Posted on 01/08/2012 1:54:41 PM PST by John Semmens
Pitched to the American voter as the vanguard of a “greener” future, the heavily subsidized Chevy Volt was dubbed one of the worst product flops of 2011 by Yahoo Finance’s 24/7 Wall Street site. The low sales volume—-an estimated 8,000 vehicles for 2011 (all of which are currently under recall notices to correct defects)–-has made the effective unit cost for each car amount to around $250,000.
Representative Hansen Clarke (D-Mich) insists that “despite the reluctance of the American driver to buy these cars we must not falter in our efforts to make them understand the necessity for government’s role in ensuring the Volt’s survival. Its not just about dollars and cents. Sure there are cars that get better mileage and have superior performance characteristics, but our government is backing the Volt. If we want to be good citizens and patriotic Americans we need to put the government’s choice ahead of our own selfish preferences.”
United Autoworkers Local 22 President, George McGregor, argued that “people who are loyal to the President will put the good of the country ahead of their own private interests. Just because you can buy a better car for less money shouldn’t deter you from getting behind the President’s push for the Volt. Jobs are at stake. Isn’t that more important than whether your personal vehicle is the best value?”
Whether increased sales of the Volt would have a significant impact on jobs within the US is in doubt. General Motors is reportedly planning on moving production of the vehicle to China.
if you missed any of this week's other semi-news posts you can find them at...
http://azconservative.org/
It makes the Edsel look like a classic!
Actually, I drove one when we looked it over during a fire department training, it actually is pretty cool but the battery technology is all wring. AND it requires PREMIUM gasoline!
Reverse satire
I still don't get it.
Volts for dolts!
Well John I enjoyed the semi-news article if nobody else did.
The thing is that I look at all the pertinant info before I begin reading. If a headline looks interesting to me I look at the source, the author, and often the keywords/topics to determine whether I wish to interrupt my perusal of FR news pages, and read the article. That is how I know I’m reading John Semmens semi-news, semi-satire, and I begin reading knowing what to expect.
Apparently few others do that, and when they realize they have been caught taking your semi-news, semi-satire seriously they come unglued. NOT YOUR FAULT.
I’ve outlined what I do. Perhaps some might find that procedure to their liking as well.
“Satire?” Yeah, right. It’s funny to see those being rescued on the Rockies in winter.
Here’s a clue. If John Semmons is posting the article look for the semi-satire label. John is an expert in taking things that are very close to the truth (but not) and making them sound believable.
There was never anything wromg with Grandma Duck's mind
Someone who lives in a community where gasoline cars are banned.
On Kwajelein Atoll there are no privately owned gas/diesel vehicles. Everyone on the island rides bicycles. That’s not a good example because it would be a waste there also.
“That’s not a good example because it would be a waste there also.”
Lol! Exactly....AND...one wonders how expensive electricity would be there.
;-/
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.