Solution to the oil problem

[Jarlaxle]

and you can't find a new, safe, full size car for much under $40,000.00

Bull. Absolute 100% unadulterated BS from beginning to end. I drive a new fullsize car that cost me about 2/3 of that much money. Mine is a high-end model...the base models could be bought for just over half that, one a couple years old (or even a demo) for even less.

And dude, DECAF!

 

[Andy]

Not at all, you just haven't made any factual or logical refutations to anything I've said.

Which is why my posts have facts, and yours have insults. Very good.

Was it more than $10,000.00? If not, you STILL owe me. LEECH!

Not logical. If I'm paying, how much you pay isn't relevant. The person receiving rebates is the leach. Not the person earning their own money and buying their purchases with their own money.

Your entire premise is flawed because you've assumed that somebody is taking something from YOU. They're not, they're getting it from the power company. Once you pay them for YOUR power usage, the money is no longer YOURS as you have paid for SERVICES RENDERED. As far as your taxes are concerned, until you're ponying up at least 5 figures a year, you're STILL living on someone else's dime, so again, nobody is taking anything from you.

Please located in any post where I said everyone is taking from me.

If the power company is forced to pay you, by federal mandate, a large fee for solar power, that they would not have to do otherwise, that is then passed onto the customers, then you are legally stealing from me. Try again.

Don't be an idiot, if someone pays $9K, they are not living at your expense. Ask anyone who earns an hourly wage. You are an arrogant elitist, and a fool.

Which I made PERFECTLY CLEAR, and then you continued to try your silly-assed little poor mouthing "you're taking something from me". What's the matter slick, can't you comprehend the meaning of the basic English language.

And even here, when you admit it wasn't directed at you then, you still act like a stupid 10 year old. Grow up. If the statement doesn't apply to you, shut up and act mature. Can you act mature? Just once?

IF: the government gives me a rebate, that means that they're giving me money back that I've OVERPAID, so it's STILL not "your money", and if the utility company gives me a rebate, the same applies.

If you didn't have the solar panel... would the government have given the money back? Nope? Then you didn't over pay.

If you are paid back the same amount it would have cost you to buy, then maybe you have a point. If for example, the paid you 9¢ for 9¢ worth of power, then I'm ok with this. However, if you are being paid 25¢ for 9¢ of power, which is how most government enforced rebates are, then you are costing other utility users more money to fund your setup. That's wrong.

That would be very good advise for you to follow, since it's YOU who have been making the stupid, foolish, idiotic and insupportable statements.

Yeah, I suppose evidence is "insupportable" because it's... evidence. *****. How I wish I could talk to someone with an education.

The point here is that you've presented NO evidence in support of anything you've said, nothing, nada, zilch, zero. As far as I know, you've been pulling your "evidence" out of your butt, however I'm not sure how you managed to get it past your head!

Great, another claim that I'm not arguing with facts, while presenting absolutely none yourself, and then resorting to childish name calling again. Grow up. I'm getting tired of talking to 10 year olds. Maybe you should have one of your grandkids debate on here. I'm sure they would come up with similar quality statements, if not better.

Even other poster are admitting you are full of complete bull crap. That's pretty sad when everyone can see that crap but you.

 

[Federal Farmer]

You know, when you first started posting, you seemed like a nice guy. But now you just act like a grown up baby. And you have flip-flopped more than the democrats on Iraq, or drilling for oil.

Now what are you talking about? I AM a nice guy, when I'm not dealing with people who are just too damned willfully ignorant to bother to understand plain English.

In post 44 you said:

Indicating a support for other utility customers paying you.

Again I see that reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, so I'll make it REAL easy for you. If I'm putting energy ON the grid, rather than taking it OFF the grid, is it not fair for me to be PAID FOR IT?

Then in post 49 you said:

Again, attempting to justify an unequal tax system that rewards some and punishes others.

If I'm providing a product and/or a service, I expect to get paid for that product and/or service, whether it be by employing people, or for generating electricity and putting it on the grid for YOU to consume, or are you suggesting that I should just GIVE you free electricity? Even if someone is going to be completely "off the grid", it's worth it for the utility companies to provide a grant to them just so that they don't have to go to the expense of installing new sub-stations and stringing new wires 40 miles out in the middle of nowhere for 1 home when they'll NEVER recoup the expense!

In post 60, you said:

This time claiming everyone can do it, and at the same time supporting raising everyone else's electric bill to support your purchase.

Again, you failed to comprehend the part of the equation where I'M going to be GENERATING ELECTRICITY AND PUTTING IT ON THE GRID FOR YOU TO USE! Again, am I supposed to give you "free" electricity? Frankly if it were up to me, I'd charge you quadruple for the electricity that I'm providing simply for being too ignorant to comprehend the concept.

Then in post 61, you start the personal insults:

Ironically claiming you didn't get a rebate or subsidy, which means my comment wasn't directed at you. Yet, you get all bent and start acting like a 10-year-old who was told he had to do his homework.

Oh really, and exactly who was it supposed to be directed to. You were responding to MY post, which was a response to YOUR post, which was a response to MY post, and claiming that I was stealing from you. In other words, we were the only ones involved in the discussion, so now not only are you an idiot for not being able to comprehend how someone should be paid for providing a product and/or service, you're also a liar to boot!

Now you claim you paid for everything yourself with no rebates or subsidies, but then you openly state that you own your own contruction firm, with an electrical engineer to design your own system, and you'll have your employees build your home.

AND? I still have to pay them, and I still have to pay for all of the materials, so the only thing I'm saving is the P side of O&P. You DO know what O&P is don't you, or do I need to give you a basic course on Business 101?

So which is it... are you getting rebates or not?

I haven't applied for any, but if they offer them to me I won't turn them down.

Is the electric company going to pay you by raising other peoples bills or not?

No, they're going to pay me for generating electricity, at the same rate they charge everyone else for it.

Are you being subsidized or not?

Already asked and answered.

Can everyone afford this solar system or just owners of construction firms with friends who are electrical engineers? ... I just can't see why everyone doesn't own a construction firm and have elctrical engineer friends to build solar systems for them....

If you can afford to buy a home then yes, you can afford to go solar. If you can afford to build a new home, you can definitely afford to have it incorporated into the construction since it's cheaper to do it at that time, than to have to do an install on an existing home.

As for your lame attempt at a snide remark, it only proves that you really don't know anything about business. EVERY solar system needs to be Engineered for it's specific application, and most companies will do that for you as part of the package. I just happened to have an Engineer whom I've known for decades, and who does work for my company do the Engineering design for me, for which he was paid his REGULAR FEE, and who is going to supervise the installation to ensure that it is done correctly.

You can always tell a intellectually bankrupt person when they start off with personal attacks, especially when they have no clue who they are talking to, and just make broad assumptions.

And you can tell that you're talking to a drooling idiot when they fail to comprehend when someone has already told them that they bought, paid for, and installed something themselves, and the drooling idiot continues to attack them with some BS "you're stealing from me". As a Texan, you should be aware of the fact that if you did something like that to someones face, you'd be on the ground spitting your teeth, so don't try to play the injured martyr PC police game with me.

No, I didn't. In fact I included that in every calculation.

Your "calculations" are based on ASSUMPTIONS with no experience, or imperial facts to support them. You're still engaging in some silly-assed "if locomotive "A" leave Chicago at 10:00 AM and locomotive "B" leaves San Diego at 2:00 PM what time will they meet?" game. That's why I asked you to DO MORE RESEARCH, so that you might have SOME idea what you're talking about.

I quote myself:

​

I used the national average because it's what most of use pay. If you have a special location, feel free to tell me. Texas charges on average, 9.16¢/kWh.

Let us pretend that my electric bill is $200/mo. My system would produce 775 kWh/month. That would reduce my electric grid usage by... 775 kWh a month which is $76.42. My new lower electric bill would be... $123.58. So... again I spent $166.66, to reduce my electric bill by $76.42. Moving on.

And IF I lived in Texas again, and IF I was dumb enough to limit myself to the system you propose, and if I was dumb enough to pay that much for such a small system, and IF the thermal calculations for the home coincided with your mythical calculations, and IF, and IF, and IF, and IF. Are you beginning to comprehend why your little grade school math problem fails to mean ANYTHING? Each home is different, each home has a different thermal rating, HELL, each ROOM in a home has a different thermal rating, each home is situated differently on the lot, each home receives varying amounts of sunlight based on a number of factors, are you using tracking systems or are your panels going to be static, etc., etc., etc., so until you've had a PROPER solar survey of your PARTICULAR home, NONE of your numbers mean squat.

I'll tell you what isn't my American dream. It's not to get a bunch of stuff and objects, and have everyone else pay for those objects, and after living for 70 years turn into a bitter old crotchety man who comes across like a 10 year-old having a temper tantrum and thinking he's somehow 'owed' something.

Again with the poor mouthing! NOBODY IS PAYING FOR ANYTHING OF ANYONE ELSE'S. And if you can't comprehend that America is all about being able to be as comfortable as you are willing to work and provide for yourself, you REALLY need to study the FF's a bit more, because that's EXACTLY what they built this nation for. Oh, and sometimes crotchety old men have to *****-slap young punks who don't know their ass from a hole in the ground, especially when discussing subjects they don't know anything about, and it's something the "old man" has been working with for longer than the young punk has been alive. Now, have YOU got ANY experience in Engineering, construction, or anything else having to do with this topic, or are you just some over paid functionary?

Some people don't mature their whole life. Grow up.

And you haven't, so take your own advise.

IF (<--- note the word 'if') ...the federal government says it needs money to spend on alternative energy sources such as rebates which go to idiots with solar panels... then yeah, they are taking from me. I pay tax just like everyone else.

Again you fail to comprehend the meaning of the word REBATE. I suppose that all of the "scholarships" and "grants" that you got for college didn't come out of someone else's pocket either, now did they? So it's OK for the government to give YOU someone else's money, for which YOU will benefit, but it's NOT OK for them to give money to someone else in order to SAVE the government money down the line?

It's called INVESTMENT, and it pays for itself in the long run. Your college was paid for as an investment in the belief that your contributions years down the road would more than offset the cost of that investment, and the same applies to solar energy, whether it be on, or off, the grid. Go read my post on the cost analysis for building the 100 Nuclear power plants that John McCain is proposing. Now, how many fewer of those plants would be necessary if everyone in America had at least a minimal solar and/or wind power generation system on their homes? You seem to think that you're good with numbers, run 'em and get back to me and then we'll see if you can handle crunching something harder that elementary school "locomotive" calculations.

 

[Federal Farmer]

Bull. Absolute 100% unadulterated BS from beginning to end. I drive a new fullsize car that cost me about 2/3 of that much money. Mine is a high-end model...the base models could be bought for just over half that, one a couple years old (or even a demo) for even less.

And dude, DECAF!

And what kind of "new fullsize car" that is a "high end model" did you buy? I know that my wifes Chrysler 300 cost $35,000, and my Aspen cost $41,500 (and that's not counting finance costs), so we must have very different ideas of what a "full-size, high-end model" is.

Oh, and decaf is for wimps and small children.

 

[Federal Farmer]

Not logical. If I'm paying, how much you pay isn't relevant. The person receiving rebates is the leach. Not the person earning their own money and buying their purchases with their own money.

It's perfectly logical. The current Federal Budget is $3 Tn dollars, there are 300 million Americans, that works out to $10,000 per person, so again, if you're NOT paying at least $10,000 in federal taxes, somebody else is carrying your load for you.

Please located in any post where I said everyone is taking from me.

Not even a good attempt at equivocation. I never said you were accusing "everyone" of taking from you, I objected to your repeated accusations that I was taking from you, a scurrilous assertion from the very beginning, and one for which you have yet to apologize. The fact that you would continue in your prevarications is indicative of someone severely in lacking moral character.

If the power company is forced to pay you, by federal mandate, a large fee for solar power, that they would not have to do otherwise, that is then passed onto the customers, then you are legally stealing from me. Try again.

Another specious allegation. If the Federal government mandates that the power companies pay people for producing their own electricity, which they are putting on the power companies grid, how exactly is that "stealing" from YOU? Again, you fail to comprehend the concept of being paid for producing something.

Don't be an idiot, if someone pays $9K, they are not living at your expense.

Of course they are, because they're short by $1K, which means that somebody else like ME had to kick in THE REST.

Ask anyone who earns an hourly wage. You are an arrogant elitist, and a fool.

Oh I just LOVE that one. Here's yet another cluepon for you little boy, I worked on the jobs, at an hourly wage, starting as a laborer, and moved up to carpenter WHILE I was putting myself through college, and then built my own business. If I AM arrogant, it's because I've actually EARNED everything I've got. Nobody paid my way for me, I did it myself, so I have a RIGHT to be a bit arrogant, especially when I'm carrying some whiny punk like you on my back.

And even here, when you admit it wasn't directed at you then, you still act like a stupid 10 year old. Grow up. If the statement doesn't apply to you, shut up and act mature. Can you act mature? Just once?

Still lying I see. If you didn't direct your "YOU'RE TAKING FROM ME" comment to me, then exactly who WERE you directing it at? We were the only two in the conversation, so unless you were talking to your imaginary play-mate, you WERE addressing your comments to me. No, you're the one who's acting like a spoiled 10 year old who just got caught and is now trying to blame it on someone else so that he won't get the spanking he so dearly deserves.

If you didn't have the solar panel... would the government have given the money back? Nope? Then you didn't over pay.

Oh, so if you install Energy Star appliances in your home, Low-E insulated windows, more insulation and all of the other things to make your home more energy efficient, then you shouldn't be compensated by your electric company? Well HOT DAMN! I'll make sure and write my power company and let them know how you feel, I'm sure it'll make them happy. The only down side is that they're going to have to invest several BILLION to build more power plants since without those incentives, nobody is going to do it, which means that the power companies are going to have to build new plants. Run the numbers and tell us which is more cost effective for the power company to do, spend BILLIONS of dollars on new power plants, which are going to generate more pollution, or to give people a 10% cut on their power bills every month. Let's see, in my case, that would be $20 a month average (10% of a $200.00 electric bill), which is $240 a year, and if I stay in that home for 20 years, that's a whole $4800.00, and if there are 50,000 homes in our "grid", that would be $240,000,000 over 20 years. Not going to make much of a dent in that new $3 Billion dollar coal fired power plant that they're going to have to build, and it's not even going to cover lunch for the $36Bn for a new Nuclear plant.

If you are paid back the same amount it would have cost you to buy, then maybe you have a point. If for example, the paid you 9¢ for 9¢ worth of power, then I'm ok with this.

Which is EXACTLY how it works, so maybe I have a point?

However, if you are being paid 25¢ for 9¢ of power, which is how most government enforced rebates are, then you are costing other utility users more money to fund your setup. That's wrong.

And you have yet to produce any evidence of that, which means that you've been hollering, screaming, and stomping your feet over NOTHING, just like the little spoiled brat you are!

Yeah, I suppose evidence is "insupportable" because it's... evidence. *****.

Only you haven't produced any "evidence", all you've done is a grade school "locomotive" exercise that doesn't mean squat, even in the purely theoretical sense because you haven't accounted for any of the mitigating facts. You pulled some pre-packaged solar system off of a website, which may or may not be sufficient for ANY specific home, and then tried to use that as your "model" for the practicality of solar energy? That's about as retarded stupid as using a Mack truck or a Honda Accord as the "model" to calculate the average fuel consumption for the nation, it doesn't mean SQUAT! If ignorance is bliss, you must be one very happy individual.

How I wish I could talk to someone with an education.

Education? You want to compare sheep-skins little boy?

Great, another claim that I'm not arguing with facts, while presenting absolutely none yourself, and then resorting to childish name calling again. Grow up. I'm getting tired of talking to 10 year olds. Maybe you should have one of your grandkids debate on here. I'm sure they would come up with similar quality statements, if not better.

You HAVE NOT PRESENTED ANY FACTS. NO EVIDENCE. NOTHING. Now, if you want to actually PRESENT some facts, let's see them. Oh, and my grandkids would embarrass you worse than I already have (they're at that "mean" age), and they're still in grade school.

Even other poster are admitting you are full of complete bull crap. That's pretty sad when everyone can see that crap but you.

What? One guy talking about a very non-specific car that he got a good deal on, that he conveniently failed to specif icy year, make, or model of? Yeah, that's "evidence" when compared to the fact that I DID specify what make and model of car that I was talking about. That's your problem, somebody says "I can do better than that" and you believe them, but when I say that specific make and model "X" costs "Y", when it's very easy to confirm it, you can't even be bothered to look it up and you call it "crap". You're beyond help.

 

[Dr.Who]

THAT is what they are up in arms about. They aren't worried...per se...about Joe Backyard power producer...yet..but the real implications are that BigOil doesn't want a power type that cannot be easily manipulated.

This cannot be done at all with nuclear, coal or oil refining/conversion to current. And hence BigOil's pushing of these exact types of dirty and dangerous (read: complex) forms of energy production.

It's the POLITICS of alternative energy that's keeping it from happening. BigOil runs politics. Although, Kudos to Congress recently for standing up to their shortsided and stupid hopes to drill for the hard-to-refine pittance that exists on US soil.

Well we know what you think. But why do you think it?

Do you have any evidence at all that big oil is "up in arms about anything"?
That they are worried about anything?
That they want to manipulate the power industry outside of controlling themselves?
That they are pushing nuclear, coal or oil refining/conversion?
That if they are pushing them it isn't because they just think these are good sources of energy right now?
That the politics of alternative energy are holding them back?
That the oil on US soil is hard to find and a pittance?

Why I have even heard other people say that when big oil funds research into alternative energy that they are buying out the researchers to hide the truth. How about the possibility that they are actually interested in developing alternative energy?

 

[Dr.Who]

It seems to me that the various governments, federal, state, and local, are the only entities that have the ability to stop the development of any power plant, whether it is alternative energy or traditional.

If there is a conspiracy, which I doubt, then we need to look at the public sector to find it.

How can big oil, or big coal, or big any other kind of business stop a venture capitalist from building a solar power plant in the desert?

Right. There are wind farms going up all over the states. Does that mean that big oil tried to stop them but it failed? Or does that, more likely, mean that they just don't care?

 

[Sihouette]

All I can say is what I know, that since the 60s BigOil operatives have been threatening back people who tried to develop technology that would've kept them from siphoning our public funds to finance their greedy takeover of sovereign Iraq's oil. My own father got "anonymous" threatening phone calls in the 70s when applying for a patent for an engine similar to the one in the Toyota Prius today. They were startling enough to cause him to quit his patent and lay it down. Something about "hurting your wife and kids"..

And I've heard similar accounts for decades..

Proof? No, only anecdotal. But then again it's like asking George Bush to declare his actual intentions about the Iraq war..as if he would be forthcoming..

Not..

So using your logic, since we cannot obtain deadpan "proof" there's no reason even to suspect. So yeah, OJ didn't kill those two people, nor should anyone in their right mind even think so... according to that logic..

 

[Federal Farmer]

My own father got "anonymous" threatening phone calls in the 70s when applying for a patent for an engine similar to the one in the Toyota Prius today. They were startling enough to cause him to quit his patent and lay it down. Something about "hurting your wife and kids"..

Total BULLCRAP! The technology for that type of engine requires a COMPUTER to run it, and computer technology in the 70's was nowhere NEAR sophisticated enough to put into an automobile, even if you could afford to BUY such a computer in the first place, it would have been HUGE, and the heat from being in the car would have fried it in less than a month. You're just slinging the same old urban legend garbage that's been around for decades. It's just like the mythical "100 mpg carburetor", total, unadulterated CRAP.

 

[Sihouette]

No, it was a cogeneration system whose specifics I am not aquainted with. But the technology was cutting edge for the 70s and he was attempting to patent that intellectual property.

The assumption on behalf of the "anonymous" caller most likely was that the next steps would naturally be further development and implementation. A progression they were clearly intent on stopping...

 

[Federal Farmer]

No, it was a cogeneration system whose specifics I am not aquainted with. But the technology was cutting edge for the 70s and he was attempting to patent that intellectual property.

The assumption on behalf of the "anonymous" caller most likely was that the next steps would naturally be further development and implementation. A progression they were clearly intent on stopping...

Wait a minute! You're telling me no, but then acknowledging that you don't know anything about it? Little girl, I'm an ENGINEER, so I DO know something about it, and I'm telling you flat out that that type of technology was IMPOSSIBLE to achieve in the 70's. Hell, even today, most of the TRUE cogeneration systems in existance are HUGE and used in INDUSTRIAL applications.

 

[Sihouette]

The technology was in play during the 70s and was being surpressed. So you and I are both right. It was impossible then, I agree; because guys like my father were being threatened left and right. He wasn't some garage tinkerer. He was a Phd working from a University. He had experience developing laser technology for the Navy in the 60s.

The knowledge was trying to be born in the 70s. BigOil was busy night and day performing intellectual abortions to keep its monopoly.

 

[Sihouette]

And, (see above post) guess who was head of CIA during this time? Bush Sr. That's right. A BigOil operative right at the helm of the organization famous for this type of bullying..

Hey, anyone hear the Bush speech yesterday where he said his "attitude" (and I quote) was that [paraphrased] as long as he and his pals don't get rights to drill offshore, the price of gas would remain high?

The speculators are getting their orders directly from him. We are being blackmailed into letting the Bush thugs to not only sack our economy via their hostile corporate takeover of a sovereign nation with oil, but also are now being held hostage at the pumps unless we fork over the ransom (drilling offshore).

Time for Congress to start btich-slapping Resident Bush/BigOil.

Goodbye BigOil. Hello safe alternatives.

 

[Sihouette]

Seems everyone takes their orders from BigOil. Gee, I wonder where GM would be today instead of going bankrupt, it would have it's hands full filling orders fast enough...

Thanks again BigOil. Now Detroit has your technology abortions to thank for standing in line for food stamps...

GM delivered about 800 EV1s to customers from 1996 through 2000, while Toyota delivered 342 RAV4-EVs in 2002-03.

The film, which suggested GM sabotaged a promising technology that could reduce fuel consumption and pollution, caused a furor when it was released earlier this year.

The movie also intentionally ignored Toyota's experience to make its case, Bastien said.

"We shared all our experience with the RAV4-EV," but the filmmakers intentionally omitted it, he said.

He said the movie's suggestion that GM "chose not to make money on a car people wanted to buy in California" is ridiculous.

"They spent a huge amount of money advertising that car in California," Bastien said. "People wouldn't buy them."

Toyota did everything it could to attract buyers to the RAV4-EV, too. It subsidized the price, so customers paid $279 a month — the same price as the company's hit Prius hybrid. The price included an expensive home charging station.

Toyota used the same savvy Internet-intensive marketing model that fueled the Prius craze. It even gave its dealers a sweetheart deal so they could make twice as much selling a RAV4-EV as a Prius.

To no avail. Toyota sold about 300 RAV4-EVs in 2002, compared with 20,119 Priuses. Buyers waited in line for the hybrid. They avoided the electric car like it was a downed power line and Toyota, like GM, pulled the plug on the project. Source: http://fyi.gmblogs.com/2006/12/mark_phelan_electric_car_kille.html

 

[Sihouette]

Electric autos, crushed in the desert.


Source: http://commongroundmag.com/2006/06/dob0606.html

A story of unbelievable waste and BigOil vice..

..“Who Killed the Electric Car?” documents how a California law forced GM to build an electric vehicle that became so popular that Detroit had no choice but to destroy it. It shows hundreds of sleek, beautifully engineered EV1s being recalled over the passionate protests of the car’s users (including actors Peter Horton and Amanda Peet, who was handcuffed and arrested for trying to save her beloved EV1). GM secretly trucked the cars to the Arizona desert and crushed them...

..Wally Ripple, a former GM engineer with 23 US patents to his name, recalled that “the EV1, as good as it was, was built with 1980s technology. If Detroit hadn’t abandoned the EV1,” he added, “we would now be three steps ahead of Toyota.” According to Ripple, “a lot of people inside GM would like to see [the EV1] revived.” But if GM’s leadership remains obstinate, Ripple says,..

..There’s a fortune to be made replacing 200 million gas-powered vehicles, but Big Oil knows that the end of cheap oil means that “most of the dollars lie ahead” — when petroleum hits $100 a barrel. By that time, Paine predicts, other nations will have converted to electrics and “the US will become Protectionist City,” struggling to prevent the import of “cheap Chinese electric cars.”Source: http://commongroundmag.com/2006/06/dob0606.html

The irony...

GM's shares have taken a beating this year, as soaring gas prices drove U.S. consumers away from its sport utility vehicles and pickup trucks in favor of more fuel efficient cars and crossovers.

Since the beginning of the year, GM shares have fallen nearly 60 percent. In the last 12 months, GM shares have lost about 72 percent.

Shares of Ford Motor Co. also tumbled Thursday, falling 37 cents, or 7.5 percent, to close at $4.58, after dropping as low as $4.47 earlier. The Dearborn, Mich.-based company's shares dropped to a multi-decade low of $4.30 on July 3.

Citi's Itay Michaeli said that both GM and Ford, along with privately held Chrysler LLC, will need significant cash as they face one of the most severe downturns in their industry's history.

Michaeli said that while a bankruptcy filing at one of the Detroit-based automakers could happen, its more likely they would attempt to work out their financial problems outside of court.

"A bankrupt automaker could face market share losses as consumers walk away from the OEM fearing diminishing quality, void warranties, and weaker dealer support," Michaeli wrote in a note to investors.

"Under this scenario, the business model could be left with irreparable damage that leads to worse recoveries for claimholders." Source: http://www.nydailynews.com/money/2008/07/10/2008-07-10_shares_of_general_motors_hit_new_low_on_.html

People were lining up in DROVES...in D-R-O-V-E-S.. to buy the electric cars, ones that could be charged with solar panels at home and had a range up to 120 miles from one charge to the next. In other words essentially free commuting with no global-warming impact.

That free part...yeah...BigOil just wan't going to stand for that. Pockets undoubtedly got padded at GM, the recall happened and now GM faces possible bankruptcy...all for BigOil.

Be careful who you do favors for. Talk about shortsided profiteering..

If GM had stayed with the electric cars it would be one of the strongest car manufacturers in the US, if not the world.

Oh well...