Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Going after the Volt is a perfect example.
Ed, read this. It explains your illness. I feel so sorry for you, but you just will not accept my help.Going after the Volt is a perfect example.
yes, going after the Volt and Solyndra and USSR are perfect examples.
Either we are socialist and idiotically believe liberal bureaucrats can pick winners or we believe capitalism can. Can a liberal say why capitalism works better the liberal bureaucrats??
See why we are 100% positive a liberal will be slow, so very very slow?
Ed, read this. It explains your illness. I feel so sorry for you, but you just will not accept my help.Going after the Volt is a perfect example.
yes, going after the Volt and Solyndra and USSR are perfect examples.
Either we are socialist and idiotically believe liberal bureaucrats can pick winners or we believe capitalism can. Can a liberal say why capitalism works better the liberal bureaucrats??
See why we are 100% positive a liberal will be slow, so very very slow?
Daily Kos: Another study says watching Fox News makes you dumber
And there is Nova. Slobbering at the thought that GM may be having problems. Like all cons, he would like gm to go bankrupt and a million or so workers to be out of business. Typical. Un-american. But typical.Insight: GM's Volt: The ugly math of low sales, high costs | Reuters
Nearly two years after the introduction of the path-breaking plug-in hybrid, GM is still losing as much as $49,000 on each Volt it builds, according to estimates provided to Reuters by industry analysts and manufacturing experts.
Cheap Volt lease offers meant to drive more customers to Chevy showrooms this summer may have pushed that loss even higher. There are some Americans paying just $5,050 to drive around for two years in a vehicle that cost as much as $89,000 to produce.And while the loss per vehicle will shrink as more are built and sold, GM is still years away from making money on the Volt, which will soon face new competitors from Ford, Honda and others.
Ouch ! Another Obama motors Green Flop.....
Cons support the oil companies, who support the repubs in a really big way. No thought waves emanate from cons, telling them that costs go down on new technology, over time. They just want gm out of business.
Well, Expat, lets take a look at your statements. I think I see why you did not provide any sources:You are absolutely right, that's what my preference would be if you had it correct. You probably realized that it isn't because you don't, and we need to get back to what I said about my money. We can look at what good all my money did for the employees and the industry:So, if I have this correct. you would rather that something like a million of so people would be out of work, rather than to save a really major industry...
- Obama's GM rescue cost $50 billion to temporarily prolong the company's existence.
- It's now worth $1 billion.
- That's a $49,000,000 expenditure.
- The rescue scheme saved 68,500 GM employees their jobs.
- No where near 'a million' jobs.
- $49,000,000,000 ÷ 68,500 = $715,328.47 for every single GM employee rescued.
Think. With each $715,328.47 investment I've made on my own I've created dozens of jobs. With each $715,328.47 wasted in your goofy wasteful scheme you've created one. Now multiply that by 68,500. If numbers are any indication, I care a lot more about jobs and industry than you do.
Sorry, wrong again. The latest number from the CBO shows that the total cost of the auto bailout will be about $19B.
thehill.com/.../219143-tarp-payback-projections-adjusted-upward
Wow, now there is an interesting number. No one on the planet, that I have seen, believes that one. CNN Money estimates the value at $67B. But truth is we will find out when an IPO happens. But $1B does not pass the giggle test.
money.cnn.com/2010/05/18/news/companies/gm_value/index.htm
We now know this number to be nonsense. And yes, I did notice that you used millions instead of billions.
Again, completely wrong. The bailout affected not only gm, but a number of other companies who got loans from the auto bailout. And it affected a very large number of auto industry companies that did not get loans from the program. What do the experts say?
The nonpartisan Center for Automotive Research says it saved 1.45M jobs
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/26/opinion/sunday/a-million-jobs.html
The WSJ says the auto bailout saved over 1 million jobs.
blogs.wsj.com/.../gm-ipo-auto-bailout-saved-more-than-1-million-jo..
So, those numbers are completely bogus. As I am sure you knew. So, how about this: $19,000,000,000 / 1,200,000 = $15,804 for every single job saved. And, of course, the jobs go on, month after month, and the taxes paid cover help to bring down the national debt AND the deficit.$49,000,000,000 ÷ 68,500 = $715,328.47 for every single GM employee rescued.
Think. With each $715,328.47 investment I've made on my own I've created dozens of jobs. With each $715,328.47 wasted in your goofy wasteful scheme you've created one. Now multiply that by 68,500. If numbers are any indication, I care a lot more about jobs and industry than you do.
And, of course, you lied like a rug. No truth, just dogma. Which is sad. But you could care less, as long as you can attack the pres. Dipshit.
I don't have to prove it's a failure. It's proven itself one.If you study the numbers you are useing, you will see that you are quoting current loss at todays production numbers. With each volt sold, the cost comes down. The business plan was to loose money for some length of time, and then see that turn around. According to gm, they are on plan.Do you think a car company losing $49,000 on each car it builds of a particular model is a success story?And there is Nova. Slobbering at the thought that GM may be having problems. Like all cons, he would like gm to go bankrupt and a million or so workers to be out of business. Typical. Un-american. But typical.
Cons support the oil companies, who support the repubs in a really big way. No thought waves emanate from cons, telling them that costs go down on new technology, over time. They just want gm out of business.
If we required every new business venture to make money from the start, you will never see new businesses start. That is expecially true with new technology. So get a grip, look at the overall picture, and quit trying to prove the volt a failure. It may be over time, but at this time, things are going as planned,
So you're a KOS Kiddie.Ed, read this. It explains your illness. I feel so sorry for you, but you just will not accept my help.Going after the Volt is a perfect example.
yes, going after the Volt and Solyndra and USSR are perfect examples.
Either we are socialist and idiotically believe liberal bureaucrats can pick winners or we believe capitalism can. Can a liberal say why capitalism works better the liberal bureaucrats??
See why we are 100% positive a liberal will be slow, so very very slow?
Daily Kos: Another study says watching Fox News makes you dumber
And there is Nova. Slobbering at the thought that GM may be having problems. Like all cons, he would like gm to go bankrupt and a million or so workers to be out of business. Typical. Un-american. But typical.Insight: GM's Volt: The ugly math of low sales, high costs | Reuters
Nearly two years after the introduction of the path-breaking plug-in hybrid, GM is still losing as much as $49,000 on each Volt it builds, according to estimates provided to Reuters by industry analysts and manufacturing experts.
Cheap Volt lease offers meant to drive more customers to Chevy showrooms this summer may have pushed that loss even higher. There are some Americans paying just $5,050 to drive around for two years in a vehicle that cost as much as $89,000 to produce.And while the loss per vehicle will shrink as more are built and sold, GM is still years away from making money on the Volt, which will soon face new competitors from Ford, Honda and others.
Ouch ! Another Obama motors Green Flop.....
Cons support the oil companies, who support the repubs in a really big way. No thought waves emanate from cons, telling them that costs go down on new technology, over time. They just want gm out of business.
Standard con dogma. There would be no reason to save over a million jobs. No need for our countries corporations to invest in technology that china, japan, germany all spend government money to get into, and attempt to win, the game. Because you are a con, and cons are supposed to attack dem presidents. So, you say he is engaging in payback to the unions. I see you did not offer any proof of that. How surprising. That is the problem with con dogma. It is always lies. And you can not back up your lies, because they are, me boy, LIES.But, when our Tax dollars are being used to subsidize those overpriced cars as a payback to Unions, then it becomes our business.
So , another con spouting dogma. tjvh states, without any proof, :
Standard con dogma. There would be no reason to save over a million jobs. No need for our countries corporations to invest in technology that china, japan, germany all spend government money to get into, and attempt to win, the game. Because you are a con, and cons are supposed to attack dem presidents. So, you say he is engaging in payback to the unions. I see you did not offer any proof of that. How surprising. That is the problem with con dogma. It is always lies. And you can not back up your lies, because they are, me boy, LIES.But, when our Tax dollars are being used to subsidize those overpriced cars as a payback to Unions, then it becomes our business.
So, you believe that our companies should stay with good old oil Drill, baby, drill. And you do not care that the experts are telling us that we must continue to import oil from countries that hate us, because that is what you are supposed to believe. Hell, exon is paying your favorite repub politicians and you see no problem there, either. Get a grip, and look at the big picture.
You are having big issues with gm loosing money on a new technology model. You must have been really pissed at Fox for loosing money for years.
No need for our countries corporations to invest in technology that china, japan, germany all spend government money to get into,
If you study the numbers you are useing, you will see that you are quoting current loss at todays production numbers. With each volt sold, the cost comes down. The business plan was to loose money for some length of time, and then see that turn around. According to gm, they are on plan.
If we required every new business venture to make money from the start, you will never see new businesses start. That is expecially true with new technology. So get a grip, look at the overall picture, and quit trying to prove the volt a failure. It may be over time, but at this time, things are going as planned,
Show some proof of the business plan by GM.
Also, the overall picture shows that the Volt was a mistake. New technologies that are that expensive are not ready for public use. That GM did this shows the lack of sound business management and preference (or government micromanagement) for a political agenda. An $89K cost per car in that target market is outrageously expensive. There are no improvements in manufacturing or economies of scale that will change that. There will have to be a massive change in design and a new technological or engineering discovery to make the Volt successful.
The technology wasn't ready for production at this scale and it shows why GM should not have been bailed out so that it could be reorganized anew with some fresh blood at the helm chosen by the new owners not some government bureaucrats.
What proof. Are you just but stupid. Do you seriously think that any company is going to share their business plan with the general public. All I can produce is their statement that it is part of their business plan.
Perhaps you would like to provide the proof that your opinion is worth anything. Opinions are like ass holes. Everyone has one. So, where is your proof, dipshit?? Per GM, the costs that they are up against are development costs. You seem to not understand anything about business. Always, always, always, it takes time to amortize the cost of development of a new technology. Simple enough to understand, should you care to. But then, you do not care to understand anything. You are simply making statements without any research of any kind. Which wastes my time having to respond to your dogma.Also, the overall picture shows that the Volt was a mistake. New technologies that are that expensive are not ready for public use. That GM did this shows the lack of sound business management and preference (or government micromanagement) for a political agenda. An $89K cost per car in that target market is outrageously expensive. There are no improvements in manufacturing or economies of scale that will change that. There will have to be a massive change in design and a new technological or engineering discovery to make the Volt successful.
You already know how much I respect your opinion. Again, zero proof of anything. All impartial information out there, dipshit, says the same thing. And it is not what you want to believe. It said that there would have been no reorganization. So, go bring back some impartial info that backs you up. If you can find any. And stop wasting time with your opinions.The technology wasn't ready for production at this scale and it shows why GM should not have been bailed out so that it could be reorganized anew with some fresh blood at the helm chosen by the new owners not some government bureaucrats.
And before posting more con dogma, read this. It may help explain your problem:
The right's stupidity spreads, enabled by a too-polite left | George Monbiot | Comment is free | The Guardian
All I see from cons is attempts to make the bail out of the auto industry look like a big mistake by the pres. Interestingly enough, it was also fully backed and supported by President Bush and his administration. funny, eh..
George W. Bush: Auto bailout was mine! - In the Loop - The Washington Post
Going after the Volt is a perfect example. No study of the issue at all, Just statements from right wing sites. Straight dogma. Small minds saying what they are told to say, believing what they want to believe. Sad. Really sad.
The bailout of GM was a bad thing because it has rewarded failure
Yup, well, we wouldn't want to invest in new technology. Better to use the good old gas technology. Let those other countries develop and sell hybrids and electric cars. We should all listen to Asterism, who believes that GM should show us their business plan. Then tells us he knows what the target market will want, over time. Does not know what development costs are, and why it may take a little time. Yup, I think asterism is a real business kind of guy, in his own mind. So, to hell with over a million people who end up out of work. no problem for aterism. Because, asterism is a con tool, and lays out that con tool dogma.Show some proof of the business plan by GM.
Also, the overall picture shows that the Volt was a mistake. New technologies that are that expensive are not ready for public use. That GM did this shows the lack of sound business management and preference (or government micromanagement) for a political agenda. An $89K cost per car in that target market is outrageously expensive. There are no improvements in manufacturing or economies of scale that will change that. There will have to be a massive change in design and a new technological or engineering discovery to make the Volt successful.
The technology wasn't ready for production at this scale and it shows why GM should not have been bailed out so that it could be reorganized anew with some fresh blood at the helm chosen by the new owners not some government bureaucrats.
What proof. Are you just but stupid. Do you seriously think that any company is going to share their business plan with the general public. All I can produce is their statement that it is part of their business plan.
Perhaps you would like to provide the proof that your opinion is worth anything. Opinions are like ass holes. Everyone has one. So, where is your proof, dipshit?? Per GM, the costs that they are up against are development costs. You seem to not understand anything about business. Always, always, always, it takes time to amortize the cost of development of a new technology. Simple enough to understand, should you care to. But then, you do not care to understand anything. You are simply making statements without any research of any kind. Which wastes my time having to respond to your dogma.
You already know how much I respect your opinion. Again, zero proof of anything. All impartial information out there, dipshit, says the same thing. And it is not what you want to believe. It said that there would have been no reorganization. So, go bring back some impartial info that backs you up. If you can find any. And stop wasting time with your opinions.The technology wasn't ready for production at this scale and it shows why GM should not have been bailed out so that it could be reorganized anew with some fresh blood at the helm chosen by the new owners not some government bureaucrats.
And before posting more con dogma, read this. It may help explain your problem:
The right's stupidity spreads, enabled by a too-polite left | George Monbiot | Comment is free | The Guardian
All I see from cons is attempts to make the bail out of the auto industry look like a big mistake by the pres. Interestingly enough, it was also fully backed and supported by President Bush and his administration. funny, eh..
George W. Bush: Auto bailout was mine! - In the Loop - The Washington Post
Going after the Volt is a perfect example. No study of the issue at all, Just statements from right wing sites. Straight dogma. Small minds saying what they are told to say, believing what they want to believe. Sad. Really sad.
Defending a huge loser that underperformed even a meager 45,000 yearly goal while telling me that I have no understanding of business. That's funny.
The bailout of GM was a bad thing because it has rewarded failure and created money losers like this. No amount of name calling nor non-sequitur on your part will change that. $22,000 manufacturing cost is too high for the target market. Want the proof? Look at the sales results.
Yup, well, we wouldn't want to invest in new technology. Better to use the good old gas technology. Let those other countries develop and sell hybrids and electric cars. We should all listen to Asterism, who believes that GM should show us their business plan. Then tells us he knows what the target market will want, over time. Does not know what development costs are, and why it may take a little time. Yup, I think asterism is a real business kind of guy, in his own mind. So, to hell with over a million people who end up out of work. no problem for aterism. Because, asterism is a con tool, and lays out that con tool dogma.Show some proof of the business plan by GM.
Also, the overall picture shows that the Volt was a mistake. New technologies that are that expensive are not ready for public use. That GM did this shows the lack of sound business management and preference (or government micromanagement) for a political agenda. An $89K cost per car in that target market is outrageously expensive. There are no improvements in manufacturing or economies of scale that will change that. There will have to be a massive change in design and a new technological or engineering discovery to make the Volt successful.
The technology wasn't ready for production at this scale and it shows why GM should not have been bailed out so that it could be reorganized anew with some fresh blood at the helm chosen by the new owners not some government bureaucrats.
What proof. Are you just but stupid. Do you seriously think that any company is going to share their business plan with the general public. All I can produce is their statement that it is part of their business plan.
Perhaps you would like to provide the proof that your opinion is worth anything. Opinions are like ass holes. Everyone has one. So, where is your proof, dipshit?? Per GM, the costs that they are up against are development costs. You seem to not understand anything about business. Always, always, always, it takes time to amortize the cost of development of a new technology. Simple enough to understand, should you care to. But then, you do not care to understand anything. You are simply making statements without any research of any kind. Which wastes my time having to respond to your dogma.
You already know how much I respect your opinion. Again, zero proof of anything. All impartial information out there, dipshit, says the same thing. And it is not what you want to believe. It said that there would have been no reorganization. So, go bring back some impartial info that backs you up. If you can find any. And stop wasting time with your opinions.The technology wasn't ready for production at this scale and it shows why GM should not have been bailed out so that it could be reorganized anew with some fresh blood at the helm chosen by the new owners not some government bureaucrats.
And before posting more con dogma, read this. It may help explain your problem:
The right's stupidity spreads, enabled by a too-polite left | George Monbiot | Comment is free | The Guardian
All I see from cons is attempts to make the bail out of the auto industry look like a big mistake by the pres. Interestingly enough, it was also fully backed and supported by President Bush and his administration. funny, eh..
George W. Bush: Auto bailout was mine! - In the Loop - The Washington Post
Going after the Volt is a perfect example. No study of the issue at all, Just statements from right wing sites. Straight dogma. Small minds saying what they are told to say, believing what they want to believe. Sad. Really sad.
Defending a huge loser that underperformed even a meager 45,000 yearly goal while telling me that I have no understanding of business. That's funny.
The bailout of GM was a bad thing because it has rewarded failure and created money losers like this. No amount of name calling nor non-sequitur on your part will change that. $22,000 manufacturing cost is too high for the target market. Want the proof? Look at the sales results.
And another con tool hits the bat shit crazy con web site for an article. No interest in providing impartial information. Use conservative sources like Micheal Reagan. Typica., tvjh, of a con tool. Posting drivel that you like to believe. No use looking at actual data. dipshit. I would post some info from moveon, but then, I would not.. Because i have more integrity than that. I use impartial sources. Actual facts, you know. But then, I suppose not. Integrity is not part of the makeup of con tools.Here's another good article on the Volt...The Green Edsel, indeed... Chevy Volt: It
Integrity is not part of the makeup of con tools.
And another con tool hits the bat shit crazy con web site for an article. No interest in providing impartial information. Use conservative sources like Micheal Reagan. Typica., tvjh, of a con tool. Posting drivel that you like to believe. No use looking at actual data. dipshit. I would post some info from moveon, but then, I would not.. Because i have more integrity than that. I use impartial sources. Actual facts, you know. But then, I suppose not. Integrity is not part of the makeup of con tools.Here's another good article on the Volt...The Green Edsel, indeed... Chevy Volt: It
