Our rights do not originate with government, but they are to be "secured" by government.
Formerly: Libertarian Party of Citrus county

Friday, August 6, 2010

Why is the Government using Taxpayer Money to Subsidize Upscale Urbanite Toys?

Things are tough, unemployment hovers near 10%; there were only 71,000 new jobs created last month, but with 202 thosand jobs lost in the same period there was a net loss of 131,000 jobs, things don't look good. We are having to borrow money to extend unemployment benefits, and consumer spending is low. In light of this our government is subsidizing $40,000 toys for rich urbanites.

You can get $7500 off your taxes if you purchase a Government Motors Chevy Volt. The Volt is a $41,000 mid size car that is beyond the purchasing power of most Americans. It's limited range and design lead it to be an urban type car. So the extreme rich who can afford new $41,000 cars get to have a feel good toy, at the expense fo the average tax payer. Sorry this doesn't make sense to me. I'm not alone in this feeling,

Kenneth Green, an environmental scientist at the American Enterprise Institute says, "Like the EV1 that GM tried to peddle in the California market, the Volt is a vanity car for the well-off that will be subsidized by less well-off taxpayers at all stages, from R&D to sales and to the construction of charging stations."

Governemnt Motors is already owned and operated at taxpayer expense, the true cost of the volt is around $81,000 dollars according to blogger Doctor Zero So a government owned company is selling the electric car at 1/2 the cost of creating it, and is giving rich elite a $7500 tax credit if they choose to buy this overpriced toy.

I call it an overpriced toy, because the same car configured with a gasoline engine, the Chevy Cruze, costs $17,000 and gets 40mpg. Considering the extra energy and expense that goes into creating and recycling the electric version, environmentally it’s hard to justify the government losing $40,000 per car, and subsidizing its sale. Total cost to tax payers will be almost $47,500 per volt sold (correction: since the taxpayers only own 61% of GM, they will only lose $32,000 per car).

Now the pro-electric car, environmental extremists say that this is necessary to get the electric car industry up and running, and that this will allow technology to make them more affordable. Exactly how long should it take before we realize that the energy density of electric cars make them totally impractical for the vast majority of Americans. We've only been working on this for a little over 100 years.

Here is an ad for an early electric car.

At the time it sold for around $2600, and new batteries cost about $600, A new Model T cost $600 that same year. Note that today the Chevy Cruze sells for about the price difference between it and it's electric version the Volt. Interesting comparison is that to lectrify a car in 1914 cost the same as a basic car did and today electrifying a car cost about the same as a basic car does. Electric cars have been competing with gasoline/diesel cars for a century, they routinely lose for two reasons, they cost too much, and they have too little range. Even the Volt is dependent upon a gasoline engine, to make it a usable toy for the urban elite who can afford to spend $41,000 so they can feel good about the environment.

The volt's target market is upscale urbanites. It's safe to say that upscale urbanites, who are environmentally conscious and would choose to be early adopters of the Volt, are probably liberals. This demographic is one of the few that haven't abandoned Obama. It looks like he is spending taxpayer money to support what little base he has left.

Remember when Obama told Joe the Plumber, “It’s not that I want to punish your success, I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they’ve got a chance at success too, My attitude is that if the economy’s good for folks from the bottom up, it’s going be good for everybody. If you’ve got a plumbing business, you’re gonna be better off if you’ve got a whole bunch of customers who can afford to hire you, and right now everybody’s so pinched that business is bad for everybody, and I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody."

I didn’t realize that rich liberal urbanites who can afford $41,000 cars needed a chance at success too. I’m outraged that to Obama "spreading the wealth" means subsidizing rich urbanites so they can pompously feel good about themselves for purchasing a echo-friendly midsized sedan, that Government Motors is selling at a loss. Would somebody please explain to me why is the Government using Taxpayer Money to Subsidize Upscale Urbanite Toys?

No comments:

Post a Comment