Thread regarding General Motors layoffs

@9agd+1mWjep8U

You have nothing interesting to say and say it poorly. I accept your inability to debate. Bless your heart.

@7azo+1mWjep8U

Why would I debate you. It's like you didn't even read the post you quoted. You can blather out of context all day?

Tesla has their own battery factories, and Musk is going to be mining his own lithium.

While the retail cost of a battery pack at the dealer may be 10k or more, Musk's actual cost to make a battery pack will be way less.

In a few years battery packs for Teslas, at least, may be cheap enough to cover under warranty every 8 years and still be profitable.

China is willing to take losses on sales to corner a market.

This is called dumping.

If their competitors can't match China, they'll go out of business and China will be the only game in town.

You want a car, you buy it from China, Inc.

"some Chinese EV company will offer a lifetime battery warranty to break into the US market"

1. Offering a lifetime warranty for EV batteries would mean absorbing a $20k+ charge plus labor for every car sold after 100k miles. That Chinese company would go out of business. It's not sustainable.

2. "every other car company will have to do the same" - any company that matches that unsustainable model will also go out of business. Remember, many automobiles sell on a thin margin. The cost of replacing those batteries will far outpace the profit margin.

Who's next?

If you're right about batteries, in the next few years some Chinese EV company will offer a lifetime battery warranty to break into the US market and every other car company will have to do the same or the Chinese company will take over the market.

"I like EVs and can tolerate people bashing them with facts more than I can tolerate defending them with GM style ignorance based arguments. "

The battery life is a huge deal breaker and will be the Achilles heel for all Electric Vehicles.
I already made the point that a small Japanese car can get 300,000 miles without issue. Can an EV do that?
Do you want a real fact?
All EVs sold today include a battery warranty of at least eight years and 100,000 miles.
What happens after 100,000 miles?
You know the answer.
Here's another fact.
On average, drivers travel 13,476 miles per year on U.S. roads, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation's Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).
That means an electric car will last exactly 7.4 years before the battery fails. Does the 8 year warranty make sense to you now?

It's time you realize that EVs are going to end in tears for everyone involved.
I can debate EV advocates with real facts rather than religious zeal. Can you? Bring it. I can do this all day.

@7yeh+1mWjep8U

These questions don't make sense with respect to the original post. The products were delivered but had poor performance. The argument is not about whether EVs are possible. It just suggests they're performance isn't worth the cost.

I like EVs and can tolerate people bashing them with facts more than I can tolerate defending them with GM style ignorance based arguments.

Tesla proved it is viable. A Honda that goes 300k miles is one thing but companies like GM make their money by tricking people into luxury trucks with poor quality powertrains and electronics.

@7jwd+1mWjep8U

So you're just arguing that people shouldn't use batteries.

If a manufacturer signs a contract to provide a product and they don't, they can be sued for non performance and have to pay a hefty penalty.

Why would they sign a contract that would not only not be profitable, but actually cost them a lot of money?

Key takeaway: The technology isn't viable.
From the business end, there's the Higher Purchase Price, Expensive Charging Infrastructure, Driver and Technician Training and Insufficient Battery range.

This is not to mention the insurance costs and the propensity to catch fire.

From the consumer end, the battery will cycle out and won't be able to charge before the consumer pays the vehicle off. Estimated 100,000 miles life span = throwaway cars.
There are $20k Honda Civics and Toyota Corollas that run for 300,000 miles without an issue. Try that with your $60,000 EV.

Once consumers are burned with cars that won't charge after 100,000 miles (while they still owe), they will never buy an EV again. This will drive the prices of old used ICE vehicles into the stratosphere. At that point you can look forward to a GM bankruptcy. Think it won't happen? LOL!!!

Taking money from taxpayers to fail does not make the manufacturers look any better.

Why would a government offer a contract to a manufacturer to provide a product that will fail because the technology isn't viable?

Why would a manufacturer accept a contract to provide a product that it couldn't because the technology wasn't viable?

Manufacturers pursuing a technology that isn't viable should be blamed on the manufacturers.

You can read all about the electric bus program by searching the internet.
Here's an article that outlines the program and the 13 electric bus manufacturers:
https://www.wri.org/insights/where-electric-school-buses-us

Incidentally, it's amusing that anyone would look past the viability of the technology and try to assign blame to the manufacturers.

Here are some issues, regardless of the manufacturer:
*Higher Purchase Price
*Charging Infrastructure
*Driver and Technician Training
*Battery range

The lack of critical thinking here doesn't surprise me. I encounter lazy, ignorant people at work all the time. It's embarrassing. "One team" often means a handful of people in each team at GM who take all the risks, do all the work and put themselves out there while the rest barely dial it in. The old GM and the new GM are synonymous. Did you ever get recognized at work only to see a list of people on the recognition that didn't do any of the work? After a while it starts to get on your nerves.
If you are dialing it in, you aren't fooling anyone. Everyone on your team knows...enjoy your day.

What company made the defective buses?

Sounds like the problem isn't the government but the incompetent company making the bus.

Incentives are needed because GM still tells everybody it's impossible to do what Tesla's been doing for over 10 years now. Tesla did get some help from the government in the past but there's a difference between helping a startup succeed and giving benefits to a hundred+ year old company that ends each earning season by telling shareholders how well they are doing. Maybe if GM didn't do billion dollar stock buybacks with their tax breaks they would be able to fund their own charging infrastructure rather than having taking more from taxpayers.

"as incentives became available"
Who pays for those incentives? Why are incentives needed?