Michigan Auto Bailout: Dunderhead Mitt Romney Got it 100% Wrong!!

Oh God just STFU about the tech details . You seems to be in a complete bliss when it comes to car tech . It's bad enough that you can't make a post without sounding like PRC party activist .

Chrysler didn't "boomed" Fiat did , Chrysler just delivered the cars this time (last years it even failed to show up) . Also the Volt is a transition model , hydrogen - electric cars being the real deal . I know that hatred can blind you but stop saying things that make no sense in the real world . You're comparing experimental tech with tech that has been tried and tested .

 

Apocolypse: lets see hydrogen technology for fuel cells has been around for some time. Right now there are no substantial # of hydrogen fuel cell cars in the market. Honda is betting on hydrogen now...and it has half a dozen to 12 cars under test by consumers in California now. The cars reportedly cost $300,000/car. Hydrogen is way off.

I recall when a friend and peer tested an electric car in the mid 90's. I rode in it then. Interesting, fun, neat, because it was experimental, very tight and small b/c of a huge battery. My friend had fun with it....that is probably at least 15 years ago. I have no recollection of the true cost of the vehicle then. He might not have had access to that data, for all I recall.

Clearly that test model was a decade plus away from fruition.

That is roughly where hydrogen is now.

Meanwhile total all electric sales are very low around the world....hybrid sales are pretty significant. Over 20,000 were sold in the US in January alone...not world wide. Total all plug in sales might be 30,000 total world wide. Right now the Nissan Leaf is world wide #1 but its total world sales might be around 22,000.

Meanwhile hydrogen as an energy source is years away. What is the total for commercial hydrogen fueled cars on roads today?? 0 nil?

Look at real numbers.

 

Hydrogen tech is already being used for military applications the problem with hydrogen is not the technology but the cost of the technology . Right now the tech to mass produce the needed parts is still being implemented and the logistic background is still missing . Hydrogen is similar to carbon fiber, it can be high performance , it costs a ton and it's only used by certain people . However unlike CFC hydrogen isn't as easy to implement so it will take a while for it to develop . Hydrogen will get it's advent only after fusion is implemented . Until then we can only cope . By 2025 - 30 (if we don't manage to kill ourselves) we'll be rolling in hydrogen cars our day to day jobs .

 

I'm having a hard time following your post. At first it seemed you just wanted to talk about Rush Limbaugh because you were uncomfortable talking about GM layoffs. Then you seem to argue that some businesses investments are going to fail so we shouldn't be upset when our government "invests" our taxpayer money with their political supporters and those investments fail. Then you present the idea that Romney is a business failure, implying we should stick with Obama's proven track record???? Then you talk about the whopping $2 bn Bush threw at fuel cells, again making the argument that Obama is like Bush on steroids. You wrap up with the idea that GM is not a failure, going back on your earlier presented defense of failure in business, based on the idea that GM is "#1" in worldwide auto sales, or once again too big to fail. Were ya drinking when you wrote all this?

At $16 Trillion in debt, $1.5 Trillion annual deficit, and a debt to GDP ratio in excess of 100%, saying Obama is better at "investing" taxpayer dollars with his cronies and supporters is like saying you should be the designated driver since you are the most drunk.

I came up with a few more Obama 2012 campaign slogans for you.

Obama, when too big to fail isn't big enough

Obama, because the unions need your taxpayer dollars

Obama, it could be worse

Bush did it too, so stop whining. Obama 2012
​

 

Apolypse. In an earlier post you called hydrogen "the real deal". Now you say its too expensive and not commercially viable.

Couple of points:

Around 2003 Bush put $1.2-$1.5 billion of tax payer money into hydrogen and he bellowed abt how its going to fuel cars. Its not now. If I wanted to scream about govt spending such as every time the current administration proposes $1 of spending it seems that would be an appropriate target. After all it was well over $1 billion and 9 years later we have NOTHING commercially to show for it. In the mode of current Right Wing Extremist whiners it appears to be a perfectly acceptable target of utterly wasteful debt creating, wasting tax payer money.

From a different angle your post reflects general govt spending. The military is using it. Its not commercially viable. The military is spending taxpayer $$$$$$$ on stuff that doesn't relate to tax payers today or decreasing the deficit.

For SHAME. Why don't you encourage O_Nation to whine about it.

Historically the govt spends $$$$$$ on stuff that isn't commercially viable at the time. Those expenditures/investments/research resulted in things like all computerization, jet aviation, telecommunications advances such as the internet, commercial mapping on the internet, Tang, velcro, commercial limbs for medical purposes.

Every time a Right Wing extremist whines about current govt expenditures they ignore a long history of research that resulted in tremendous commercial growth. Last time I checked the federal govt didn't own Tang or velcro.

There are many mixed signals when govts put $$$$ into different things. Bush and Obama putting $$$$$ into Chrysler and GM saved somewhere between 880,000 and 2.4 million jobs according to their best estimates at the time of crisis. Additionally the govt $$$$$ into those businesses prevented about a $150 billion in tax revenue losses according to Bush's economists dealing with a crisis.

As they faced the crisis and staring at those catastrophic disasters the decision was a no brainer. Only Right Wing extremist political voices refuse to believe that.

With limited information I think its fine for the DOD to continue to research and spend on hydrogen. They may come up with stuff they can use for defense. Later on commercial entities may figure out how to apply it commercially and make a profit. But lets face it. Hydrogen is not fueling cars now....and Bush claiming back in 2003 that it was going to do so turned out to be a bunch of political BS

 

More misguided logic from Earlpearl. Because the federal government spends money on defense, why not spend money on cars? Hell, why not get into dildo sales? There is always demand for sex toys. Great investment.

By the way, keep pounding the "Bush did it too" drum. I love hearing it.


Obama 2008 Campaign mantra - I'm not Bush

Obama 2012 Campaign mantra - Bush did it too


Too bad he can't adopt the campaign mantra - I'm not Obama. That would boost his poll numbers by 35%.

 

LOL you and Rush Limbaugh have a lot in common. Have you been married 4 times? Have you had issues w/ prescription drugs? Do you use viagra a lot? You two guys are really similar.


now if you made the $$$$ Rush makes I'd say .....bully for you......though it appears with his latest rant he is losing advertisers. Wonder if the radio deals will dock his pay.

 

FTR, Velcro wasnt developed by the US government, it was the brainchild of a Swiss engineer.

Hey Earl... might stop for a sec and read your last couple of posts. You're repeatedly pairing the words "Right Wing extremist' OR "Right Wing extremist whiners" as if it were a formal title, and going pretty much postal with ad hominems. Looks like you're channeling Breezewood. Just saying it cause maybe you havent noticed it happening. Doing the textual equivalent of screaming doesnt couple well with calling others "extremist". Generally your posts arent that shrill.

 

Rob wikipedia agrees with you and goes on to say

You are right. I am wrong. I stand corrected.

I don't mind admitting I'm wrong. I've done that for a long time. OTOH when I'm right I want to be acknowledged for it. I'm a human.

Generally I never see the extreme right wing ever admit they are wrong. They raise the anger level. They stay on the attack. Doesn't matter how wrong they are.

Not all Republicans did that. Dwight Eisenhower was a US President and before that Supreme Allied Commander of US and all allied forces in Europe during WWII. He is responsible for organizing the assault on DDay which sent thoudsands of allied soldiers against smaller numbers of very well fortified and protected German/Nazi soldiers guarding the beaches on Normandy.

It was a huge gamble risk and critical military move. The attack was successful in driving the Germans off the beaches and enabling the allies to put hunddreds of thousands of troops onto Northern Europe allowing for a 3 pronged attack on the Nazis that ended the war in Europe (russians on the east, allied forces coming north from Italy, and allied forces coming from France.

Before the invasion he wrote a note and stuffed it in his pocket. The essence of the note was if the invasion failed he would take responsibility.

Today's extremist right wing republicans would never do that. When they are 100% wrong they simply escalate the attacks. That is why it is extreme. Regular people don't do that. Responsible people don't do that.

There is a crazy attack on the bailouts. Look, the financial crisis was massive and a disaster that approaches the disaster of war without death...or the storm that hit New Orleans and devasting it also devasting up to 25% of the entire nation. The recession wiped out about 25% of total domestic wealth. That is brutal.

The auto part of the bailout cost $85 billion in total. A lot has already been paid back...but not all of it. The potential cost of not doing anything, according to Bush's best estimates at the time...was $150 billion. I don't recall him saying that then...but he says it now.

Now GM and Chrysler are doing significantly better. Ford is doing better. Everything that Romney wrote in his op ed that I started in the Opening thread proved to be wrong.

Meanwhile we will hear and hear and hear about the evils of the auto bailout from GOP candidates for the long term and throughout this campaign.

that is why I use the term extremists.

How does a nation move forward and make decisions that work when extremists twist the stuff that worked?








[/QUOTE]

 

If you lock your keys inside your Aston Martin, and I throw a brick to through your windshield to get them out, I could rightly claim my stuff "worked". You pointing out that throwing a brick through the window was the wrong decision does not make you an extremist. In fact, calling someone a dumba$$ for making dumba$$ decisions is one's patriotic duty.

Your whole argument has boiled down to, "Well Bush seemed to think it was a good idea". High in comedic value, but otherwise, an idiotic argument.

 

Back in the day, Ford told me they thought the future of non-gasoline vehicles was hydrogen. They were waiting for Congress to throw money at them to do it. They felt they had solved the safety issues, but it was the same problem as I mentioned before - in the USA's litigious environment, new tech like that is financially dangerous.

Politicians like to throw money at cool-sounding science, even if they don't understand it. I'm guessing that someday hydrogen cars are going to be cost-efficient. But I admit I haven't looked at the technology for some time.

 

This thread has the #1 Google ranking for: Dunderhead Mitt Romney

And, the #2 Google ranking (1st is YouTube) for: Mitt Romney is a Dunderhead

 

YAh, but who uses the word Dunderhead. I mean really.

 

I know! Actually, I had to look up the definition. I guess that makes me one.

 

Regardless of whether you use dunderhead or any of these synonyms:

When you write a highly charged OP ED like Romney did and write it in a style that is entirely reflective of extremist politics rather than reasonable economics....you are still going to get it 100% Wrong.

So we could change the word in the title from dunderhead to blockhead, cretin, dimwit, dolt, dumbbell, lunkhead, nincompoop, pinhead, turkey, or yo-yo.

Its still 100% wrong.

BTW: During 2009 when Obama's administration spurred auto sales via tax breaks the representatives of the extremist right wing here were screaming bloody murder among other things and claiming it would kill, kill, kill future sales.

guess that didn't occur either.

 

$250k of taxpayer dollars to produce each vehicle that sells for $40k, and still they have to lay off workers because of lack of demand. Idiotic doesn't begin to describe it. Of course one has only to look into any 3rd world banana republic to see how Government run businesses perform. One could say GM is a poster child from that perspective.

 

Your source, O_Nation, is one of if not the largest Right Wing State operated think tank devoted to supporting the Plutocracy beliefs of the 1/10th of 1% of the population that want to continue the 30 year process of moving money from regular folks to the wealthiest of the wealthy. A little about the writers of that heavily slanted politically absurd article:

In a nut shell the people who underwrite the research are the same people who are individually financing the campaign of Mitt Romney, Wall Streets favorite candidate.

Meanwhile: GM, Ford and Chrysler sales have soared...even as the Right Wing Extremists here screamed that a tax write off in 2009 for new car sales would kill all future sales.

I guess all your Right Wing Extremist politics in 2009 Were 100% wrong. Sales are increasing. Demand is increasing.

Meanwhile, if you want to look to the future and look to development its interesting to look at the history of the Toyota Prius, the first and highest selling volume hybrid car that combines electric power with gas.

Prius sales were miserable and low when they first hit the US. The Right Wing Gas fanatics were attacking it.....of course. Here is a chart on sales growth over the years: Quite impressive.

Toyota Prius Sales (based on TMC data) (Unit = 1,000 vehicles)
Year '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 Jan.-Sep. '10 Cum Total
. Total
Japan 0.3 17.7 15.2 12.5 11.0 6.7 17.0 59.8 43.7 48.6 58.3 73.1 208.9 254.2 826.9
North America - - - 5.8 16.0 20.3 24.9 55.9 109.9 109.0 183.8 163.3 144.3 105.9 939.1
Europe - - - 0.7 2.3 0.8 0.9 8.1 18.8 22.8 32.2 41.5 42.6 35.5 206.1
Other - - - 0.01 0.2 0.2 0.4 1.9 2.9 5.3 7.0 7.7 8.4 5.8 39.7
Total 0.3 17.7 15.2 19.0 29.5 28.1 43.2 125.7 175.2 185.6 281.3 285.7 404.2 401.3 2,011.8

I know that makes you cringe. Real hard facts and figures versus a Right Wing propaganda report funded by the Koch Brothers, the bilionaire duo that underwrites all Right Wing efforts to take political control of the nation.

Nissan has an all electric car. Sales are slow. GM introduced the Volt. Sales are slow. Ford has its own electric car being introduced this year.

What is your issue, O_Nation? Do you hate progress? Do you hate research? Do you hate engineers going to work to take a technology and make it better? Do you hate American jobs?? Or do you hate all those factors?

 

Why is Ford even in this conversation at all ?

 

LOL, on a busines level. . . . Don't even include Obama and Romney in the same sentence.

 

Needs a picture....