Government Motors Volt Costs Taxpayers $250,000 per Vehicle

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


It's CNBC Mad Money's Jim Cramer's site where he serves on their board and is a recommendation site. They are however not an end all, be all site!

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
It's CNBC Mad Money's Jim Cramer's site where he serves on their board and is a recommendation site. They are however not an end all, be all site!

Either way, enough people who use the site think the stock is, rightfully, a dog. General Motors only staved off bankruptcy for the time being. A company so fundementally flawed that it needs to take taxpayer money (which it will never repay) and cheat its rightful bondholders (circumventing the Constitution) will eventually find itself back in the same place it started.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


Would you agree to give the plan however it was conceived 5 years from 2010 please before you make a judgement as a report from the other day said that GM is on track to shatter 2011 model year sales reports!

GM was told that any money that was still owed can be divested to R&D so that it could allow us to finally kick oil to the curb or is this the action you are against?

reply to post by jdub297


How are GM and the U.S government "forcing" people to buy these cars? Hint: they're not!

The cars exist because there is a market (somewhat) for them. There are people who wish to drive hybrid vehicles and their freedom to do so deserves just as much respect as the freedom of others to drive gas-guzzling vehicles.

If and when the cost of batteries goes down, we may see a reduction in the cost of hybrid vehicles.

reply to post by neo96


Oh no, they want us to drive hybrid vehicles! Quick, better find a politician to stand in their way! Better yet, a lobbyist!

Where's the "free market" when it comes to this technology? When will it come up with these solutions that Aunt Ann (Rand) promised us?

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
reply to post by macman

 

The money they got in 08 is long since spent. The money that exists today is the results of investments using said money. Different money! The taxpayer's risk has pretty well been concluded. If it is something as simple as a cord head replacement then let it be done before further attack on The Volt, which is American made (components can be ROW but final assembly is in The USA)!

edit on 30-12-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)

Are you serious?
Honestly, your defense is money in as a tax subsidy was 08?
Your are a fool.
GM has been getting those every year, even more so with the Free loan from the Govt.
Now who looks like a Corp Shill, defending GM.

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus

 

All owed money is to go towards employing Americans as they do that the debt can be forgiven and total balance is less then $2 Billion as they got $13.2 Billion so what's this tens of billions figure?

Instead of slamming GM who got literate table scraps and crumbs when compared to the banks who got Trillions collectively and that we'll never see so until you demand that banks pay back their money don't dare talk yap on GM.

edit on 31-12-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)

Deflect and attack.
The last straws to grasp at.

Sorry, but GM should have failed.
Throwing in the "Banks" is nothing more then deflecting the issue.

Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by jdub297

 

How are GM and the U.S government "forcing" people to buy these cars? Hint: they're not!

The cars exist because there is a market (somewhat) for them. There are people who wish to drive hybrid vehicles and their freedom to do so deserves just as much respect as the freedom of others to drive gas-guzzling vehicles.

If and when the cost of batteries goes down, we may see a reduction in the cost of hybrid vehicles.

Um, NO!
The market is not driving for a $45k battery powered vehicle.
The market is driving for a $25k-$15k vehicle that gets 30-35mpg.

The Govt, buy offering tax subsidizes is driving the market for battery powered $45k vehicles.

Originally posted by jdub297

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by jdub297
reply to post by Indigo5

 

Are you insane? Or, are you Dudley D in disguise?

You OP has been shown to be propaganda funded directly by Exxon Mobile and the Koch brothers and it is plain to anyone with a 5th grade education in math that the math is false.

Carry on with the thread though. It capitalizes on folks willingness to abandon actual thought, even basic math skills, as long as they can rant about how Obama is a "Socialist"....and in that regard I imagine it will sadly have a loyal following.

Peace out.

Funny how GM itself has not even attempted to challenge what its "Government Affairs" director and chief spokesman have admitted is "basic math."

You can manufacture all the phony projections and quote from all the insulted "greenies" who can't face the truth.

Seriously...It is starting to seem like an idealogical blindness with you. I provided several links explaining the phoney math that this Propaganda piece used.

Apart from the articles, you can actually read your own OP and discern the BS Math can't you?

As far as the inference that it is only "Greenies" that can do math...I already provided the link the "The Street"..a well known Wallstreet Analyst periodical...found the claim to be BS

Setting it Straight: Chevy Volt vs. the Government
www.thestreet.com...

Geez...this is like a different flavor of the birther debate.

Do you know what a Denominator is? How about a Numerator?...I can't believe I have to explain this...

In your Propaganda OP...Directly funded by Oil Barrons...

They INFLATED THE NUMERATOR...The Number to be divided...

By including loans that are due to be repaid, plus all incentives for next generation battery technologies...NOT JUST THE VOLT OR GM...etc. etc.

While DEFLATING THE DENOMINATOR....assuming that all of that investment was only going toward the 6,000 Volts that GM Sold in their first year...while not accounting for what they might sell over the next 20...which is the length of the LOAN...not Outright Subsidy, Not accounting for the sales of those new technology batteries to other car manufacturers...etc. etc.

It is like claiming that the first Viagra puill sold cost the 2 Billion it took to develop it.

If you are incapable of math and hink that Wall Street publication "The Street" is some secret "Greenie" publication, then I don't know how to help you.

You are welcome to disagree with the idea of government incentives for new technology, but you are not free to invent a new form of Math to make your case.

Or as the famous qoute goes...

You are entitled to your own opinion, you are not, however, entitled to your own set of facts!

Deny Ignorance...Or embrace idealogical delusion...I have zero respect for folks who ignore reality so that they can stroke themselves and feel good about thier own world view.

Your OP article fails basic math...not Left or Right....MATH

Originally posted by macman

Um, NO!
The market is not driving for a $45k battery powered vehicle.
The market is driving for a $25k-$15k vehicle that gets 30-35mpg.

The Govt, buy offering tax subsidizes is driving the market for battery powered $45k vehicles.

The logic on this is a bit shakey...

Why not say the market is driving for a $10k vehicle that gets 100mpg?

Or a 5K electric Vehicle that uses minimal energy and no oil? I don't think people particularly have a love of Oil per se, just the performance that it affords.

Wouldn't that be accurate?

What restrains that price point and fuel efficiency?

Simple answer...It costs much more than that to manufacture it.

New technology decreases costs long term.

The American Auto industry is not in a position to invest in that new technology right now and unfortunately every other country with the luxury of not enduring a culture war is aggressively subsidizing their Auto industry and new Battery Technology.

EU nations, Japan, Canada, South Korea etc.etc. all fund their auto industries new tech inniatives.

For example...South Korea heavily subsidized the manufacture of New technology Lithium Batteries...and won the contract for the Volt! Our response was to fund 50% of a new $303 plant in Holland Michigan so we can make the batteries here.

And BTW...to circle back to my earlier point of bad math...this new government subsidized plant in Holland, Michigan...will be making all the batteries for the FORD FOCUS...FORD...Our goofy math OP forgot to explain how Ford Benefits from the Government Subsidies.

www.hollandsentinel.com...

I am totally fine with getting the US Gov out of the Auto Industry...as long as the American Public is OK with the US Government restricting Auto Sales in the US to only vehicles where every single part is manufactured in the USA...how do you think that will go over at home and abroad?

Until then, we need a government that encourages new technology like every other auto and auto part manufacturer in the worl benefits from.

It is my strong opinion that here in the USA that investment goes farther than it does in other countries, because frankley we rock...work hard and innovate, but that is just my opinion.

The bottom line is ...do we as a country want to be in the Auto Industry or not? The Koch Brothers and other Oil Barrons who paid for this OP (Not Conspiracey-they literally fund the Macinac Policy Center) could care less about the Auto Industry in the USA...they don't make cars...they profit from Oil and they will profit more the more they stomp out fuel efficient vehicles.

Just my 2 cents...and I am about done with a thread where most posters ignore evidence.

Just found this...I have to assume that I am not the only person on ATS that understands math"

First, he does not take into account future Volt sales, which, as Fox Business' Stuart Varney pointed out, will substantially reduce the cost-per-vehicle number. In the coming months, GM plans to expand manufacturing plants and increase production of the Volt to keep up with rising demand from dealerships. As production and sales ramp up, the per-vehicle subsidy cost will continually drop.

Furthermore, the $3 billion figure includes a broad range of state and federal incentives not only to GM, but to any company supplying parts for the Volt. For example, it includes $100 million in tax credits and subsidies to Compact Power, which manufactures lithium ion batteries for the Volt. But the company also supplies batteries to several other automakers, including Ford, Renault, and Hyundai. Therefore, it is misleading to include the full $100 million as government support for the Volt.

Finally, the $250,000 figure assumes that the full $3 billion in subsidies that has been awarded will be spent. But as Hohman acknowledges, it is "unlikely that all the companies involved in Volt production will ever receive all the $3 billion in incentives ... because many of them are linked to meeting various employment and other milestones."

mediamatters.org...

Again...anyone can argue that the Gov should invest in the Auto Industry, but you can still cling to rational thought by understanding the OP Claim is BS.

reply to post by The Sword


reply to post by Indigo5



What is shakey in this thread is the devout liberals defending crony capitalism aka corporatism meaning tax dollars are lining the pockets of GM.

Simple business 101 of your paying more to produce something you end up in oh what was it now oh yeah i remember it was Solyndra land.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by The Sword

 

reply to post by Indigo5

 

What is shakey in this thread is the devout liberals defending crony capitalism aka corporatism meaning tax dollars are lining the pockets of GM.

That is Palinesque rhetorical nonsense that in no way addresses the false and dishonest math that was used for the OP. Seeing as your best response to a debunking of the OP claim on factual and basic mathematical grounds was to spout "devout liberals defending crony capitalism aka corporatism "...I suspect you must be suffering from idealogical derrangement.

An inability to recognize facts or evidence or in this case, basic division, when your world view is challenged.

If you are unable to debate facts...why bother?

Tip...here is where you should research some facts irrelevant to the false claims in the OP and pretend that is the discussion.

Geez...what weak nonsense...where have the bright conservatives gone?

reply to post by Indigo5


Yes, and rainbows are unicorn vomit.

As it stands now, the Market is as I stated it.

reply to post by macman


Thanks...I always wondered where rainbows came from.

As the market stands now, every international auto manufacturer is recieving government grants to create new technology. We are better innovators, but we will lose as long as we don't do the same. Even the Green Bay Packers will lose horribly if they field 6 men to an opposing teams 11. We are at a disadvantage and in all the rhetoric of "free markets" the conservative bobble-heads seems willfully blind to the fact that the International Auto industry is anything but. Politics and BS should be set aside...

Again...bottom line...does the USA want to compete in the Auto industry or not.

Edit to add - before the thread again diverges from OP Claim...the OP has been shown to be bunk, opinions and markets are a different matter.

reply to post by Indigo5


Best selling vehicles 2011:

1) Ford F150
2) Chevy Silverado
3) Toyota Camry
4) Nissan Altima
5) Ford Escape
6) Ford Fusion
7) Honda Accord
8) Toyota Carolla
9) Chevy Cruze
10) Dodge Ram

In all cases where a hybrid model is available, it is not the top seller of that model.

Hybrids have not yet hit the point of cost vs justification for the average consumer.

The Volt is a hybrid (not popular by cost) and not a very good hybrid.

If it was not being propped up by GM (and GM's good fortune with the US treasury) it would most likely have been cancelled already.

The Volt sales are not going to come anywhere close to expectations, as they are already being out performed by competitor electrics, and that is usually followed by a significant drop in sales numbers.

reply to post by Indigo5


I love the personal attack there means there is no argument the facts are GM received taxpayer monies that cost more to produce than sell for.

heres a link

A GM spokesman, Gary Martin, responded to Hohman’s study by declaring that there is nothing wrong with government subsidies as everyone else is doing it. In fact, these subsidies for the Volt are “much less than the hundreds of billions of dollars that Japanese and Korean auto and battery manufacturers have received over the years [and these ‘investments’] provided … match the foresight and innovation that other countries are exhibiting.”

thenewamerican.com...


other links:
www.mygovcost.org...

The facts are you are supporting crony capitalism 3 billion in taxpayer money siting in the CORPORATE bank accounts of GM.

So 3 billion divided by 6,142 =$488,440 so the facts are is its half a million to produce a car that MSRP is $31k

www.chevrolet.com...

Those are the facts.

Originally posted by Indigo5
reply to post by macman

 

Thanks...I always wondered where rainbows came from.

As the market stands now, every international auto manufacturer is recieving government grants to create new technology. We are better innovators, but we will lose as long as we don't do the same. Even the Green Bay Packers will lose horribly if they field 6 men to an opposing teams 11. We are at a disadvantage and in all the rhetoric of "free markets" the conservative bobble-heads seems willfully blind to the fact that the International Auto industry is anything but. Politics and BS should be set aside...

Again...bottom line...does the USA want to compete in the Auto industry or not.

Edit to add - before the thread again diverges from OP Claim...the OP has been shown to be bunk, opinions and markets are a different matter.

edit on 3-1-2012 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-1-2012 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-1-2012 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)

Neo just broke it down for you.

But, thanks for the deflect and attack again.
The excuse that this happens because of this or that, or the crying over Foreign Auto Makers getting this or that does not negate the fact that the Chevy Volt is a failure, sales wise.
It is expensive, the R&D and manufacturing was funded by a tax free loan from the Govt and GM as a whole received subsidizes for its creation.

Thanks for playing though.

reply to post by macman


Another way of looking at it is 6,142 * 31,000 per sale is aorund 190 million dollars of course the caviate is that is either lining Corporate or union pockets.

So 3 billion less the 190 million means someone pockets is getting lined except the taxpayer.

Needed to make that distinction since the GM bailouts Going Green is Going Corporate and Going Union with the parts subcontracted to China.

Meh.

reply to post by macman


Until you schedule a test drive to drive a Volt don't talk yap on it while continuing to fall for spun propaganda. It is an attack yes, a direct assault and attack on the lies and mistruths you are issuing.