barack-obama-detroit-test-driving - from igocars.org

A Los Angeles car salesman and electric car advocate is shelling $32,400 out of his retirement savings so he can make a pitch directly to President Obama at a “private, off-the-record” Democratic fundraiser next week.

Paul Scott, 60, says he isn’t a rich guy. He’s a $50,000-a-year Nissan salesman who plans to rub elbows with 24 bigwigs in a private luncheon that he says will put a crimp in his retirement plans.

But he says the goal is worthwhile. He wants to make a few points to Obama about on how to better support electric cars — a cause that Obama already embraces — and thought the private audience would be a fine way to do it. For $10,000, you can be luncheon guest. For $16,200, you can be a VIP luncheon guest and have your picture taken with Obama. For $32,400, the package “includes an official photograph with President Obama, as well as a very special one-hour roundtable discussion with the President after the luncheon. President Obama will take your questions in a private, off-the-record conversation where you can discuss with him what you’d like. Please note this is limited to 25 people to keep it an intimate discussion, and so will sell out very fast.”

He wants to tell Obama that as an electric car expert he believes the administration needs to push for a so-called “carbon tax” that would raise prices on oil-based fuels, making electric car prices more competitive.

So the plan is to pay a carbon tax on oil based fuels, AND a carbon tax on fossil fuel generated electricity for electric cars. It’s what some might call a win-win.



  1. flatwombat says:

    “For $10,000, you can be luncheon guest. For $16,200, you can be a VIP luncheon guest and have your picture taken with Obama. For $32,400, the package “includes an official photograph with President Obama, as well as a very special one-hour roundtable discussion with the President after the luncheon.”

    Sad proof of what our democracy has deteriorated to. Serving the people…if the price is right.

    • msbpodcast says:

      Serving the people…if the price is right.

      You too can end up with your head on a platter, just like John the Baptist.

      I wouldn’t give you a plugged nickel for lunch with O’Mama.

      Repubes or Dumb-o-crap makes no difference.

      They’re going to do exactly what the 12,400 billionaire oligarchy of this country tells them to do.

      If the oligarchy decides to do away with foreign oil, we’ll do without foreign oil.

      If the oligarchs decide to go with Thorium reactors, you’ll suddenly get Thorium reactors.

      What you, a 99%er, want or need doesn’t even appear on any radar.

      We don’t even rate as speed bumps to the oligarchy.

    • Paying money for communication with the President is disgusting! My point of view!

  2. bobbo, in Repose says:

    Best government money can buy.

    To the merits, the car guy wants social engineering/planning with the lightest hand by government possible: the carbon tax.

    Easy to apply and enforce with zero interference other than the tax itself. After that, its free market competition guiding the market place.

    Who could be against this except child molesters?

    • F U 2 says:

      Do you even hear yourself?!

      You’ve said many times that “big money equals big corruption.” And now you seem to be saying that we need to give these corrupt business/government types MORE MONEY!

      You say you want to even the playing field with a carbon tax so that electric car manufacturers can compete. But you absolutely fail to see that by doing so that you are in favor of GIVING THE GOVERNMENT MORE MONEY!

      You don’t even seem to want to consider other ways to encourage electric vehicles such as giving tax breaks (aka “incentives”) or even passing new laws which promote better energy efficiency. You seem to say that all car companies are evil (which I even admit is hard to refute) and therefore need to be taxed. But just WHO do you think is going to PAY that tax? THEM???!!!

      What’s the matter? don’t you get taxed ENOUGH?! Or do you really think the government will somehow use a new carbon tax wisely? Or could it be that you are more of a tattle tell little kid who expects mommy and daddy, aka “the government”, to settle your problems and force the other kiddies to play nice?

      Sure! I’m in favor of electric cars and anything that helps them compete in the market place. But forcing the other kids to play nice by taking away their stuff is a very bad idea. It’s known as FAVORITISM which is really just another form of SOCIALISM!

      So let me tell it to you again, MORE TAXES ARE NEVER THE ANSWER TO ANYTHING!!! (Unless you’re a jealous clueless socialistic douche bag.)

      • ± says:

        Dont’ get your stuff twisted. You’re trying to reason with a troll.

         

  3. kiwini says:

    “…Easy to apply and enforce with zero interference other than the tax itself…”

    I must be a child molester: the current POTUS and the concept within the quotes are both filled with unseen evils.

    • So What? says:

      “unseen evils.” What ideas are not. To quote Pedro “yawn”.

      • bobbo, in Repose says:

        But are they “known” unseen evils, or “unknown” unseen evils?

        I think most of the evils of free market competition are known.

        Your evils may vary.

        • msbpodcast says:

          I think most of the evils of free market competition are known.

          Most of the evil is perpetrated by people who try to subvert the market forces.

          There are times when they’re appropriate, and other times when they deserve to get tossed out of a fuckin’ air lock.

    • deowll says:

      This crap has worked so well in the EU they are dumping much of it to bring down energy costs to what they can pay and be competitive. One of the things that is seriously bleeping them off is that energy costs are much lower in the US. They are paying way more than Americans pay though CA and NY have voted to pay more than most locations.

      Of course some of them have also noticed that global warming stopped before this year’s high school freshmen were born. Why ruin your economy to stop something that isn’t happening?

      • msbpodcast says:

        global warming stopped

        And I can show you dated pictures (1950s to 2012) of glaciers from Patagonia to the high Arctic, from the Alps to the Urals that show just how much they have shrunk. (And lets not forget the Himalayas. When the glaciers finish melting, the Indus river will dry up and you’ll have over a billion people without an adequate water supply.)

        I can show you dated satellite pictures of retreating coastlines and rising waters but that’s irrelevant to you.

        But deny away.

        Global warming’s a hoax, right?

        Climate change is bunk, right?

        Have fun in Tornado Alley, just north from New Orleans, which still isn’t recovered yet. (It used to all be ocean bottom you know, all the prairies, from Texas to the northern shores of Canada and from the Rockies to the Appalachians used to be ocean bottom.)

        I’ll have fun in New Jersey, just south of the Champlain Sea, on a high scarp, far from any Tsunami, like the one that’ll some someday from Las Palma, across the Hudson from sea-level New York City, that flooded during Sandy. (Do you detect a pattern here? My land will be safe. Yours’ll be underwater.)

        I kept my eyes open and bought land where it’d be safe and you can go dance a merry denialist jig and not be on the look out for anything.

        Some people can’t cope, so they deny, right up until they’re smacked in the face, over and over again.

        • F U 2 says:

          How true!!!

          “Some people can’t cope, so they deny, right up until they’re smacked in the face, over and over again.”

          …And even then, most will STILL deny the big giant schmotz in their face! At least until they’re forced to swallow it.

  4. Cap'n Kangaroo says:

    I am still waiting for those damn Fusion-powered power plants!

    We were told they were only twenty years away and that was twenty five years ago.

    And today? Yeah, only about twenty years away from being reality.

    • F U 2 says:

      …And what happened to the METRIC SYSTEM?!!!

      Remember:
      The best laid plans of mice and men,
      often requires they do it again!

      (Or something like that)

  5. MikeN says:

    It’s 32K for one hour, about $500 per minute. Plus there’s no guarantee you get an audience with president, rather you are the audience.

    He also needs to think through his plans. As you said, you pay higher prices for the electricity in your vehicle too, so now you haven’t saved very much. Unless he is planning to have buyers steal electricity from someone else.

    • bobbo, in Repose says:

      So now you put photovoltaics on your garage roof and avoid the tax totally. Minimal initial investment for good life time savings.

      ………and you are no longer poisoning the earth.

      • Sam says:

        You will instead be hit with a “run-off” tax based on the square footage of your roof. I believe the boy governor in Maryland is working on this.

        Resistance is futile.

        • bobbo, in Repose says:

          Yes, or a “gas tax” replaced by a “milage tax” to recapture that lost revenue. the game is constantly changing…. just as it should …. always adjusting the needs of the society with all the competing interests.

          Can you think of any better alternative?

          Carbon tax is one of the least impactful “regulatory” schemes possible. All Darwinian Capitalists should be “for” it. Otherwise, only special interests prevail.

          Yes–every interest is special. .1% for Big Oil, 99.99% for clean(er) Earth. You know–what we eat, drink, breath.

          Common Sense.

          • Cheney's Lawyer says:

            “99.99% for clean(er) Earth. You know–what we eat, drink, breath.”

            Ha Ha, that’s rich. What fucking planet do YOU live on?

          • deegee says:

            “Carbon tax is one of the least impactful “regulatory” schemes possible.”

            The so-called “evidence” that CO2 is responsible for global warning is getting more debunking.

            Google UofW’s recent CFC research for just one example.

            But be sure the government won’t drop their carbon taxes when the CO2’ers are proven wrong.

      • deegee says:

        “So now you put photovoltaics on your garage roof and avoid the tax totally. ”

        Battery Tax…

      • JudgeHooker says:

        and the batteries you have to dispose after awhile? Nah, perfectly safe to chuck those in landfills. So we’ll pay fees and taxes to “safely” dispose of the batteries.

        After carbon, what other elements from the table do we start taxing? I hear all that silicon and sodium is choking the planet.

        I’m already tapped. Knock it off.

        • bobbo, in Repose says:

          The Luddite lies.

          Like most TeaPublicans.

          The truth favors Liberals.

        • MikeN says:

          I want to know how many liberals dutifully replace their CFL light bulbs properly, and how many throw them in the trash.

          • Michael B. says:

            So let me get this straight: you have no arguments with “liberal” policies or ideas, just with those liberals who don’t follow through 100% on their beliefs?

            It’s like Faux Snooze or anyone else criticizing electric vehicles because coal still pollutes. (ie, implying that coal pollutes and the aim of getting away from it is good) Ha!

  6. Hugo Smedlap says:

    Raise your hand if you think this country deserves to die.

  7. deegee says:

    Lobbying aside…

    Anyone who knows anything about electronics (BEE for me), knows batteries are a consumable.
    One of my brothers also works at a large firm that does industrial and commercial solar panel installations.

    Electric cars are fine and all, until you have to replace the batteries.
    Which is usually around the time the base warranty is gone.
    And usually costs more than the car is now worth.
    The result, disposable cars every 5 to 7 years.
    Google it or check out the various electric car forums if you need proof.
    So if you think our landfills are filled with junk and toxic chemicals now, just wait to see what would occur if everyone was using electric cars and solar power.

    Same thing with solar installations.
    Sure, cheap energy from the sun, but the batteries will kill your bank account.
    Until they get satellite reflectors in geostationary orbit that reflect sun light 24/7 to the surface of the earth, solar power is a joke.

    • bobbo, in Repose says:

      The system you criticize is only one of MANY alternatives. Let the free market sort it all out.

      But batteries is why I would get the compressed air car.

      See?—really, can you see?

      • deegee says:

        I’m not saying that we should not use alternatives to petrol. :-p

        I’m saying that if most of the public really knew the full story on electric cars and solar installations, they would not be allowing these people to lobby the governments to obtain tax cuts, incentives, grants, subsidies, etc. They are dead-end polluting alternatives.

        Depending on the specific battery system used, the typical maximum recharges is around 5000.
        And the typical purchase cost is substantially higher than current mainstream vehicles.

        Would you buy a petrol (or other energy) vehicle if the salesman told you one of the limitations of the car was that you can only fill it up ~5000 times?
        Then you have to pay ~$20k in parts to get another ~5000 fillups?

        And for those who are reading this and thinking “well you have to pay for petrol at each fill up so it evens out”. No, with electric cars you also have to pay for electricity at each fill up. Replacement battery costs are akin to vehicle maintenance and parts.

        Not to mention, the mining of materials for the manufacturing of batteries adds large amounts of pollutants like CO2.
        Manufacturing an electric vehicle has roughly 2x the amount of CO2 and pollutants compared to manufacturing a petrol car.
        And many of the power plants that are providing your home with electricity for charging the batteries are filling the air with pollutants (eg. coal power plants).

        • Mextli says:

          Hmmm, sounds like An Inconvenient Truth .

        • bobbo, in Repose says:

          So…. you can’t see.

          Once again: you are critiquing only ONE of MANY alternative vehicular choices from standard internal combustion.

          Different solutions will work better for different people. Do you want government mandates like number of condo’s to be included in High Rise Business Parks so that people can take the elevator to work, or a simple carbon tax where this might be only one of the many freely undertaken market solutions to “save money?”

          Again–cost/pollution of batteries is why I favor compressed air cars. That and making hydrogen for home uses.

          Technology and smart social planning.

          Not dogma stuck in a rut.

          Can you see?

          • deegee says:

            “Can you see?”

            I see perfectly well. :-p
            But can you read?

            Like I said before, I am not saying we should not use alternatives.
            All I am saying is that electric cars are not it.

          • bobbo, in Repose says:

            You can’t see…… the issue is….. having a tax on carbon.

            Can you see it now?

  8. enemy_of_the_State says:

    For $32,000, you do get a reach-around.

    • msbpodcast says:

      Man, you don’t even get kissed.

      Just bend over like usual, but for 32K he’ll use some K-Y.

  9. Dallas says:

    We need a hefty tax increase on imported barrel of oil from the Saudi-Bush Cartel or end the tax payer subsidies.

    Billions of tax dollars are spent to protect the Saudi-Bush oil fields along with the 5th Fleet based there. Why is this cost not added to a barrel of oil?

    Stop the free ride. Where are the Teapublicans on this fiscal responsibility?

    • MikeN says:

      Very small percentage of oil to the US comes from Saudi Arabia. Perhaps Dilbert can explain it to you, look up the word fungible.

  10. Sea Lawyer says:

    There are a lot of details that make it difficult to accurately estimate; but I see no problem, in theory, with a Pigovian tax on fossil fuels.

  11. orchidcup says:

    I charge only $12,000.00 for a roundtable discussion.

    Somebody is getting shafted.

    • Cap'n Kangaroo says:

      Yes, but you do not have to pay for all those blue-suited, clean-shaven men (and women) wearing sunglasses and a single earphone, who talk to their wrist.

  12. jbenson2 says:

    That car salesman better hit the books some more. Will the Carbon Tax cut down on the CFC’s that are really behind Global Climate Change? CFC’s are the culprits and not carbon dioxide CO2 emissions.

    So much for Al Gore’s religion that man-made CO2 was the cause of global climate change and that it was “settled science” – actually it was just hogwash.

    “The peer-reviewed paper published this week not only provides new fundamental understanding of the ozone hole and global climate change but has superior predictive capabilities, compared with the conventional sunlight-driven ozone-depleting and CO2-warming models.”

    https://uwaterloo.ca/news/news/global-warming-caused-cfcs-not-carbon-dioxide-study-says

    • Dallas says:

      You were against the EPA halting the use of CFC’s in 1987 because you thought it was a plot to take away your air conditioner.

      While I agree CFC’s play a factor, we don’t need Teapublican 2 cents on the cause of climate change.

    • MikeN says:

      Don’t believe the press release.

      Perhaps cosmic rays have an impact on climate, that is still being studied, and yes it was ridiculous for climate scientists to discount the possibility in favor of their pet theory.

      CFCs are known to have a greenhouse effect, and their current impact is to allow Europe to send lots of money to China and India which are exempt under the Montreal Protocol. They then produce lots of CFCs, and then destroy them so they can sell Europe the carbon credits.

      That said, if you see a paper claiming 96% correlation to temperature, it’s probably bogus. It’s easy to match a few squiggles. Let’s see how their predictions go going forwards.

  13. MikeN says:

    >Would you buy a petrol (or other energy) vehicle if the salesman told you one of the limitations of the car was that you can only fill it up ~5000 times?

    Sure. That’s over a million miles.


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 13882 access attempts in the last 7 days.