That still doesn't make it our fault. You guys are the one's spending the bucks there and keeping them in business.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
|
That still doesn't make it our fault. You guys are the one's spending the bucks there and keeping them in business.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Elliot:
Everyone is required to choose something. I'm not suggesting everyone follow my lead and live life the way I do. My lifestyle won't work for everyone. But if you are not required to choose something, then you are required to have a decision made for you.
You have lost me on one thing though.. how exactly did we get on this discussion from clunkers anyway? All I said was I thought it was wasteful to ruin all those good cars. The bottom line is about saving money, and once you have a car paid for, you save lots of money to the bank. Even enough to make up for fuel charges.
I'm not going to debate how to fix every problem in the world, there are people a lot smarter than me and still they can't even figure it all out. One thing is for certain, the system we have now is failing. And Obama better pray that his plans work, otherwise we are all going to be in big trouble.
Okay, I see where it came from now...
Okay, I stand by my post. It's accurate, however there are sacrifices you make, I have made them. It's a choice. Although the intent of the comment wasn't to step on a nerve.Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewc24301
Scooters are very fun to ride though...
Andy you would like it in New Zealand they used to have a law that all freight over 100 miles had to travel on rail and the trucking industry never recovered, the long distance roads over there are free of trucks, of course it is more expensive to live there.Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewc24301
You must travel a lot less that we do and have good weather I would expect a car to reach 100K in five years and be clapped out due to rust
Yes electric trains are more efficient but rail infurstructure can be very expensive and these days takes a lot of concrete which brings us back to manufacturing pollution
Bring back the bicycle for city transport, solves the obesity problem tooQuote:
Originally Posted by andrewc24301
Clete ;good point .The US subsidizes a national rail service and it is a money loser . Across the country local mass transit faces the same problem even as the recession has made travel by rail and buses more popular than ever. In DC, the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, is facing a $176 million budget gap at the same time their customer base is increasing . They are considering cut backs in service and personel . Other cities are considering eliminating routes and reducing frequencies include Denver, Phoenix, Baltimore, and San Diego. Many are raising fares making travel by rail less competitive.
Meanwhile I content that if the Volt and other electric plug in's ever did take off it would crash the grid. There are very few locations in the country that are increasing electric generating capacity;and very little of our generation is not fossil fuel based.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...wreck-the-grid
One possible alternative to supplement the electricity needed is being developed by Michelin tire. Their new “Active Wheel” concept would put an electric generator in the wheels of a hybrid capable of an output of 30 kilowatts of power—per wheel.
Tom I cannot get excited at a car generating it's own power there is the law of thermodynmanics which basically says some energy is lost in closed system, you cannot get 100% efficiency, so ultimately it winds down to zero. Anything you get will be a small percentage of input
I also heard that 20% of your generation is nuclear so you could use that to charge the cars, a little more expensive than coal of course but fully green so exchange uranium for oil and make me rich
Clete is correct, 30 kilowatts would be enough to power the car, however then what you have is a pepetural motion machine, which to date, is considered impossible. Everything must burn some kind of fuel to operate. There is no free lunch.
Consider the horse power that would be needed to turn 4 generators to produce a total of 120 kilowatts. (4 wheels) I'm sure it would be enough to stall the car.
It's the same concept of using a generator to power a motor to power a generator. Effiency is lost, and the machine stops.
It takes 746 watts to equal one horse power. A quick search of the internet reveals a hybird may produce about 175 hp, 175X746=130550 (130kw) Each 4 tires moving at full speed, full throttle, producing 30kw each, equals 120kw. Leaving you with about 10kw left over to power the car. 10kw/746= 13.40HP.
About the size of my riding mower. In other words, these generators would put a considerable drag on the car. Like towing the queen mary. In fact, I'd argue it would be better used as a breaking system in the snow...
I'd put my stock in solar and wind. Emphisis on solar. Nuclear isn't off the table as long as it's respected and built to the highest standard.
All this doesn't even factor the inefficencies of the internal combustion engine which can loose up to 75% of its energy in heat lost.
I also realize that in my above post, at the end, you still have produced 130kw, but I argue that due to efficiencys in the car, engine, etc, you would erode any power gained just trying to keep the car moving along. There are people who have claimed to create a machine that generates more wattage per horse power. Some have claimed to produce several hundred kw from a single HP. Nobody has yet to prove it to the US patent office though. I wish I could remember the guys name, I'd provide a link. Looked into it a few years back.
After about a month of reserch, determined the guy was a fake.
Andrew a few Years ago I had contact with an inventor who claimed that once he got the machine started he could produce electricity continuously. The output of his device was extremely small and he couldn't scale it up. Some things can be done in small scale prototypes but all they do is prove theories, the reality is a long way away and without megabucks of research and years of experimentation nothing happens. I expect Michellen's device is one of these, theoretically possible but not scalable otherwise we would be knee deep in free power by now. The guy I had contact with claimed he was drawing power from another dimension or something like that. Needless to say I didn't invest
As far as I know it takes energy to make energy so nothing is going to be perfect. Michelin's idea sounds like it's worth considering to me.
And of course I clearly said that the Michelin Active wheel was to "supplement " the electricity . In no way did I suggest that it would replace extenal sources.
As for the Chevy Volt ;at $40 grand I want a kick a$$ Bose sound system and an AC /heating system that works . Guess that's out of the question.
Just heard that the NY auto dealers association has pulled out of this debacle. What does that say for Government control of anything?
Yep, cash for clunkers is still working...
Let's see, people quit buying new cars so car makers cut production and cash for clunkers takes 700,000 used cars off the market, so used car prices may hit a record and what are people buying? Gas guzzlers. I love it, lol.Quote:
Here's one economic indicator that's flashing green: used-car prices.
Prices for second-hand cars took a hit late last year, along with the prices of many other assets. But since the start of this year, a combination of tight supplies of both new and used vehicles and higher demand from a frugal public have pushed average used-car prices to the highest levels in years, industry watchers say. Demand seems particularly strong for used SUVs, analysts say, reflecting lower gas prices.
That should be good news if you are selling or trading in a well-tended used vehicle over the next couple of years. It might not be so welcome if you are trying to buy one.
One widely followed measure of used-car prices, the 14-year-old Manheim Used Vehicle Value Index, will likely hit a record when data for September are released in early October, says Thomas Webb, chief economist for Manheim Consulting, a subsidiary of Cox Enterprises Inc.
What kinds of used vehicles are selling? All kinds, but particularly "gas guzzlers," says Katharine Kenny , vice president of investor relations for CarMax Inc. the big used-vehicle retailer based in Richmond, Va.
Yeah, and what happens when all those people who really couldn't afford a new car but bought one because of the subsidized down payment default and all those cars come back to the bank?
Hello gal:Quote:
Originally Posted by galveston
You know that shortage of cars in the used car market that Steve mentioned right above you?? It'll reverse that, for sure...
But, don't you see those vast empty lots that USED to house your local car dealer?? I'll bet the towns in Texas have more of 'em than Seattle has. There's a few live ones left, though, but they're on their last threads... I'll bet they only survived because of this program... Maybe you know a secretary, or a mechanic that works there. Isn't it BETTER to keep them open rather than board 'em up. You do know what boarded up stuff looks like, don't you? It looks like the ghetto. Do you want that?
Look, gal. I'm not saying that it won't turn into that anyway. I'm just saying there are results of this program that you can SEE, right in your home town, TODAY. On the other hand, boarding up your town is going to KILL it, for sure.
excon
Yep, could be another problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by galveston
Excon,
So your solution is to bail out EVERYONE.
Keep them all afloat regardless of whether they are viable or not.
Don't let them fail, or else they might have to be... >gasp<... boarded up.
And in doing so, we make sure that instead of ONLY the business that not viable failing, we instead make sure to bring the rest of the economy to the point of failure too.
What a brilliant solution... kill the entire economy instead of just letting go of the parts that don't work and SHOULD fail.
As it so happens I have three failed used auto dealerships in my loan protfolio right now. The owners abandoned the properties and we foreclosed and took ownership of them.
Y'know what? All three properties have interested buyers looking to start their own dealerships. All three will end up sold to NEW owners. All three will become viable businesses again.
Instead of propping up bad businesses, we allowed them to fail on their own. Oh, we tried modifying the loan terms for the original owners, but they continued to be unable to maintain the business, and we let them go as painlessly as possible.
And the result will be new businesses to take their place.
The result of going out of business is not "boarding up the neighborhood". The result is new business with better capitalization, fewer liabilities, and a better chance of success.
Letting old, badly-run businesses go makes way for the NEWER, stronger businesses.
Elliot
Yeah, but I still think it's hilarious that after pushing all those fuel efficient vehicles the demand for gas guzzlers has gone sky high. The Goracle must be reeling from that news.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Hello Elliot:Quote:
Originally Posted by ETWolverine
It's getting more and more difficult to argue with you, because you distort written words. This is just another example of it.. You apparently DISTORT my support for the Cash for Clunkers program as support for the bailout of, how did you put it, EVERYONE??
The discussion then, instead of being about the issues, devolves into accusations of who said what... The crazy thing about that, is that our writings are left to posterity, and the truth in them becomes evident to anyone who cares to read them...
So, I'm going depart from your "through the looking glass" world you've created for yourself, where up is down, and one thing means another... If you wish to resume discussing real life stuff, let me know, but I'm not going to dignify your hysteria with further responses.
excon
PS> I'm going to copy this post, and paste it where ever necessary in the future. I have a feeling that it's going to be VERY necessary.
Oh... did you just mean all the car dealers?Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Because what you said was that cash for clunkers saved the car dealerships. You didn't diffrentiate between them.
You said that if a car dealership is up and running (and you specifically mentioned the large number of them still up and running in Texas as opposed to Seattle) it is because cash for clunkers saved them. And you said that if cash for clunkers had failed, those dealerships would have been closed down, boarded up, and the neighborhoods would have become blighted.
Did you not say that?
Yeah, you did.
As you say... the words are right there for everyone to read.
You said that cash for clunkers saved the car dealerships... WHETHER THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN SAVED OR NOT.
And my response, which you have ignored, is that those dealerships SHOULD have been allowed to fail rather than being propped up, because the result would have been newer, stronger, better-capitalized car dealerships.
But you, as usual, ignore substance and instead attack people for answering what you actually posted. Not what you THINK you posted. Not what you MEANT to post. But what you actually posted.
And we both know that the only reason you do it is because you don't have a response for the SUBSTANTIVE parts of my posts. The facts of economic reality keep getting in the way of your Keyensian fantasies, and you have no response to those facts. And so instead you attack.
Post your attack wherever you wish. I'll follow it up with this response.
Elliot
Obviously you were not one of those who got the rebate check... if you were than your computer is now the property of the US Government and all file and pictures contained therein. Oh, and not to mention all foreign governments also.
Good Luck!
Hello sweetpea:
I see you got the right wing emai. Cool. Just checking.
excon
PS> So, it didn't bother you when George W. Bush had the National Security Agency READ your emails and listen to your phone calls, ALL without a warrant?? No, huh?
PPS> The stuff I mentioned REALLY did happen. The stuff you mentioned DIDN'T.
And does it bother you that those little Obama helpers may also read your emails?Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Maybe Obama will just shut you off from the internet if he doesn't like what you post. (Internet neutrality)
Psst... that's not what Internet Neutrality means. Research it.Quote:
Originally Posted by galveston
You think?Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
We now live in tha age of Newspeak.
What doe the concept of 'net neutrality have to do with Newspeak - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I made the newspeak comment because I don't trust anything this administration says.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
When the govt says it wants to control anything, just what do you expect? Greater freedom, or less freedom?
The concept of freedom demands that the government keep its hands off the internet. It is just about the last avenue for the free expression of ideas still available to the public.
You know, ex, this whole question of tax and cross subsidy can be easily fixed. You abolish all the deductions and lower the tax rate. But in order to do this you have to have a focus on advantaging the poor, not making it easier for the rich. That is too revolutionary a thought for the capitalists who have forgotten that it is the poor who spend every dollar they get. So you make the population the spender of the last resort and you get prosperity, you make government the spender of the last resort and you get stagnation.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Actually, Clete, Conservatives have long been fighting for lower tax rates (real tax custs), as opposed to tax rebates. We criticized Bush's tax rebates in 2008 for just that reason... but agreed that it was better than nothing. We also opposed the $13 a week tax rebates in the Obama Stimulus Bill... which he called a "middle class tax cut" but was actually a rebate, not a cut. And because at $13 per week, it really was "nothing".Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Where have you been? We've been all for tax cuts from day one.
Elliot
Elliot, I said nothing about lower taxes or reductions in government revenue, what I said was do away with (exchange) deductions for a lower tax rate to get rid of cross subsidies because the cross subsidies disadvantage the poor. $13 a week might be significant to the poor even though it is meaningless to you or I. I seen a lot of crackpot tax ideas originating in the US tried here and they all have detrimental results so they must be equally bad for you, but fortunately, we had the good sense to implement a Goods and Services Tax which has resulted in significantly lower rates of Income Tax because the cheats couldn't get out of paying tax when they spent their money, and incidentally you might wonder which economy faired better in the GFC.Quote:
Originally Posted by ETWolverine
We didn't have mortgage securitisation, cash for clunkers, bank bailouts. Insurance bailouts, panic stations to name a few.
I'm actually in favor of a Goods & Services tax or a consumption tax instead of an income tax. That is the basis for the Fair Tax that I support. We happen to be in agreement on this point.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Elliot
I think we have to be cautious about any tax other than the income tax, UNLESS THE INCOME TAX IS PROHIBITED BY THE CONSTITUTION.
Otherwise, the Left would later bring back the income tax on top of any other tax that might be implemented.
That's right . The so called progressive income tax has to be repealed.
You have to have a social compact in these things, taxation isn't an end in its self, it is the means by which government funds the programs your democratically elected representatives have approved, therefore if the revenue is sufficient there is no need to increase income tax when a consumption tax is in place. The consumption tax is a growth tax far more so than income tax because capital transactions are involved. Increases in income tax would bring retribution at the pollsQuote:
Originally Posted by galveston
Very progressive thinkingQuote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Our social compact says that the Federal Government has enumerated powers to tax and anything beyond that is a usurpation of power.Quote:
you have to have a social compact in these things, taxation isn't an end in its self, it is the means by which government funds the programs your democratically elected representatives have approved
Yes I could understand how you are focused on usurpation of power rather than sensible provisions to solve a problem. Your founding fathers had a little thing about taxation and such issues. Maybe it's time for another tea party, you can have a consumption tax without taxing tea, you knowQuote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Watch the news, they're already happening. Nowadays, TEA stands for Taxed Enough Already. Lots of elitists try dismissing them with scorn and ridicule, but the people are still gathering.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:00 AM. |