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 WalksTheWalk on 6/28/2012 1:43:07 PM , Rating: 3
If you have no job and are in dire need of one, are you going to not take an entry level job to provide sustenance while you look for a better job or do you expect to suck at the teat of government while waiting for the job you want?

Entry level jobs are there to provide initial experience for better jobs at a later date. If all entry level jobs provided the means to support a "lifestlye" there is no incentive to improve your position. It's up to the person to find there way from an entry level job to a "lifestyle" supporting job. (Note that lifestyle is a completely subjective term.)

Once a person has a better job, it's up to them to balance their spending with their saving so they have something to fall back on if they ever lose their job. This is called "contingency planning" and it's something many Americans ignore completely because they are hooked on big government assistance.


By Quadrillity on 6/28/2012 5:13:04 PM , Rating: 3
BINGO! Nail on the head


RE: Anyone need an extra billion?
By mindless1 on 6/29/2012 5:02:03 AM , Rating: 2
You are merely describing the way things are, not the way things work well.

The way things are is the problem, is why people are on welfare and potential labor is wasted along with money to support them.

Think about it. If we as a society are spending hundreds or more a month to support someone through welfare, that money didn't grow on a tree, it could have gone even further to provide additional wages. It's all a matter of where the money comes from and where it goes. Yes a McDonalds hamburger might cost a little more but I could be paying less taxes to offset that, a win/win situation instead of THE WAY THINGS ARE which is that minimum wage doesn't serve any useful purpose being this low except to exploit the poor. They don't like being treated like less than human beings so they say "fvck it".

It's very simple. People will do what they perceive benefits them. To get people off welfare you need to pay them enough that they feel it's of benefit to work. If you just pull welfare out from under them instead you then end up with more crime instead so we pay to incarcerate people which is yet another failure we have in society, a huge penal system.


By Quadrillity on 6/29/2012 12:39:51 PM , Rating: 2
So we shouldn't force people to do the right thing because they might increase the crime rate? That is faulty and absurd logic. I agree that we should rethink our justice system in this nation, and we can start with more serious punishments for capital crimes like rape, murder, etc. If you are given the death penalty, you should only have one appeal, and that should be speedy. None of this "waiting on death row for 20 years" bullcrap.


"Well, there may be a reason why they call them 'Mac' trucks! Windows machines will not be trucks." -- Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer














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