If you're never seen Man of Aran, you're in for a treat! Far more thought provoking than the fluff Lucas made, but by which I always assumed his fictional homestead on Tatooine was inspired.
Obviously, but the question I was responding to was, "Why buy a sleek phone made of premium materials just to bury it in the cheapest, ugliest, chunkiest plastic case you can find?"
In an ICE pickup, maybe, but assuming the Slate has an EV weight distribution advantage, RWD is probably better. To each their own, but I much prefer my driven wheels not to be my turning wheels.
A 4x8 trailer is also a great option, if you have a place to keep one, and super cheap. I have a Thule that stands on end in the garage. Trailers are a lot easier to load and unload than an American pickup, too. It seems like every time I take mine to the Home Despot I see someone struggling to get materials into their SUV or short-bed pickup, and I'm in and out in a flash. Just don't expect to win any races driving in reverse.
If you've lived in Australia, I'm back to thinking you're being wholly disingenuous, and certainly evasive. I'll steer clear of engaging with you in the future.
You wrote that Australia has plenty of brodozers. Crossovers are not brodozers, nor is it possible to operate a brodozer on public roads in Australia. Clearly, you're misinformed, if not entirely disingenuous, but your commitment to stay the course is admirable.
> Vehicles with 40s on them and a 6” lift are so rare in America they have no statistical significance in regard to accidents.
Do you have a source for this? Asking as someone who recently narrowly escaped death with a loved one as victims in a highway rollover crash caused by a dimwit operating a brodozer with 40" mud tires and a 6" lift in America.
Sorry, I'm just trying to understand your point of view. I live in the US and spend a lot of time in the EU. I'm a citizen of both. It couldn't be more obvious to me that our street designs differ (as implied by my previous comment). I'd genuinely like to know where you're coming from, but your responses so far are shallow tautologies. I initially responded to your comment, "Fixing on the pedestrian safety yields higher death counts overall" (I assumed you meant "fixating on pedestrian safety," but perhaps this was a mistake). I'm curious how you came to that conclusion. Can you please elaborate, and what was my stupid "jump and conclusion," precisely?
I see. So you believe that if Europeans designed their streets to be less safe for pedestrians, like they are in the U.S., then their overall vehicular death rate would go down. Is that right?