Franc, I've got no problem with Finland producing cars for the US market. I've got a problem with the US taxpayer funding the project. We've thrown close to a billion dollars into the Fisker and the Tesla at this point, and the idea we were sold with the stimulus was that they would produce "Green" jobs. Guess who is the lead investor in both of these companies? If you guessed Lyin Al, you get an A. Tesla is not doing well, and clearly producing cars in Finland is not going to produce jobs in the US automotive industry. In fact, it will reduce them.
Your point about the US being unfriendly to new US business is exactly my point. If the gummint gets the hell out of the way and does not subsidize one business at the expense of another, the best will prevail. The other side of the coin is my guess that at least some of the doubling of gasoline costs in the country by limiting supply is related,. There are two ways to make a product competitive: make yours cheaper and better, or increase the cost of the competitor.
Another quote from Al. This one at the announcement of the Fisker subsidy in 2009:
Gore touted the subsidy as a “first step toward a completely green automotive future. While these vehicles may look expensive, they are really a moderately priced contribution to saving the planet. Those who insist on owning their own transportation should be willing to pay this price. Those unable or unwilling to pay the price for their own vehicle should contribute by using public transit. No one has the right to pollute the planet just for the sake of their own freedom to drive wherever they want at a price they can afford.”
In other words, if you can't afford the tab, take the bus. Only the rich should be able to drive where they want, and it is the government's obligation to help with the purchase. Wonder how that would play with the occupy crowd if they knew about it
Seem me that engineering problems are marketing problems. If they weren't, then there would be no need for the $7500 purchase subsidy. Few people will purchase an automobile capable of limited mileage and performance for 100K, even if subsidized. Who wants an electric capable of 32 miles before becoming a gas guzzling smoke belching internally combusting vehicle? Design may be a factor, but put an electric motor in a Ferrari and sell it for the price of the V12, and I would guess the 200 MPH V12 will win every time.
Gore is an idiot yes. but quoting his support does not negate the valueof government cooperation with private industry.
You seem bent on this point, that the government should not be involved with private business. Period.
The Constitution does not say that, and the founders did not say that. So, if your logic is based on the fundimetal principles of our nation it is flawed. If the govenrment cannot "promote the general welfare" in any way, then the founding principles are in error.
Would you abandon the Interstate highway system? Would you abandon the space program? grants to universities that produce new crops, new medicines, newcommunications.
Do we stop asking questions about the physical laws of our universe, the by products of which are better machines, medicines, technologies and chemistry?
Should all new roads and bridges be privately operated toll roads? Are not some things done in this way are for the "common good?"
Over regulation is the issue. Cronyism is the issue. GM unions get a buyout that saves their pensions but not the company they helped ruin. Wall street builds a bubble on lies and we bail them out and lay restrictive and consumer costly Dodd/Frank regs on the system. Solyndra was losing money beyond measure, yet cronyism got them a bailout loan they squanderd in less than a year. All because progressive regulators want us to go "green." and don't mind making Al gore and his friends wealthy.
These things are wrong.
All are government choices which were based on cronyism and control not the creation of and environment beneficial to private enterprise initiatives, AKA "to promote the general welfare."
But the concept of creating fecund ground for new technologies is not cronyism or regulation in and of itself.. We have been doing it since our nation's inception. Just sometimes doing it wrong.
Right now, with this administration, is one of those times. Let us not over react. Let us remove the venal administration and curtail the tools they used to corrupt the intentions of the original systems.
We need the EPA,We need a dept of Labor. We need banking regulations and oversights of WallStreet. We need to make capital available for start up companies with new ideas. We also need to protect investors. But we need such entities to protect and back our people up, not push them over the cliff.
Let us kill the weeds without hurting the flowers eh?
franc