What are your thoughts on what might happen to the electric car industry? I haven't heard anything of what he would do, but given his pro-oil, ant-climate change stance, I would imagine he might try to eliminate subsidies. Without those, electric vehicles are a lot less attractive to consumers. Gas may also get cheaper with his polices. Could this be really bad for the electric car industry?
I don't think so.
While eliminating subsidies long term may delay adoption by the masses until $140 instead of $120 right now electric cars are a luxury good and a status good. So even the low cost Tesla the Delta between it and another luxury car is a trip to Mexico.
So targeting the upper middle class it should be fairly price insensitive.
The expansion of the market will take longer but the real problem with that outside of the NE and West is the infrastructure build out. Essentially Canada's problem. The middle of the country is too big and not enough people.
The other problem is an electric car fueled by coal is worse than a gasoline engine. So the benefit of an electric car in a Coal fired incremental power world is negative.
But based on what? Nobody knows what the heck he's going to do, other than likely tearing up or reforming trade agreements. He's the biggest injection of uncertainty into the market that one can imagine - usually an indicator investors will move their assets to safer plays. This looks a bit more like disaster capitalism speculation to me, all without any solid foundation.
But hey, it's not like stock markets have ever been highly rational anyway. I'm just surprised we haven't seen much more movement. But there are still about 2 months for the landscape to shift.
I think people are betting that the establishment and the system will restrain trump so this will just be a typical republican regime and the benefits of deregulation and lax environmental rules will drive growth in oil and power.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GGG For This Useful Post:
Well, fair enough, I have no idea why he was banned. He insulted a moderator?
I'm not saying he insulted a moderator, I was saying you know better and why should I tolerate you insulting the moderators.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
It is a little frustrating to see people who make far less valuable and interesting contributions persist in doing so while he's removed, because good discussion isn't served by everyone saying the same things in different ways.
That's why some people (obvious examples in this thread) get on a short list while only have been being members for a short time, while others get discussed for literally years.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
I suspect pulling out of NAFTA really means re-negotiating certain provisions of NAFTA. Maybe he'll even change the name. I doubt his Congress would let him simply not have a free trade agreement with Canada. Too many districts would be utterly ruined by it.
I read an article in the Globe (and I think it was mentioned somewhere in this thread), but we just revert back to the 1989 Canada/US Free Trade Agreement. I don't know the differences between that and NAFTA. In essence we may end up with two separate agreements - one for the States and one for Mexico.
Trump will be a puppet for a career politician everyone seems to hate for some reason.
I will never understand why people think the most powerful political position in the world, a position that deals with career politicians all around the world and nationally, should go to someone who isn't a politician. It's the most bizarre thing I hear. I understand not wanting representatives that aren't beholden to lobbyists but not ones lacking experience.
I think it stems from a belief that the layman has that everything is black or white. The world isn't black and white it's all sorts of shades of grey and even being the best politician in the world is to set yourself up for a thankless job in the end.
While eliminating subsidies long term may delay adoption by the masses until $140 instead of $120 right now electric cars are a luxury good and a status good. So even the low cost Tesla the Delta between it and another luxury car is a trip to Mexico.
So targeting the upper middle class it should be fairly price insensitive.
The expansion of the market will take longer but the real problem with that outside of the NE and West is the infrastructure build out. Essentially Canada's problem. The middle of the country is too big and not enough people.
The other problem is an electric car fueled by coal is worse than a gasoline engine. So the benefit of an electric car in a Coal fired incremental power world is negative.
I'm not talking about the $100 000 Tesla's though. Their new model, and Chevy and others are aiming for the $30-$35k mark, post subsidy. Now some of those subsidies are up to $10k I think. So it is going to be a big price difference if they are gone.
I think people are betting that the establishment and the system will restrain trump so this will just be a typical republican regime and the benefits of deregulation and lax environmental rules will drive growth in oil and power.
Look at the stock sectors that are up right now. Defense, pharma, private prisons. Look at what's down: Gun manufacturers, clean energy companies, tech stocks. Market knows best, and market has inside connections to both the Dems and GOP. I think the GOP has soothed their worries that this will be anything but a standard GOP President.
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Senator Clay Davis For This Useful Post:
But based on what? Nobody knows what the heck he's going to do, other than likely tearing up or reforming trade agreements. He's the biggest injection of uncertainty into the market that one can imagine - usually an indicator investors will move their assets to safer plays. This looks a bit more like disaster capitalism speculation to me, all without any solid foundation.
But hey, it's not like stock markets have ever been highly rational anyway. I'm just surprised we haven't seen much more movement. But there are still about 2 months for the landscape to shift.
Based on his "100 day plan", I would predict Energy, Infrastructure, and Defense stocks to preform pretty well under Trump.
I'm not talking about the $100 000 Tesla's though. Their new model, and Chevy and others are aiming for the $30-$35k mark, post subsidy. Now some of those subsidies are up to $10k I think. So it is going to be a big price difference if they are gone.
I guess I see that even the small cars are status vehicles for the upper middle class. There is no economic viability for a 30k-35k car that the rough gas equivalent is 20k-25k. So the purchase is on status.
Here is a tacking website to monitor the effects though
EDIT: Also re-reading this post, that's pretty ####ing racist dude. The "no-father" narrative isn't even true and it's pretty sad to see you perpetuate it here.
According to kidscount.org blacks have the highest rate of growing up in a single parent househould at 67%. The next highest is American Indian at 52%. Whites are 24%.
Surprising lack of talk about the increase of White Supremacy incidents in the last day and a half. Shaun King's feed is pretty much an hour by hour ticket of reported incidents in the US right now. Hate is hip.
I read an article in the Globe (and I think it was mentioned somewhere in this thread), but we just revert back to the 1989 Canada/US Free Trade Agreement. I don't know the differences between that and NAFTA. In essence we may end up with two separate agreements - one for the States and one for Mexico.
Even if the president cancels the deal, congress has to alter or repeal the tariff measures implemented in accordance with that deal. And you're right that pre-existing agreements would probably remain in force unless NAFTA nullified them. That I don't know.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
If there's anything positive that came out of this election it's the evidence of the terrible folly of identity politics. It was entirely predictable (and many have been warning about it for years) that when you legitimize an ideology that sees all politics as a struggle between groups of people based on race and gender, that you will eventually provoke a backlash from others rallying under the banners of race and gender. Hopefully the people who have encouraged this folly will change tack and return to the classical liberal individualism that was responsible for all of the genuine progress we made in the last century.
not if Van Jones continues to be on tv
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire
According to kidscount.org blacks have the highest rate of growing up in a single parent househould at 67%. The next highest is American Indian at 52%. Whites are 24%.
Yes I've seen that study before, and it only counts married biological couples for some stupid reason:
Quote:
Definitions: Children under age 18 who live with their own single parent either in a family or subfamily.
In this definition, single-parent families may include cohabiting couples and do not include children living with married stepparents.
I actually thought Van Jones's little spiel was one of the best things about that whole night. He can be pretty insightful, there are about a dozen people I'd sooner see exiled from my cable news sight. You're right though that he often descends into exactly what Cliff is complaining about.
EDIT: This one.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
Last edited by CorsiHockeyLeague; 11-10-2016 at 09:38 AM.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
Not to mention, outside of some existential economic threat (Japan in the 80s, China for the last ~10 years) and vague communist allusions, most Asian stereotypes are "positive" (though have negative impact). The small population percentage plays as well.
I met a guy from Albuquerque a few years ago who came to Calgary on business, and he told me when we were out downtown that he had never seen an Asian person in real life, only on TV and in the movies, until this trip.
Lack of exposure and lack of negative stereotypes makes Asians a non-factor to the average American.
i guess my next question would be, how do the other groups turn negative stereotypes into positive ones.
Exposure isn't always a good thing. "The Latino Vote" being an actually thing already is a negative. The Democrats need to build better policy and stop using these groups as pawns.
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire
i guess my next question would be, how do the other groups turn negative stereotypes into positive ones.
Exposure isn't always a good thing. "The Latino Vote" being an actually thing already is a negative. The Democrats need to build better policy and stop using these groups as pawns.
Newsflash: Every political party uses people as pawns. Trump just won using rust belt voters as pawns, claiming he (and the GOP) care about workers despite a titanic amount of evidence that suggests they don't. The game is the game.
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Senator Clay Davis For This Useful Post:
Massive protests across the USA tonight. The protest in Oakland, California looks huge. Easily tens of thousands of people out on the streets in Oakland.
So presumably these people who are in the streets are the same ones who were furious when Trump would not say he would accept the outcome of the election when asked a few weeks ago? Time for them to look in the mirror and move on.
i guess my next question would be, how do the other groups turn negative stereotypes into positive ones.
Exposure isn't always a good thing. "The Latino Vote" being an actually thing already is a negative. The Democrats need to build better policy and stop using these groups as pawns.
Chicken or egg kind of thing.
First point, most negative stereotypes are bull####. Parroting, echochambers, and fear of the other perpetuate them.
Second point, I think the Republicans are just as guilty of driving minority groups to the Democrats as the Democrats are of taking advantage of the scenario. I do agree however that the Democrats don't go far enough left to truly help the demographics they claim to care about.
Newsflash: Every political party uses people as pawns. Trump just won using rust belt voters as pawns, claiming he (and the GOP) care about workers despite a titanic amount of evidence that suggests they don't. The game is the game.
I definitely agree with you that this is how the game has been played for a long time. But I do think there's an important difference between creating a wedge out of a social issue ("you're either opposed to killing unborn children or for women's rights") and drawing lines along racial divides. Tribalistic instincts are bad enough without doing that.
Obviously this is not solely (or arguably mostly, if you factor in historical positions over the past 60 years) the Democrats' fault; they merely took what the Republicans were offering them in terms of voting blocs. Trump did likewise.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
The Following User Says Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
