Login is disabled. This forum is read-only.
Imperial Forum → Politics → Proof the Bailouts Were Necessary
Haha all electric range of a dozen miles or two. Useless garbage. Waste of money and the batteries are mega toxic pollution to the environment.
It's bad technology. GM's wasting money and a lot of it is taxpayer money (both invested in GM and subsidizing these crappy electric vehicles).
The technology isn't there. No company is helping their bottom line with this crap.
They're finding out that the batteries don't work in extreme cold or extreme heat. Good thing we don't have a lot of that...well...OK so half the counties in the USA are formally "disaster areas" due to drought, but...
Even under ideal conditions they're incapable of getting the average person to and from work, let alone anywhere else, on electric. And company vehicles? Not even close.
The added weight of the motor and battery just decreases gas mileage and would result in a net loss of money and a net increase in CO2 emissions for the vast majority of drivers.
The only reason anyone uses them is because they want to make an ignorant political statement, and they either barely drive anywhere--and short distances when they do--or they're just too dumb to understand that they're wasting money and producing more CO2 pushing a worthless electric motor and battery around everywhere. And they're going to have a mega toxic battery to throw out in a short time.
Looks like you can already convert the Ford F-150
http://www.qtww.com/assets/u/F150PHEVTruck.pdf
35 mile range on electric only - good enough for me (probably could pick up a used f150 for, what 5 grand)?
wonder how much the conversion would cost - maybe another 5?
Now for the camper and solar-array / wind generator.
Maybe another 5 grand?
So far 15k
A fair-sized lot of land out in the sticks off-grid (within 35kms of a ski hill, hopefully): maybe, what, 40k? Easy...
Cost to build a little cabin on a lake shore in the woods there: do it myself, since I can live in the camper while I do it. Could build a nice-enough place for maybe 15k.
total: 75k - pretty much what a new top of the line gasloline-powered dodge ram truck with all the bells and whistles would cost.
Ahh.. the good like for just 75k...all paid, no mortgage...
My little solar array / wind generator and truck will power my cabin's appliances: washer and dryer, dishwasher, garborator, fridge, microwave, flatscreen TV (oops maybe will have to buy those, too,...used - say, what another 5k? yeah, easy) I'll grow my own vegetables; go hunting, fishing, brew my own moonshine (wonder if the truck's gastank would like moonshine, too? Probably), beer, wine - could do it today, all for less than 100k easy; actually retire young.
i'm holding out for energon cubes
"35 mile range on electric only - good enough for me (probably could pick up a used f150 for, what 5 grand)?"
35 is under ideal conditions, "estimated" ideal. Ie, less than 20 miles. Ever test driven an electric vehicle? I've test driven the Volt. It has an estimated range of 35 miles on electric. I watched it not last 20.
If you pick up a used F150 for 5 grand it's either old as Moses--and, thus, in poor shape--or in poor shape.
I hate to ask this again, but do you have any clue what you're talking about? It seems not, begging the question of why you post such baseless conjecture which common sense and the tiniest bit of life experience render laughable.
"wonder how much the conversion would cost - maybe another 5?"
Have you ever worked on an automobile? Okay, silly question. Let me just inform you that the labor and necessary parts for a conversion (motor, battery, adjustments [regular 150s do not leave space for all this crap]) are easily going to be over $5,000.
"Now for the camper and solar-array / wind generator."
Yeah, because living in a camper is really desirable. Have you ever spent much time in one? Rather cramped. Not desirable living conditions.
"Maybe another 5 grand?"
For a "camper" capable of living in (for more than a few days) and a "solar-array / wind generator" capable of supplying all desired electricity? LULZ. You have to be kidding.
"A fair-sized lot of land out in the sticks off-grid (within 35kms of a ski hill, hopefully): maybe, what, 40k? Easy..."
I'm sure you can find a completely undesirable plot of land for that amount or less. But, then, that's a completely undesirable piece of land. Why are you talking about it like anyone would want it?
"Cost to build a little cabin on a lake shore in the woods there: do it myself, since I can live in the camper while I do it. Could build a nice-enough place for maybe 15k."
You obviously don't have the knowledge or skills to produce such a home, which is representative of the general problem we have with your whole post.
You have literally absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Not one single part of your break-down made any sense of had remotely accurate numbers or presumptions.
Accept the fact that you have no idea what you're talking about. Learn and grow as a human being. All this crap you're posting is completely nonsensical--it's ignorant and factually wrong in every detail.
Everyone knows dilithium crystals are the wave of the future. Get with the times.
Sadly it is no longer possible to live in a camper on your own land while you build. the courts have accepted the theory that your neighbors property values are affected by you camping out; therefore the county can regulate how long and where and what time you can camp out, because by breathing on your own land is "harming" everybody around you. Also for that reason they can demand a permit to build your solar array, and free to charge you up the yingyang to do it. AND, even if they allow all that, parking on your own lawn is especially harmful to property values, because it attracts people who aren't anal retentive, and they have less money than control freaks, thus, lowering prices and "harming" your neighbors and shrinking the tax base, thus justifying impounding your vehicle.
It's funny because xeno would support such government action to protect property values if he understood them.
> The Yell wrote:
> Sadly it is no longer possible to live in a camper on your own land while you build. the courts have accepted the theory that your neighbors property values are affected by you camping out; therefore the county can regulate how long and where and what time you can camp out, because by breathing on your own land is "harming" everybody around you. Also for that reason they can demand a permit to build your solar array, and free to charge you up the yingyang to do it. AND, even if they allow all that, parking on your own lawn is especially harmful to property values, because it attracts people who aren't anal retentive, and they have less money than control freaks, thus, lowering prices and "harming" your neighbors and shrinking the tax base, thus justifying impounding your vehicle.
Not surprised that is the case some places, but surely not all places. I have said this would be an off-grid area, and as such, I do not think I would be hindered from camping on my land while building my cabin. Besides, the amount of land would have to be a few acres - enough arable land to grow food and maintain balance in the natural environment, to sustain the basic living needs of myself and family, and so I don't think my 'camp' would be visble from the road or the neighbors.
How's the weather in your fictional universe where you regress tens of thousands of years to forsake trade, make your own clothes, crap in holes in the ground, make up costs of things many times more expensive, and subject your family to sub-poverty standards of living?
GM has to sell cars to be a business. Usually to sell cars you need to advertise the brand. GM reckons sponsoring Manchester United (and Liverpool by the way) will create more exposure for their money than other means. This makes sense... shirt sales over 7 years will be 10 million for United, plus years of being seen by a billion viewers each week of Premier League football.
Whether this form of advertising shall translate to sales, profits and share gains is questionable. However the payments are spread over the years and should come from operating profits not taxpayer money.
GM doesn't have to sell cars to be a business. That's the problem. They're still operating with billions of tax dollars invested and massive subsidies for hybrids and the useless waste that is the Volt.
The point made about the advertising is that they're paying a ridiculous rate for it, much more than other buyers were. Government money was followed with inept leadership and bad decisions. What a shock.
>>Not surprised that is the case some places, but surely not all places. I have said this would be an off-grid area, and as such, I do not think I would be hindered from camping on my land while building my cabin. Besides, the amount of land would have to be a few acres - enough arable land to grow food and maintain balance in the natural environment, to sustain the basic living needs of myself and family, and so I don't think my 'camp' would be visble from the road or the neighbors.<
Not only did the Supreme Court sign off on this scam, but in 2005 in a 5-4 decision called Kelo vs (somebody) they said that any level of government can seize your campsite and give it to Walmart on the sound theory that Walmart would pay more taxes than any mere inhabitant.
(Case involved Mr. and Mrs. Kelo who had their home taken from them for rockbottom prices so a developer could build a mall. Us rightwing nuts gleefully point out that the developer has abandoned the project, so, what were once nice taxpaying homes is now a dirt lot)
Most places are in on these scams to the hilt. I was looking at homesteading in Alaska; you can buy some acre lots from the state. No road, no electricity, no water, no sewer, no gas. They're accessible by boat or airplane. To buy in you have to join the Homeowners Association
Supreme Court decisions against Constitutionally protected property rights have been disgusting and legally baseless (beyond "there's enough of us to make it law!") for too many decades for any hope now.
Actually GM is paying the market rate to advertise on a Manchester United shirt. Perhaps a little higher than other advertisers on other football shirts but for a longer term. Certainly a much better deal than Olympic sponsorship. Or prime time TV ads.
GM may continue to exist with subsidies, loans and bailout money - but it's not a viable business without operating profit I.e. a revenue stream. Either the US government hopes to recoup its investment or hopes that a slowed decline in GM will prevent a major collapse in US manufacturing and strong localised recessions.
It's not a viable business either way.
The US government reaches for power. It doesn't plan ahead or scheme. It just takes everything it can. This is what's leading us to decline and collapse.
> Mace wrote:
> Either the US government hopes to recoup its investment or hopes that a slowed decline in GM will prevent a major collapse in US manufacturing and strong localised recessions.<
C govt doesn't give a damn, the Senate and House figures it can barter more $$ to bailout a failed GM every year to get their own goodies, the Presidents figure they can blame the need for a bailout on the last Administration, this is the new normal and we are headed to Greece.
I have been INSTRUCTED by keynesian obamanites that there is no potential debt crisis as the world economy will continue to buy American bonds at whatever level is necessary to keep the US govt afloat, as none of you dare suffer an American collapse
I suggested this was betting that the entire human race was too stupid to stop enriching America at their own expense and they said it wasn't stupid it was smart!
me I think you're not that dumb.
dumb enough
but not THAT dumb
"PUEBLO, Colo.
Yell, interesting notion the world will buy American bonds - it's a definite fact for now and the foreseeable future. However 2000 years ago Italy (Rome) was the preeminent economic power, 1000 years ago it was China, 500 years ago it was Spain. Indeed just 25 years ago it was - albeit briefly and on the back of a bubble - Japan. Each has suffered economic declines.
America can for the foreseeable future rely on it being the biggest economy, the biggest consumer, and home to the global currency. However at some point America needs to get its house in order. Perhaps the Keynesian Obamaniacs know this and hope economic growth, inflation and incremental decreases in the deficit will eventually work. They're also right about this - at least in theory. Whether in practise America sorts itself out before it ceases to be vital to the world's economy is something we may not know for decades. And possibly not within our lifetimes - hence the problem, short term political and personal benefits surpass the long-term need of the country.
"Perhaps the Keynesian Obamaniacs know this and hope economic growth, inflation and incremental decreases in the deficit will eventually work."
Hahahhahahaha
HAAAAAAhhahahahahhahahahahhahahahahaha!
Because these guys, with all of their education and wealth, really support Keynesian theories because they benefit the working poor? Because these guys have absolutely no concern with the increases in power than Keynesian systems demand--They're so virtuous and noble they don't even need to address the inherent problems with elevating corruptible man to such levels of authority. They don't even need to talk about safeguards, because safeguards are clearly unnecessary! Wait, what?
Nobody seriously believes that obliterating the economic freedoms of the working poor is in their interests. The Keynesian model has no success stories. The notion that the poor are helped by taking away their freedom and rewards for success is just ignorant garbage sold to lazy welfare trash--who will always vote for whoever gives the most handouts--and well-to-do, ignorant successful people who envision themselves as being part of some future aristocracy in which they can make the world perfect just by paying their taxes--no additional effort or concern necessary.
Yeah, enslaving the poor might be best for them. That's certainly a valid theory. Lulz.
The bailouts harmed the viability of these companies by not allowing them to renegotiate contracts they couldn't afford--which regular (and legal) bankruptcy procedures would have allowed for. They also harmed these companies by screwing private investors, discouraging them from investing in the future if there's any chance the government will pull something else (as they'll have motivations to do for some time, given their investment).
"hey're also right about this - at least in theory. Whether in practise America sorts itself out before it ceases to be vital to the world's economy is something we may not know for decades. And possibly not within our lifetimes - hence the problem, short term political and personal benefits surpass the long-term need of the country."
24 years ago there were 2 Germanies, Red Army was on the Baltic and there was no European Union.
The fact that "smart Americans" think they can make easy money without any consequences is the Trump of Doom -- every time
Hey, if you [cluck] up you can play word games and still get elected by a majority of ignorant idiots who don't know the difference.
yeah that settles political power
but not economic power
we would still have to convince suckers to lend real money
Not necessarily. With enough control of the money supply (hehe!) and getting their grimy hands into some huge banks (hehe!), they could pull whatever they wanted and play more word games to explain that they did X for the good of the people, and anyone who disagrees (aka, exposes them) is a rich elitist who wants to exploit them!
Half of the country doesn't pay income taxes. Half of the country dies with less than $10,000 to their names. As long as there are enough ignorant slaves to government to keep electing them, democratic government can tyrannically take (both wealth and freedoms) from those who don't submit voluntarily in exchange for handouts.
Yell, yes. 24 years ago the political situation in Europe was vastly different. It was the end game of the Cold War and Japan was the biggest economy. China was only a decade into its economic revolution... and still very poor.
Nonetheless the decline of a nation like the USA takes a long time. And America can follow Japan and buy more of its own government debt.
Anyway I would argue that there's not much true patriotism in America. Chinese politics always looks to the best for China. Germany has strict rules on preventing short-termism. American politics is about the now. Of course the American political class came to America for self-enrichment. Let's not forget most are descended from (already wealthy) Europeans who saw an opportunity to make vast sums in the new world. The true measure of success for an American is to become so wealthy they can come to Europe and be considered almost as an equal. (I'm just teasing)
Imperial Forum → Politics → Proof the Bailouts Were Necessary
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.