Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
After they design and build a product without taxpayer dollars and can sell it without a tax subsidy that gives them a unfair advantage over the competition, you might be able to say they are on to something.
Funny you aren't saying the same thing abut oil companies and farmers. Both of which receive federal subsidies.
Also it's not unusual for governments to give emerging industries tax subidies in their initial startup phases if there is a national interest in developing that particular industry. The European Union did it with Airbus and Brazil did it with Embraer in the aviation industry.
Most of the large companies in Korea such as Samsung, Hyundai, and LG where given either government loans or loan guarantees and various tax advantages to develop their corporations. The same thing happened in Japan.
The problem is that Motortrend is kind of a joke. They picked the Volt and that was a bonafide Edsel. The Tesla looks to be a nice car, but is it practical and actually commercially sgnificant? Why not a flying car?
Maybe, but do you really feel the Volt was really a massive failure and a bad car? Also, given that what kind of car gets Car of Year (by price range, by model, by manufacturer, etc.) I guess you can say it's borderline useless since it's not restrictive enough, but at the same time it is a lot more interesting that way. Sort of like overall Best in Show for dogs or some such rather than saying there is only a single limited category in which cars can compete in. I'll tell you not flying car because those aren't available on the consumer level nor is the technology, infrastructure, or regulations capable of handling them.
As far as practical for use as a car and commercially significant, the Tesla seems to meet those standards since there is some segment of the population able to afford 50K cars and these cars are actually in mass production rather than custom models each. If it helps, it's not just glowing reviews from Motor Trend, but from pretty much across the board.
The world is full of skeptics! Don't knock the little guy with an idea! We'll never know will we until it's front page news. Remember all the great inventors of the past and the present?
I make new stuff a lot, prototype and manufacture on a small scale. However, there's a difference between doing something that works or doing something that does not. Perpetual motion machines are a holy grail of sorts, but it simply doesn't work with the laws of physics. Systems that magically output energy from somewhere must have had some energy put in somewhere up the path and it's important to realize this. Of course, if this guy you mentioned actually did make something amazing then great, but your vague recollection of something that did this or that is like countless dead ends that neglected to account for some very basic things. One example that blew up earlier this year was a guy in China who had the great idea of installing blades and a wind generator in front of an electric cart he built so driving would generate more power and therefore power his cart so he can drive more and generate more power and so on and so forth. While I applaud his tinkering efforts and building of the cart, I'm also aware that he's pretty much off on the power recapture for that because the loss from drag and carting around a generator is going to more than offset what minimal energy the generator creates by a huge margin. It's this basic kind of understanding that some people seem to never even try to develop which I'm against.
I too am in awe of the Tesla Roadster, but not it's present price tag! They could have built a slightly larger stripped down model without all the bells & whistles that everyone can afford to buy like say between $15,000 - $25,000! They would sell like hot cakes for sure or won't be able to keep up with the public's demand!
Must have air conditioning though or an efficient interior climate control!
Funny you aren't saying the same thing abut oil companies and farmers. Both of which receive federal subsidies.
Also it's not unusual for governments to give emerging industries tax subidies in their initial startup phases if there is a national interest in developing that particular industry. The European Union did it with Airbus and Brazil did it with Embraer in the aviation industry.
Most of the large companies in Korea such as Samsung, Hyundai, and LG where given either government loans or loan guarantees and various tax advantages to develop their corporations. The same thing happened in Japan.
I dont believe in the federal government subsidizing any industry and Im not saying anything about oil companies and farmers because this thread isnt about them
So your argument is we should subsidize certain industries because other countries do? Compelling
I dont believe in the federal government subsidizing any industry and Im not saying anything about oil companies and farmers because this thread isnt about them
So your argument is we should subsidize certain industries because other countries do? Compelling
Almost all effectual governments have subsidized something or other. Name a single president who has not pushed for some kind of subsidy. Name a current government that does not subsidize anything. Even the most free market of societies in the world such as that of Hong Kong engages in subsidies. The closest thing I could think of to completely lack of government subsidy would be places that have become failed states and government basically has no hand in anything--but even then any kind of social order in the end collates around some kind of subsidization.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yellow Jacket
I like my gas guzzling cars too much. I will never waste my money on an electric car.
And you're certainly entitled to keep it. Your gas guzzler is currently indirectly subsidized, but subsidies aren't all bad. The only thing that would be hard to change is real supply and demand of oil which the government of the US or any singular government really has control over. There is nothing wrong with paying the real world price set by the free market for gasoline, so as long as you are able to pay it then continue. For others, the electric car might be a great investment.
I know I'm entitled to keep it because you can't take it from me. On to less obvious points. People complain about gas prices but I can easily afford the fuel for every vehicle I have including my thirsty V8 powered vehicles. If I can afford the car then I can afford the gas. Just don't try to kill off the gas powered vehicles in order to force electric cars down our throats. No need to drive a car packed with batteries. I would much rather have a hydrogen fuel cell car.
Last edited by Yellow Jacket; 11-19-2012 at 11:01 AM..
I know I'm entitled to keep it because you can't take it from me. On to less obvious points. People complain about gas prices but I can easily afford the fuel for every vehicle I have including my thirsty V8 powered vehicles. If I can afford the car then I can afford the gas. Just don't try to kill off the gas powered vehicles in order to force electric cars down our throats. No need to drive a car packed with batteries. I would much rather have a hydrogen fuel cell car.
Who is forcing electric cars down your throat? How wide of a gape can your throat handle if an entire car, electric or otherwise, can be forced down it? Give me your number. I can make you famous.
Hydrogen fuel cell cars are fine, too, and both public and private institutions here and abroad have been working on it for decades. A lot of it is the safe storage of hydrogen gas which would have to be heavily compressed and is highly flammable. It could become a very viable option alongside electric and gas cars, but projections are that a decade is the minimum amount of time for a competitive vehicle if advances progress steadily which is uncertain. The other issue would be the hydrogen gas infrastructure that we would need to build which would be substantially trickier than what was necessary for the electric car (which was fairly easy in that it required access to the electric grid). I actually think it's pretty weird that you seem vehemently against electric cars and would be much rather for hydrogen fuel cell cars. I'm curious, what's the rationale behind that?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
