Derwood

When did "becoming a millionaire" become the benchmark for success in this country? My family's household income is 10% of that, and we live quite comfortably. Am I 90% failure?

__________________
"You can't shoot a country until it becomes a democracy." - Willravel

roachboy

one of the many accomplishments of our pals in the conservative media apparatus is a construction of being-wealthy that has nothing to do with reality.

to wit:
Americans Vastly Underestimate Wealth Inequality, Support 'More Equal Distribution Of Wealth': Study

check out the report that's cited.

one conclusion is that for conservatives, "the wealthy" is an empty category that stands in for their own material ambitions. "the wealthy" then is just themselves, but tweaked a little. a projection of the super-ego, in freudian terms. and depending on the sector depending on the geography, there is some of this mobility, this self-made millionaire thing.

but overwhelmingly, the success that america rewards is the success of being born into a situation of inheriting money. but populist conservatives wouldn't find much to identify with about that. but look at the people who bankroll the ultra right. inherited money across the board...

i gotta go.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

dogzilla

I don't think that is the benchmark. It's just proof that the middle class does have the opportunity to improve its lifestyle. Unlike some liberals here, I still see the US as a land of opportunity. It's just that nobody is going to hand you the success that goes with the opportunity. You have to work for it.

Also, if the number of millionaires is increasing, then the number of people in other income groups is also increasing. It's not like newly created millionaires are just appearing out of nowhere.

Derwood

That's a completely unfounded correlation

__________________
"You can't shoot a country until it becomes a democracy." - Willravel

Tully Mars

That logic is completely illogical.

This whole idea that if you just work hard enough you too can join the ranks of people born into wealth is completely false. Sure some people come up with great ideas or manage to climb from one class to another but the data clearly shows the middle class is shrinking. And it's not because they're all joining the wealthy. Jobs have been lost nation wide, health and education costs have gone up. A lot of families who had decent family wage jobs are now working multiple jobs and struggling.

__________________
I used to drink to drown my sorrows, but the damned things have learned how to swim- Frida Kahlo

Vice President Starkizzer Fan Club

roachboy

http://www.people.hbs.edu/mnorton/no...in%20press.pdf

one of the conclusions of this paper, which is the basis for the stub i posted earlier about conservative fictions around questions of wealth & its distribution, is that most people support the political worldviews they do because they are able to imagine that will bring us, collectively, to a **more** equitable distribution of wealth, far more equitable than is presently the case in the united states where the top 1% of the population controls over 50% of the wealth.

so there's obviously been ALOT of disinformation around concerning the realities of class stratification in the u.s..

qui bono?
kinda makes you wonder, don't it?

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

pig

My favorite bit is that if people in middle or lower class advocate for tax and political policy that does not disproportionately favor the wealthy, that's CLASS WARFARE!!!, but if the wealthy advocate for tax and political policy that favors themselves, well that's just the natural order of things...

The information roach posted above reminds me of the polls taken on OBAMACARE...ask people about the policies without naming it, and they support it. Tell them what it is, and it's the unholy makings of Satan! Ask people what kind of wealth distribution they favor, they pick social democracy. Tell them its a social democracy, and they say they really want the wild wild west. Which they would never actually pick.

__________________
You don't love me, you just love my piggy style

aceventura3

Here is where I get honestly confused. I am not sure if some really don't see it or if they simply try to protect their ideology or the irrational actions of some government officials.

*GM is a failed auto company. One reason is in their failure to recognize the need and their lack of ability to produce fuel efficient green vehicles that people actually want to buy.

*Obama bails-out GM. GM is a failed company propped up by tax payers.

*Obama talks about the new green economy as the future. Obama and Congress, in their wisdom, think they know the winners in this new emerging green economy.

*Tulsa Motors, a start up green company making electric vehicles. Has to compete with GM an old smoke stack company in the auto industry. Tulsa makes and sells electric vehicles, the type I might actually buy.

*The founder of Tulsa Motors used his own personal funds to start the company, a company that will compete with a government subsidized company like GM.

*Our tax policy taxes the founder of Tulsa Motors on virtually every dollar of income he saved before he could invest. And Obama would have taxed him more, and more, and more - perhaps to the point where the founder of Tulsa Motors would not have started his company.

*Tulsa Motors is located in California but incorporated in Delaware, why? Because that action would be less punitive. The founder is actually South African - he could have made that country his home base. If tax rates get too high, he might just do that. Taking jobs, technology, his tax base, income and consumption with him.

*In 2009 Mercedes, a German company, invests in Tulsa Motors, and now owns 10%. Tulsa Motors was founded in 2003.

* Also in 2009 Tulsa Motors became profitable. A group of Abu Dhabi investor acquired a stake in the company, and the US decided to give the company a low interest loan.

What if there was no government interference? How many Tulsa Motors don't exist because they can not compete or get funding due to our government picking winners and losers? How many Tulsa Motors are based in different countries because of our current anti-business environment?

Rhetorical questions certainly. I fully expect a few flip responses. But, the problem is this stuff is real and for every flip response I can come back with solid real word examples. Supply side is real, it works.

__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

Tully Mars

Why do you keep referring to the bailouts as an Obama program? Bush started them, including the auto companies. Obama simply continued Bush's program.

__________________
I used to drink to drown my sorrows, but the damned things have learned how to swim- Frida Kahlo

Vice President Starkizzer Fan Club

aceventura3

I wish I could fully put into words how wrong you are.

Established, mature companies in industries with the same characteristics, consolidate. It is the "new" that fuels growth. I assume the term "basement" is figurative and represents entrepreneurs creating new businesses and services or starting businesses in new markets.

__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

The_Dunedan

Because Obama could have -stopped- them, and chose not to do so. Instead, he expanded them. Bush started a nasty house fire, Obama refused to put it out, tossed Kerosene in the windows, and is currently fishing around for some Thermite for the roof.

__________________
"I personally think that America's interests would be well served if after or at the time these clowns begin their revolting little hate crime the local police come in and cart them off on some trumped up charges or other. It is necessary in my opinion that America makes an example of them to the world."

--Strange Famous, advocating the use of falsified charges in order to shut people up.

aceventura3

Start here:

There is always a known demand for a good or service before that good or service comes to market. T/F?

Innovative people who develop new goods and services, don't benefit society at large, don't improve the lives of those they employ, don't benefit government and national treasury. T/F?

---------- Post added at 03:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:51 PM ----------

Are you saying Bush saved us from the "brink" or was it Obama? Forgive my confusion, I thought Obama was taking the credit (blame, IMHO) for saving GM. Either way, my opinion about the bailout is the same.

__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

Baraka_Guru

Well, if you can't, it leaves you in a position of being rather unconvincing. Sorry.

Here is one position that strikes at what I'm talking about. You're welcome to disbelieve it, refute it, or ignore it if you want. I myself think it's an important realization for the American economy.
Andy Grove: How America Can Create Jobs - BusinessWeek

I'm not saying startups aren't important. I'm saying that it will be up to existing companies and the recovery/expansion of their markets that will lead to a recovery.

The problem isn't a lack of startups; it's a lack of scaling. It's a difference between "some guy with an idea" who's looking for angel investors vs. a company who has already moved beyond that and has something ready to go on a large scale. This is both for young companies and older companies alike. Apple has been around for decades, yet look at the heavy scaling they've done in recent years. Now they're bigger than Microsoft, being the biggest tech company in the world. The challenge, of course, is for companies to scale in a way that helps the domestic job market, which isn't often the case with tech companies who manufacture elsewhere.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

FuglyStick

Well then, I'm sure you're out singing the praises of the small business bill that Congress is sending to the White House.

__________________
AZIZ! LIGHT!

pig

ace - are you talking about Tesla Motors?

__________________
You don't love me, you just love my piggy style

dogzilla

Really? Then just where do you think these new millionaires come from? Is it some kind of miracle where each day a bunch of newly created millionaires just pops into existence?

---------- Post added at 01:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:43 PM ----------

Well, it's not completely false. I've managed to improve my lifestyle significantly. Not to be a millionaire, but enough for what I want. I have friends and family who have done likewise. People have started companies on a shoestring and done really well. People have become millionaires by working for companies like Google and Microsoft.

On the other hand, I don't hear too much about people living on government assistance ever improving their lifestyle much. Maybe because there's no incentive for a government program to become successful because then a bunch of government bureaucrats might lose their jobs.

I'll take my chances with capitalism over liberal or socialist handout programs any day.

Baraka_Guru

dogzilla, it's odd that you'd make it sound like you have to choose between capitalism, liberalism, and socialism—especially considering you've experienced the effect of each to get to where you are today.

And the thing about never hearing about people on government assistance improving their lifestyle: it's not as media-friendly as those among the "new money." Who cares about the impoverished becoming a part of the lower middle class, right? Oh, and most of those who receive welfare do so on a temporary basis. And, as you can imagine, the case is the same for those on EI. I think maybe disability payouts are bit more permanent, but what can you do?

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

roachboy

SHOW YOUR CAPITALISTIC SPIRIT
Buy your Bracelet inscribed with
"I Believe in Capitali$m"***

http://www.ibelieveincapitalism.net/braceletad.html

this seems about the level of thinking that we're getting from the right, both in general and here in particular. so why not get some merch? it's a start up. soon everyone will be employed making plastic bracelets that extol the virtues of liking capitalism. everyone likes to like things and capitalism on this account is a thing AND a matter of faith but then again so are most things to the extent that it is really a matter of faith that keeps you from worrying about whether the monitor you are now looking at is going to fly into atoms in the next few seconds.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Baraka_Guru

O-ho! Somebody's anti-union.

That's a smashing bracelet, however....

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Derwood

I'm simply saying that the addition of new millionaires doesn't necessarily mean there are also more $500'000'ers and so forth. You seem to think that the addition of new wealthy people means EVERYONE has seen a boost, which is statistically untrue

__________________
"You can't shoot a country until it becomes a democracy." - Willravel

Wes Mantooth

That assumes that Tulsa Motors would have been able to just wander in and fill the void left behind by the big auto companies and continue to thrive despite a massive collapse in our economy. They are still free to carve a place for themselves and if done right they will reap the rewards of the hard work they put into the company. The government bail outs where an extraordinary solution to an extraordinary problem, hardly punishment for success.

I agree that we can't keep subsidising failed companies but if there is nobody poised to fill in the hole and keep a massive sector of our economy functioning then we have to deal with that reality.

__________________

pig

Well, if you read the article from businessweek dogzilla linked earlier, you will see the opening line "The millionaires’ club in the U.S. grew by 16 percent in 2009, following a 27 percent decline in 2008" which would seem to indicate that more or less some people who used to be millionaires were bit in the downturn, and now have recovered somewhat a year later...which is essentially what the npr article points out as well. Furthermore, this is completely in line with the criticism of recent tax policy in that our middle class is vanishing. In other words, a relatively small number of people are indeed becoming millionaires, and their children will likely remain millionaires, and large number of people are living in relative poverty with increasing numbers joining the bottom ranks.

And should we allow the tax cuts on the wealthiest 3% or so expire??? Of course not, our dominant conservative party has a plan.

__________________
You don't love me, you just love my piggy style

silent_jay

...

pig

I think before going too far down the "Tulsa Motors" rabbithole, we might want to confirm that we're talking about Telsa Motors, and then decide whether it makes sense to conflate a company which produces less than 1000 cars a year, each of which cost $100,000 and one of the largest employers in the United States. I am a huge fan of Tesla Motors, and I think Elon Musk is awesome, but the picture is a bit more complicated. And lastly for now..."Our tax policy taxes the founder of Tulsa Motors on virtually every dollar of income he saved before he could invest. And Obama would have taxed him more, and more, and more - perhaps to the point where the founder of Tulsa Motors would not have started his company." You might want to go read up on Tesla Motors and Elon Musk...he wasn't exactly making these things in his basement. He's a brilliant engineer and philanthropist who already had millions from PayPal before Tesla came along. Tesla which is solely aimed at early adopter electric vehicles until technology can catch up and make them cost and utility competitive with hydrocarbon based technologies. And I seriously don't think he's considering taking Tesla to S. Africa any time in the future. Hello...who in the hell in Africa is going to be able to afford $100,000 sports cars other than Robert Mugabe types?

__________________
You don't love me, you just love my piggy style

roachboy

further down in the same krugman edito that pig links above:

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

aceventura3

Yes, my error.

---------- Post added at 07:16 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:00 PM ----------

Not really, it is just I have no magic dust to make you believe what you see all around you. I am not talking theory, I just give real examples.

In every state I am aware of contractors are required to be licensed, and you can go to state websites and look at those companies and check the status. Contractors are generally small, and start as "garage" businesses. In good times they spring up like weeds in the spring. In bad times they disappear. So do jobs. We are talking about, general contractors, roofing contractors, framers, cement, wallboard, electricians, plumbers, land graders, landscapers, window installers, painters, outdoor lighting, cabinetry, brick, pools, doors, inspectors, etc, etc, etc.

When the housing market rebounds, pick a state any state and monitor the activity and see what happens. Within months there will be thousands of new companies. Each of these companies may start with one, a few, a dozen or so employees - some will grow quickly to employ 50 or more, perhaps hundreds. And this is just one little segment involving licensed contractors. Within months you can see strong employment growth in this area that can have a measurable difference on a state's unemployment rate. Just from guys starting a business in the "garage"'. On the other hand any job growth from GM will be trivial in comparison.

I know, I know, unconvincing - what do you expect, some supe-rsized spaceship thing, job creator, that comes from the sky and drops jobs like paper leaflets?

---------- Post added at 07:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:16 PM ----------

I don't like government picking winners and losers. Let the market decide. I want government to be neutral. Small business tax cuts are great for existing businesses making a taxable profit. It takes most new businesses some time before they reach that point. On the surface the bill is a good thing and perhaps better than them doing the opposite. But long-term this legislation is not the solution.

---------- Post added at 07:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:22 PM ----------

In the normal course of events, businesses start, grow, consolidate, and some die. Nothing extraordinary about that.

---------- Post added at 07:27 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:24 PM ----------

Go back and look at the history of the automotive industry, come back and we can discuss this further. We are not on the same page, even discounting my spelling error.

---------- Post added at 07:32 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:27 PM ----------

GM employs less that 300,000 people, and employment at the company is in a declining trend. Why do you underestimate the power and potential in small start-up companies????

What was Microsoft to IBM about 30 - 40 years ago????Why do I have to point this stuff out???I don't understand you folks!I hope I spelled Microsoft correctly - and maybe it was 29 or 41 years ago!!!

{added} there are 15 million poeple unemployed, you would need GM to grow by a factor of 50 to absorb 15 million people, is that what you folks think will happen, is that what Democrats are waiting for? Walmart employs about 1.3 million, do we need Walmart to grow by a factor of 11.5? The US government employs about 1.3 million also, I got it now, the plan is to grow government by a factor of 11.5. I think I will get a one way ticket to Greenland.

__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

Wes Mantooth

There is when a massive chunk of that business sector is collapsing all at once and in turn that collapse will not only effect those with financial interests but everyone else around the globe as well. Regardless of how each company failed we can't just ignore the real world consequences in an attempt to adhere to a rigid theory about govt/economics because that's just the way it should be. No solution is right 100% of the time.

__________________

Baraka_Guru

I'm beginning to think that maybe it's just that you aren't being entirely clear.

"When the housing market rebounds" is the key phrase here.

No, I expect investors, spenders, and a market for exchange, not just investors throwing good money after bad or playing high-risk games.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

aceventura3

Look at the DOW companies 25/50/75/100 years ago. Look at the S&P 500 or the Fortune 500 over the same intervals. Come back and tell me if that changes your opinion.

---------- Post added at 08:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:57 PM ----------

Yes, that is it. Like I said I wish I had the words to...

We have seen these patterns repeated time and time. Nothing new to these cycles, in housing or in other markets.

You are still in a theoretical plain. A professor at a university, who writes a book in his "garage" and it goes on to become a best seller and then he becomes a full-time writer and a filthy "rich" fat cat, employing a team including fact checkers, agent, publicist, consultants, etc., in my opinion did not play a game of "high-risk". To make this example more real, perhaps look at Stephan King.

__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

Wes Mantooth

Looking at the course of business over the last 100 years is supposed to change my opinion that no one solution is right 100% of the time? I'm not arguing weather or not the bailouts were right or wrong, I'm saying we need to be free to look at all viable solutions and find the one that best fits the situation we're facing (and then we can argue until we're blue in the face about weather or not it was right), not blindly applying one fix all solution, crossing our fingers and hoping it works again.

But that's not the point anyway. I'm saying that I don't buy into the rights hyperbole that we are punishing and not celebrating success in this country. Are there barriers that tend to make it more difficult sometimes? Sure but we hardly exist in a society that doesn't allow people to reap the reward of their hard work or at least given a chance to try.

__________________

Baraka_Guru

But, as from the start, you are talking about the exceptions and not the rule.

You can dump all the money you want on startups, but if no one's buying anything, the money will be wasted.

You just mentioned the business cycle. Maybe we should have brought that up earlier. Right now we are in the "trough" phase, though some areas could still be considered in the contraction phase. Regardless, the trough phase is indicated by a continued recession due to falling demand and excess production capacity, but interest rates at this point are usually very low and possibly have been for a while. At this point, consumers tend to have pent-up demand that they consider fulfilling because, hey, interest is low (borrowing is cheap, saving cash isn't attractive). With this renewed spending, you tend to see stocks starting to rally (we've seen a slow but steady recovery of stocks over the past couple of years).

Now, this isn't a great recovery and so you get fits and starts, but what's at play here is spending spiking and receding. Once spending stays steady and increases once again, you're going to see stocks climb at a more steady rate as well. Without this spending, you get stuck in the trough and possibly even slide back into a contraction. This is the very real risk with the American economy right now (double-dip recession).

No amount of investor money on its own will fix this. Spending is required or nothing will happen. Spending will happen when consumers stop postponing their purchases based on their economic outlook.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

aceventura3

No. I am talking about what drives economic growth. Through the ages the pattern repeats. I agree that most people are not entrepreneurs, but most people don't need to be.

Occasional it helps me if I understand people, so I ask a personal question:

How many times have you thought about writing a book? Or, how many times a day do you think about it? How many have you written? What was your motivation to write or not write a book? Would you base your decision on macro book selling trends or your passion for your craft? What would the consequence be if you wrote a book and no one bought it? What would the consequence be if they did? I think you should publish your book or tell us what you have written so some of us can buy it and stimulate the economy and perhaps make you "rich". If you get "rich" will others benefit?

__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

Baraka_Guru

I'm not going to keep talking economics 101 in this thread, ace, because it's not exactly related to the topic. I will finish with this: consumer spending is a key component of economic growth. Without it, "supply and demand" simply becomes "supply."

This is not to downplay the importance of what you're talking about. Innovation and emerging markets are generated from the seed that is "the guy with the idea." But when you're talking about economic recovery from a recession, there is a bigger picture not to be overlooked.

* * * * *

In other news, the Republicans have joined the Tea Party:

Republicans present "Pledge to America" agenda - The Globe and Mail

Well, more accurately, the Republicans have issued the Pledge to America, which is based on their Contract with America, which formed the basis for the Tea Party's Contract from America, but you get the point.

Everything's coming to a point with conservative anger, and now they're galvanizing and mobilizing for the election.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

ASU2003

I don't have a problem with people getting rich like this. I don't believe any body here has a problem with it. This is the good type of Capitalism. But, our income tax laws don't differentiate between making money by innovating, or making money by stealing someone's work and sending it off to China to get a cheaper product. It doesn't matter if you were made a CEO of the family business and took a big salary while the company failed, or if you made some unscrupulous financial transactions that 'guaranteed' that you would make money from the little guys. Then the one way around income taxes (and FICA probably) that some upper management does is to take stock options instead of a salary.... 15% in long term gains sure beats the 37% + 7% + city (most likely 0) (estimated percentages), yet everyone thinks your such a good guy...

All I want is some basic rules so the consumer doesn't get screwed, corporations don't get to dictate the rules and run the country, and the higher-ups in the financial industry don't make millions by using borrowed money to make bad investments. I don't want people to buy homes they aren't going to live in, spend thousands of dollars they don't have on things they don't need to impress others, and take certain jobs that we don't need anymore of just to make money. There are a lot of problems. Yet, I didn't want the entire economy to collapse in a period of a month or two in order to sort it out.

pig

ace: i honestly don't give a flip if you mispelled Tesla as Tulsa...I did want to make sure we were referencing the same company. From the details you provided I assumed that we were, but I thought I'd make sure. No need to get in a huff about it.

The point is - I hope Tesla is successful. There are technological hurdles in their way to making an electric vehicle that will be broadly commercially viable, they are aware of them and they are working on it. I really hope they come out strong, or else get bought out by a larger manufacturer (such as Daimler/Mercedes), if they/we can innovate a strong enough battery technology, or prices for petroleum-based energy storage elevate to a point where the break-even point is met.

I honestly am a little leery of the GM bailout myself, but I do know that they are one of the largest American companies going. Quick google search provided: linky with the largest american companies listed as:

I believe that Tesla employs less than 1000. Therefore, my point was that making an apples to apples comparison of the two isn't really viable (which you might agree with, but it did seem you were trying to do so), and Tesla is actually partnering with larger vehicle manufacturers such as Mercedes/Daimler and Toyota.

The main point however, is that Tesla wasn't started because Elon was not taxed an extra 3% on his personal income. It was started because he sees a potential market in the next 20+ years, and is willing to eat costs up front to gain early adopter market share. Our tax structure is not what is keeping Tesla in the United States - they are staying because of the potential market for early adopter customers (California, where their plant is) and the U.K. Incidentally, they are also looking for financing from other "bailout" beneficiaries like Goldman-Sachs.

The government isn't just looking to "pick winners, truth-be-damned, it's all Obama's secret Union-loving administration...". Union lobbying no-doubt has its influence, as all major companies have influence via bribery under the guise of first amendment freedom of speech. I believe the mantra of bailing out GM was that a massive failing by a company such as GM, along with the subsequent failure of all the OEMs who supplied GM, would have caused catastrophic collapse throughout our economy.

Incidentally, I'm fairly certain that Tesla has received government incentives, and that they have interaction with the United States Department of Energy via our Vehicles Technologies office. They're not exactly out-of-the-loop.

edit thanks - maybe this will work

__________________
You don't love me, you just love my piggy style

Pearl Trade

Ace, I think you also need to know that demand is not only wanting a product, but also having the money to buy it. Like this: I want a Ferrari, but I don't have the money to buy one. My demand for a Ferrari is zero.

Let me get this straight: the Republicans are officially lining themselves up with the Tea Party? Is it "your enemy is my enemy, so we should be friends" deal?

__________________

Our revenge will be the laughter of our children.
Give me convenience or give me death!

Baraka_Guru

I think it's more about the politics of anger. As in, "We're all angry about the same things, isn't that convenient?"

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Derwood

Or someone realized "oh shit, we're splitting the conservative votes here, and the Democrats are going to pants us in November! Quick, regroup!"

__________________
"You can't shoot a country until it becomes a democracy." - Willravel

robot_parade

I'm confused about which actions of the government you're complaining about exactly...

Would you prefer if the government had let GM fail? Ok, that's a valid position to take. I would argue that, by temporarily propping up GM, the government helped stabilize the economy, by avoiding the effects of GM going bankrupt (thousands of layoffs, etc). Would you rather the government hadn't loaned tesla motors $465 million to encourage green development? I think that low-interest government loans to businesses help encourage competition and innovation. I think encouraging 'green' cars is a worthwhile use of my tax dollars. If we let the free market work, gas-powered cars will dominate the market because they're cheaper...polluting the atmosphere until climate change is truly devestating...until...the gas runs out...then...boom, there goes the economy.

I think it's pretty clear that the free market, on its own, tends to follow a boom-and-bust cycle...it's been that way since the free market began, and there doesn't seem to be any stopping it. IMHO, one of the roles of government in the economy should be to try to smooth out those booms and busts. That means that regulation will be a little bit of a drag on business profitability, and that taxes will be slightly higher to pay for that regulation, but I think things like a social safety net and reasonable regulation are worth it.

The free market is a great thing, but far from perfect. It's short-sighted as hell, and open to manipulation by powerful players (monopolies, for instance).

Obviously a 'planned' economy doesn't work, but neither does a completely free market.

And, fwiw, Obama's supposed anti-business attitude is nothing but rhetoric. He's a very few points more liberal than, say, W, but so far from the anti-business commie the right makes him out to be that it isn't even funny.

edit: Oh, and you also seem to be arguing that it's a bad idea for labor income to be taxed more than investment income. I've wondered about that a lot, and don't really understand the reasoning, or know if its a good idea or not.

Tully Mars

What I'm saying is you constantly state this action was negative and you blame Obama for it which is simply telling a half truth.

Seems to me both the GOP and the Dems looked at this and came up with the same solution. If or how much that solution worked is completely debatable. Claiming it's "Obama's program" is being dishonest.

__________________
I used to drink to drown my sorrows, but the damned things have learned how to swim- Frida Kahlo

Vice President Starkizzer Fan Club