brookiecookie87
Romney called Tesla a "loser" Tesla is posting profits, expects to pay back the loan 5 years ahead of schedule, and won Motor Trend's Car of the Year.
April 2, 2013 at 1:11 PM
Six months after Mitt Romney called the Department of Energy’s loan to electric auto company Tesla Motor Co. a “loser,” Tesla has announced it will post its first ever profit in the Q1 2013 and expects to pay back its Department of Energy loan 5 years ahead of schedule, by the end of 2017. Meanwhile, Tesla’s Model S was unanimously voted Motor Trend’s Car of the Year in November 2012.
 .
Wasn’t there some other contest that happened in November of 2012? I feel  like there was.
 .
If we’re going to talk about picking losers, though, let’s talk about picking Tesla as your “gotcha” zinger during the presidential debates. If you’re going to call someone a “loser,” maybe don’t choose Tesla, which has nearly every demographic in the entire United States rooting for it. Let’s review:
  1. Environmentalists: Don’t like 10,000 barrels of crude oil running down the streets of your cul-de-sac? An electric car may be for you.
  2. Car fans: Sadly, the rumor that Tesla would be racing in Nascar was just an April Fool’s joke, but its Roadster model has already won a four-car drag race against a Lotus Exige, a Porsche GT3, and a Porsche Carrera GT (video below). Surely the Nascar Dad demo can get behind that.
  3. Geeks: Tesla’s Chairman and CEO is Elon Musk, who is also the founder of PayPal and the CEO and chief designer of the Space Exploration Technologies Corporation (SpaceX). In case that’s not enough geek cred for you, Musk is even fluent in the Geek dialect, telling the press after Mitt Romney’s “loser” comment and subsequent loss in the presidential election, “In retrospect, he was right about the object of that statement, but not the subject.” (Translation for those of you who do not speak awkwardese: “Who’s the loser now, motherfucker?”)
  4. People who like awesome things: See, e.g., photo above, video of drag race below.
Lesson: Do not bet against a geek. (Auto journalist Dan Neil already tried that back in 2009, betting Musk he could not build the Model S “within the technical specifications Mr. Musk laid out before the end of 2012.” Musk won, but he donated $1 million to charity anyway.)

Replies

  • talia-mom
    April 2, 2013 at 2:38 PM

    And they take from the 99% so the 1% can save money on their cars.


    But who cares about their government welfare right?   They are PC, so they are exempt.

  • SEEKEROFSHELLS
    April 2, 2013 at 2:43 PM

     Good for Telsa. We so need an affordable electirc car. There was a documentry about an electirc car I think GM put out. It was manufactured and distributed to people to test drive. Tom Hanks drove one. They drove it for a year I think. Then they were given back. It was a good documentry.

  • Aslen
    by Aslen
    April 2, 2013 at 2:45 PM



    Quoting talia-mom:

    And they take from the 99% so the 1% can save money on their cars.


    But who cares about their government welfare right?   They are PC, so they are exempt.


    what the bloody fuck are you talking about?

  • SEEKEROFSHELLS
    April 2, 2013 at 2:47 PM

     The documentry was" Who killed the electric car." It's in 8 parts on Utube. 

  • talia-mom
    April 2, 2013 at 2:49 PM

    The tax credits people get for buying them.   They aren't affordable for most of this country.  If people are going to say tax loopholes are welfare for the rich, these tax credits for the Tesla are corporate welfare.



    Quoting Aslen:



    Quoting talia-mom:

    And they take from the 99% so the 1% can save money on their cars.


    But who cares about their government welfare right?   They are PC, so they are exempt.


    what the bloody fuck are you talking about?



  • brookiecookie87
    April 2, 2013 at 2:52 PM


    Quoting talia-mom:

    And they take from the 99% so the 1% can save money on their cars.

    But who cares about their government welfare right?   They are PC, so they are exempt.

    So someone points out the dangers of building Pipelines across the country and you get upset and give out a false ultimatum suggesting the only two options is let them build where they want, or giving up oil entirely (Despite the fact those are not the only two options).

    Then when someone points out there is an alternative car that not only works but will be profitable and successful and then you attack that?

    You do realize the oil industry makes billions in profits a year. Billions in profits. And yet they are still subsidized. Let me guess you don't care about that kind of government welfare though, right?


  • brookiecookie87
    April 2, 2013 at 2:56 PM


    You would have a point if the Oil industry was not subsidized as well. This just evens the playing field. And since it is an alternative to oil it makes even more sense.

    Giving corporate welfare to a dirty industry that puts our environment and people at risk that already makes billions in profits doesn't make any sense.

    Quoting talia-mom:

    The tax credits people get for buying them.   They aren't affordable for most of this country.  If people are going to say tax loopholes are welfare for the rich, these tax credits for the Tesla are corporate welfare.

    Quoting Aslen:

    Quoting talia-mom:

    And they take from the 99% so the 1% can save money on their cars.

    But who cares about their government welfare right?   They are PC, so they are exempt.

    what the bloody fuck are you talking about?



  • talia-mom
    April 2, 2013 at 3:00 PM

    Yep.   Such a hypocrite.    Their corporate welfare is acceptable because others you don't like get it.

    If they are so great, then they don't need these tax credits right?

    They should be able to stand on their own!




    Quoting brookiecookie87:


    You would have a point if the Oil industry was not subsidized as well. This just evens the playing field. And since it is an alternative to oil it makes even more sense.

    Giving corporate welfare to a dirty industry that puts our environment and people at risk that already makes billions in profits doesn't make any sense.

    Quoting talia-mom:

    The tax credits people get for buying them.   They aren't affordable for most of this country.  If people are going to say tax loopholes are welfare for the rich, these tax credits for the Tesla are corporate welfare.

    Quoting Aslen:

    Quoting talia-mom:

    And they take from the 99% so the 1% can save money on their cars.

    But who cares about their government welfare right?   They are PC, so they are exempt.

    what the bloody fuck are you talking about?





  • brookiecookie87
    April 2, 2013 at 3:11 PM


    You don't see the difference?

    Oil Industry. Dirty. Pollutes and endangers both people and the environment. It depends on a resource that is finite. It also makes billions in profits. It doesn't need corporate welfare but gets it.

    Electric Car. It doesn't pollute or put any lives in danger to the extent that the oil industry does. It gives us an alternative to the method above and doesn't depend on a finite source. But it is a new product and needs help starting up. Corporate welfare makes sense in this regard.

    If you still don't understand this concept lets use a different example.

    Let's say there are two people.

    One person makes 850,000 dollars a year lets call him Greasey.
    The other person makes 35,000 dollars a year. Lets call her Electra.

    Greasey makes a lot of money and doesn't always obey the law. Sometimes he breaks it on purpose, and sometimes he breaks it on accident. He also tends to put peoples lives at risk and puts the environment in danger. He makes a lot of money but he wants to make more so he applies for government assistance to pay for food stamps and to help pay his rent.

    Electra is just starting out. She helps clean the environment. She doesn't put anyones life at risk. She doesn't break the law on purpose or on accident. She is just starting out in life so she doesn't make much money yet. She applies for government assistance to help her get her business going.

    Which one makes sense and which one doesn't?

    Do you understand what people are pointing out now?

    And do you understand in the hypocrisy of saying, "They should stand on their own" but then not saying the same about the Oil company and their subsidies?

    Quoting talia-mom:

    Yep.   Such a hypocrite.    Their corporate welfare is acceptable because others you don't like get it.

    If they are so great, then they don't need these tax credits right?

    They should be able to stand on their own!

    Quoting brookiecookie87:

    You would have a point if the Oil industry was not subsidized as well. This just evens the playing field. And since it is an alternative to oil it makes even more sense.

    Giving corporate welfare to a dirty industry that puts our environment and people at risk that already makes billions in profits doesn't make any sense.

    Quoting talia-mom:

    The tax credits people get for buying them.   They aren't affordable for most of this country.  If people are going to say tax loopholes are welfare for the rich, these tax credits for the Tesla are corporate welfare.

    Quoting Aslen:

    Quoting talia-mom:

    And they take from the 99% so the 1% can save money on their cars.

    But who cares about their government welfare right?   They are PC, so they are exempt.

    what the bloody fuck are you talking about?



  • jaxTheMomm
    April 2, 2013 at 3:15 PM

    It's quite simple.  Tesla's "corporate welfare" is an investment in our future, and it will pay off.  They are innovating the industry, and the tax credit is nothing more than an incentive.

    Eventually their vehicles will be more affordable for more people, and it's renewable energy.  So don't worry, I think they will stand on their own very soon.  Their stock has already doubled.

    Quoting talia-mom:

    Yep.   Such a hypocrite.    Their corporate welfare is acceptable because others you don't like get it.

    If they are so great, then they don't need these tax credits right?

    They should be able to stand on their own!




    Quoting brookiecookie87:


    You would have a point if the Oil industry was not subsidized as well. This just evens the playing field. And since it is an alternative to oil it makes even more sense.

    Giving corporate welfare to a dirty industry that puts our environment and people at risk that already makes billions in profits doesn't make any sense.

    Quoting talia-mom:

    The tax credits people get for buying them.   They aren't affordable for most of this country.  If people are going to say tax loopholes are welfare for the rich, these tax credits for the Tesla are corporate welfare.

    Quoting Aslen:

    Quoting talia-mom:

    And they take from the 99% so the 1% can save money on their cars.

    But who cares about their government welfare right?   They are PC, so they are exempt.

    what the bloody fuck are you talking about?