Democrats full of it regarding fuel economy?
America doesn't need $20,000 hybrids?I've been reading a lot lately about the various tax incentive programs being created by Congress and states, particularly Michigan, to promote battery research and development.
Are these people on crack?
I'm 100 percent for incentives to push consumers into fuel efficient vehicles, but I think the facts are pretty clear. If gas is cheap, consumers WILL NOT buy these cars in numbers that will cost-effectively justify their production without 100s of billions of tax payer subsidies. Even then, the effort might still fail.
More important, according to a recent study, the costs of greening the auto industry are staggering, especially if you're talking electrification, and pay back will take decades.
Thus, how can almost bankrupt automakers survive by going green? They can't possibly afford to go green. They can't survive today without government help and next year is even supposed to be worse for automakers.
Going green means being put on the government dole, especially if we don't put a serious bottom on fuel prices that rewards fuel efficiency. And the government dole always breeds complacency and inefficiency, it doesn't breed the kind of competition that results in revolutionary innovations.
Today, the US auto industry needs to fight for survival, to question everything, to think further outside of the box than ever before if they are truly going to survive and compete. Otherwise, we might as well just nationalize these companies today.
Democrats, unfortunately, are acting as if just throwing 100s of billions at this problem will solve all the issues that created this mess in the first place (Of course, at least Democrats are trying something other than only drilling for more oil). Ironically, however, the one thing that created this mess, cheap gas, is barely even on the table as a topic.
Ultimately, if you can't address the root of a problem, can you really solve the problem? Is the green movement just turning into a porkfest for armchair liberals to get rich off the government at taxpayer expense?
Labels: gas tax, Hybrid Vehicles
posted by Dahcredyns at
11:37 AM
13 Comments:
If people knew the true cost of why their fuel is so cheap, they'd buy hybrids.
This tax incentive ploy is nothing more than to deflect the reality of real costs in fuel production.
The powers at be have created a system so well designed that we haven't realized yet how big of a whole we are in. And that's exactly the way they want it to stay.
When you add the cost of war, misery, death, transport, pollution, healthcare costs due to those things, etc etc, we're having 40% of our paychecks taken out...and STILL sheep in this country are fast asleep going and coming from and to work.
The only thing that is important to them is that there's a Costco nearby, Everybody Loves Raymond on TV, and they can fill up their barges with $1.8 for a gallon.
This is how stupid we have become.
Well, happy friday to you to, Noz!
Yeah, that's another, more depressing way to put it.
But, is this how stupid we've become, or have we always been this stupid? There was an interesting study I read yesterday where science confirmed long-proven psychological studies demonstrating that humans are confirmists by nature.
Thus, am I too hopeful to think we've always been stupid, but we're slowly - too slowly, however - getting smarter? That there is still some reason, albeit small, to have hope?
Even before the Iraq war, the US military was spending over 60 billion dollars annually protecting the Persian Gulf oil routes.
PHEVs and EVs could dramatically reduce our dependence on foreign oil and keep hundreds of billions of dollars annually from flowing out of the US economy.
Marcel F. Williams
http://newpapyrusmagazine.blogspot.com/
Dahc,
Hehe...sorry man...didn't mean to be depressing...but it's so hard not to be when looking around this place. Perhaps if I lived in Paris....that would cure alot of my ailments!
I'm reading a book called Smelling Land. Fantastic book about hydrogen and electricity infrastructure. I highly recommend it.
Marcel-
I certainly don't disagree with your statement. I've been arguing that point as justification for a gas tax for a few years. The book ZOOM really got me honed in on that point.
Without doubt, the cost of securing those shipping lanes should be paid at the pump.. Yet, I highly doubt Democrats will change that. On this point, Democrats are just as pathetic as Republicans.
Still, Democrats could easily spend 100s of billions helping save Detroit from, well, itself. If you believe the Congressional testimony from Moody's during the bailout debate, US automakers are going to need about $100 billion just to survive this economic crisis.
In fact, if 2010 is as bad as GM is now predicting 2009 to be. It will probably take 100's of billions to save Detroit, and that doesn't even cover the cost of developing new vehicles, or the tax credits it will take to make those green vehicles financially sensible for consumers, especially if gas prices remain low.
Inevitably, I just don't believe the government can just spend its way out of this mess.
Consumers and citizens must bear some responsibility. If not, it doesn't matter what Democrats do. It won't work and it won't be enough. The people must be part of the solution.
That means a gas tax, in my opinion, period. And, I just don't believe Democrats have the gumption to support such a position - reelection is more important than real change.
Although I'll gladly eat my words if Dems prove me wrong.
That's right, smelling land. You mentioned that recently. I have it in my phone notes now.
I think I'm going to be by abookstore today, if so, I'm going to pick that book up.
I also really like the book Hydrogen Economy, additionally ZOOM is also fantastic, although it isn't as much about Hydrogen, more about the dangers of oil dependence.
For you, Noz, I think you would really dig ZOOM.
Dahcredyns-
As far as low gas prices are concerned, I'd rather have the Federal government mandate that a continuously growing percentage of gasoline, diesel fuel, and jet fuel be composed of carbon-neutral gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel from nuclear and renewable sources.
These carbon neutral fuels that can be derived from urban and rural biowaste and from water electrolysis and CO2 from air extraction, are currently more expensive than fossil fuels.
So mixing expensive synfuels in with low cost fossil fuels would be a good way to gradually make the transition from a fossil fuel economy towards a clean synthetic fuel economy over the next few decades. And no taxes or subsidies would be required to do this.
Plus the Federal government mandates more expensive fuel additives all of the time.
Marcel F. Williams
http://newpapyrusmagazine.blogspot.com/
"Is the green movement just turning into a porkfest for armchair liberals to get rich off the government at taxpayer expense?"
Did any of you brilliant folks expect something different? Oh! Wait a minute; It's change that's a coming. Right....
Consumers think with their wallets only. As long as gas.....and gas guzzlers are lower priced, that is what consumers will buy.
If we truly want to provide an incentive for consumers to go green it isn't simply a matter of subsidies for Hybrids. We need to TAX the gas guzzlers.
We need to go the route that many European countries have gone. Provide a SALES TAX for non-fuel efficient vehicles, and a LOWER SALES TAX for fuel efficient vehicles. The more fuel efficient the vehicle, the lower the tax.
In addition, increase the gasoline tax.
Increase the gasoline tax, but not the deisel tax. That way we do not increase the cost of shipping goods across the country while at the same time we provide an incentive to purchase diesel automobiles which are also more fuel efficient.
With these new taxes, the gas guzzlers pay the cost for going green, while those purchasing fuel efficient vehicles pay less taxes.
With the increased tax revenues from gas guzzlers, the governement has the money to finance the cost of going green without incurring trillions of dolars of debt.....
It takes too long to change big industry. They have to go ahead with alternate fuel plans now (and should have years ago) because by the time they can develop the products, years have gone by. We're talking months for the price of gas to climb up again. They'll still be too late.
If you want, argue "too little, too late." But don't contradict yourself when they finally see the light. Condemn them for their delay, not their final yielding to the obvious.
kp-
Democrats tried an ambitious plan under Jimmy Carter, but the people, ultimately, didn't care. Likewise, fuel prices went down.
Dems are going to spend tons of money, but what are they going to develop? How many bridges to nowhere will become part of that plan thanks to the love of pork in Congress?
You can be assured the bulk of the energy policy, in terms of the auto industry, is going to be developed hand-in-hand with the US auto industry. Just yesterday the UAW was already appealing to the Obama administration for much more bailout leniency.
You're not a big fan of GM, yet I'll bet GM will be a critical piece of the "moon shot" Dems are planning. Can Obama straighten out the US auto industry only by throwing massive amounts of money at them?
This is a huge fiscal fiasco waiting to happen, especially if fuel prices remain low, in my opinion.
Ultimately, I'm simply asking, can throwing lots of money at a problem, solve that problem if you do nothing to address the root of the problem, cheap gas?
Maybe, but it will take a ton of money to make EVs and PHEVs cost-effective compared to conventional vehicles, especially if gas is relatively cheap the next few years. Ultimately, I think you have to get prices to bottom at about $4.00/gallon if u want any chance of having a cost-effective impact on fuel efficiency in the next decade.
Certainly, I'm glad that Dems are willing to try something, but that doesn't mean we should just accept they have the right plan, especially when they will be spending OUR money and financing OUR future.
Thus, any plan should, I believe, require participation by the people - a gas tax i think - but I've not yet heard anything that demonstrates that kind of bite.
This is NOT some chess game of Dems and Republicans. It is the survival of our civilization as we know it. The sooner you bury the hatchet, forget political parties, think "all people," we might be able to approach the problem constructively. As long as we create sides and point fingers the sooner we condemn all of us.
"Thus, any plan should, I believe, require participation by the people - a gas tax i think - but I've not yet heard anything that demonstrates that kind of bite."
How is that a hatchet? How is that partisanship?
Democrats are in control. That's reality. I'm not just going to blindly follow their lead. We know what that's lead to.
I think we're on the verge of huge change, but that change must include the people.
If it all comes down to Congress and GM solving our energy problems with our money, I'm sorry KP, but history doesn't bode well for our future.
"Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country."
Today, everybody is just expecting Obama to save us from ourselves. We, the people, need to change as well.
I've heard many whom believe Obama is going to pay our mortgage, give us free health care, save our pensions, and give us an EV for the same cost as a gas car even though the EV costs 3 times as much to make.
That's just not realistic.
I'm not saying Democrats suck.
I'm asking aren't Democrats full of it if they think they can lead a "moon shot" regarding foreign oil dependency without asking for a contribution from the people.
I'm asking for realism. I'm asking for the greatest change possible as quickly as possible.
Without selling the people on their role in this change, I don't expect much change.
Just because Democrats are talking about these issues and are willing to throw hundreds of billions at these problems doesn't mean they'll succeed. It doesn't mean they will even come close to succeeding.
I agree that we must rally, as a people, but you can't have such a rally without bringing the people into the solution.
Post a Comment
<< Home