digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About
See the original image at gas2.org

Tesla Says Money Shouldn’t be Diverted to Bailout Car Makers

gas2.org — After the big three Detroit auto makers essentially had their rear-ends handed to them in a bag by Washington politicians last week, they have been scrambling to find ways to get the money they feel they need to stay alive — and their proposed solutions are making Tesla cringe.

Who dugg this? Made popular Nov 29, 2008

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

325 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • Jacolyte, on 11/29/2008, -9/+285Damn straight they shouldn't get any government money. If we hadn't subsidized coal... we'd most likely be using something more efficient by now (especially since the coal efficiency hasn't increased for decades)

    Subsidization will only make sure technological advances slow down to the pace of molasses.
  • badenglishihave, on 11/29/2008, -9/+191Correction to title:

    Pretty Much Everybody Says Money Shouldn’t be Diverted to Bailout Car Makers
  • tonmil, on 11/29/2008, -6/+181Giving money to the big 3 will hurt innovative auto companies like Tesla and Better Place. The government should not be picking companies and making taxpayers unwilling stockholders.
  • wildest, on 11/29/2008, -2/+65eek, this whole bailout makes me cringe... I'm sure it wont end well
  • staz77, on 11/29/2008, -7/+60coming from the company that laid off the majority of their workforce via email.
  • hugolp, on 11/29/2008, -3/+53Little people understand that when you give money to someone you are taking it away from someone else. So bailouts are just taking money from eficient people and giving it to ineficient people. US is going to be in bad shape after this.
  • pwner, on 11/29/2008, -5/+49@ the trolls talking about the Tesla Layoffs

    So what if they got laid off via email? Yea its rude but its efficient, and a lot of the employees were outside contractors that weren't even regular employees.

    If you're talking about the Tesla layoffs earlier this year, they laid off 10% of their staff, 26 people. That means Tesla is a company comprised of hundreds of people. Among the 26 employees, were some top level executives, meaning that Tesla actually holds people on the top accountable as well. Can you imagine what it would take to lay off a Big 3 Executive?

    Keep in mind Tesla is a relatively new startup and that GM is over 100 years old and has about 300,00 employees.

    That being said, GM, a company 1000X larger is struggling to come up with a working electric car for production in 2011. Meanwhile, Tesla has managed to deliver production models this year.

    If a company is more efficient, I would much rather they get government funding.
  • heartsblood, on 11/29/2008, -4/+42Wait I thought that was a joke. GM actually thinks 25b would save a company that burns through nearly 2b a month? ***** off and die. If they had invested in clean cars when they had a surplus they wouldn't be in this situation.
  • Langolas, on 11/29/2008, -0/+21Half the city is already out of work. Ever lived there? I did. I could see one of Ford's factories from my flat.
  • PhantomTrain, on 11/29/2008, -15/+35Ha! Of course they would say that. The Detroit Three are their direct rivals. They want to see them collapse. What a bunch of crap.
    What makes the shady double-dealings of banks like Citigroup and companies like AIG more sound than GM and Ford?
  • tango1110, on 11/29/2008, -2/+22What do I care what some 80's band thinks
  • nosecohn, on 11/29/2008, -0/+20@feliks2

    You could have made the same argument about the horse and buggy when the automobile was introduced. Should we have subsidized the buggy industry so as to prevent all the workers from losing their jobs? Times change, and those who change with them should succeed.

    There will remain plenty of automotive jobs in the US. First of all the big three would likely file for bankruptcy protection if they don't get bailout money. That would keep them running, while protecting them from creditors. Then there are about 10 other major companies building cars in the US (Toyota, BMW, Honda and more). And finally, companies like Tesla are springing up all over the place because they see an opportunity where Detroit has failed. They will be the employers of the future. That's how capitalism works and why socialism fails.
  • ZenMojo, on 11/29/2008, -7/+26Attaboy, Tesla Motors, kick ass and take names. There's already a pretty non-objective and snarky MSN article saying you guys have failed even though your reservation list is full (while they advertise GM cars on the same page). The Big Three are out for blood, so spare no quarter.
  • haikuFU, on 11/29/2008, -1/+18Not only that, but the US automakers dug their own grave by not innovating and offering the same technology and ***** quality for the past 30 years.

    It's their own fault, they need to solve this themselves. If they get money, it's just going to be business as usual. No one at those companies wants to change, they just want their pension when they retire.
  • TJ11240, on 11/29/2008, -3/+19I couldn't agree more
  • rmxz, on 11/29/2008, -4/+19IMHO the bailout money should be approved - BUT given to companies like Tesla (and the 10 other small american electric car companies) instead - and then Tesla can buy whatever factories they need from the soon-to-be bankrupt detroit companies.

    That keeps the jobs in the US (same factories & workers -- just owned by Tesla instead of GM). Keeps the economy strong, and encourages innovation.
  • oboshoe, on 11/29/2008, -3/+18Detroit is a balloon that has popped long ago.

    Putting 25 billion into Detroit is like trying to inflate a popped balloon.
  • JonTheGoose, on 11/30/2008, -0/+14better than via text message

    " btw ur fired. soz :'( "
  • UNL1M1T3D, on 11/29/2008, -1/+14Actually it was worse, it was a blog post.

    http://gizmodo.com/5065078/tesla-lays-of-90-off-de ...

    My thoughts exactly.
  • arkaycee, on 11/29/2008, -3/+15Right now, ALL of the bailouts (automotive or otherwise) amount to nothing more than a very expensive version of "throw it at the wall and see if any of it sticks." And it's the largest gamble in history.
  • oboshoe, on 11/29/2008, -0/+12Thats already happened. And the auto industry is the one who put them out of work.
  • Ma1achi, on 11/29/2008, -0/+11Ford and GM only ponied up $1 Million? Thats a ***** joke. They probably spend ten times that promoting the donation in the media.
  • lulzy, on 11/29/2008, -0/+11I think regular sized people are to blame here.
  • drknockrz, on 11/29/2008, -1/+11There's a reason they call it the "rust belt." All the manufacturing was moved to Mexico. Also... Companies like Toyota and Honda and Volkswagen, anything NOT from the USA are STILL HIRING. It's like the Big Three are the last dinosaurs on Earth and the metor-contrived lack of plant life is finally killing them off. Now, mammals can evolve, and this is a good thing, because we must remember that the average dinosaur had a walnut-sized brain.
  • hugolp, on 11/29/2008, -2/+12They are getting ***** by bad management not by the present situation. Those jobs are allredy lost. You can keep throwing money at it. It wont work. At the present situation you just have to let it go and start over. Its the only solution, and it will happen sooner or latter depending on how much money the goverment is thinking on throwing out the window. When something is rotten you have to cut and start over.
  • Agarikon, on 11/29/2008, -8/+17This is a dirty blatant lie:

    “national spine collapse. America can’t be a country of lawyers and financial analysts. We have to manufacture. We need that infrastructure. We need those jobs. We need that security. Have [we] forgotten who built equipment during the world wars?”

    First off, if these auto makers go bankrupt and do not emerge guess what: THE FACTORIES DON'T DISAPPEAR, THE ROBOTS AND COMPUTERS DON'T DISAPPEAR.

    Second, to call these sorry companies " the national spine" is, THE MOST EFFIN' RIDICULOUS THING I HAVE EVER HEARD IN MY ENTIRE LIFE HANDS DOWN.
  • mfc5200, on 11/29/2008, -5/+14I'm so sick of hearing this:

    "if we let the big three die we let our “national spine collapse. America can’t be a country of lawyers and financial analysts. We have to manufacture. We need that infrastructure. We need those jobs. We need that security. Have [we] forgotten who built equipment during the world wars?”

    That's simply not true. Are the factories going to disappear overnight? Are all the skilled workers/engineers/technicians going to lose their training overnight? No. The companies will either go into bankruptcy, and renegotiate all their ridiculous contracts which will bring their costs in line with Toyota, BMW, Honda, Subura, etc (all of whom produce cars here in the US), or all those factories will simply be bought up by said companies (at fire sale prices of course, thereby screwing the debtors and shareholders of GM, which is what should naturally happen) and they will being employing the same people again in a sustainable and profitable fashion.

    This "our manufactruing base will disappear" line is such *****, and I'm sick of hearing it.
  • nokdeez, on 11/29/2008, -3/+12Let them go bankrupt - its obviously time to cut the top fat, in both the structure and market. They won't go away and will be forced to innovate like Tesla has.
  • ASfinkterSezWut, on 11/29/2008, -3/+12BUT... I would LOVE to see Tesla get a $10Billion chunk of that "bailout" towards production of a decent small car which would compete with the Prius or the Civic. Money well spent I would think.
  • inactive, on 11/29/2008, -0/+8It was an innovative way to save money on paper pink slips.
  • portnoy, on 11/29/2008, -1/+9Come on, if GM had produced a vehicle at the price point of the Tesla with a third the problems the Tesla has or will show later on it would be blasted with complaints. What I find strange is everyone thinks the same batteries that in laptops show pronounced loss in capacity in a year is going to be just super in a car. Sure, it gets 170 a charge the first year, then 120 the second year (maybe) and 50 the third? That sure rocks for a car that costs 12.5 megapennies. :P
  • Target91, on 11/29/2008, -4/+12Big words from a company that fires people with emails. And I can't help but think their real reasoning is that they don't want competition. Also did anyone else watch that congressional hearing? Both sides in that should be ashamed of themselves in that *****.
  • Dragular, on 11/29/2008, -1/+9Then they shouldn't bail them out. If they declare bankruptcy, they can get rid of the unions. It's not like declaring bankruptcy is the end of the company, look at KMart. They declared bankruptcy, stock was around $0.25 a share, then the restructured company ends up at over $100 per share and they buy out Sears. Could work out good.
  • ctdkid, on 11/29/2008, -1/+9Subsidizing corn has led to high fructose corn syrup being in everything, and an obesity epidemic.
  • phreak79, on 11/29/2008, -1/+9I happen to agree, but lets face it this is hardly surprising as I'm sure Tesla would benefit if there was a little less competition both in the marketplace for customers and staff.
  • Misaiato, on 11/29/2008, -2/+10Tesla and the Big Three are competitors?

    Tesla hasn't made one car for mass production yet. The Big Three make dozens of models each year.

    Tesla's one car costs nearly 100k. The majority of cars sold in the US do not cost 100k.

    Tesla isn't going to benefit if the Big Three go under. Most of us STILL won't have 100k to drop on a car. The ones that do have that dosh are just as conservative with their resources right now as the rest of us. They aren't wildly spending on any little luxury toy.

    Tesla and other car companies are not competitors - at least not until Tesla actually makes a product that competes.
  • thejokker, on 11/29/2008, -0/+8how many jobs would be created in other parts of the country making more marketable vehicles?

    Why should i as a tax payer worry about keeping car jobs in detroit instead of in calif, tenn, ga., or somewhere else? Isin't the point that there are jobs, not what city they are in?
  • Target91, on 11/29/2008, -1/+8What? I thought Digg's savior was Ron Paul? Judging from the last week or so I'd say Digg hates Obama.
  • Ma1achi, on 11/29/2008, -1/+8They're going broke because their vehicles are ugly and poorly designed. Japan are killing them in car sales.

    The only good american vehicles are trucks & suv's, and nobody can afford to drive them anymore.
  • Olfster, on 11/29/2008, -2/+9Nothing. They all should fail. As much as it would hurt it needs to happen.
  • TurdZilla, on 11/29/2008, -3/+10***** Yeah!!!!
    Rewarding bad behavior is sending a bad message to all other companies.
    Hell didn't GM Kill the electric car ? ***** them!! ((( Let them Fail )))
  • eclectro, on 11/29/2008, -4/+11It seems to me that the "free market" brought us to this point, i.e. everybody abusing the free market until it crumbled. We "hardly cared" would seem more like it.
  • Culyt, on 11/29/2008, -0/+7You mean Japanese and other foreign based car makers didn't throw money at Americans?

    The nerve!!!!

    This also isn't having 'heart' its having a interest in good PR.

    These are corporations, they don't do anything, ever just for the sake of it. It needs to make them money. In this case that can say how they donated. There are also probably tax breaks.

    The fact that you posted this shows how it works.

    ☢
  • nosecohn, on 11/29/2008, -0/+6@wejmahtin

    Uh... you do realize that the Tesla car is built on the same Lotus frame, right?
  • drknockrz, on 11/29/2008, -1/+7Car makers, perhaps?
  • Ghoztt, on 11/29/2008, -4/+10Goodbye free-market, we hardly knew ye.
  • firesphotons, on 11/29/2008, -1/+6Tesla doesn't want GM bailed out, ponderous huh? In a related story Eastman Kodak has requested that Fuji of Japan be bombed.
  • heartsblood, on 11/29/2008, -3/+8The labor unions did not bring them down, and 1 car is not going to save the day. As for the hybrids, do you have any idea how many years they are behind Japanese lithium-polymer research? They're dying because they refused to innovate when they had the chance, when gas was cheap. Petrol is not a source of renewable energy. It was the weakest point of their business model and instead of addressing it directly, they ignored it and built more SUV's, or mustangs that nobody wanted. The big 3 need a whole new line of energy efficient cars, and they don't have anything planned. Wasting $25B on hybrid technology they've LEASED FROM JAPAN is not going to save anything. 3 companies are about to die because of petrol, not labor unions, and only one of them has a fully electric car in the works. Are you honestly going to tell me you don't see the problem with this?
  • BinaryFragger, on 11/29/2008, -1/+6Regulations aren't killing the Detroit automakers.

    Other car companies have been building fuel-efficient cars for decades, while GM focused on building as many Hummer and Cadillac SUVs as possible.
    Now with this year's event, they're scrambling to bring the Cruze and Volt to market while people are buying Hondas, Toyotas and diesel Volkswagens.

    They wrongly predicted that large trucks would remain popular for a while, and now they're paying the price.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 328 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.