Posted on 09/05/2014 7:29:57 PM PDT by willk
If no incentive, Tesla won't build there.
Now let's say there is an incentive, and Tesla builds there. Here's where the 2nd statement (that you had a hand in originating in post 44 that I responded to). So if Tesla would build, there is a possibility they could go belly up. Or not.
See, no contradiction in my statements. I can't accuse you of being lazy, just, well, stupid to see that it is not a contradiction.
Ouch, I remember the fiber optic build outs. People I know lost their jobs when Quest built fiber everywhere but couldn't make money on it. I lost many thousands in Quest stock that became worthless. Now years later, other companies are making money on the fiber that Quest originally built.
I meant Qwest!
Already forgiven, my friend. When attacks become personal, I flick them back as a wall would a ball. They should have no place in our forum, but we are human after all. Cheers.
Excuses are easy.
They should give the same break to everyone or to no one. Why should one company get a break when the one next door doesn’t?
Its no different than giving tax breaks to build wind farms in my state while traditional plants are failing under the tax and regulatory burden.
Note that it’s liberals that want government to intervene in the economy.
So companies that employ a certain number of people become tax exempt? How is that equal under the law for smaller companies who have to pay those taxes? Isn’t that an unfair advantage for the big company over the small business? (Yes)
Government should not be picking winners and losers in the marketplace.
Government exempting some companies from taxes and not others is doing exactly that.
Nevada Taxpayers......... ha ha ha. This is not about Nevada taxpayers losing. This is about Dingy Harry enriching himself.
It would be a real tragedy if he were to die before receiving it.
“This factory is never going to be built. Just like those vaunted “battery swapping” stations never got built.”
Do the math on battery swapping. I did. For a $20,000 battery that good for 100,000, you have to depreciate the battery by $40 for each charge (i.e., swap), if you assume 200 miles between charges. Add to that $9 to actually charge the battery (60 kWh at 15 cents per kWh, including an allowance for efficiency losses), and then pro-rate the cost of the changeout station, and you’re looking at $60 to drive 200 miles. Compare all that to putting 8 (maybe 10) gallons of gas in your car to drive the same distance and an allowance of about 5 cents per mile for (gasoline) drive train depreciation ($10,000 engine/trans, good for 200,000 miles if not UAW-built).
So you are TOTALLY RIGHT, unless the price of batteries come WAY DOWN. As a Texas, I’m glad to see us not get suckered into Tesla’s Snake Oil. Bummer for Nevada...they will GO BROKE over this.
It isn't equal, so you're right. It is an unfair advantage for the big company, so you're right. But life isn't fair. There are a lot of young people screaming for a $15 minimum wage, saying it isn't fair that others make more money allowing them to live easier on their wage. It's easy to argue that one is not getting what another is getting. A company can entice one individual to come aboard with stock options and high wages, while another is given minimum wage. Is that fair? Apples and oranges, you say? But aren't we talking about fairness? Shouldn't everyone be employed and get the same wage? Oh, that's dangerous socialism talk!
This is a capitalist society. There are inherent unfairnesses in the way our markets work, that end up benefitting society. Incentives to attract businesses to build are a reality, have been for a long time. Railroad builders, ship builders, steel foundries, etc. got incentives to build, enriching the builders (unfairly) while strengthening our nation. There are wasteful incentives like the GM bailout, solar panel builders, cash-for-clunkers where taxpayer money was directly poured down a toilet.
In this instance, taxpayer money is not being poured in. The $1.3 billion "loss" is a fiction unless the Tesla factory is a runaway success - in that case lots of employed workers win.
Government is not supposed to favor one company over another and you want to compare it to free market wages is silly.
Then all incentives to companies should be abolished. Otherwise, it happens.
No, but they have priorities. Harry’s is mostly Southern Nevada (Las Vegas), where he was born, raised and lives. He doesn’t spend a heck of a lot of time thinking about Reno.
Easy to see why the country is collapsing isn’t it?
Even FReepers will sell their principles in a hot second as long as they can convince themselves that it’s their state that will come out on top.
As far as I’m concerned, equal protection should apply. It should be illegal to give a break to one company without giving the same break to all. It might actually encourage companies to cut taxes across the board rather than giving breaks to the companies with the right political connections.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.