If you look at the current trend landlines will all but disappear in a few years’ time.

And it seems more and more Americans, now about 18%, are using cell phones as an only means of staying in touch (Reuters: http://www.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idUSTRE4BG5GH20081217 )

I think that in these tough times a lot of people are going to have to choose between landlines and cell phones. And frankly, for me a prepaid package, and using it less, is the only way to go if you want to save money. My trusty Tracfone is serving me very well.

The city has a very spotty bus service, nothing like it was when I was a child. We were carless for a number of years, but we lived right on the main busline. My Dad worked in the mill, and the bus covered the mill schedule very well. Most of the stores were still downtown, so Mom and I would board a bus to Main St, do all of our shopping, and head home at the end of the afternoon. My once-a-week or so lunch counter meal at G.C. Murphy’s, or Woolworth’s was a huge treat.

A large fountain Coke, the best fries you ever tasted, and a grilled cheese or BLT.

I certainly picked a good year to start working at home, since now I only drive every other day on average. Also, I have to recommend the Camry’s fuel efficiency. I get 35 mpg on the highway, even at the speed I drive.

Of course, public transportation would have to improve tremendously and perhaps the cost of bicycles could come down, too. It’s going to take EVERYONE’S cooperation to make significant changes.

The solution is simple: allow the oil companies a lease anywhere they like, any time. But put a time limit on it. Say, “You must use this lease in five years, or it reverts back to the people, and you lose any lease payments.” You will find not one single taker for the leases under those conditions.

As for funkool’s claim of a mere 9% profit, that is indeed what the oil companies claim–to the general public. But they give a different story to their investors. Their total ROI for 2007 before taxes was 29%, and 17% after taxes. However, even that is not meaningful, because of the $29B charge for taxes, $23B is in “deferred” taxes (meaning they don’t actually pay them–tax accounting is weird.)

The “9%” is a return on sales, which is a meaningless number; an investor looks at return on investment (ROI). Even the 9% number is a gross understatement, a manipulated number. The stated return on revenues for 2007 is actually 10.5%. But even just adding back in the (infinitely) deferred taxes brings that to 16.4%. And then there is the outright looting of the company by higher-level executives who take enourmous salaries, expense accounts, and perks, money which comes from what rightfully belongs to the workers and the investors.

In any case, when you hear a company making claims like this, the best way to check it out is to see what they say in other contexts. If they really only earned 9%, they would be hard-put to get any investors, so they have to tell the investors something which comes a bit closer to the reality, even if there are still mythical elements.