1 - 10 Next
How about having the basic class and decency to admit being wrong about Volt buyers taking your tax dollars, before rushing off onto other issues as as distraction? No, that's not the kind of person you are, is it?
In response to:

GM Doubles Down on Chevy Volt's Failure

Carney Wrote: Jun 09, 2014 10:26 AM
Wish there was a Plus Up button on this site's lame comment system.
I remember when the Volt was anticipated with iPhone level excitement. It's a shame Obama publicly praised the Volt, appeared in photo ops with it, etc. Instead of having its techno-cool rub off on him, he smeared his stigma all over the Volt, alienating half of America from it that now WANTS to believe anything bad about this amazing car, no matter how false. The irony is that these people BELIEVE Obama's boasting and credit-claiming for this technological breakthrough, and thus while rejecting him reject it too. What an unfairness. He had NOTHING to do with the Volt which had 2008 gone the other way have been released on McCain and Palin's watch. Maybe then the Left would have gone bonkers about it and we'd see all kinds of myths and malice about it on liberal sites.
Wrong. Often automakers have no “assurance” about profit; the long history of disastrous flops and surprise hits they couldn’t keep up with the demand for shows that. The only way to know is to try. Toyota lost money for years on the Prius, enduring jeers over the car’s green ethos, high up-front price, and especially government incentives for it such as tax breaks. But they stuck with it and now the Prius is a top seller in America, THE top seller in Japan, and a major profit generator for the company, having sold so many units it no longer qualifies for any incentives and has had its price fall dramatically due to economies of scale and mass production. The question is, do Americans have the discipline, focus, and long-term attention span necessary to pull off a similar achievement? Going by you, the answer is no, but let’s hope GM shows otherwise. GM would have released the Volt even if McCain-Palin had won in 2008 and it had undergone and survived a standard private-sector bankruptcy reorganization. GM had positioned the Volt as a “halo” car - an attention-getting, brand-redefining top priority meant to show that GM was no complacent dinosaur waiting to be caught napping again but rather could still innovate.
The Volt outsells many cars, and has out-sold the Corvette.
Nobody's taking your tax dollars to pay for it, you ignorant wrong aggressive jerk. Volt buyers, like buyers of all electric cars, get a $7,500 tax credit which lets them keep more OF THEIR OWN MONEY. The tax credit is "non-refundable" which as accountants know means that if your tax liability does not equal or exceed the amount of the credit, you don't get the full credit. In other words, if you only owed $4,000 in income tax the year you bought a Volt, you only get back $4,000 from the Treasury. So, again, Volt buyers don't get anyone else's tax money. And don't start with nonsense about how a tax cut for someone else somehow raises YOUR taxes, since conservatives reject that liberal assertion in all other contexts.
If you own a Tesla automobile, you can drive for up to 300 miles, then recharge from "empty" to 80% of a full charge in about 30 minutes at any of 94 (soon to be hundreds of) SuperCharger stations nationwide, FOR FREE. And no, it's not provided by government; Tesla simply provides them to its owners as a perk, since after installation the ongoing cost to them is minimal, especially for the solar-powered SuperCharger stations.
The Volt is not a government program. It was begun in 2006 (while Bush was president, and well before the 2008 crash and bailout) by a purely private-sector GM, on its own initiative. The GM executive who is the Father of the Volt, Bob Lutz, is a cigar-chomping Republican who's called global warming a "crock of $#!t", and who pushed for the Volt within the company starting in 2003 in response to the progress in battery-electric vehicle R&D being made by a startup Silicon Valley automaker. Yes, the electric-car tax credit, helped get the Volt greenlit within GM, but that was passed by a GOP House and GOP Senate and was a signed into law by Bush in 2005. Since when are conservatives against tax breaks, enabling a private-sector to pay less in taxes, if they do something to help us break free from jihad juice?
It's as lame for Republicans to try to out-PC the Left and to attack the Democrats from the left on racial issues as it is for the Dems to call the GOP unpatriotic, hostile to veterans, and weak on terror.
On GM "repaying" taxpayers, they've repaid all the money they actually owe, with interest. The notion they still owe taxpayers money comes from the US government selling off its remaining GM shares at a loss. But that wasn't GM's decision, it was the government's to not wait for the stock price to rise high enough to break even. GM has no moral or legal obligation to guarantee a profit to anyone who buys its stock, and if they did hand out cash to make whole an investor who sold lower than he bought, they'd be sued into oblivion if they just did that for one investor (the US Treasury) but nobody else.
1 - 10 Next