Do you agree with government incentives to buy the Chevy Volt?

[Quantum Windbag]

How is a tax cut for the rich? The car will be $33,000 not $330,000 dollars. Most of the people I know who have hybrids are middle class or upper middle class. They also are in the group that usually gets screwed by taxes.

And this could also help the factory workers, and right now we need to supporting American workers, not foreign ones. I also didn't answer you question, because you didn't provide enough options.

The car will be $41,000, of which you will pay $7,500, and the idiot that buys it will pay $33,500. this will get them a underpowered glorified golf cart with a lawnmower engine to run an electric engine.

Friday NY Times rare gem: “G.M.?s Electric Lemon” (Chevy Volt) | RedState

In other words, it is an overpriced toy. The average American family is not going to sink enough money in this to buy 3 other cars of the same size, that are actually bigger in size. The only people it helps are the union workers who bought Obama during the primaries.

RealClearPolitics - Video - Krauthammer: "The Chevy Volt Is A Disaster"

You are nothing more than a partisan hack if you are buying into the party line about this abortion.

I think they should have tax incentives for every hybrid car. And I have three family members, all middle class, who have $30,000+ hybrid cars. My parents who are middle class, plan on buying one next year. If you drive often, it is worth the money you save on gas.
I do think they are not worth it, if you don't.

Actually, I don't know if they are worth it yet. The only hybrids that have been on the road for any length of time all belong to the upper middle class or the rich. No one has a clear grasp of the costs involved in maintenance of a hybrid over a regular gasoline engine yet. The first hybrids are just coming into the period where battery replacement will be a factor, so the numbers just do not exist.

That said, why should everyone have to pay for it when someone buys a new car the left likes? Tax incentives are artificial, and do not serve as proper market incentives. Government should never favor one group over another, and no one I know supports it if the government supports one religion over every other religion. Why do they support it when government favors something they agree with?

 

[Luissa]

The car will be $41,000, of which you will pay $7,500, and the idiot that buys it will pay $33,500. this will get them a underpowered glorified golf cart with a lawnmower engine to run an electric engine.

Friday NY Times rare gem: “G.M.?s Electric Lemon” (Chevy Volt) | RedState

In other words, it is an overpriced toy. The average American family is not going to sink enough money in this to buy 3 other cars of the same size, that are actually bigger in size. The only people it helps are the union workers who bought Obama during the primaries.

RealClearPolitics - Video - Krauthammer: "The Chevy Volt Is A Disaster"

You are nothing more than a partisan hack if you are buying into the party line about this abortion.

I think they should have tax incentives for every hybrid car. And I have three family members, all middle class, who have $30,000+ hybrid cars. My parents who are middle class, plan on buying one next year. If you drive often, it is worth the money you save on gas.
I do think they are not worth it, if you don't.

I drive a 72 Ford Bronco Sport with a 351W we dropped into it 2 years ago. It gets 7mpg, 8 on the highway with a tailwind.

I drive it because I like it. I "get" people who like hybrids for the green factor, and the fuel savings, but it just isn't me. I'm old school, and want to hear and feel what I'm driving, and I make enough money to afford the extra gas I burn. Plus, I go off road a good bit, and the hybrid ain't going to get me to many of the places I choose to go.

But GM is dead to me. No one in my family will ever own another GM product (and I did love my Tahoe) again unless they pay for it with their own money. It's Ford or foreign for us (wife loves her Acura, but that little rice burner is too cramped for me!)

My brother in law works for Toyota!

And I wish I had my Acura still.

 

[Luissa]

The car will be $41,000, of which you will pay $7,500, and the idiot that buys it will pay $33,500. this will get them a underpowered glorified golf cart with a lawnmower engine to run an electric engine.

Friday NY Times rare gem: “G.M.?s Electric Lemon” (Chevy Volt) | RedState

In other words, it is an overpriced toy. The average American family is not going to sink enough money in this to buy 3 other cars of the same size, that are actually bigger in size. The only people it helps are the union workers who bought Obama during the primaries.

RealClearPolitics - Video - Krauthammer: "The Chevy Volt Is A Disaster"

You are nothing more than a partisan hack if you are buying into the party line about this abortion.

I think they should have tax incentives for every hybrid car. And I have three family members, all middle class, who have $30,000+ hybrid cars. My parents who are middle class, plan on buying one next year. If you drive often, it is worth the money you save on gas.
I do think they are not worth it, if you don't.

Actually, I don't know if they are worth it yet. The only hybrids that have been on the road for any length of time all belong to the upper middle class or the rich. No one has a clear grasp of the costs involved in maintenance of a hybrid over a regular gasoline engine yet. The first hybrids are just coming into the period where battery replacement will be a factor, so the numbers just do not exist.

That said, why should everyone have to pay for it when someone buys a new car the left likes? Tax incentives are artificial, and do not serve as proper market incentives. Government should never favor one group over another, and no one I know supports it if the government supports one religion over every other religion. Why do they support it when government favors something they agree with?

Go to Washington State and Oregon, and you still see your above statement is false. Many people drive Hybrids here, and most are middle class. Toyota has many Hybrid models now, that cater to each price range.

 

[boedicca]

Maybe it would be $18000-$20000 without this subsidy.

As I said in another thread, the Volt has all the style and comfort of a $15K economy car for a politically correct price tag of $41,000.

The subsidy is a transfer payment to government cronies. It's disgusting.

 

[asterism]

Hahahaaaa...I think Poll choices are a good indicator of the intelligence of the pollmaker.

Please elaborate if you can.

Your choices...it goes like this generally...

Poll Question: "Do you agree with me?"

1) Yes...and therefore I am a great and wise person.
2) No...I don't agree with you, and yes that makes me an idiot.

Please Vote.

It seems you don't understand my words, so here's a picture to describe my understanding of your comments:

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I think they should have tax incentives for every hybrid car. And I have three family members, all middle class, who have $30,000+ hybrid cars. My parents who are middle class, plan on buying one next year. If you drive often, it is worth the money you save on gas.
I do think they are not worth it, if you don't.

Actually, I don't know if they are worth it yet. The only hybrids that have been on the road for any length of time all belong to the upper middle class or the rich. No one has a clear grasp of the costs involved in maintenance of a hybrid over a regular gasoline engine yet. The first hybrids are just coming into the period where battery replacement will be a factor, so the numbers just do not exist.

That said, why should everyone have to pay for it when someone buys a new car the left likes? Tax incentives are artificial, and do not serve as proper market incentives. Government should never favor one group over another, and no one I know supports it if the government supports one religion over every other religion. Why do they support it when government favors something they agree with?

Go to Washington State and Oregon, and you still see your above statement is false. Many people drive Hybrids here, and most are middle class. Toyota has many Hybrid models now, that cater to each price range.

I understand that, but we are not talking about those cars here, we are talking about an overpriced $15,000 dollar economy car, not a car that has the ride and performance most people associate with a $40,000 dollar price tag.

 

[asterism]

I think they should have incentives to buy any American made hybrid car.

Where's the yes vote in favor of this tax cut for the rich then?

How is a tax cut for the rich? The car will be $33,000 not $330,000 dollars. Most of the people I know who have hybrids are middle class or upper middle class. They also are in the group that usually gets screwed by taxes.

And this could also help the factory workers, and right now we need to supporting American workers, not foreign ones. I also didn't answer you question, because you didn't provide enough options.

Who in the middle class can afford a $33,000 car?

 

[Luissa]

Actually, I don't know if they are worth it yet. The only hybrids that have been on the road for any length of time all belong to the upper middle class or the rich. No one has a clear grasp of the costs involved in maintenance of a hybrid over a regular gasoline engine yet. The first hybrids are just coming into the period where battery replacement will be a factor, so the numbers just do not exist.

That said, why should everyone have to pay for it when someone buys a new car the left likes? Tax incentives are artificial, and do not serve as proper market incentives. Government should never favor one group over another, and no one I know supports it if the government supports one religion over every other religion. Why do they support it when government favors something they agree with?

Go to Washington State and Oregon, and you still see your above statement is false. Many people drive Hybrids here, and most are middle class. Toyota has many Hybrid models now, that cater to each price range.

I understand that, but we are not talking about those cars here, we are talking about an overpriced $15,000 dollar economy car, not a car that has the ride and performance most people associate with a $40,000 dollar price tag.

And I have already said there should be tax incentives for every hybrid car. We shouldn't decide for people which Hybrid they should get.
In this case Obama is wrong for only allowing it for the Volts, if the OP is correct.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Go to Washington State and Oregon, and you still see your above statement is false. Many people drive Hybrids here, and most are middle class. Toyota has many Hybrid models now, that cater to each price range.

I understand that, but we are not talking about those cars here, we are talking about an overpriced $15,000 dollar economy car, not a car that has the ride and performance most people associate with a $40,000 dollar price tag.

And I have already said there should be tax incentives for every hybrid car. We shouldn't decide for people which Hybrid they should get.
In this case Obama is wrong for only allowing it for the Volts, if the OP is correct.

Then we mostly agree.

Why are we arguing again?

 

[Luissa]

I understand that, but we are not talking about those cars here, we are talking about an overpriced $15,000 dollar economy car, not a car that has the ride and performance most people associate with a $40,000 dollar price tag.

And I have already said there should be tax incentives for every hybrid car. We shouldn't decide for people which Hybrid they should get.
In this case Obama is wrong for only allowing it for the Volts, if the OP is correct.

Then we mostly agree.

Why are we arguing again?

I was thinking the same thing.

 

[Greenbeard]

That said, why should everyone have to pay for it when someone buys a new car the left likes? Tax incentives are artificial, and do not serve as proper market incentives. Government should never favor one group over another, and no one I know supports it if the government supports one religion over every other religion. Why do they support it when government favors something they agree with?

The favoritism in our tax treatment of various energy sources doesn't really swing green:

 

[Quantum Windbag]

It doesn't matter which way it swings, it is wrong.

 

[johnrocks]

Toyota is none too happy about it in Canada so I'm sure they will have the same concerns on this.
Canadian Government Gives $10,000 Chevy Volt Subsidy, Angers Toyota

“How long does this continue?” said Stephen Beatty, managing director of Toyota Canada Inc. “We can’t set up a situation where the future of the industry depends on constant subsidies.”

“This suggests that (the government) is prepared to be interventionist beyond their aim to help the industry recover,” he said. “The question is: Is this a well thought-out industry strategy? Or is it sort of the next stage in advancing a particular product and helping a particular company?”

Toyota will only be producing a limited test fleet of 500 global plug-in Priuses by the end of 2010, and have hesitated to publicly embrace the technology which could make their hybrid synergy drive obsolete. “We’re not entirely convinced that the technology is a winning proposition for consumers today,” said Beatty.

 

[boedicca]

That said, why should everyone have to pay for it when someone buys a new car the left likes? Tax incentives are artificial, and do not serve as proper market incentives. Government should never favor one group over another, and no one I know supports it if the government supports one religion over every other religion. Why do they support it when government favors something they agree with?

The favoritism in our tax treatment of various energy sources doesn't really swing green:

What is the source of your chart. A link would be helpful to see how they actually determine the numbers. It would also be more revealing if these figures were then compared to what percent of our energy comes from these areas.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Toyota is none too happy about it in Canada so I'm sure they will have the same concerns on this.
Canadian Government Gives $10,000 Chevy Volt Subsidy, Angers Toyota

“How long does this continue?” said Stephen Beatty, managing director of Toyota Canada Inc. “We can’t set up a situation where the future of the industry depends on constant subsidies.”

“This suggests that (the government) is prepared to be interventionist beyond their aim to help the industry recover,” he said. “The question is: Is this a well thought-out industry strategy? Or is it sort of the next stage in advancing a particular product and helping a particular company?”

Toyota will only be producing a limited test fleet of 500 global plug-in Priuses by the end of 2010, and have hesitated to publicly embrace the technology which could make their hybrid synergy drive obsolete. “We’re not entirely convinced that the technology is a winning proposition for consumers today,” said Beatty.

Good for Toyota.

 

[asterism]

I think helping the American Autoworker is pretty important.

Is favoring GM workers in the US, Canada and Mexico at the expense of Toyota workers in the US helping?

Which car is "American," a Chevy built in Mexico or a BMW built in South Carolina?

and just in case you forgot:

Who in the middle class can afford a $33,000 car?

 

[boedicca]

Here's the one of the real reasons why this subsidy has been put in place - to inflate the prospects for GM as a bunch of Big Government Cronies cash in on the IPO:

The presumption is that GM will raise as much as $20 billion. This will be good news for U.S. taxpayers, since the federal government owns a hefty 61% stake in the automaker. Uncle Sam plans to sell roughly a fifth of its 304 million shares. It also looks like the United Auto Workers union will sell a portion of its 17.5% equity stake.

As for the underwriters, they include who-who's of Wall Street: Morgan Stanley (MS), J.P. Morgan (JPM), Bank of America's (BAC) Merrill Lynch unit and Citigroup (C). However, underwriter fees are expected to be lucrative because of the political sensitivity of GM's offering.

GM's IPO: A Look Under the Hood at the New General Motors - DailyFinance

 

[Greenbeard]

What is the source of your chart. A link would be helpful to see how they actually determine the numbers. It would also be more revealing if these figures were then compared to what percent of our energy comes from these areas.

ScienceDaily provides the context:

ScienceDaily (Sep. 18, 2009) — The largest U.S subsidies to fossil fuels are attributed to tax breaks that aid foreign oil production, according to research to be released on Friday by the Environmental Law Institute (ELI) in partnership with the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. The study, which reviewed fossil fuel and energy subsidies for Fiscal Years 2002-2008, reveals that the lion's share of energy subsidies supported energy sources that emit high levels of greenhouse gases. [...]

The subsidies examined fall roughly into two categories: (1) foregone revenues (changes to the tax code to reduce the tax liabilities of particular entities), mostly in the form of tax breaks, and including reported lost government take from offshore leasing of oil and gas fields; and (2) direct spending, in the form of expenditures on research and development and other programs. Subsidies attributed to the Foreign Tax Credit totaled $15.3 billion, with those for the next-largest fossil fuel subsidy, the Credit for Production of Nonconventional Fuels, totaling $14.1 billion. The Foreign Tax Credit applies to the overseas production of oil through an obscure provision of the U.S. Tax Code, which allows energy companies to claim a tax credit for payments that would normally receive less-beneficial treatment under the tax code.

ELI researchers applied the conventional definitions of fossil fuels and renewable energy. Fossil fuels include petroleum and its byproducts, natural gas, and coal products, while renewable fuels include wind, solar, biofuels and biomass, hydropower, and geothermal energy production. A graphic chart that will be released on Friday presents general conclusions about the overall subsidies for fossil fuels versus renewables other than corn-derived ethanol. Nuclear energy, which also falls outside the operating definition of fossil and renewable fuels, was not included.​

The graphic was created by the authors to accompany the report.

 

[johnrocks]

Entities that love subsidies

Insurance/Pharmaceutical Companies
Corporate Farmers
Ethanol producers
GMC
Unions

Might as well love "pick pockets" as to love subsidies.

 

[boedicca]

ScienceDaily (Sep. 18, 2009) — The largest U.S subsidies to fossil fuels are attributed to tax breaks that aid foreign oil production, according to research to be released on Friday by the Environmental Law Institute (ELI) in partnership with the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. The study, which reviewed fossil fuel and energy subsidies for Fiscal Years 2002-2008, reveals that the lion's share of energy subsidies supported energy sources that emit high levels of greenhouse gases. [...]

​

How expensive do you think gasoline would be if we didn't have access to foreign oil? Tax breaks that AID FOREIGN OIL PRODUCTION. As our government is loathe to allow domestic production, we are increasingly dependent on economically viable foreign oil sources.

I'm not advocating subsidies - it would be better to get rid of the government picking winners in losers in energy. Let private investors decide.​