Notice how they didn't mention that hybrids have been doing this for years.
Another good reason that I cancelled my Forbes subscription some years ago. Magazine has been on a fast downward spiral quality wise.
They are producing news on paper and we are driving car's on electricity, so if you want to take advice from them, be my guest! :)
If we hadn't invested in the space program, we would have saved money too (of course that's if you don't count the trillions that can be directly attributed to developments that came from them). If we hadn't built roads and schools and powerplants, we'd have saved lots too. Of course we'd be living in tiny villages (ruled by some other nation that didn't "save money").
The typical conservative nonsense where you first decide your conclusion, then try to come up with evidence to back your narrative. Even when the evidence is shaky at best, as long as it has "truthiness", you run with it.
Here's a quote from Patrick Michael's Wiki page:
"Patrick Michaels acknowledged on CNN that 40 per cent of his funding came from the oil industry. According to Fred Pearce, fossil fuel companies have helped fund Michaels' projects, including his World Climate Report, published every year since 1994, and his "advocacy science consulting firm", New Hope Environmental Services."
Of course his article is biased against Tesla, he is in bed with the oil barons.
Yeah, he's the same guy that wrote this fine article: http://www.forbes.com/sites/patrickmichaels/2013/04/18/the-climate-horro...
He sites Vaclav Smil who writes books on how without oil there would be no globalization. He also bases carbon footprint on number cars sold. I stopped reading after that. what a joke.
These same kind of articles were written to stem the drift away from everything from typewriters, to phone booths, to cassette tape players. It did nothing to stop the sale of computers, cell phones, CDs and MP3 players. The typewriter was a great invention but a better mousetrap came along and replaced it.
Tesla has forced the car industry past the 'crossroads' with respect to electric power by focusing on making their product better than, instead of equivalent to, ICE cars. The ICE may take longer to get there but we are saving a spot for it in the Smithsonian...right next to the IBM Selectric II.
This type of contrived press is proportional to how worried the legacy guys are.
My advice to them is to make a great EV too. Stop dissing and start building. Otherwise ...
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
As @sips posted on another thread, the author works for the CATO institute, which is funded by the Koch brothers, owners of several large refineries. Enough said.
If GM would have been ALLOWED to stop selling cars we would all have a lot more Money......let the markets take their course
If the $7500 rebate program is so bad, why did the Republican Bush administration start it and the Democratic Obama administration make the loans?
If the other car companies would stop selling ICE, less babys would die!...http://www.nber.org/papers/w18736
Conservative counter-argument (to the Forbes article): The $7500 is a tax credit. You cannot take a tax credit except on money that you've already earned as income. All it means is that I send $7500 less of the money I've earned to the government. So I decide where the $7500 I earned gets spent or invested instead of the government. Frankly, my track record is better, and it's more likely to benefit the economy if I spend or invest it than if the government does.
He is only sorry that he did not buy shares when those va at $ 20
People talking about the "massive tax subsidies" to TSLA and other companies conveniently forget to mention the HUGE subsidies which keep the carbon based economies alive. The field is already tilted in their favor. What are the yearly subsidies and tax breaks given in oil exploration? Conservative estimates are around $10B yearly. Many would peg it even higher in the $25B range. This has in part occurred since the 1970's. Add up all those subsidies ...
Perhaps we could even add in a fraction of the 2 Trillion for the oil related parts of the wars in Afghanistan & Iraq.
If you want to really compare apples to apples, stop ALL the tax breaks. Every single one of them. See who can survive on merit alone. Good companies will rise, failures will sink and the Great will go on to change the world on their own merit.
The question I'd love to get an answer on from Mr. Michaels is:
"As a matter of policy, would it be fair for the US to stop ALL taxpayer subsidies for ALL corporations?". If you can't answer this question in the affirmative, then he's not making a principled argument on subsidies. He's willing to play "free markets rule" when it suits his rhetoric.
"xradr | MAY 29, 2013 NEW
Perhaps we could even add in a fraction of the 2 Trillion for the oil related parts of the wars in Afghanistan & Iraq."
So....... all of it?
The pundits can all write as much mindless dribble that they want.
Tesla will get the last say when the millionth Model S rolls off the line....
Two things: One, he's using bad math to make his point; and two, the tax rebate and DOE loans were enacted under "Dubya's" administration (the loans jsut happened to be exercised/taken under Obama's administration).
Now, let's do some math:
$7500.00 tax rebate/312 million people in the US = .0000024 cents per person per car sold. So for the average 4 people per family that comes to .0000096 cents/family for every car sold. Sell 20,000 a year and that comes to: 19.2 cents per family.
Let's take the subsidy for just Exxon in 2012 of $8 billion:
$8,000,000,000.00/312 million people in the US = $25.64/person. For a family of 4 = $102.56/family/year. And that's for just one oil company!!
So, tell me, who's getting the shorter end of stick here?
Let them say what they want. Let them continue to short TSLA.
We keep our Tesla Grin.
Stop selling an american built car? Yeah, throwing money to a foreign built car makes more sense. Not.
Anyone who moans about the taxes helping Tesla, didn't buy a Tesla...
They helped bring the cars' price down for me to get one.