Cevy Volt cosing us HOW much?

http://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/16192

Chevy Volt Costing Taxpayers Up to $250K Per Vehicle Analyst: 'This might be the most government-supported car since the Trabant'

Crony capitalism. Quite a lucrative career if you can get into it..

The Green movements desire for "green" cars no matter what the actual cost has a part to play as well. Some in the Green movement don't look at all the costs and factors involved and thus some bad decisions are made.

In reply to Jay_W:

They based that on the number of cars sold, 6000. Each additional car drops that cost. If they end up not selling too many Volts over the years, it looks pretty bad. But if they end up selling a ton, that cost per car drops down dramatically.

That being said, I am not particularly pleased about how much money the government has put into the Volt.

A dumb analysis, in my opinion. They get grants and such, sure, but they did not directly target the Volt. Congress didn't vote on the Volt, despite what most of the right wing media types have you believe. Most of those were applied to "green tech nology" which could be the Cobalt SFE, the new ECO versions, the Volt and a few others. Bogus numbers.

I highly disagree with the idea that the federal government should give any money to any company for any reason, by the way, I just think that this analysis is unfair.

All technology is expensive in it's infant years. The only way to drop that cost is invest in the technology. Even if we don't sell enough Volts to zero the cost, the long term technology jump and public acceptance should pay off.

I only say that to be optimistic, just because the money is already spent, nothing we can do about it now.

Unless we're talking about Solara, that's a whole different (BS) story

Where's the headline crying foul over this one? The DOE has given Fisker $529,000,000 and Fisker has produced 225 cars. Taxpayers are on the hook for over $2 million for each car that Fisker has made so far, and the chances of Fisker paying the US Goverment back are slim.

Similarly, Tesla got $465 million from the DOE. They've sold over 2,000 cars, so that's about $225,000 per car which taxpayers have financed. Good times.

tuna55 wrote: I highly disagree with the idea that the federal government should give any money to any company for any reason...

That's a pretty right wing point of view.

In reply to bravenrace:

That's an intelligent point of view.

nderwater wrote: Where's the headline crying foul over this one? The DOE has given Fisker $529,000,000 and Fisker has produced 225 cars. Taxpayers are on the hook for over $2 million for each car that Fisker has made so far, and the chances of Fisker paying the US Goverment back are slim. Similarly, Tesla got $465 million from the DOE. They've sold over 2,000 cars, so that's about $225,000 per car which taxpayers have financed. Good times.

Ashton Kutcher drives a Fisker on 2.5 Men.

I think the people who drive Prius' are retarded and should not be allowed on the public road. They all seem to work their hardest not to allow the gas motor to start so there's always a long line of traffic behind them and on 2 lane country roads that gets dangerous as people do stupid things to pass.

I put the Volt right up there with the Prius - BUT until there is enough demand for a battery system that lasts, has sufficient storage capacity to allow a vehicle to have both range and power and is greener than the present crop who will spend the time and the money to invent it?

I feel they are a necessary evil, but make no bones, I still consider them evil at this stage of the game. One day, who knows, we may look back fondly on them.

In reply to carguy123:

There is a teenager in my neighborhood who drives his Insight at about 90 mph in the 35 zone behind my house. It is impressive. There is a Prius that drives almost as fast.

Otto Maddox wrote: In reply to carguy123: There is a teenager in my neighborhood who drives his Insight at about 90 mph in the 35 zone behind my house. It is impressive. There is a Prius that drives almost as fast.

I sure wish they lived around here!

I spend 2-3 days a week stuck for miles behind a variety if Prius's, Priae, Pruissssss, or whatever you call more than one, and on more than one occasion I have seen people almost have to take to a ditch because of people taking risks to pass.

They sit there and glare rightously when someone does finally pass them.

bravenrace wrote: That's a pretty right wing point of view.

So? Doesn't mean a right wing media type like Limbaugh or beck makes something out of nothing to prove their point. The left does it too. I am simply stating my opinions so nobody questions my bias when I don't put horns on the Volt.

Grizz wrote: That's an intelligent point of view.

Thanks!

Grizz wrote: In reply to bravenrace: That's an intelligent point of view.

What about the $20 billion dollars per year in farm subsidies?

I agree... we have to invest in the technology if we want to succeed. I know that is not a popular theme right now, but how else do you spur along a technology that could free us from fossil fuel use and the problems it brings?

The issue is - should politicians be picking the companies to invest in? The opportunities for graft are huge the accountability is small.

This article is so biased it is ridiculous. The incentives will be paid out over 15+ years, but they attribute them all to the first year of a vehicle. A lot of the grants they are citing don't have anything to do with the Volt:

From the article: "If those manufacturers awarded incentives to produce batteries the Volt may use are included in the analysis, the potential government subsidy per Volt increases to $256,824. For example, A123 Systems has received extensive state and federal support, and bid to be a supplier to the Volt, but the deal instead went to Compact Power. The $256,824 figure includes adding up the subsidies to both companies."

So A123 Systems makes batteries, bid to sell those batteries to GM for the Volt but didn't get the contract, but their government subsidies can be attributed to the Volt? Talk about grasping at straws. Why not say that Nissan got $300 million in state subsidies to build the Titan in Mississippi, the Titan is an automobile just like the Volt, so naturally we should attribute that $300 million to the 6000 Volts made, so now the number is a whopping $316,000 in subsidies per Volt! Do they not realize that A123 Systems makes batteries for other automakers and a lot of non-automotive applications?

They say that they included a $106 million subsidy that was given to GM for the assembly plant where the Volt is made, but what they don't say is that the 2011 Chevy Malibu is also made there. Last I checked GM sold a heck of a lot more Malibus than Volts. Why attribute all of the subsidy to the Volt? Why not spread it out over the 100,000+ Malibus that are sold each year too?

I haven't looked at any of the other things they reference, but I suspect it will also contain a lot of similar "facts".

This is a ridiculous article by a group whose sole purpose is to criticize public policy. While it raises a good point about the amount of money the government is throwing around, raining hatred down on the Volt because of it is stupid.

Bob

nderwater wrote: The issue is - should politicians be picking the companies to invest in? The opportunities for graft are huge the accountability is small.

Opportunities? You mean probabilities or certainties don't you?

carguy123 wrote:

Otto Maddox wrote: In reply to carguy123: There is a teenager in my neighborhood who drives his Insight at about 90 mph in the 35 zone behind my house. It is impressive. There is a Prius that drives almost as fast.

I sure wish they lived around here! I spend 2-3 days a week stuck for miles behind a variety if Prius's, Priae, Pruissssss, or whatever you call more than one, and on more than one occasion I have seen people almost have to take to a ditch because of people taking risks to pass. They sit there and glare rightously when someone does finally pass them.

carguy123 wrote: I think the people who drive Prius' are retarded and should not be allowed on the public road.

That's a reasonable point of view. Well thought out and well argued. You make a compelling point.

Cone_Junky wrote:

Grizz wrote: In reply to bravenrace: That's an intelligent point of view.

What about the $20 billion dollars per year in farm subsidies?

Golly, Let's see if my plan will take care of that:

tuna55 wrote: I highly disagree with the idea that the federal government should give any money to any company for any reason...

Yup - it looks like it works for that too!

tuna55 wrote: I highly disagree with the idea that the federal government should give any money to any company for any reason

What about tax returns?

On a more serious note, what about tax breaks/incentives for things like not outsourcing labor? Does that count as the fed giving money to a company?

carzan wrote:

(sniff, sniff...)

I smell smug.

Most of the Prius' around here are driven well above the speed limit...

ReverendDexter wrote:

tuna55 wrote: I highly disagree with the idea that the federal government should give any money to any company for any reason

What about tax returns? On a more serious note, what about tax breaks/incentives for things like not outsourcing labor? Does that count as the fed giving money to a company?

Yes, it does.Taxes should be low enough that doing business in this country with Americans should be pretty cheap. This is now off topic, though.

ReverendDexter wrote:

tuna55 wrote: I highly disagree with the idea that the federal government should give any money to any company for any reason

What about tax returns? On a more serious note, what about tax breaks/incentives for things like not outsourcing labor? Does that count as the fed giving money to a company?

Nope. A tax break/return/incentive is the the government taking less of your money out of your pocket.