To echo Ghavrel a bit, I don't know much (read: anything) about that in the big statistical scheme of things, but I do know that my dad's succession of "dirt cheap" manual cars have lasted for many years and hundreds of thousands of miles, while our one automatic van has had its transmission replaced three times now. Also, whether or not the cost is negated by things like that, I really like knowing that the way I drive has a huge impact on my fuel usage. Yes, that's true to some extent with automatics as well, but not nearly as much. It's a whole different kind of control. I mean, how awesome is it that I can get 30-35 mpg on my old, crappy Ford Focus just by paying close attention to what my feet and hands are doing?

My other argument in favor of manuals is a bit harder to articulate. It's what you said, but flipped. You think it's safer to drive an automatic 'cause you can do a whole bunch of other things and still be okay in a pinch. Well, I like a car that forces me to concentrate on what I'm doing. Because of the more complicated movements and all, I am not tempted to eat or drink or talk on my cell. And I'm far more competent as a single-minded manual driver than I would be as a multi-tasking automatic driver. (That's not a dig at you, necessarily; my mind/body just don't do that juggling act thing very well.) As for the gut reaction... that really all depends on how you learned to drive, I'd say. My instinct involves both feet.