Government Motors Volt Costs Taxpayers $250,000 per Vehicle

reply to post by TheImmaculateD1

So, let's just nuke the Middle East, China, Russia, Asia, Africa all to steal their oil because if we don't get off the tit of oil soon that will be our future. Besides, the Wars Over energy are over and by 2030 you will not be able to buy a petrol powered car produced new so you might as well get used to it.

Major leaps forward in tech require a little sacrifice!

Are you on the right thread?

This one is tltled : "Government Motors Volt Costs Taxpayers $250,000 per Vehicle."

If there will be no new hydrocarbon-fueled vehicles after 2030, WHY did Obama alter the CAFE standards to require 55 mpg averages for 2050? And who says the fuel needs to be petrol? LNG works very well and is in use in dozens of fleets and dozens of countries.

Any reasonable estimate, except in your warped psyche, acknowledges the use and avaiability of fossil fuels thru the end of this century. If you would post facts relevant to Earth, istead of imaginary woerld, you might have something to contribute. Somewhere. Certainly not here.

Why don't you try again when you sober up?

Actually, your previous two posts have as much relevance to facts, topic and truth as all of the rest of your posts.

Other than pointing out that, while Barack Obama and David Chu have done their very best to destroy the US oil and gas industries, and that it is 100% impossible to immediately cease reliance on hydrocarbons; I cannot for the life of me understand what other alternatives you or any other "green" idiot would propose for powering the existing powerplants, automobiles, factories, ship and rail transportation sysytems than foreign oil.

Why do you insist on trolling this threaed just to show howout of touch you are?

deny ignorance.

jw

At least you know where the $250,000 good deal or bad deal is going and most of the time we do not know where the $Trillions$ of dollars have been spent. Isn't it the way government works tax and spend and once in the hands of our government it is theirs not yours with no cap on spending? ^Y^

reply to post by jdub297


Transportation first then things like plastics and other applications. Let's work on targeting transport first so that it'd be easier for us to employ and write up a template that can be employed on other applications!

3M and Dow Chemical are already at work now developing petrol free products that won't be market ready for at least 10 - 15 years!

reply to post by TheImmaculateD1

Let's work on targeting transport first so that it'd be easier for us to employ and write up a template that can be employed on other applications!

3M and Dow Chemical are already at work now developing petrol free products that won't be market ready for at least 10 - 15 years!

"Let's work?"

You can't be serious. You waste post after post trying to gin-up some kind of argument that subsidized production (at exhorbitant cost) somehow is the equivalent of basic research, when it most clearly and definitely is not. Then, you backstep to try to wrangle Obama's give-aways to the "1%" of car buyers and the UAW as part of the fight for "energy idependence," despite Obama's best efforts to destroy independent US production.

Now, you attempt to present an "us or them" alternative resolution!

"Let's?" Let "us?" Who the hell are "us," under your warped perceptions? Some industry or product that Obama can throw "our" money at to buy votes and constituencies?

You note that private industry like "3M and Dow" are spending their own resources on efforts already, that will not pay off for them, or anyone else, "for at least 10-15 years."

You ignore that much of their "work" is castigated, vandalized, starved and otherwise hamstrung by those on "your team" that oppose even basic research that doesn't incorporate or further their agenda.

When government stays the hell out of private industry, maybe then "we" can "work" together to support private efforts.

The last thing "we" need is for government to pick another Solyndra, GM, CITI or AIG to foist their "principles" upon "us," whether "we" want them or not, at "our" expense and without regard to cost!


jw

Originally posted by GovtFlu

Soulless politicians have been bleeding US jobs over seas for generations, yet suddenly I'm supposed to believe they care?.. lol, whatever..

Uhm, it was the gov't sending jobs overseas to make extra profits and where pollution laws are far more lax so they'd not need to be concerned about poisoning the environment? The gov't did that?

Derek

Starting in 2000 didn't GMAC start giving new car\truck\suv loans to illegal immigrants?

Just needed a utility bill and a little money down? They all jumped in their $40,000 Trucks and SUV's and headed south of the border never to pay for them?


The Volt atleast had people making payments on them.

Originally posted by Viesczy
Uhm, it was the gov't sending jobs overseas to make extra profits and where pollution laws are far more lax so they'd not need to be concerned about poisoning the environment? The gov't did that?
Derek

Of course! Obama made sure that GM's "leadership" followed his dictates, or they were forced to resign.

This included at least 2,400,000 cars produced in China alone.

General Motors Co. may hasten plans for boosting output in China after regulators in the world’s largest auto market said they will impose anti-dumping duties on some vehicles imported from the U.S.

Punitive duties of as much as 12.9 percent for its autos “may accelerate GM’s localization plans,” Himanshu Patel, a New York-based analyst for JPMorgan Chase & Co., wrote today in a note to clients. The Detroit-based automaker already plans to add local production in China and just 1.3 percent of GM’s 2.43 million sales in China last year were imported, he wrote.

GM May Boost China Production

But, that's not enough, he wants production in China, Brazil, et c., increased.

General Motors do Brasil is adding a third shift in the São Caetano do Sul plant, in the State of São Paulo, creating up to 1,500 new jobs as it prepares to produce four new Chevrolet products, GM Chairman and CEO Dan Akerson said Friday.
Akerson made the announcement during a visit with São Paulo Gov. Geraldo Alckmin.
“Brazil is a key player in the global economy and the investments we are making in the country show our confidence in its growth potential,” Akerson said. “In 2010, Brazil was the third-largest market for GM globally and the second largest for the Chevrolet brand.”

GM is on track to complete $3 billion of investment in Brazil between 2008 and 2012, GM South America and GM do Brasil President Jaime Ardila said.

GM do Brasil Adds Third Shift at São Caetano do Sul Plant, 1,500 new jobs

Why don't you try to do some research on your own?

deny ignorance

jw

reply to post by Pervius


Don't forget to mention that the Volt also has a purchase option which means as long as the payments are made the car is yours signed, sealed and delivered as opposed to the 1997 EV1 that was lease only. When GMAC was split from GM around 2006 also signaled that they couldn't directly approve financing in house and had to go out of house to arrange financing. In 09 GM recaptured control of it's GMAC financing arm.

reply to post by jdub297


They were forced out due to incompetence. If you are on my company and if you force it into the ground by pushing large trucks over the fuel efficient smaller cars and electrics of course you're gone. Rick Wagoneer was the first to go.

The Gen 4 Tahoe - Escalade and Yukon due 2014 will be smaller in size. The Suburban will remain at the alpha truck as it's the longest running single car in the world as 2012 marks it's 76th year of production. The Corvette C7 is in development now and should be unveiled at 2013 NAIAS at Detroit.

reply to post by Viesczy


Yup, this is where deregulation became a double edge sword that cost us! See how deregulation always hurts the little guy?

reply to post by jdub297


Every major chemical firm is in development of a petrol free plastic that won't be production ready for at least 10 - 15 years. This is allowing private industry to take the lead there, but notice how in order to make this happen Govt had to set the tone and reset the direction?

Remember the GM AUTOnomy project? The skateboard chassis with the interchangeable bodies? That will be the future of transportation that was almost derailed when they were about to go under? That can be production reality in as little as 7 years but need to develop a substance that's as strong as steel but as light as carbon fibre or pvc so that you and like 1 - 3 other people could change the bodies when the mood hit!

Development of that should be kickstarted soon.

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
reply to post by jdub297

 

Remember the GM AUTOnomy project? The skateboard chassis with the interchangeable bodies? That will be the future of transportation that was almost derailed when they were about to go under? That can be production reality in as little as 7 years but need to develop a substance that's as strong as steel but as light as carbon fibre or pvc so that you and like 1 - 3 other people could change the bodies when the mood hit!

Development of that should be kickstarted soon.

Development never ended.

It is still at the same point it was a while ago, waiting on material technology to catch up to the idea.

Do you think they just throw these things out?

YEAH!!!!
A company that should have either failed or restructured, gets a free loan from Bush, and extended by 0bama, that continues to move manufacturing out of the US, and produces a vehicle that goes what 35 miles on a charge, that first gets its power source from the coal based electrical grid and catches fire.

What a great product GM.

Lets just forget the Nissan LEAF, with better numbers.

Oh, and the best part? The cost is $47k for a hunk of crap that is subsidizes like crazy by the America Tax Payer.

Oh, don't forget that the batteries in place don't break down after use, and that batteries typically carry a 10 year life span.
Wonder what the replacement cost for the batteries will be? Or is it just a car to be used, then thrown away once the batteries are dead.

What a hunk of crap.

Thanks GM and Thanks Big Corrupt Govt. YOU ROCK.

reply to post by peck420


When they lost their GMAC arm for awhile went with it was the funding to develop a material that if the temporary split would've never occurred they may've just cracked the surface!

reply to post by macman


Wait until sometime next year when Chevy launches it's first true pure electric in 15 years, the 2013 Spark next fall and then come back and tell me that the Leaf is better, that or even the Tesla Model S due 2013/14!

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
reply to post by macman

 

Wait until sometime next year when Chevy launches it's first true pure electric in 15 years, the 2013 Spark next fall and then come back and tell me that the Leaf is better, that or even the Tesla Model S due 2013/14!

We aren't talking about that.
We are discussing the total worthless hunk of junk that is the Volt and the Nice Tax Payer subsidizes for its creation.

reply to post by TheImmaculateD1


Lol, not even close.

They stopped funding because it didn't matter if they funded or not.

The research facilities (the place that could actually come up with the new materials) were just getting built (some are now complete) and funding until the facilities were complete was wasted money.

That doesn't mean the project was ever mothballed or cancelled. It means they had to wait.

Unless, you happen to have some nanotechnology labs in your basement? That is the field that the materials required will be coming out of in the next decade or so.

In many areas we have hit the literal wall in how far we can push our current materials. No reconfigurations will help, no new designs will help. We need new base materials to work with. Stuff that was only dreamed about 10 years ago (when that chassis was designed). It will come, but it's not like flipping a switch.

reply to post by macman


The Spark is the American made and born pure electic, are you gonna trash this too as it was developed using money from TARP, is that the next to be attacked because both are proving to be the future of transportation and are now the driving force behind the electric movement!

So sorry but an American made car is not a hunk of junk!

Answer me one question that I'm find that you have yet to address and that is :

DO YOU WANT THE UNITED STATES TO EVER HAVE A SUCCESS STORY? WHAT IS THIS INTENSE HATRED OF ANY ADVANCEMENT THAT THE US TRIES TO GET IN FRONT OF?

Why this Anti Americanism?

reply to post by peck420


They stopped funding it because they'd have to cancel the project as a concession of The SCUM in order to recieve money. Remember the crap GM put up with in the 90's when developing the EV1? History will not repeat here.

Watch "Who Killed The Electric Car?" and it's sequel "Revenge Of The Electric Car" and tell me that this is a pipedream and a waste!

More BS. Ok, here we go.

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1

The Spark is the American made and born pure electic, are you gonna trash this too as it was developed using money from TARP,

Yes. The Govt has no business is bailing out companies.

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
is that the next to be attacked because both are proving to be the future of transportation and are now the driving force behind the electric movement!

Driving force?
You are diluted.
Where are the Batteries going to be manufactured? China.
What about the physical vehicle itself? Mexico or Canada.
Oh, and the whole green pitch? What a load of crap. It still has to be connected to the Coal powered Electrical Grid.

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
So sorry but an American made car is not a hunk of junk!

really?
The Chevy volt is such a great thing, then why are they catching fire and why has GM offered to buy them back. Oh yeah, what is the sales figures as well?

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
Answer me one question that I'm find that you have yet to address and that is :

DO YOU WANT THE UNITED STATES TO EVER HAVE A SUCCESS STORY? WHAT IS THIS INTENSE HATRED OF ANY ADVANCEMENT THAT THE US TRIES TO GET IN FRONT OF?

There are many success stories. 99% are not related to how the Govt swooped in and helped *cough* took over a company.
You yourself spout that you are against Big Corps getting bailed out, yet when it is convenient, you set those statements aside when you see 0bama doing what you hate, bailing out a Company.
The people can't win when the Govt is the sugar daddy. Because as the people become increasingly dependent on the Govt, when the Govt says jump, you better say how high.

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
Why this Anti Americanism?

I would retort with stating how very clever, to try to relate this to Anti-Americanism.
But........................It is not.
Has nothing to do with that.
I am anti Big-Intrusive-Controlling Govt.
Get your facts straight.