backtop


Print 52 comment(s) - last by Quadrillity.. on Jun 29 at 12:39 PM

Senators fear Fiskercould default on giant government loans

The United States government granted a number of loans to different high-tech startups in an attempt to kick start innovation and research into alternative fuel and power. Among the companies that received these loans were Fisker Automotive and Tesla Motors. Tesla Motors has been undeniably successful and recently launched its Model S and made deliveries to the first buyers of the electric vehicle.
 
Fisker Automotive, however, hasn’t been as fruitful. The auto company has experienced issues with battery packs that had to be replaced, and a test vehicle loaned to Consumer Reports “died” with just a few hundred miles on the odometer.
 
As the recipient of a government loan, U.S. Senators Chuck Grassley R-Iowa and Senator John Thune, R-South Dakota are now questioning Energy Secretary Steven Chu about why a loan was made to Fisker Automotive considering it is partly owned by Qatar Investment Authority, a foreign-owned company.
 
The letter to Chu read in part, "Why should the American taxpayer have to accept the credit risk of a company owned by a foreign government?"

 Fisker Karma

The Energy Department loaned Fisker Automotive $529 million and awarded battery supplier A123 $249 million in grants. A Fisker spokesperson responded by stating that the company sold more than 1,000 cars globally and generated more than $100 million in revenue. The spokesman also stated that Fisker was focused on creating American jobs.
 
Fisker has already announced delays in producing its lower-cost family sedan due to setbacks with the battery packs for the plug-in hybrid vehicle. Battery supplier A123 is replacing 600 battery packs in Fisker Karma vehicles at a cost of $55 million after manufacturing flaws were found in the batteries.
 
The letter from the Senators also asked, "Will DOE consider A123's ongoing financial struggles before distributing the rest of the grant?"
 
A123 intends to hire as many as 400 new employees in the coming months, as was a condition of receiving the state and federal money. The company currently has about 780 workers in Michigan. 

Source: Detroit News



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Anyone need an extra billion?
By JediJeb on 6/27/2012 7:01:47 PM , Rating: 2
You also have to take into account the ridiculous amount of federal regulations placed on employers/manufacturers in this country. That also drives companies out of the country because it increases their operating expenses. We reduced taxes on the rich/companies hoping they would spend it in the "trickle down" yet increased their cost of doing business and took back all the money placed into the system by the lower taxes.

quote:
According to the Office of the Federal Register, in 1998, the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), the official listing of all regulations in effect, contained a total of 134,723 pages in 201 volumes that claimed 19 feet of shelf space. In 1970, the CFR totaled only 54,834 pages.


The current page count in approximately 150,000 pages.

quote:
The General Accountability Office (GAO) reports that in the four fiscal years from 1996 to 1999, a total of 15,286 new federal regulations went into effect. Of these, 222 were classified as "major" rules, each one having an annual effect on the economy of at least $100 million


In four fiscal years the government added at least a $22.2billion dollar burden on the economy just through those few major regulations out of the total. How much more did the other 15,064 regulations cost our economy?

Maybe trickle down economics could work, if the government didn't turn around and take away every bit of the extra money lowering the taxes placed back into circulation. There are more things than just taxes and spending we need to get under control in this country.


RE: Anyone need an extra billion?
By FITCamaro on 6/28/2012 8:18:22 AM , Rating: 2
One thing I always laugh/cry at is the fact how liberals like to brag how they understand the world better and how we're a global economy. Yet their policies of tax the rich and corporations more don't work in a global economy. Businesses can move elsewhere to where their tax burden is less while losing few, if any, customers. The rich can move their money elsewhere so its not taxed.

Maybe in the 1940s when individuals and companies really had very little ability to move around wherever they wanted high taxes were possible. But today if you try to steal 90% of someone's labor (income), they'll just go somewhere else that doesn't. Because they can.


RE: Anyone need an extra billion?
By Reclaimer77 on 6/28/2012 8:44:05 AM , Rating: 2
Argh I wish I could remember their names! Back in the 1960's a Liberal think-tank came up with a theory that you could destroy Capitalism, make it fail, if you placed enough regulatory burden, red tape, and Federal mandates on the system.

If we're not witnessing that in living color today, I don't know what. Sometimes when I look at this Administrations actions and the Marxist running it, I wonder if that's not the whole point..


RE: Anyone need an extra billion?
By praktik on 6/28/2012 8:52:55 AM , Rating: 2
Marxist??

Reclaimer77 buddy - I know that kind of stuff has currency on the shuffleboard court and the early-bird buffet, but the rest of the world has moved on from the Cold War era and I think you'll find that the commie threat comes across as a somewhat ridiculous anachronism of a bygone era - kinda like people worrying about the "Irish threat" in the 1800s... something that scared a lot of old people back in the day, but doesn't really mean anything today.

There are innumerable ways we can demonstrate that Obama is not a Marxist, perhaps the easiest indicator is the fact that the "far left" is seriously disappointed with Obama and there is lots of coverage of how unenthused the "hard left" is with Obama's policies to date. Wouldn't the far left be LOVING Obama if he was truly a Marxist?

The fact they castigate him as a Wall Street sell-out, with some reason, should be one indicator that your Cold War programming is finding it difficult to process the current political environment.


RE: Anyone need an extra billion?
By Reclaimer77 on 6/28/2012 10:53:39 AM , Rating: 2
So we should judge him on how others react to his policies, in some arbitrary and myopic sampling? Just because there are insane people out there who don't think he's gone far enough, doesn't mean his policies should meet our approval.

I also reject your categorization that people using the word "Marxist" must be Cold War holdovers. I specifically recall using "marxist", NOT Communist. And I'm speaking about his political and economic leanings, not some "red scare". Be serious.

And it's just a buzzword. It doesn't matter if we say "Marxist" or Socialist or Kensyian. It all springs from the same well. Obama is a Marxist. Just because he hasn't been able to transform America into a Marxist state in 4 years is irrelevant. We can't allow him another 4 to try and get it right. He's already done enough.


RE: Anyone need an extra billion?
By praktik on 6/28/2012 11:02:52 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
So we should judge him on how others react to his policies, in some arbitrary and myopic sampling? Just because there are insane people out there who don't think he's gone far enough, doesn't mean his policies should meet our approval.


Nope. I listed that as one small example, among many, that could be marshalled to prove he is not a Marxist... however since we do not share the same language, I don't think we can productively discuss this issues since you said:

quote:
It doesn't matter if we say "Marxist" or Socialist or Kensyian. It all springs from the same well.


So if you were REALLY saying he is a Keynesian (moving goalposts) then sure, there's a credible argument to be made there...

Since you see no distinction however, between Keynesian economic thought, the wide umbrella of socialist politics and the narrow realm of Marxism (a subset of communism) and see no difference between what are distinct vectors of political thought, we can't really talk.

It would be like me and a bio-physics PHD talking about nano manipulation of proteins - I couldn't talk to him about that cause I don't understand the basic tenets of his science.


RE: Anyone need an extra billion?
By Reclaimer77 on 6/28/2012 11:32:53 AM , Rating: 1
Here's a news flash: I didn't ask you to "discuss" anything with me. Since you are no doubt in favor of Obama, or go out of your way to defend him, we have nothing to say to each other.


RE: Anyone need an extra billion?
By praktik on 6/28/2012 11:41:11 AM , Rating: 2
Hey Reclaimer77 - the 50's called, they want their paranoid McCarthyism back!!

And for the record, I am no partisan for Obama, nor even an American (just across the lake from you lot) - if I had my druthers we'd be looking at a 3rd party President since both parties aren't much more than whores for cash and political expediency.


RE: Anyone need an extra billion?
By praktik on 6/28/2012 11:50:03 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Since you are no doubt in favor of Obama, or go out of your way to defend him, we have nothing to say to each other.


Interesting that the identification of someone as potentially being somewhere other than where you are on the political spectrum is your ground for deciding a conversation would not be fruitful. This is a sad admission to make since it means you do not challenge your assumptions by honestly engaging with people who think differently than you - and this behaviour is a huge part of why politics is so f*cked up for you guys these days!

In my case, I think we can't speak productively not because you self-identify as a conservative, but because you don't have an understanding of what the myriad of differences are between different strands of socialism, keynesian economics and communism. It would be like discussing colour with the colour-blind. I could however, discuss these issues with someone who has a basic understanding of political science yet is a staunch conservative. Perhaps my library of old Commentary/Weekly Standard and other conservative publications and literature would convince you of that fact, but I'm not counting on an honest foot forward from someone looking for excuses to stay in their bubble (a bubble devoid of some of the basic facets of the political spectrum)


RE: Anyone need an extra billion?
By Reclaimer77 on 6/28/2012 12:22:06 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Interesting that the identification of someone as potentially being somewhere other than where you are on the political spectrum is your ground for deciding a conversation would not be fruitful.


Because it never is. You don't think I've done it hundreds of times? The end result of two ideologies slamming against each other is always the same.

quote:
In my case, I think we can't speak productively not because you self-identify as a conservative, but because you don't have an understanding of what the myriad of differences are between different strands of socialism, keynesian economics and communism.


That was never the discussion. You MADE it the discussion. Read my original post again, and actually look at the context and what I was speaking about. You never even attempted to discuss the TOPIC with me.

I'm really tired of being dragged into a pointless derailment about the meaning of terms anyway. Fine, let's settle on "Progressive" if that makes you happy. Which guess what? Has roots in ALL of those strands of socialism.

I don't care if Obama is a Marxist, Socialist, or a Martian. The point is, he's bad for the country. His policies have been disastrous. And the debt and bloat he's saddled us with will be with us long after he's out of office.

I'm glad you feel so superior to me and that gets you through the day. But I'm not impressed by your smugness, your inability to understand the context of the discussion, and your superiority complex.


RE: Anyone need an extra billion?
By praktik on 6/28/2012 12:51:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Because it never is. You don't think I've done it hundreds of times? The end result of two ideologies slamming against each other is always the same.


No I totally believe you've done it hundreds of times!

I just think there is tons of value in engaging with people who have completely different politics and outlooks - the most rewarding thing is finding those little bits of common ground, that you support a policy or idea the other person supports, but for completely different reasons! There is always more than one route to the same place and I think a policy is stronger for having competing political outlooks collaborate... rather than attempting to purify the landscape in an eternal battle with "the enemy", who obviously is not worth talking to cause well, they might think a particular Keynesian approach makes sense in some places and times....

Good luck with your Holy War! Remember, the price of freedom is eternal vigilance!


By Reclaimer77 on 6/28/2012 3:08:45 PM , Rating: 2
You misunderstand. Such discussions can be very enjoyable and revealing, IN person or at the very least over the phone. Over the Internet? Not so much.

quote:
Good luck with your Holy War! Remember, the price of freedom is eternal vigilance!


The more insulting, condescending remarks like this you make, the more hypocritical you appear. Because you're showing yourself as someone who would NOT be an enjoyable and open minded debater. You've accused me of McCarthyism and evoking Communism, which I've not done. You've portrayed me as some radical because of terminology you don't agree with, you've not once taken the high road or even given me the benefit of the doubt.


By WalksTheWalk on 6/28/2012 2:01:18 PM , Rating: 1
I think Reclaimer77 said:

quote:
Oh, you English are *so* superior, aren't you? Well, would you like to know what you'd be without us, the good ol' U.S. of A. to protect you? I'll tell you. The smallest fucking province in the Russian Empire, that's what! So don't call me stupid, lady. Just thank me.


- Otto; A Fish Called Wanda


RE: Anyone need an extra billion?
By KoS on 6/28/2012 2:36:41 PM , Rating: 2
It's the same concept that the two Columbia Univ professors have and are pushing...cloward and piven. Overwhelm the system so it collapses!


RE: Anyone need an extra billion?
By KoS on 6/28/2012 2:42:44 PM , Rating: 2
It's the same concept that the two professors from Columbia have promoted and are still trying to achieve....Cloward and Piven.

Overwhelm the system so it collapses.


RE: Anyone need an extra billion?
By KoS on 6/28/2012 2:44:24 PM , Rating: 2
Oops..double post. :(


"You can bet that Sony built a long-term business plan about being successful in Japan and that business plan is crumbling." -- Peter Moore, 24 hours before his Microsoft resignation














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki