without a truck. My cars are in great condition. Sounds like a capability issue.

Do any kind of outdoor activity, maintain a property or mild home renovation on the regular with your sedans and we’ll see how long it takes before they look beat to shit or have mechanical issues.

Been using my Leaf to maintain my rural acre for 2 years now and the most beat up looking part of it is where my goats jumped on it the first time they saw it, and even that’s just a dent in the roof

Have yet to need to rent a truck to do anything major, it’s all been quite easily manageable in my little car. Should I need a bigger truck, I can rent one really easily for the time I need to use it

I bring enough ice fishing gear to over night on the lake in a hut and fit it all with room to spare in a small hatchback. The idea you need a truck to do outdoorsy things is mostly propoganda.

Implying the majority of owners of those oversized things do any of those activities

No one hates work trucks. We hate pavement princess. Trucks that are a status symbol, not work vehicles. Notice how the OPs image includes things like “same bed size” - realistically the only different work feature of the original two trucks pictured. Troll better.

Alright, so first you didn’t read the post. It’s about two trucks with the same bed size. However, one of the trucks is pointlessly large, to the point that it’s actually harder to use it to haul things since the bed height is so much higher. A truck with a lower bed is easier to load.

Second, the vast majority of trucks are never used for anything a sedan can’t do. If your bed liner doesn’t have any scratches, you could have saved a lot of money and CO2 with a sedan. Hell, if you do need the cargo capacity a van (including a mini-van) can haul more cargo than a truck. A truck’s advantage is that it can carry oversized loads, not a lot of cargo.

Third, if you do occasionally need a truck or other cargo carrying vehicle, it’s probably cheaper to rent one the few times you need it. The amount of extra you’re paying in gas and everything else will almost certainly outpace the price of a rental a few times a year it’s needed.

Obviously there’s still some use cases for a truck. The smaller one will be better though, and 99.9999% of US truck owners don’t fit this group.

You would have to, if you ever used it for work.

bold of you to assume they’re using it for more than their weekly groceries

these big ass pickups spreading into Europe

https://xkcd.com/37/

In the Netherlands you need to register one as a company vehicle to be able to import it which seems like it’d be a pretty sizeable limitation… yet I still see these pieces of shit everywhere, being used as personal vehicles exclusively

Just wait until you see the guys with the extended length mirrors so they can cosplay driving a big rig. They stick out over the lines in Canada.

I can’t express how much I love this idea

I have this visual of some guy reading the card and making a huge show of ripping it up

or protected from import competition by huge terifs

Europe never opened their chicken market.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_tax

The Chicken Tax is a 25 percent tariff on light trucks (and originally on potato starch, dextrin, and brandy) imposed in 1964 by the United States under President Lyndon B. Johnson in response to tariffs placed by France and West Germany on importation of U.S. chicken.[1] The period from 1961 to 1964[2] of tensions and negotiations surrounding the issue was known as the “Chicken War”, taking place at the height of Cold War politics.[3]

Eventually, the tariffs on potato starch, dextrin, and brandy were lifted,[4] but since 1964 this form of protectionism has remained in place to give US domestic automakers an advantage over imported competitors.[5] Though concern remains about its repeal,[6][7] a 2003 Cato Institute study called the tariff “a policy in search of a rationale.”[4]

Largely because of post–World War II intensive chicken farming and accompanying price reductions, chicken, once internationally synonymous with luxury, became a staple food in the U.S.[12] Prior to the early 1960s, not only had chicken remained prohibitively expensive in Europe, but it had also remained a delicacy.[13] With imports of inexpensive chicken from the U.S., chicken prices fell quickly and sharply across Europe, radically affecting European chicken consumption.[13] In 1961, per capita chicken consumption rose up to 23% in West Germany.[13] U.S. chicken captured nearly half of the imported European chicken market.[13]

Subsequently, the Dutch accused the U.S. of dumping chickens at prices below cost of production.[13] The French government banned U.S. chicken and raised concerns that hormones could affect male virility.[13] German farmers’ associations accused U.S. poultry firms of fattening chicken artificially with arsenic.[13]

Coming on the heels of a “crisis in trade relations between the U.S. and the Common Market,”[13] Europe moved ahead with tariffs, intending that they would encourage Europe’s postwar agricultural self-sufficiency.[14] European markets began setting chicken price controls.[13] France introduced the higher tariff first, persuading West Germany to join them—even while the French hoped to win a larger share of the profitable German chicken market after excluding U.S. chicken.[3] Europe adopted the Common Agricultural Policy, imposing minimum import prices on all imported chicken and nullifying prior tariff bindings and concessions.

Beginning in 1962, the U.S. accused Europe’s Common Market of unfairly restricting imports of American poultry. By August 1962, U.S. exporters had lost 25% of their European chicken sales.[13] Losses to the U.S. poultry industry were estimated at $26—$28 million[3] (equivalent to $251.53—$270.88 million in 2022).

TTIP came probably as close as things have been, but ran into opposition from European poultry farmers again.

I mean, this is a factor I’m sure, but the reality is people want the big trucks. The big trucks sell. That’s the major factor. If this were the real reason the EV trucks would be small, right? Well they’re not, they’re gigantic. You can hava long and wide wheelbase without a 5 person cab, you can have an extended bed. You can have a long and wide wheelbase without a giant front end you can’t see over. The footprint doesn’t mandate a tall, luxurious cab.

Yeah, blame the governmental entity that gets its hands tied behind its back by protectionist lobbyists and corrupt Supreme Court Justices, and not the the big 3 reaping the rewards. Just like the IRS and the USPS.