Sometimes, you just have to laugh. In the rush to become politically correct and green, some companies really don’t think their policies through very well.
Today as I was traveling back from Thanksgiving holiday I happened to notice a U-Haul vehicle trailer next to me in bumper-to-bumper traffic. Lo and behold in my face was a statement about reducing carbon emissions as you can see in the picture below. Look at the orange label on the inside fender, you may have to click the image to zoom in.
The label reads:
U-Haul Auto Transport – Reduces Carbon Emissions
So, rather than drive your car you should just tow it on this U-Haul trailer using another one.
Yeah, that’s the ticket.
While it is technically a correct statement that two engines running would produce [MORE] carbon emissions than one, this is likely offset by the fact that most uses of the trailer are likely behind a larger U- Haul truck, fully loaded with belongings, while towing the car.
I really don’t think the math works but it might make some people feel good for thinking they are saving Gaia while moving.
Like most of the climate change moving, er movement, it is really all about the feelings, isn’t it?
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Marketing
Did you really intend to say that two engines running produce less carbon emission than one, or did the negatives somehow get turned around?
Pulling the weight of the car behind a large, energy inefficient van, would use MORE energy than actually driving the car…IMHO…
I agree on the basis of aerodynamics. Especially for those folks who ignore the U-haul speed limits they see in their mirrors and compete with traffic. I never plan to “get there fast” when towing.
..Pop, I always find it funny to watch young, inexperienced drivers trying to back up with a trailer…No matter how hard you try to explain to them that turning the steering wheel left, forces the trailer to go right, they will still try to do what perception tells them…
The Overdrive setting on an automatic transmission switches the gears to focus on pulling power over speed, and is intended for towing. Wonder how many U-haulers don’t know this and end up using more fuel and having less control on the road because they didn’t shift gears.
Obviously if the van was empty this would make no sense, but anyone with half a brain can understand that this is most likely someone moving interstate with their household goods in the van.
This seems like the most fuel efficient way to get your possessions and your car to where you are moving to.
Seems like a lot of people are being hypocritical here.
drednicolson November 27, 2016 at 6:44 pm
Really? Years ago in manual cars it was simply a taller gear for cruising at speed: Less engine rpm for the same speed. Generally it meant you had a more than 1:1 ratio between the engine side of the gearbox and the tailshaft side (tailshaft turned at a higher rate than than the engine). In the early days it was a separate lever and gearbox.
Similarly in earlier autos: the transmission just shuffled through the lower gears with the tallest locked out, engaging overdrive allowed a taller gear into the mix.
Modern cars have settings to alter change points: “Sport” mode increases them, more rpm before changing up, and cruise or overdrive modes allow shifting into higher gears earlier. To get moving with a trailer, you might want to use “sport” mode, then switch to cruise once on the highway.
These days, with 5, 6 and more speed gearboxes and electronic switches … it is all built in.
This is something that shouldn’t be hard to calculate, opinions notwithstanding.
It depends on what mileage the car gets, really. The extra load on a fully loaded U-Haul won’t drop mileage by much since it’s already pretty low. If the car gets high mileage, it might not be a good trade, and vice versa.
C’mon people, it’s like you never did such a move yourself.
Putting the car on the trailer behind the truck means the trip requires only one driver. That way you can move your “stuff” and your “ride” in one trip.
Or you and your friend or family member can take turns driving the one vehicle. That way one of you can rest and the other person can drive, and then you can trade. At the very least, you don’t have two drivers in two vehicles with the problem of getting separated and then trying to find each other.
I guess U-Haul wants to promote this system as energy saving, and who knows whether it saves fuel or not. It is just that many people doing their own moving want to do this with one driver at the wheel instead of trying to coordinate a small convoy, and there are those of us who would pay a little extra to have that trailer to have that convenience.
U-Haul is a corporate entity that promotes its offerings, services, and products as “green”, but corporations do a lot of things, now don’t they, to promote and market what they do, but those of us who want this trailer will use it and those of us who want to drive with two separate vehicles to not bother with a trailer will do that. Capitalism! Freedom! Choice!
WUWT got this one wrong.
Why, well bringing the car saves a flight or drive back, plus driving the car.
Simple really.
[wrong, you assume they want to return. Most U-haul moves are one-way -mod]
Does it save gas? Possibly, especially if you do not have a separate person to drive and would have to take two separate trips with a bus ride or flight back. However, the more important issue is whether the savings are MEANINGFUL. That is a resounding “No”. Remember the reduction goals that have been set. 50-90% reduction of CO2. You don’t get that with using U-Hauls or owning cars in the first place. For the designated audience and customer base, no it does not meaningfully reduce CO2.
More, not less carbon emissions than one – typo
…like product labeling trying to make something that’s not good for you
sound like it is
“contains no nuclear material”
Guess that depends on your definition of nuclear. 🙂
Not a source of free neutrons…
So Gamma, Beta and Alpha are ok? 🙂
Or trying to sell a product that IS good for you by addressing (and, sigh, reinforcing) the junk science fears of some consumers:
“Contains no chemicals.”
“Organic.”
“No pesticides.”
“Carbon free sugar.”
“Sustainably puffed.”
LOL.
ROTFL…..exactly Janice
“Contains no logic”?
“Organic” If it is not mineral or metal it is organic. Fruits, vegetables, grains and meats, no matter how you “raise” them, are all organic. That one really makes me want to smack some people’s childr’ns.
Don’t forget: “Rice Chex is 100% Gluten-Free”.
And full of 100% pure B.S…… :o)
My personal favorite is slapping “All Natural!” on stuff that you have no reason to think otherwise. All Natural clam juice? I don’t even want to know what you do to make “unnatural” clam juice. The piece de resistance: All Natural bottled water.
“…where do you even find unnatural water? Witch toilets? Are you claiming your competitors’ water comes from witch toilets? Because that’s [bleep]in’ crazy.” – Seanbaby (paraphrased/bowdlerized)
How about organically grown rubber in the tires?
Hey wasn’t it low carbon sugar ? Ok still bs .
I remember, maybe 20 years ago, one of the oldest brands of bottled water had to do a recall. They advertised as “naturally carbonated”.
It turns out that they remove the “natural” CO2 and send the water through some sort of treatment process (filtration, maybe?) then re-inject the “natural” CO2. The reason for the recall was that the chemicals they used to clean the treatment process was not properly flushed so some of it ended up in a batch of their “naturally carbonated” bottled water.
But I think the chemical was organic (benzene?) so I don’t know why they had to do a recall. 😎
“Don’t forget: “Rice Chex is 100% Gluten-Free”. “100% Gluten-Free”. Saw that on the label of Jiffy peanut butter. All I could do was smile.
The gluten-free rice chex actually makes sense, as it’s not unheard of to mix different flours together to get better properties in your bread (any decent cornbread recipie involves both wheat and corn flour). While it has been overhyped, it is a legitimate food alergy.
or https://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/05/04/sugar-coated-consumerism-or-just-plain-crap/ – non-carbon sugar
Put your car on a trailer, wear their gear out. Pretty economical way to save running costs and repairs on ones own car.
Oh, slight typo error in your post me ole mate:
“While it is technically a correct statement that two engines running would produce less carbon emissions than one,”
It should read, one engine produces less carbon emissions than two.
My experience is that one engine running uses less fuel than two.
Sometimes my spouse wants to join me on longer contracts, and wants to have a car at the destination so that we don’t need to share. So I have experience of pulling cars on their own wheels, on tow dollies, and on trailers on several trips of distances from 250 to 1100 miles in the US.
In each case the amount of fuel used by the combination is less than we would have expected for the same number of miles had we driven the cars individually. On the last trip I thought ~15 MPG (15.7 L/100km) in the tow vehicle was pretty abysmal, but the combined MPG for the two vehicles when driven individually on the return trip was ~12.75 (18.5 L/100km).
Dear lord that’s spectacular fuel efficiency, I get 17 litres to 100 kilometres out of my oil burning 4wd and that’s not towing that’s more like 25 litres per 100 , just doing my bit for the plants .
4 km/L? That’s less than 12 mph. What kind of tank are you driving? How can you even afford that?
My dad, who was a genuine “Mad Man”, said his nomination for the worst slogan in history was U-Haul’s: “An adventure in moving”. Nobody wants an adventure when they move. Dull as dishwater is what you want. Some people.
Good point, DJ: Holiday Inn had, for a while, the slogan, “The best surprise is no surprise.”
LOL. Yes! 100% agreed!
Always wish people “an uneventful trip”!
“A Bekins move is a wild adventure.” (Not.)
Yes I made a typo, thank you to everyone who pointed it out multiple times. Writing a blog post on a phone has its disadvantages.
Just so long as you weren’t writing and driving at the same time. 🙂
Hope you had a good Thanksgiving.
Of course you were not typing this post on your mobile phone whilst driving!
SMC…..just beat me to it!
You can actually see the alphabet on your phone ?? The Nums and Alpha’s on my phone are so small, I have to plug my phone into my computer and use the online keyboard just to make a call (and that is with 3X glasses) ! And I also believe you were right the first time…An MPG inefficient van, full of furniture and what not, pulling a car on a trailer is probably not better than driving the car separately…IMHO…
Marcus November 27, 2016 at 5:59 pm
And here I thought that the times I towed a car behind a U-Haul Van was because my A$$ could only be in one place at a time….
michael
As does writing a blog reply with no “edit” feature. [drum roll -> cymbal crash]
Reblogged this on Climatism and commented:
An amusingly un-subtle example of politically correct corporate “green-washing”! 🍃
I wonder if the label is really suggesting that towing a car on the trailer requires less energy than towing a car on the ground. After all, there’s less drive train involved.
Then again, towing a front wheel drive car with just the front wheels off the ground also dispenses with drive train friction and is less mass too.
The mass of the vehicle is the same, no matter how it is towed. Friction is the only variable you can change here.
Ric, you may have been referring to the fact that the two wheel tow dolly offered by u-haul is less mass than the four wheel trailer. That’s true.
Yeah, that’s what I meant. Sorry for the lousy wording. It would have helped if I knew the term was “tow dolly.” Now I know!
Imagine Louie Armstrong singing….
“You need a tow dolly! A U-Haul tow dolly! Feels so nice to spread less CO2 around….”
It really depends on the trailer, a good two-axle trailer will track better than a typical two-wheel car dolly. Even with the extras weight I’d put my money on the full blown trailer.
Isn’t a cube van highly inefficient, MPG wise ? I do not drive (since I left Florida), so maybe I am missing something ??
Hi, Marcus: the 17′ (box only) U-Haul truck I drove to move, fully loaded with furniture and household goods, got about 6 mpg on the freeway (on the flat — in the mountains, less). I stopped for gas about every two hours (groan) — to keep the tank about 1/2 full.
btw: you have been in Canada longer than you realized (smile) — in the U.S., these days (100 years ago, I think van might have been used in the same way, here, thus, we have a moving company with “Van Lines” in its name) such a vehicle is called a “truck” (or a “box truck”). A van is what Scooby Doo and the gang rode around in. Just so, you know, when you go to that party in the U.S. and start chatting about moving and stuff, things will go a little more smoothly…..
Pretty woman: You are moving clear from Canada back to Florida in a VAN? How will you fit your bed and couch and dining table in there??
Marcus: Oh, easy. It’s around 20 feet long.
PW: Wow. I’ve never seen a van that long before.
M: Huh. Well, that wasn’t even the longest size you could rent.
PW: What is it, sort of a bus with no seats in it? Does it have an extra axle?
M (thinking: boy is she dumb, I think I’ll go talk to that other woman over there): Do you remember the Disney movie, “101 Dalmatians”? The one from when we were little kids? Well, it’s what ‘orace and Jaspuh drove.
PW: ?? The “bad ‘uns” drove a rickety old moving truck.
M: TRUCK? Oh.
PW (smiling): Oh. You’re moving in a truck with a 20′ box.
M: What are you doing Friday night?
PW (smile): Nothing.
M: Want to help me load my truck?
PW (eyebrows raised — no more smile)
*!*!*!*! — HOLD IT RIGHT THERE, M *!*!*!*!
Re-wind, and Edit! lololololo
I haven’t had this much fun on the interwebs thingy for a long time.
lol, hotel — me, too. Anthony’s on the road (heh, heh). Whee!
Everyone has seemed so grim the last couple of years. Perhaps that weather vane has spun. I best go load the cannon, just in case.(now you done it, Mary Poppins reference. Could G$S be far behind?!?!)
“FOUR, THREE, TWO, ONE, FIRE!”
(youtube)
Salt Lake City has billboards with a 1950’s looking woman talking on the phone saying “Joan, I just love my new smaller trash can”. Trash cans range from $21.00/mo down to $13.75/mo. I think what they really mean is I like having a lower trash bill, but I’m not sure.
Reality, you came to a logical conclusion.
The enviro (and or enviroprofiteer) who paid for that ad, however, are pushing the IRRATIONAL JUNK of:
1. pseudo-religion — “Holy people generate less trash. They make interesting things with all their milk cartons and tote all their cereal and fruit and mashed potatoes and stuff home from the grocery store in reusable bags (never, never washed with an effective, er, I mean chlorine or phosphate-containing, detergent).”
Thus saith the Cult of Sustainability.
and
2. money (“recycling” is pretty good money) — “Put your extra trash into our bins and …… heh….. save the planet….. or whateverallIknowisthisracketmakesmegooddough.” {taxpayers get to “invest” in the recycling business, too!}
JUST IN CASE THERE IS A CULT MEMBER READING THIS:
As IBM used to like to say: THINK.
“Sustainability” is a lie.
Get out. Join Reality in the land of truth and light and freedom.
In short: love yourself.
The cult does not love you.
The cult is ALL about money.
Cui bono? Answer: not you.
..Wait, what ?? You have to RENT your trash cans ?
Yep, some places you do. And they get very upset when you light a fire in those places,too, you heathen.
Marcus November 27, 2016 at 6:06 pm
..Wait, what ?? You have to RENT your trash cans ?
Yeah big plastic things. Pay a fee one to three months. Back in Oregon I had a neighbor who did not pay the fee. He would sneak his stuff into my can on garbage day. Arizona is much different , at least in the small town I live in. I think you can understand why.
michael
..OMG, what do they do if you don’t pay your rent ?? Repossess your garbage ?? LOL
I have seen that on Uhaul trailers, not just car carriers. Dubious, at best. And I don’t know, guys. That truck loaded full pulling that trailer and car most likely puts more emissions in the atmosphere than that truck loaded full and the car following combined would produce. I have pulled a lot of trailers with a lot of different trucks over the years, just sayin’.
Emotions as reasons. Sigh. On a Thanksgiving visit, I was able to hear what my daughter has been learning in college. She was in a federal policy course. The course has included three debates on issues, such as euthanasia or gun control. I asked about federal policies covering euthanasia – expecting her to pipe up with something about how a court decision has taken a “reserved power” issue and brought it into federal domain, or funding for euthanasia services, or something along those lines.
Nope, no federal policy at all in these debates. Just discussion of arguments for and against something.
So, while I am always interested in federal policy, I had no common ground for discussion. Lots of good that tuition has done.
–This is how “progressives” win arguments, and how they have been dumbing down our young adults.
First, mislead them that student loans are awesome, even when they have no idea what their major, or vocation, might eventually be, and second, now that they have money and a blank slate to fill with four classes, they sign up for whatever, where the professors await – to cover emotions, not knowledge.
Why emotions? The acceptable answers to all of the major issues have all been pre-determined. The “progressive” answers are those deemed to be virtuous. Like “reducing your carbon footprint,” or using fewer natural resources. Never mind that they actually also continue to teach about the natural CYCLES – water cycle, etc.
If it is possible to waste water, where does it go? How does it escape the cycle? If I leave my tap on while brushing my teeth, does that water go out to outer space?
How did my gasoline get in the tank? Atmosphere > tree > fossil fuel > refinery > engine > atmosphere > …..
..The “Last True Democrat” was JFK…(My hero, I have 23 books about him)…Then LBJ (I have copies of his actual Oval Office recordings which I can’t print here) started the Democrats into a long, slow dive into never never land which continues to this day…( See Trump election..and the House..and the Senate..)..IMHO..
“Nope, no federal policy at all in these debates. Just discussion of arguments for and against something.”
Yep thats pretty much what debates are. Getting them to have their own thoughts outside a govt policy is probably appropriate for a learning institution, and is how a lot of policies get formed in the first place. No common ground for discussion? really? surely you had some thoughts of your won.
I suspect that much of the confusion comes from less than precise communication regarding what constitutes “waste”. While it technically isn’t possible to waste something that doesn’t disappear such as water, it is possible to waste the energy used to process and transport “potable” water by not making good use of the processed water.
Perhaps rather than rolling your eyes and shrugging you might educate your children to be more selective in making their arguments and appreciate better communication.
Adventure has been defined as ” something bad, happening to someone else, a long way away”
I’ll second that definition.
Any infantryman will tell you; “F adventure”.
First rule of military survival: never volunteer. An officer asking for volunteers is code-talk for “I want you men to do something extremely risky that will probably get you all killed, but don’t want to go on the record as having actually ordered you to do it.”
See? There was my mistake! I screwed the pooch right of the bat by volunteering to be in the Army to begin with. I’ll know better next time(no, I won’t).
Getting there is half the fun! The other half is dragging your a$$ out of the malarial mud bog you fell into when the chopper pilot said ” Get Out.”
Mr. Baggins defined it as something that makes you late for dinner.
There might possibly be a drafting advantage and the U-Haul truck will be driven more slowly burdened by the tow and the load than an independent automobile, still the carbon advantages are fleeing and quite possibly imaginary.
One engine running near full throttle is more efficient than two running at part throttle.
Having the car right behind it might make the truck more aerodynamic. It’s possible that they are telling the truth. That said, without a carefully controlled experiment, it’s all just conjecture.
It has to be compared with having the car lead the truck.
“U-Haul Auto Transport – Reduces Carbon Emissions.”
It’s written. You know, in actual words. So it must be true. /sarc.
Dean, that is good! 🙂 (so, repeated with emphasis)
Dean (from Ohio)
******************************************************************
A related example applying your fine principle:
“Environmentalism” (as currently used) — (to the mis-informed) feels good, but:
explodes bat lungs,
burns birds eagerly flying toward “a bright shining lagoon,”
and smashes raptors to the earth, and
closes factories ==> making people miserable.
“Conservationism” — does good.
“Look, dear! Look! There’s an eagle soaring in the setting sun over Bryce Canyon! Get the camera!!!”
#(:))
Conservatives (generally speaking) love people.
Progressives hate people (and loving people in a way that is ultimately harmful to them and/or to others is NOT love, Simon, it is self-gratification).
(Yes, wonderful WUWTers, we have said these things before 🙂 )
Beautiful. As I laid out the late electoral choices, one candidate likes people, wants them to have jobs, make money and be happy. The other hates people and only wants to punish them for not doing as they are commanded. Simple, really.
..Dear Janice, Progressives are only truly happy when they are spending Other Peoples Money !! I think it gives them a “Thrill” up and down their legs…(you’ll have to check with that Mathews guy over at MSNBC to be sure)….
Progressives focus on what they think is WRONG with the world, and find happiness from protesting and eliminating as many of those things as possible. Conservatives focus on what they think is RIGHT with the world, and find happiness from enjoying and preserving as many of those things as possible.
I’ll leave taking each mindset to its logical conclusion as an exercise for the reader.
..Dr. Ed, the Conservatives have a bad habit of not burning and looting their own neighborhoods ! How can they get attention if they don’t burn and loot their neighborhoods ? Sarc off….
Very well said Janice. Great to hear from you.
Well! Thank you, Ron and also, hotel. Your affirmation is much appreciated. Hope all is well in “Winged Hearts” land, Ron — good to hear from you, too.
Also, Ron, If you missed it (I think you might have), on the WUWT Milestone thread about the 10th anniversary of WUWT, there is a link to download an anthology of WUWT over the past 10 years. Over 800 articles are included. You might find it a helpful resource. Just FYI. It’s free.
Well, towing a car on a trailer behind a U-Haull truck spews a lot less carbon than “Green Champion” Barry O flying 5 C-17’s each loaded with 8 Suburbans multiple times per year, not to mention going to Martha’s Vineyard and making the family dogs take a separate flight from the First Family.
Green marketing on the back of the climate change movement is being taken to ridiculous extremes. Check out @maersk on twitter for example. In Thailand even hotels are claiming to be low carbon. But you can’t blame them. They are a business. They do what makes money. That they do this low carbon goofiness means that it works. And that implies that the goofballs are us the consumers.
No, I am just staying at a hotel. Fact is that crap makes me look to their competition. I truly hate this false eco-crap. And I ain’t alone.
The best sign I ever saw on a truck was on a functioning bright pink rubbish collection truck in the Northern Territory, Australia, which read in large writing: “Satisfaction guaranteed or double your rubbish back.”
I will never forget that! I wish I had a camera with me on the day. 🙂
Might have been these blokes:
https://www.yellowpages.com.au/act/oconnor/toms-trash-paks-11848376-listing.html
Or these:
http://skipbin.com/
It seems to be a pretty popular slogan in the rubbish biz:
https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Satisfaction+guaranteed+or+double+your+rubbish+back%22
Hi Dave, thanks for those links – I had never seen the slogan before. I like it. The truck I saw was a garbage compactor (compressor?), you know the type, and a council vehicle. Made me laugh at the time (and still does). 🙂
I get miserable fuel economy of about 15 mpg with my 5000 pound vehicle when towing my 3500 pound boat/trailer combo, without the boat I get about 25-26 mpg. Trailers are heavy dead weight, a car trailer must weigh about 1000 pounds.. I’m thinking if I towed a 3500 pound car on a 1000 pound trailer I would get 13 to 14 mpg. If that same car got 30 mpg it would be about a wash, mpg-wise. The problem with towing a heavy weight and mpg is that when you go up an incline, the transmission has to downshift and that really wrecks the mpg.
Scott, the last dual axle U-haul trailer I borrowed weighed 4,000 lbs without the load.
Are you sure that was not the GVWR?
No, Uhaul trailers are heavy. Meant to be abuse by folks that got no real idea how to operate a vehicle pulling a trailer, although, they are all up in carbon’s bidness!
They want them bomb proof and they’re not buying the gas.
I tow a 3-horse slant-load gooseneck with 12 ft short-wall in the living quarters. Around 11,000 lbs.
About 10 mpg with a Power-stroke 6.4.
I would like to see what a hybrid diesel-electric truck could do before dismissing it as impractical.
Alt-right icon meme Pepe: “Feels good man!”
That is funny. I know a bunch of people who legitimately fall under the heading “alt-right”. I have tried to explain Pepe to them, that it is a pic of a green frog with a smile. They ask “what has that got to do with smaller government, reduction of taxation, enforcement of immigration laws and eliminating over burdensome governmental regulations?” to which I respond “its a meme, on the internet, ya know, twitter”, and they say “OK, twitter” as they slowly back away. So, I still can’t answer the question, no idea what a green frog has to do with smaller government, reduction of taxation, enforcement of immigration laws and eliminating over burdensome governmental regulations. Don’t get emojis or do textmess either. Oh, well.
..2hotel9…Well this is weird…”The Truth About Pepe the Frog” ??
https://pepethefrogfaith.wordpress.com/
THIS is why a come here, real answers to pressing questions! Thought it was just something to make those on the left twitch uncontrollably.
Marcus, you are an evil man. I think I am starting to like you. Now I have to ponder upon how this group of “alt-righters” I know could possibly be white supremacists, seeing as they are a rather mixed race group who are practically color blind, at least politically, though none of them like Jesse Jaxson or Rev Al. Gonna have to dwell on this a spell!
Feelings and money.
Kind of like Love and Marriage?
Or, how about: Church and the collection plate?
Well those trucks only seat two, max three, people in the cab, and it is not particularly comfortable. But the car is a four door, so I presume that this is a family moving, and that the rest of the family flew. You see, on this basis, there is a CO2 reduction because the truck doesn’t have to haul the weight of the rest of the family members. Flying of course does no harm to the climate. We know this, because if it did, the alarmascientists wouldn’t constantly be doing it, would they? So I have to take U-Haul’s side on this one based on the scientists…
lol.
Oh, well, MrHoffer, you forget. When you move, you are to leave at the recycle center all excess family members. Holy people have no more than one child, you know…..
Three max. total. What? Middle seat’s awfully small? Can’t move once the child is over about age 10? Aaa, sure you can, mister! Here! We also rent tie downs! State law? Nooo problem! Wrap it, I mean her or him, up in one of our …. BLANKETS…. Huh? Oh, just tell the trooper it’s a rug…. that someone threw up on (that way they won’t look inside).
Chances are good the “throw-up” part might nor be fibbing. You’re reminding me of Clark Griswold now…:-)
(sorry, nor’d my not)
Send it all by train and save even more CO2.
+1
(and, better yet, don’t go to that new job. Just stay where you are. Permanently under-employed. Have a great time feeling holy! Think of it as an “adventure.”)
“Drive carefully, Anthony! We need you to get home safe and sound!”
Your WUWT “family”
🙂
(yeah, like a real sister, I can be a pain sometimes — heh, heh, heh)
How much extra to rent the trailer, lol?
Bingo.