Are there really that many haters?

[ERG4ALL]

The divisive issue is whether demand side or supply side economics is the best to create jobs. On the demand side we have Keynesian economics (i.e. stimulus). On the supply side we have the GOP preference to start new businesses with low taxes. We cannot continue to increase the National Debt as a percentage of the GDP.

I'm reading the book "Bad Money" by Kevin Phillips. He makes an interesting point. In 1950 the percentage of the GDP due to manufacturing was 29.3% and Financial Services made up 10.9%. In 2005 manufacturing was 12.0% and financial services was 20.4%. He goes on to say that Financial Services includes purchases of: Foreign currency futures, Equity futures, T-bill futures, Futures on mortgage-backed bonds, over-the-counter currency options and 25 other financial instruments. The point is that the GDP is not as relevant to job creation as it used to be. Pushing money around counts as purchases, but it doesn't create near the jobs that manufacturing does.

Added to this, Alan Greenspan in his book "The Age of Turbulence" indicates that in a global economy such as we have now, that manufacturing will follow the lowest wage scale of the workers. China has a vast labor pool. As it moves from an agrarian society to a manufacturing society the farm workers will migrate from the country to the city for jobs that are higher paying than farm work. He believes that this migration will continue at least until 2030. This will continue to suppress global manufacturing wages. As China reaches full employment regarding manufacturing and labor becomes scarcer, then wages will rise which will then allow other countries to compete more effectively.

My personal belief is that intelligence in the population is a bell curve. On the far left we have individuals that need to be institutionalized because they cannot take care of themselves. On the far right we have the Einsteins of this world. Somewhere on the left is a portion of the population that can be productive in a repetitive manufacturing environment, but never would be able to function as a hedge fund manager.

I believe it boils down to asking ourselves what kind of society do we want for the next 20 years? Do we want to come closer to resembling a third world country with beggars and shoe shine boys roaming the streets, or do we want to take care of our own. It's all a matter of priorities. But as Bette Davis said her classic line, "Fasten your seatbelts, it's going to be a bumpy night."

 

[hodad66]

well said.....

Question is, will selfish win?

Is the "right to life" party ready to legalize "deathatoriums" just to
get the slow and sick out of the way?

The corporations have used the "family values" crowd to get here...
how long before the sheep wake up to see that they have been duped?

 

[Fabio]

While over-regulating and over-taxing can indeed be dangerous, if you look at the rest of the industrialized world, you will see that the US is on the low side of both.

We are in dire straits now because in the 90s (under Clinton) we deregulated the financial system, and their actions caused the '08 crisis.

I submit to you those things flourish in CA because of the location in spite of the government not because of it.

 

[Yodrak]

True

The smart and proven way to grow the economy is to provide an environment that is favorable to conducting profitable (not a four letter word) business.

True again

If you turn vandals loose in your town to break all the windows people will have jobs replacing glass, but you will not have created sustainable economic productivity.

Here's where your train starts to de-rail. People not having enough money to buy food, or the other essentials of life, is not an environment that is favorable to conducting profitable businesses of any kind. Profitable businesses require customers first and foremost. Lower tax rates on business will not encourage new or espanded business, people having enough money to buy the product is what encourages businesses to produce and sell a product. That doesn't mean that we as a society (via our government) should subsidize extravegance (which lowering taxes on the rich does, by the way), it does mean that all people should have the means to purchase the basic essentials of life.

Nor will you stimulate the economy by borrowing money and handing it out in food stamps.

 

[Blackhouse]

A nice lady in a Leaf showed me the four foot long scratch down the side of her car. She assumed it was from a hater who keyed her car. It looked like it had been keyed. It was a long waivy deep scratch. Sucky!

 

[mwalsh]

A nice lady in a Leaf showed me the four foot long scratch down the side of her car. She assumed it was from a hater who keyed her car. It looked like it had been keyed. It was a long waivy deep scratch. Sucky!

That is sucky! I hate that. I mean it's one thing to do that to someone who has caused you a genuine grievance, and I can maybe see that (though I would not condone that kind of behavior). But just out of outright hate...that's just wrong.

 

[GaslessInSeattle]

A nice lady in a Leaf showed me the four foot long scratch down the side of her car. She assumed it was from a hater who keyed her car. It looked like it had been keyed. It was a long waivy deep scratch. Sucky!

I have gotten two rather strange scratches on either side of the car on the back panel. One looks like a side swipe from a car leaving a parking space the other looks like a door ding, but can't figure out how that would happen on the back end. It's discouraging to think one or both might be intentional.

 

[hodad66]

well, if you were driving a Smart you might come out to
find it tipped over........ :shock:

 

[lkkms2]

I can only encourage everyone with a LEAF to search out venues where you can display your LEAF and answer questions honestly without hype. We've displayed ours at three local venues with a fourth coming up on Sept. 3rd. The organizers were very happy to have the LEAF there because it is new and it is different.

I have talked to probably 100 people and have only encountered a few "haters". Personal contact like this can do wonders. There is a tendency for someone that has had an up close experience with a LEAF to become the source of knowledge when they are talking with their friends. If they have had an honest discussion with an owner and know the benefits, then they will spread the word.

I've prepared about eight pages that I keep in a three-ring-binder when I display the vehicle. It backs up what I am telling them. For example, I have the graphic of the LA4 test and can show the person exactly what that means and how you deviate from that standard will affect your range.

I also, ask what the person's driving habits are before I start explaining the LEAF. If it isn't right for them, then I tell them immediately and encourage them to keep an eye out for the next generation that will have a large range. I don't oversell the vehicle, but explain the niche where it excells.

I like your idea about the three-ring-binder with back up material ( will start mine today). Also asking them about their driving habits first. Good idea.

 

[mbutter]

I was very happy a couple of days ago to learn that our local library in Austin just added two charging stations. My enthusiasm was tempered when I also realized that this displaced 4 front row parking spots, and these spots were sitting empty while the remainder of the rather small parking lot was relatively packed. As an EV owner, I can now park at the library and charge (whether needed or not) while non-EV owners fight it out for the remaining spots.

This has raised my concern about two possible scenarios:

(1) Some EV charging stations have displaced 'choice' parking spots, so non-EV owners will grow resentful about losing the use of these parking spots, especially as the spots sit unused (at least for the short term, until more EVs are sold in this market).

(2) EV owners may view these spots as 'preferred parking' rather than a charging opportunity, and possibly block the station from use by another EV owner that needs a genuine charge. On the relatively rare occasions I have driven by a few of these spots, I have observed electric cars and scooters use these spots without even connecting to the charger. That makes even ME (an EV owner) get a bit miffed.

To mitigate resentment from non-EV and EV owners, new charging stations should be placed in a location that is relatively convenient to persons needing a 'legitimate' charge, but not displace choice parking spots that convey a sense of entitlement or promote abuse.

 

[AndyH]

The divisive issue is whether demand side or supply side economics is the best to create jobs. On the demand side we have Keynesian economics (i.e. stimulus). On the supply side we have the GOP preference to start new businesses with low taxes. We cannot continue to increase the National Debt as a percentage of the GDP.

It shouldn't be divisive - it doesn't need to be. All we have to do is dump the political talking points and other 'noise' and find the 'signal' - the truth. Basic macro econ shows dramatically why demand-side is the only solution to our problem and why supply-side simply is the the wrong tool for the job. It may be the right tool in other situations, but not now. In addition, one only has to step back and look at Europe to see that cutting budgets makes the recession worse.

If one wants to bring the country out of recession, they'll ignore the debt and the deficit in the short term in order to get the train moving again. Once the economy is growing at some stable rate, THEN we can take stock and start adjusting the budget. While one might be able to draw a direct connection between a lack of exercise and the patient's current pneumonia, I think most can understand that antibiotics and bed rest are the best near term solution, rather than forced time on a treadmill.

As for GDP/debt ratios - these can change by either reducing the debt while keeping GDP the same, or by increasing GDP while keeping debt the same, or by increasing GDP and reducing debt concurrently. But in the near term, I think this is the absolutely wrong 'gauge' to focus on.

Noise coming from the right in this country is not designed to fix the economy, it's designed to create a 'one term president.'

Added to this, Alan Greenspan in his book "The Age of Turbulence" indicates that in a global economy such as we have now, that manufacturing will follow the lowest wage scale of the workers. China has a vast labor pool. As it moves from an agrarian society to a manufacturing society the farm workers will migrate from the country to the city for jobs that are higher paying than farm work. He believes that this migration will continue at least until 2030. This will continue to suppress global manufacturing wages. As China reaches full employment regarding manufacturing and labor becomes scarcer, then wages will rise which will then allow other countries to compete more effectively.

Note the point that manufacturing jobs are moving to countries transitioning from an agrarian to an industrial economy. We in the US made this transition many years ago. We've moved beyond the industrial age as well and are in the information age. Those that desire to regain manufacturing jobs in this country are bucking the tide - we cannot go backwards! That doesn't mean that we shouldn't manufacturer anything in this country, but it means that it simply will not happen on it's own.

 

[Herm]

A nice lady in a Leaf showed me the four foot long scratch down the side of her car. She assumed it was from a hater who keyed her car. It looked like it had been keyed. It was a long waivy deep scratch. Sucky!

Probably a hydrogen zealot.

 

[Yodrak]

Interesting. As I and another poster have discussed in another thread, least expensive place to locate an EV charging station is either where the power to a building comes from or where it enters the building, i.e. where equipment for making electrical connections already exist and from where cable runs to the charging stations can be the shortest. More often than not such locations are not near a building entrance, which is where preferred parking locations would be.

I agree with you that EV charging stations need not be located on preferred locations. Rather, they should be where the easiest and least expensive connections to a power supply is located, which is ususally an out of the way location (since electrical infrastructure is 'ugly' and can be dangerous). The ability to charge should provide more than sufficient convenience to an EV driver, regardless of the walking distance to the building entrance.

Just out of curiosity, did the charging spots at the library displace any handicapped parking spots?

I was very happy a couple of days ago to learn that our local library in Austin just added two charging stations. My enthusiasm was tempered when I also realized that this displaced 4 front row parking spots, and these spots were sitting empty while the remainder of the rather small parking lot was relatively packed.

...

To mitigate resentment from non-EV and EV owners, new charging stations should be placed in a location that is relatively convenient to persons needing a 'legitimate' charge, but not displace choice parking spots that convey a sense of entitlement or promote abuse.

 

[N952JL]

To mitigate resentment from non-EV and EV owners, new charging stations should be placed in a location that is relatively convenient to persons needing a 'legitimate' charge, but not displace choice parking spots that convey a sense of entitlement or promote abuse.

I agree. I live in Warner Robins, and currently the only public chargers are at the Nissan dealer. I would love to work with the Mall owners and other popular stores (like Walmart etc.) to install chargers, but I don't want them to be were everyone wants to park. I would rather walk a little ways. The problem I see is if it is too far out, then it will be easy to vandelise. They have to be in a secure enought location to protect the equipment, car, and drivers.

 

[jkolsrud]

OK - saw this just now. I'll just go to my happy place and hope that my delivery date isn't pushed back again.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/289828-it-s-time-to-kill-the-electric-car-drive-a-stake-through-its-heart-and-burn-the-corpse?source=email_the_daily_dispatch" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Jim

 

[GaslessInSeattle]

OK - saw this just now. I'll just go to my happy place and hope that my delivery date isn't pushed back again.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/289828-it-s-time-to-kill-the-electric-car-drive-a-stake-through-its-heart-and-burn-the-corpse?source=email_the_daily_dispatch" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Jim

That is really quite the article! Where did I read lately that Japan has sourced a huge supply of rare earth metals on the sea floor, essentially solving the supply issue for the time being. I'm tempted to sign up to make some comments, this guy ignores the reality we have here in the North West of producing nearly all our electricity carbon free through hydro, which is where China is likely headed. There is no simple trade from oil to coal in our future and Wind and Solar are proving to be a lot more realistic than he suggests. This guy is a hard core academic and I'm not really as sharp on all of this as others on the board. anyone going to take this guys on? If not, I might just stick my neck out. We should create a section with talking points and update links to articles like this so that at least there is a chance for a fair argument.

 

[abasile]

John Petersen has been making the same argument for years now, which is that large EV batteries are not the best use of limited metal resources. I would agree that his arguments are academic. He seems to be extrapolating based on current metal production and battery technology, claiming that what we have today will not scale while at the same time saying that his time horizon is only five years. But metal resources are not a problem in the next five years; if anything, the market is concerned about overproduction of batteries. Longer term, it's anyone's guess as to which exact battery chemistry will prevail, and it's not as if there is only one chemistry that will work. Effectively, Petersen has chosen to attack a problem that does not exist, and has no problem gaining traction with those predisposed against EVs.

 

[hodad66]

To mitigate resentment from non-EV and EV owners, new charging stations should be placed in a location that is relatively convenient to persons needing a 'legitimate' charge, but not displace choice parking spots that convey a sense of entitlement or promote abuse.

good point, our parking places don't need to be close and that
being the case WILL generate resentment. Placement may be
based upon availability of electrical source but a "hater" won't
think of that.

 

[Yodrak]

I do not know if Mr. Peterson is right or wrong, in whole or in part, on the issues that he raises. But I do agree with him that the issues need to be examined carefully before rushing to conclusion.

I expect that many people who disagree with Mr. Peterson's positions on those issues would nevertheless agree with him that potential downsides as well as obvious upsides need to be taken into consideration before rushing to implementation of a new technology? (fracking, for example?)

Easier said than done. We did figure out pretty quickly that fracking has its downsides that may make it not worth the benefits, but look how long it took the world to realize that burning coal - essential to the development of the industrial age - has some pretty significant downsides that can't be ignored.

 

[ERG4ALL]

I've read where 94% or more of all lead acid batteries are recycled and the intention is the same for Lithium-Ion.