Obama's One Million Electric Car Goal:

Nobody that matters wrote: IRS:
Plug-in Electric Drive Vehicle Credit (Section 1141)
Plug-In Electric Vehicle Credit (Section 1142)

Credits are not INTERFERENCE.... Wanna try again?

There's also a "Child Tax Credit"...Are you suggesting that the gubm'nt is trying to "interfere in my life" and suggesting I go out and breed?

There were also tax-credits for energy improvements to one's home... I don't remember those as being "interference"...

Oh, sorry...I keep forgetting I'm dealing with teabagger-types who "don' need no steenkin' facts."

BearMtnHIB wrote: The gubberment is subisdizing the car with taxpayer money and we are losing as much as $49,000 on each Volt it builds. In addition, it's subsidizing the leases- so the people leasing the car don't pay anywhere near what the car actually costs- and so the numbers of actual sales look pumped up.

This is a obsurd- and a total waste of tax money. This is how the government does business. They care not how much of our money they piss away.

(I assume you meant ABSURD...not "obsurd"...?)


So, considering the FACT that GM payed back the gubm'nt loans in April of 2010, I suppose you have a link to prove that the GM losses are being subsidized by the gubm'nt?

GM pays off its bailout loans
By Peter Valdes-Dapena, senior writer, April 21, 2010

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- General Motors has made a final payment of $5.8 billion to the U.S. and Canadian governments, paying off the last of its $6.7 billion in loans, the company said Wednesday.

"I am very pleased to announce that, as of today, General Motors has repaid, in full and with interest , the loans made last July by the U.S. Treasury and Export Development Canada," said GM chief executive Ed Whitacre, speaking at a plant in Fairfax, Kan., where GM builds Chevrolet Malibu and Buick LaCrosse sedans.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/04/21/autos/g ... /index.htm

So, unless you DO have a link showing that the government is subsidizing this, then that would make you a liar....wouldn't it? So, what "waste of taxpayer money" are you talking about? (I suppose you noticed the part about "WITH INTEREST"?...So, that would mean that the gubm'nt MADE MONEY on the loans, and rather than it costing the taxpayer ANYTHING, it put more money back in the Treasury...)

So, I'm still waiting for that link....

Democracy4Sale wrote:

BearMtnHIB wrote: The gubberment is subisdizing the car with taxpayer money and we are losing as much as $49,000 on each Volt it builds. In addition, it's subsidizing the leases- so the people leasing the car don't pay anywhere near what the car actually costs- and so the numbers of actual sales look pumped up.

This is a obsurd- and a total waste of tax money. This is how the government does business. They care not how much of our money they piss away.

(I assume you meant ABSURD...not "obsurd"...?)


So, considering the FACT that GM payed back the gubm'nt loans in April of 2010, I suppose you have a link to prove that the GM losses are being subsidized by the gubm'nt?

GM pays off its bailout loans
By Peter Valdes-Dapena, senior writer, April 21, 2010

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- General Motors has made a final payment of $5.8 billion to the U.S. and Canadian governments, paying off the last of its $6.7 billion in loans, the company said Wednesday.

"I am very pleased to announce that, as of today, General Motors has repaid, in full and with interest , the loans made last July by the U.S. Treasury and Export Development Canada," said GM chief executive Ed Whitacre, speaking at a plant in Fairfax, Kan., where GM builds Chevrolet Malibu and Buick LaCrosse sedans.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/04/21/autos/g ... /index.htm

So, unless you DO have a link showing that the government is subsidizing this, then that would make you a liar....wouldn't it? So, what "waste of taxpayer money" are you talking about? (I suppose you noticed the part about "WITH INTEREST"?...So, that would mean that the gubm'nt MADE MONEY on the loans, and rather than it costing the taxpayer ANYTHING, it put more money back in the Treasury...)

So, I'm still waiting for that link....

I gots yer link right here.....

Government Motors Bailout was 50 billion taxpayer dollars, and some of the money GM paid back was in the form of stocks.

The fact is that the government still owns about 24% of GM.

In fact the Treasury says that it's still out over $25 billion. Why?
GM's "payment" to the Feds included stock. A lot of stock. The government has sold some, but it still owns 500 million shares of General Motors.

GM's stock rose to almost $39 after its return to the public markets in late 2010, but it's been all downhill ever In fact since. Right now, GM is stuck around $20 to $21 a share, a range it has been in for a while.

Here's the problem: For the taxpayers to break even on the bailout, the shares of GM still owned by the Treasury have to get up to around $53 a share.

The Fed might dump its investment. 500 million shares is a lot of stock. If the government decides to bail on its investment after the election, the price will drop further as all of those shares hit the market.

What do you you say now LJ- I'm still a lyer?

If this happens, the taxpayers will be out billions!
Here's my source....
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/08/15/ ... 5-billion/

Democracy4Sale wrote: Credits are not INTERFERENCE.... Wanna try again?

Bullshit.

Credits are a direct route to market interference. Denying that is just insane.

Why is the right against cleaner cars to help the environment?

Democracy4Sale wrote:

BearMtnHIB wrote: The gubberment is subisdizing the car with taxpayer money and we are losing as much as $49,000 on each Volt it builds. In addition, it's subsidizing the leases- so the people leasing the car don't pay anywhere near what the car actually costs- and so the numbers of actual sales look pumped up.

This is a obsurd- and a total waste of tax money. This is how the government does business. They care not how much of our money they piss away.

So, considering the FACT that GM payed back the gubm'nt loans in April of 2010, I suppose you have a link to prove that the GM losses are being subsidized by the gubm'nt?

GM pays off its bailout loans
By Peter Valdes-Dapena, senior writer, April 21, 2010

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- General Motors has made a final payment of $5.8 billion to the U.S. and Canadian governments, paying off the last of its $6.7 billion in loans, the company said Wednesday.

"I am very pleased to announce that, as of today, General Motors has repaid, in full and with interest, the loans made last July by the U.S. Treasury and Export Development Canada," said GM chief executive Ed Whitacre, speaking at a plant in Fairfax, Kan., where GM builds Chevrolet Malibu and Buick LaCrosse sedans.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/04/21/autos/g ... /index.htm

So, unless you DO have a link showing that the government is subsidizing this, then that would make you a liar....wouldn't it? So, what "waste of taxpayer money" are you talking about? (I suppose you noticed the part about "WITH INTEREST"?...So, that would mean that the gubm'nt MADE MONEY on the loans, and rather than it costing the taxpayer ANYTHING, it put more money back in the Treasury...)

So, I'm still waiting for that link....

The federal government is still in possession of something like 500 million shares of GM stock SFB. A stock which is still valued below the IPO price of 2010. And while it may be true that GM paid back the federal loans, it did so by taking out new loans, at a lower interest rate than the one that was being paid to the taxpayer, to accomplish the task, not by paying off $5.8 Billion in debt. In essence, GM screwed the people who bailed them out by refinancing their loans. The taxpayers would have gotten more money than they ended up getting from a corporation that is 26% owned by the taxpayers if GM hadn't refinanced the loans. GM didn't pay off $5.8 Billion in debt, they refinanced the debt. The existence of that refinanced debt, along with their still underfunded pension funds, are responsible for the drop in the value of the 500 million shares of its stock still owned by the taxpayers and are what is looming on the horizon which might make another excursion into bankruptcy court a necessity for GM in the not too distant future, with the taxpayers still owning 500 million shares of the company.

In addition, we have yet to touch on things like $109 million dollar grants from the Department of Energy to the supplier of the batteries for the Volt and all the rest of the grants, subsidies, loans and tax breaks for other suppliers of Volt components that, while not made directly to GM, would still be reasonably considered as government subsidy of the final product. I know you'd like to keep that from being mentioned as you state your case, but its still there even when you try to ignore it.

Raees wrote: Why is the right against cleaner cars to help the environment?

I'm all for cleaner cars to help the environment.

I'm all against the federal government legislating cleaner cars.

How many MPG does your daily driver get, Raees?

Nobody that matters wrote: I'm all against the federal government legislating cleaner cars.

Let me guess: it's against your god-given right to pollute the planet?

Raees wrote:

Nobody that matters wrote: I'm all against the federal government legislating cleaner cars.

Let me guess: it's against your god-given right to pollute the planet?

No. It's not a sustainable economic solution.

When the price of gas goes up and the battery technology becomes more mature, the market will shift all on it's own. Why spend a ton of our next generation's money just because you're impatient for the inevitable?