Otherwise, people would choose the cheapest, or best value vehicle. I don't think any 4x4 can be described as good value.
You might not Stuart, but plenty of other people do. I guess it all depends on how you define value. Your idea of what represents best value is probably completely different to mine. Your priority may be, say, economy or size. Mine, on the other hand, might be speed or handling. The fact that we have different priorities doesn't mean one of us is right and the other is wrong. It's just that we as individuals are simply exercising our freedom of choice to form our own judgements. Long may it continue.
A mate of mine borrowed another mate of mines Porsche Cayenne whilst he was vacationing for two weeks. After 24 hours with the car he had to stop driving it because, in his own words, "I'm driving like a twat and I'll probably kill myself."
Now the question raised is this, was he driving badly beacuse he was in a 4x4, or simply he had turned into a Porsche driver?
Are you seriously suggesting that 4x4s - or indeed Porsches - turn people into bad drivers?
So, in conclusion, 4x4's are fine within the context of their use, it's just that a lot of people are buying them when other cars would be more appropriate.
Who decides what's appropriate or not? Why stop at 4x4s? What about Ferraris, Lambos, Astons and, dare I say, Lotus Esprits? When is any high performance car ever 'appropriate'? My wife and I don't have children yet we run two 4/5 seater cars (and for that matter live in a house that's far too big for just the two of us), is that appropriate? Stretching the point? Or is it?