Chevy Volt – The Government’s Car

Saturday, October 23, 2010

Here is a short but energetic editorial on Investors Business Daily about the Volt fraud at Government Motors. Make sure you look at the photo showing the smiling, phony Bureaucrats and Michigan Monarchs who, thanks to the average Dufus Americanus, can easily turn your enslavement into a fuzzy photo-op.

We heard GM’s then-CEO Fritz Henderson claim the Volt would get 230 miles per gallon in city conditions. Popular Mechanics found the Volt to get about 37.5 mpg in city driving, and Motor Trend reports: “Without any plugging in, (a weeklong trip to Grandma’s house) should return fuel economy in the high 30s to low 40s.”

Car and Driver reported that “getting on the nearest highway and commuting with the 80-mph flow of traffic — basically the worst-case scenario — yielded 26 miles; a fairly spirited backroad loop netted 31; and a carefully modulated cruise below 60 mph pushed the figure into the upper 30s.”

We know that our Soros-sanctioned, Green Prime Minister has hailed the Chevy Volt as the new Lord and Savior of the planet. After all, it is impossible to ignore the fact that this car, no matter what you think of EVs or hybrids, is the direct result of central planning from the people in power who pass laws allowing them to take and spend your money as they, along with their friends in big corporations, see fit. In the process, the enablers and their recipients all get richer, and those who aren’t in power lose their prosperity and freedom. The whole green, planned economy is one giant racket to propagandize you about your social responsibilities and take control of your lifestyle and tell you how you must live by making you feel guilty for living, breathing, and existing, and therefore zapping the precious earth of its resources to sustain your miserable life. Meanwhile, the green planners all live an exalted and affluent lifestyle while individuals continue to sacrifice for the benefit of their masters.

On the Volt, here is an interesting paragraph from an article on KansasCity.com (bold is mine):

The Chevrolet Volt has a lot riding on its shoulders. With two electric motors and a gasoline engine to charge the battery, it places the company at the forefront of technology and demonstrates that General Motors can compete effectively in the green car arena.

Someday, when words have meanings, government policy (coercion), taxes (theft from citizens), redistribution (to favored government programs), and subsides (to players in the governmental-corporate complex) will not be confused with “competing effectively.” Here is a snippet of truth that is usually missing in all of the media masturbation over the Chevy Volt:

To consumers, what matters is how well the car works, not what it is called. If your daily commute is less than 40 miles a day, you can drive the Volt every day without using a drop of gasoline. The battery is recharged in 10 to 12 hours by plugging into a standard 120-volt outlet. A special 240-volt charger does the job in four hours. The charger lists for $490 and Chevy estimates the installation would cost $1,475, depending on your house.

Can you say FAIL? Whoops, but don’t forget Big Government’s $7,500 tax credit for buying one of these metal hoodwinks. Oh Volt, and we hardly knew ye … (Thanks to Michael Harris for the link.)

Be Sociable, Share!
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

11 Responses to Chevy Volt – The Government’s Car

  1. Steve says:

    October 23rd, 2010 at 1:57 pm

    What galls me is the battery pack shown above. It weighs nearly 400 lbs. to get that first 30-40 miles on electric power. A gallon of gas weighing less than 8 lbs. can easily do that.

  2. liberranter says:

    October 23rd, 2010 at 3:22 pm

    What a photo! Those fossils even look sleazy!

    I’d like to think that the public is smarter than buy this piece of shit, given the well-publicized unpleasant surprises that other hybrid owners (ask any Prius owner) have experienced when it comes time to replace their cars’ batteries, which have a very short shelf life. I have no reason to believe that the Volt (or should that be “Dolt”?) will be any different.

  3. Tom Osborne says:

    October 23rd, 2010 at 6:04 pm

    Isn’t anybody talking about how much fuel (or pollution, or so-called “carbon emission”) is involved in generating the electricity that is required for charging these batteries?  MAYBE the cost is small, I don’t know, but I do think it must be part of the overall equation.  The fact that it seems to be missing from the hype makes me suspicious.  Everybody is acting like the “fuel” is more or less “free”, which is so much of the falsehood that is spread by this current administration, such as in “free” healthcare, “free” education, and so on.  I, for one, am quite sick of things stolen being touted as being “free”.  I guess to the thieves and their process of wealth “redistribution” (mostly to their own pockets), it all really IS free.

    Anyway, instead of the “Volt”, maybe this thing really ought to be called the “Volk”.  Or is that too obscure of a reference?

  4. Iluvatar says:

    October 24th, 2010 at 11:31 am

    Tom:

    Perhaps too obscure? Best I did was get “folks” since that is what it means in German. Perhaps, “folk” in terms of mindless bovines? My stab at it, but thanks for the thought experiment on a pretty Sunday morning. Time to get the lawn done…

    But before I leave (eyes rolling, I know – I’ll be terse)…

    Have you thought what motivates “green” to begin with?

    Are you convinced about CO2 emissions after the scientists were exposed in their changing the data to “fit the model” (upsidedown science)?

    Clearly, fossil fuels can be viewed as finite, so from a resource perspective, motivation towards other means makes sense, but careful on the reasons why we pursue a certain strategy (and how, i.e., the collusional role of government).

    I won’t go into the absorbtion/reemission spectrum of CO2 nor the concept of “heat (infrared radiation) saturation” effects of CO2. But we should be clearer about “green” and what’s behind it (and who stands to gain). Recall are planet used to be a lot hotter than it is now, on the average over 300 million years. What is a far greater risk is cooling (life follows heat).

    And oh btw, also know this fact borne out of the high resolution ice core samples: CO2 always FOLLOWED a heat increase, NOT the other way around – so CO2 did not CAUSE the warming trend.

    Almost terse!?!
    It’s Sunday morning after all…

  5. Alex says:

    October 24th, 2010 at 8:01 pm

    Illuvatar, Tom was referring to the most famous government-financed car in world history:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen#History

    And bringing it all back home to government cars and Democratic Party politics:

    http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/jalopnik/2009/08/Ted_Kennedy_VW2_EDIT.jpg

    Of course, I would like all the Volts-Waggin’ tongues to tell us how people who live in apartment buildings in large cities like New York and Chicago supposed to partake of this “reduction in carbon footprinting”? Throw daisy-chained extension cords out of eighth floor windows to the Volts on the street below (providing you even have parking on the street)?

    And what if you have an emergency but the car is at the beginning of a charge cycle (“Sorry honey, can’t have the baby, yet. We have another seven hours of charge time before I can drive you to the hospital…”)?

    Until they solve the battery recharge time, as well as availability and proximity of battery charging stations, the Volt is a dud.

  6. clark says:

    October 25th, 2010 at 8:42 am

    “Until they solve the battery recharge time”

    Yea, ya have to buy two, one is a spare.

    And, don’t ya know, city people don’t need cars they can take a bus or walk or get a taxi, maybe have a wheel barrow for the pregnant wife, or a whatchya call them,… rickshaws.

    /sarc off

    I’m not up to speed on all this though. I just now figured out the rust on the oil dipstick on my old beater car is probably from the ethanol in the gasoline, and looking back it’s probably also the reason why I’ve had the breakdowns that I’ve had, expensive ones too.

    In the early 1990′s an older guy told me he thought this green movement was a fad and that it would soon pass like any other fad.
    It sure is a weird kind of fad. A goberment driven fad where the true cost isn’t realized much the same way no one person knows how to build a pencil, or can measure the output to produce it.

    I wonder if the Amish laugh at all this?

  7. Tom Osborne says:

    October 25th, 2010 at 11:49 am

    Thank you, Alex, for beautifully explaining to Illuvatar what I meant by calling the car the “Volk”.

    Illuvatar, I don’t believe in human-caused carbon dioxide global warming at all, but the people who make the “Volt” say they do.  Ever since electric cars have been presented as the liberals’ answer to various “problems,” I have wondered how they justify replacing gasoline power with electric power.  How is electricity generated?  In most places, by burning coal, I think, which Obama himself said was an industry he wanted to destroy.  Next most frequent, I guess, is actually burning petroleum to generate electricity, so here you are merely taking the oil-burning plant away from each individual automobile and concentrating it down at the electric company. I’m not sure that solves any “problem”.  Then comes, I imagine, hydro-electric generation, and nuclear, but both of those get the environmentalists all up in arms.  So, again, I ask the liberals, “How is this a solution?”  I want them to give some actual statistics that THEY believe in, which is why I included carbon emissions.  I, myself, don’t feel it is relevant, but neither do I think a $50,000 car that can go only 40 miles per “charge up” is relevant, either.  These are just going to become fad “status toys” for the rich, to show off their “environmental conscience” to the masses (or as a method of one-upmanship among each other, now that the Prius is so commonplace).  Remember that other electric car that came out about ten years ago (I forget its name)?  The only people in LA (where I live) I saw driving them were hugely successful film producers.  By now, though, they’ve probably been junked.

  8. Iluvatar says:

    October 25th, 2010 at 10:58 pm

    OK – Need to be qwik here

    Let me just say that Tom, Alex & Clark? You guys rock!!

    Hey Tom the “Volk” refererence? Looks like I got it right! (German term leading to “VolksWagon” a German term for “people-car”, but I think the bovine extrapolation fits as well?).

    Hey did I win a Cd or somp-thin???

    Anyhoo – back to your basic points (violent agreement here), ummmmm… who’s up first – aw heck – take `em in order:

    1) Alex: agree on the ill-fitting of all-electric for city dwellers, more work needs to be done (honey? hold tight on that baby thing `kay??). Is utter nonsense. We need something better – someimes – it ain’t such a good thing as a baby’s birth…

    2) clark: that rust is more likely due to the fact that we weren’t DESIGNING those engines for Ethanol – but we could (and oh? guess what? – it’s a RENEWABLE source of energy – only costs about twice the cost of a gallon of gasoline – swell! – but that may be our near future – fossil fuels may turn out to be one of the cheapest sources of energy we EVER had – now we’re moving into the real deal…). Have you heard what Brazil has done over the past 5 years? I am still trying to digest – if you know – `fess UP!

    As an aside, I heard of a guy in Ohio in the late `70′s who got an engine to get ~180 miles/gallon. Dude was squashed FLAT by Big Car (Detroit). Anyone can recount????

    3) Tom on the re-bound: just to be clear – my take WAS NOT that you were a believer in CO2 based global warming – sorry not be clearer.

    And to top it off, your thought trajectory on providing the electric power via (more) coal-burning plants was DEAD ON. Or for that matter, fossil-fuel burning generators.

    Look, we all know that fossil fuels are finite.

    How do we move forward in the development of alternate fuels that won’t KILL us??

    Do we do this motivated by an unsubstantiated fear that we are going to heat up to 2 billion degrees next year due to global warming (I almost wish – but this shiite ain’t gonna happen until the Sun turns into a red giant – many billions of years from now).

    And one thing that Karen mentioned about a year & 1/2 ago: “whenever you politicize something – you ruin it – it becomes a game of power & money – nothing else (paraphrasing here)”. But you get my point – it basically morphs something good into something BAD.

    And I think that is what we got here fellas.

    A movement towards something better (renewable) turning into a collusion of Big Corp spanking the back sides of Big gov and giving a wink besides – gross (finger down my throat).

    I had this conversation today w/ a work colleague who basically bitch-slapped me (he is a hard fella). He is much more studied than I am.

    As an engineer, he suggested we re-open thorium-based nuclear power that we dismissed in `76 and to get Lithium Ion battery technology up to snuff.

    Parting thought?

    Wanna know how safe Lithium Ion battery technology is?

    Navy just funded a project on a L-I based unmanned (thank GOD!) underwater vehicle. Frickin’ battery developed a leak and burned 2/3 of the vehicle up! It took 3 months before the vehicle could be approached to determine its salvageabilty – DUDE!

    Yeah, we gotta a LOT of work to do!

    And, oh yeah, next year we are gonna have a 212 degree summer too.

    Bon Soir!

  9. Dave K says:

    October 26th, 2010 at 1:22 pm

    Tom, I completely understand what you are saying. Assuming there IS human-caused global climate change, how is reducing gasoline consumption and replacing it with burning coal beneficial?

    Are you thinking about the EV1 or something like that, which General Motors made? There’s a documentary about that, which I have not seen (Who Killed the Electric Car).

    I believe Tesla makes a pretty sweet electric car, which costs more than 100K. I imagine successful film producers would own those.

    All emissions equal, I suppose I’d rather burn coal, because at least money to purchase coal does not go to the Middle East.

  10. Alex says:

    October 26th, 2010 at 8:17 pm

    “As an aside, I heard of a guy in Ohio in the late `70’s who got an engine to get ~180 miles/gallon. Dude was squashed FLAT by Big Car (Detroit). Anyone can recount????”

    It was James Brolin, before he and OJ went on the run for their lives because of the space program coverup (now THERE’S a 70s reference even more obscure than Volk—lol).

    Illuvatar, there have always been ways to increase mileage, it’s just a matter of getting enough people to financially back you or be willing to invest in the process. One way that is known, but not generally used by the public

    http://www.onecryo.com/motorsport-prijune98.htm

  11. Iluvatar says:

    October 28th, 2010 at 9:13 pm

    Thanks, Alex

    Your input is always highly regarded & oh, btw your jokes/sarcasms are the BOMB!

    Thanks, dude.

Leave a Reply