Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6789 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 86

Thread: GM Losing Up To $49,000 Per Volt

  1. #71
    Sage
    poweRob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    35,037

    Re: GM Losing Up To $49,000 Per Volt

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    Its wonderful if it ever becomes viable. Frankly we can give OPEC the big kissoff if we would just utilize our own fuel reserves and be a little smarter about mass transit. I know people that own the Volt. 2 regret it. 1 drives it but honestly I believe I does it because he is the type that refuses to admit he has made a mistake.

    We'll see how it plays out long term. It doesnt do anything for me but if it works for some people long term, happy days. And who knows where technology will take us.
    I give GM credit for taking that huge leap of being the first. I think once they stabilize the tech enough to where they can trust it fully, it will be expanded into their other cars as an option. Like you see with hybrid versions of cars that had been established. Accord, Civic, Escape, Camry.

    I think this will happen with this tech. Toyota has been checking it out for years. People had been doing their own conversions on the Prius called PHEV or Plugin Hybrid Electric. They've been driving with only electricity for the first 40 miles for some years now. Toyota started looking into production models of it.

    Also as far as getting ride of OPEC, I wish we'd make a WOPEC... a western hemisphere OPEC market were we sell and buy only to the western hemisphere. Those jobs would help people to not have to migrate for work so much. Let Russia, China and Europe fight over the Middle East.
    Last edited by poweRob; 09-12-12 at 10:05 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moderate Right View Post
    The sad fact is that having a pedophile win is better than having a Democrat in office. I'm all for a solution where a Republican gets in that isn't Moore.

  2. #72
    Sage
    EagleAye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Last Seen
    03-28-13 @ 09:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    5,697

    Re: GM Losing Up To $49,000 Per Volt

    Quote Originally Posted by Born Free View Post
    Your whole argument is foreign oil, you know we send 500 billion a yrs to Oil Lords, so why not bring home that 500 billion a yr and all the jobs that go with it HOME. Then you would say we don't have the oil? Sure we do, all we have to do is open up our lands to exploration, and build Keystone that brings oil in from a friendly nation.

    Electric cars have been around for decades, there is not one green anything that can compete in price of oil, natural gas, or coal. Without government using tax payer money there would not be a windmill, solar panel, or an electric car. They cannot compete, right now natural gas is as cheap as it ever was and we have a thousand yrs of the stuff, same with coal, and our lands and off shore is full of oil, and so is our close neighbor Canada. Drill here drill now and team up with Canada and say good by to Oil Lords.

    Electric cars is at best an around town car, it's not going to take you 300 miles to no where, let alone and long haul truck, going across country. Batteries are not going to do it. Electric cars now, try turning on the heat when it's O degrees outside, batteries do not work in cold or high heat and turning on the heat you will probably not make it out the drive way. The when it's 95 degrees outside try turning on the air and see how far you get. Last if it were not for government subsidizing these cars they would not sell one. Not one.
    I do agree with bringing the oil jobs home. But even then, the object is to keep them home, but still not run out of oil any time soon. We need that oil for plastics and fertilizer and myriad other uses. You see we've obviously been leaning on foreign oil for a very obvious strategic reason, and that is not running out of our own. Better to use the other guy's oil up first, right? But doing so has enriched the workers of other countries and not our own. Right now we need jobs, and an upgrade of domestic energy, which we need anyway, would provide a lot of jobs and create economic stimulus. So I propose replacing those old coal plants with newer NG plants, because as you say it's cheap and we've got lots of it. If we add in wind and solar, with NG as a base load, then the inevitable increased demand for NG won't drive up the price too high and it will last a lot longer too. So will the oil. The whole point is to rely on our own resources but not use them up before we're ready. Make sense?

    And yes, EVs as it stands now are a city car only. You won't drive across the country in one. But most people spend most of their time driving around the city anyway. Occasionally, taking a long road trip. Since it isn't unusual to have two cars, it would therefore be reasonable to keep a city car, which you use most of the time, and then an ICE car for long-range driving. In time battery tech will improve and EVs will improve in range. Lets just not throw the baby out with the bathwater. And not look at a newborn and say, "well he cain't talk and he seems mighty short for a farmhand." Give it time. Just don't throw him in the trash before he's grown a might.
    Check out my Blog http://momusnews.wordpress.com/
    Sherry's Photography site: http://www.sheywicklundphotos.com/

  3. #73
    Sage
    Born Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Sonny and Nice
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 01:53 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,396

    Re: GM Losing Up To $49,000 Per Volt

    Quote Originally Posted by poweRob View Post
    I give GM credit for taking that huge leap of being the first. I think once they stabilize the tech enough to where they can trust it fully, it will be expanded into their other cars as an option. Like you see with hybrid versions of cars that had been established. Accord, Civic, Escape, Camry.
    Yeah, and how do you like subsidizing them with your tax dollars, that is if you pay federal income taxes. Because I don't, we're 16 trillion in debt and counting and why are we subsidizing wind and solar and cars, when we have a thousand yrs of natural gas, coal, and oil.
    Liberals - Punish the Successful, Reward the Unsuccessful
    Liberals - Tax, Borrow, Spend, and Give Free Stuff
    Obama's legacy - President Donald Trump

  4. #74
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    2,802

    Re: GM Losing Up To $49,000 Per Volt

    Quote Originally Posted by Born Free View Post
    Yeah, and how do you like subsidizing them with your tax dollars, that is if you pay federal income taxes. Because I don't, we're 16 trillion in debt and counting and why are we subsidizing wind and solar and cars, when we have a thousand yrs of natural gas, coal, and oil.
    A-Source?
    B-Oil receives these subsidies too. The only difference is one is established and rakes in multi billions while the other is not
    Men do what they have to when they want to, Great men do what they have to, even when they don't want to.

  5. #75
    Sage
    Born Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Sonny and Nice
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 01:53 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,396

    Re: GM Losing Up To $49,000 Per Volt

    Quote Originally Posted by EagleAye View Post
    I do agree with bringing the oil jobs home. But even then, the object is to keep them home, but still not run out of oil any time soon. We need that oil for plastics and fertilizer and myriad other uses. You see we've obviously been leaning on foreign oil for a very obvious strategic reason, and that is not running out of our own. Better to use the other guy's oil up first, right? But doing so has enriched the workers of other countries and not our own.
    You can say that again and not only the workers of other countries, but the countries themselves.


    Right now we need jobs, and an upgrade of domestic energy, which we need anyway, would provide a lot of jobs and create economic stimulus. So I propose replacing those old coal plants with newer NG plants, because as you say it's cheap and we've got lots of it.
    Changing out from coal to NG has been going on for decades, all the new plants burn NG.

    If we add in wind and solar, with NG as a base load, then the inevitable increased demand for NG won't drive up the price too high and it will last a lot longer too.
    There you go subsidizing wind and solar with tax payer money, while we're over 16 trillion in debt and counting. We have over thousand yrs of NG and you want to spend one hell of a lot more on wind and solar, just because. No Fing way. Further we have over a thousand yr of coal and we've come a long way in cleaning up coal.

    The whole point is to rely on our own resources but not use them up before we're ready. Make sense?
    It only makes sense if we're running out, but when we have over a thousand yr of supply I don't I would clasifiy that as running out. Christ wind and solar is old, and we need be we could flood this country with those stupid things if was needed to. T Boone lost millions on wind and is now pushing NG as the future energy source.

    And yes, EVs as it stands now are a city car only. You won't drive across the country in one. But most people spend most of their time driving around the city anyway.
    I don't know what city your talking about but try driving to work in California, Texas, NY, or any big city where people commute 75 miles one way. Then when the temperature drops to "0" and you put on the heat, your little battery goes dead, same when it's hot, put on the air and you stop driving. Plus the life of a Battery differ in hot or cold weather, thus unreliable.

    In time battery tech will improve and EVs will improve in range.
    You can say the exact same thing about cleaning up coal to burn. In time Tech will improve. But the problem with that theory, you cannot force science, storing electricity has not been successful for decades, and it may never be in the amounts that we would need to move heavy trucks, construction equipment, move cars long distance without a extremely heavy load of batteries that is self defeating. Subsidizing solar, wind, and EV is a waste of tax payer money. Especially when we're 16 trillion in debt and counting.

    Lets just not throw the baby out with the bathwater. And not look at a newborn and say, "well he cain't talk and he seems mighty short for a farmhand." Give it time. Just don't throw him in the trash before he's grown a might.
    I am all for green, but I am only for green research, subsidizing wind, solar, and EV is a waste of money. Put some money into research only do develop that battery you speak of but until we have that battery why keep throwing good money on a wanabe EV. McCain wanted to put up prize money to a company that would come up with a battery that would meet certain criteria. I can't recall the award amount but that is the type of research we can support. Not just throwing money at a problem and hope something sticks. Because right now wind, solar and these EV are costing this country billions in borrowed money we don't have
    Last edited by Born Free; 09-12-12 at 10:35 PM.
    Liberals - Punish the Successful, Reward the Unsuccessful
    Liberals - Tax, Borrow, Spend, and Give Free Stuff
    Obama's legacy - President Donald Trump

  6. #76
    Sage
    Born Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Sonny and Nice
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 01:53 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,396

    Re: GM Losing Up To $49,000 Per Volt

    Quote Originally Posted by Fruityfact View Post
    A-Source?
    B-Oil receives these subsidies too. The only difference is one is established and rakes in multi billions while the other is not
    Here we go, I don't want government subsiding anything, nothing, noda. How about you?
    Liberals - Punish the Successful, Reward the Unsuccessful
    Liberals - Tax, Borrow, Spend, and Give Free Stuff
    Obama's legacy - President Donald Trump

  7. #77
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    2,802

    Re: GM Losing Up To $49,000 Per Volt

    Quote Originally Posted by Born Free View Post
    Here we go, I don't want government subsiding anything, nothing, noda. How about you?
    Can I please get the source for your earlier numbers?
    I think government should provide subsidies for moving forward-whatever that entails
    Men do what they have to when they want to, Great men do what they have to, even when they don't want to.

  8. #78
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Republic of Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,022

    Re: GM Losing Up To $49,000 Per Volt

    Quote Originally Posted by EagleAye View Post
    Well, it's clear Volt attackers easily see this as political with all the references to "Obamacar." The opposition to the car is more about opposition to Obama than anything else.

    If the number of car sales is so critical, then would you say Lamborghini is an unsuccessful, unprofitable company?


    Lamborghini Sales Increase 23 Percent In 2011
    Its opposition to govt control of GM. As I said before, if taxpayers werent subsidizing GM, no one would care if they were losing money.

  9. #79
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Republic of Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,022

    Re: GM Losing Up To $49,000 Per Volt

    Quote Originally Posted by EagleAye View Post
    You should have stopped before the obvious Obama reference. You just revealed a political bias/lean.



    Hammering and underlining on the $1.2 billion point only works as the travesty you desire if the technology developed is only used in one car ever (which will not happen), and they stopped making Volts now, which you are encouraging them to do. The tech developed for the car will get used in many other types. So that cost will get spread around. Here's other folks making this clear...


    The Real Story On GM's Volt Costs - Forbes

    GM's response:

    GM Response to Reuters Story on Chevrolet Volt Development Costs
    I notice GM didnt actually post any numbers.

  10. #80
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Republic of Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,022

    Re: GM Losing Up To $49,000 Per Volt

    Quote Originally Posted by hazlnut View Post
    Not unless they personally own GM stock.

    Get your facts straight. The treasury still holds shares of GM stock as part the bailout deal.
    And who owns the Treasury?

Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6789 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •