All In The Name Of "Green"

The Fix Is In...

I been reading along on this issue and not watching the Lame Stream Media thoroughly cover the issues surrounding some of this. They never cover any of the "under the radar" stuff so I try to stroke my pen in their noted absence. As I read about what is being proposed, and who is being excluded, I had flash backs about the federal government becoming "Government Motors" and that whole fiasco. Now understand fellow tax payers, we still own a large stake in General Motors. They have paid us back some of the bailout money but are still dangling on the hook. Uncle Suygar can be so generous when you're a failure in life and the market place.

Then after the bailout along came "Cash For Clunkers." Ah yes, a walk down memory lane. That was a bit of a fiasco. What I am noticing is that these government fiasco's always seem to be on the tax payer's dime. You picked up on that too? The intentions of the program may have been honorable. It was designed to remove less-than-fuel efficient vehicles from the road by using the rebate bait. The bait was anywhere between $3,500 to $4,500 discount which was funded by - YES - the US government. Since the government has no money of its own, where does the cash come from? You have three guesses and the first two don't count. BTW, foreign car makers loved the Cash For Clunkers program.

I'm not here to rehash whether it was a success or a failure. Overall, it cost "us" some money though which we didn't have at the time, nor did the federal government have either. It also had some rather harsh unintended consequences such as selling cars to people who couldn't really afford to buy a new car but did it anyway because the of the juicy bait they eyed to do so. Reminds me of one of the causes of the foreclosure crisis - selling something to someone who had no business buying it in the first place. What we don't need is a repeat of anything of that nature, but we will probably experience more of this insanity.

Obama wants one of his stamps on history to be his "green" thumb print. How he goes about that will determine whether it is a smudged print or not. What I am about here isn't being anti-environmentalist. I'm not a tree hugger per se but a concerned tax payer once again who always watches what they do in Foggy Bottom with skepticism. It seems a bit odd to me that we have to view what is going on their with distrust but distrust it is. There is now, which Smirksalot recently announced, a new green initiative on his watch that is going to probably cost us some of our hard earned cash again, even if we don't buy a Chevrolet Volt.

"Wait just a minute FP," you say. Yes, ladies and gents, Chevrolet is a brand under the Government Motors label. Just a coincidence so lets keep going (snickers to self). Who is going to end up being on the end of the hook is the $64K question. Last time it was the American tax payer so...

Presently the bait on the hook is a $7,500 tax credit for purchasing a "green" vehicle. Boy, I don't know about you but that makes me want to rush out and buy one. But lets wave a bigger worm for your consumption. The new idea proposes not a tax credit but a $7,500 rebate at the point of sale. WOWSER! Someone lead me to the showroom floor! This proposal can be found in two places. The first is buried in Obama's $3.6 trillion budget proposal for 2012 and the second appears in Representative Debbie (The Coo Coo's) Stabenow's, a Michigan Democrat, proposed bill in the House. Michigan? Isn't that where Government Motors has built its nest? Again, just a coincidence so lets keep moving on.

Upon further examination, here's what happens. You walk into a Chevy dealership, just a chompin' at the bit, and eye the sticker price on that brand new Chevy Volt. Then you step back a bit and ask, "You want how much for that hunk of tin? That says $41K big ones!" But the smooth Government Motors salesman says, "Naw, we're just funnin' ya, have we got a deal for you." He whips out a coupon for $7,500 and places it in your meaty little paw and says, "Viola! I just marked it down to $33,500 just for you because you are you." But the end game never changed in that interplay. Who assumed the risk on the deal that was struck? In all appearances it puts the car dealers on the hook for allowing the federal government the opportunity of extending its (read - our) largess to you. Many a dealer found out the pitfalls of that during Cash for Clunkers I.

The real beneficiary of this whole plot is Government Motors, and I suppose Obama for being such a good guy once again with our tax dollars. If it didn't work out too well the first time, then lets take a different stab at it this time seems my logical conclusion when I look at it without my blinders on. That seems to be the approach of nitwits on The Hill lately. If at first you don't succeed then try, try try again. It's always easy to spend someone else's money, isn't it?

Did you also hear that the "federal fleet" is going "green?" Thass right folks! Here's what The Smirky one announced just this week up in Landover, Michigan. What the heck is he doing up there? Campaigning I imagine, that's what he does best you know. These are his words, not mine:

"I'm directing (he likes that word!) our departments and our agencies to make sure 100% of the vehicles they buy are fuel-efficient or clean energy cars and trucks by 2015. NOT 50%, NOT 75% - 100 percent of our vehicles." The brand? Take a guess. Government Motors Chevrolet Volt and its successors. Just another coincidence so lets keep on truckin' along here.

There are always caveats to his directives. 100% isn't always 100% and it is once again the case here. What are the exclusion(s)? It always amazes me how these follow up announcements follow on. Along comes the federal Secret Service to announce that there will be exclusions from the Prez's directive - the Presidential Limo being one of them. Now we can't have the President of the United States riding around in less than a gas guzzling, luxury model now, can we? What is good for the geese isn't always good for the gander. I hope you've learned that about this crowd too.

Here's Obama's explanation for that and I quote:

"Now, the reason is not because Secret Service are bad guys. It's because the cars that I'm in are like tanks. I mean, they, as you could imagine, they're a little bit of extra stuff on it. They're a little bit reinforced. So they weigh at least two or three times what an ordinary car weighs. so they couldn't get the performance, in terms of acceleration, using a hybrid engine."

Well DUH Mr. President, neither does the M1A1 Abrahms tank. Maybe you should switch over to something with a bit of firepower to it. Talk about armament and speed! That baby is the ticket!

Using that rationale I have a double DUH to add. That's the very reason I won't venture out into the "green" vehicle market any time soon. Doing what I do for a living, I need a "hauler" capable of getting me from Point A to Point B quickly. Maybe some day Obama will fix that for us too.

I sense another boondoggle of a bailout behind all of this.

Have an awesome day. Until next time...

The Frog





More by this Author

  • "Ineptocracy" Is A Word
    18

    Ineptocracy is the new system of government that Obama-Biden ushered in. It is a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society...


Comments 39 comments

breakfastpop profile image

breakfastpop 5 years ago

I never listen to what he says, but I watch what he does. I do not trust this president and I I believe he, under someone's instructions, just delights in screwing up our economy. Up and awesome.


Hmrjmr1 profile image

Hmrjmr1 5 years ago from Georgia, USA

Frog - I'd be willing to bet the next on the 'waiver' blockj will be the Postal Service, and then Customs and Border Patrol, and so on, the green technology just aint there yet and our dime is not gonna make it so. Good point out and great hub!


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 5 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

BPOP - Charles Krauthammer, who I am s big fan of, pointed that out early on when he took office. Did you know Charles is also a psychiatrist?

Hmrmr1 - Other exclusions do indeed include federal law enforcement vehicles. Can you see the Secret Service guys trying to catch the Presidental Limo in Chevy Volts? LMAO


Pegassi 5 years ago

Oh, Lordy, FP--I just caught a mental image of the Border Patrol trying to load twenty-three illegal aliens into a Chevy Volt along with their arsenal and the half ton or so of drugs they brought into the US.

Kinda like the classsic clowns at the circus with enhancements.


Carpefriggingdiem profile image

Carpefriggingdiem 5 years ago

FP, just another example of crony capitalism, a.k.a. fascism, i.e. government collusion with big business. It's a model that has never worked. It didn't work in Germany or Italy. It didn't work when Peron tried it in Argentina. LOSERS choose this sort of model, and we all know that Barack Hussein Obama, the most unqualified person in any room he enters, is a LOSER, as are his disciples and the entire Democrat party.


Carpefriggingdiem profile image

Carpefriggingdiem 5 years ago

FP, I should have included this in my previous post. We need to resist this "greening" movement. We can do this easily enough by encouraging anyone who has an IRA or 401K program to sell their GE and GM stock. Sell the crap short. Drive the market price down. Get these idiots out of the market place.

I detest this movement. I recently purchased 600 incandescent bulbs, all 100 watt bulbs that will make it unnecessary for me to ever convert to those nasty mercury laden bulbs that give very poor quality light. Banning the incandescent bulb is just another example of what happens when the lunatic run the asylum. Where does it end?


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 5 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

Carpe - We've been around each other for quite some time and you know that I was sounding off loudly against all the bailout crap we were witnessing, no matter who was doing the bailing.

This whole idea of "being too big to fail" rubs against my grain and always will. I guess I'm just going to be labeled as a "capitalist pig (frog?) which is fine with me. If you can't run with the big dogs then don't pee on the fire hydrant sort of thing.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

The Chevy Volt is a fraud. Its already limited range drops drastically if the temperature requires heat or air conditioning (which is almost always!)

And what about all those poisonous batteries?

If we all converted to electric cars, the massive additional demand for electricity would require an all new grid, thousands of new power plants, and the burning of billions of tons of additional coal, since environmentalists don't like dams or nuke plants!

What's 'green' about that?


RealHousewife profile image

RealHousewife 5 years ago from St. Louis, MO

I think I'm about to say something dumb, but here goes anyhow.

Why is the government so interested in the cars we drive at all? Can't they just fix things that already broken?

Educate me on what I'm missing? I don't know.


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 5 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

RHW - BINGO time. The federal government needs to get out of, and stay out of, the way of the free market enterprise system. They do more to hamper things than to ever improve them.

You aren't missing a thing Cookie and your comment illustrates that.

The Frog


The Frog Princess profile image

The Frog Princess 5 years ago from Florence area of the Great Pee Dee of South Carolina

Thanks for the input Frog.


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 5 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

TFP - Can't you just imagine a Chevy Volt trying to pull our Toy Hauler? We wouldn't get out of the driveway Darlin. I had a mental picture of that just now.


T4HOTA profile image

T4HOTA 5 years ago

Interesting connections and it doesn't surprise me in the least that the gov't engaged in these tactics. The Obamination administration sure is tricky.


rkhyclak profile image

rkhyclak 5 years ago from Ohio

Up and useful Frog. Same plan, new name and the same level (or higher!)of disaster. Apparently learning from mistakes was never a lesson his mother pounded home.


Stu From VT 5 years ago

Frog - Agree on all points. But to be fair, Cash For Clunkers did serve one important national purpose - think how many Obama stickers were removed from our highways. :)


CHRIS57 profile image

CHRIS57 5 years ago from Northern Germany

Economic progress was always linked to industrial revolutions. In the 19th century the steam engine changed the world. Then came mass transportation, railroads, the world getting smaller. In the beginning of the 20th century it was individual transportation, the automobile. Now we live in the information age, that come in a triple pack: 1. radio and television, 2. computer, 3. WWW

What will be the next industrial revolution or evolution? I think it will be green. People will start to feel responsible for the well being of their children and future generations.

So in this situation the Obama administration moves to push green products, green industry. What´s wrong with it?

You can blame Obama for a lot of things - but not for going green. It may be the last chance for the US economy in a changing world to jump on the moving train.

Reading the comments, i have doubts you even see the green train coming. But i am sure you will find someone to blame afterwards, when you found out you missed the green train. Sorry, i´m a little sarcastic and don´t want to be offensive.

Enjoyed reading the hub though, especially on Obamas limo.

Actually, there was one thing in common for US economic policies in the last 30 years: There were no policies. It was all "laissez faire". Now there is a guy coming and planting a little seed of green. Don´t step on this little green plant.


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 5 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

Chris - Being a wise old bullfrog, the greening of America has been coming since the 70s oil crisis. Look at what you see. I don't dispute the need for alternative energy sources. What I dispute now is the cost of having done nothing but give lip service to all that we know.

I don't fault the President for wanting to develop any means of energy but get this fact. The WORLD is run on oil. Just about everything you use either has it in it, needs it to run, or some variation thereof. He won't change that, nor will you or I. Those are the bare naked facts.

Obama is a political animal so read between the lines. We can't undo the problem in a short amount of time and it takes money. Have you looked at the federal deficit lately. If you havent, please do so.


tmckim profile image

tmckim 5 years ago

Is this the most clueless regime in the history of the Republic? I did enjoy shopping for cars, though. Great work!


Stu From VT 5 years ago

CHRIS57,

I have no objection to green alternatives, but they should be voluntary. Let the market decide which alternatives and legacy products provide the best cost/benefit ratios. I don't want federal bureaucrats violating enumerated powers and telling me what I'm allowed to buy. I do agree we need laws to prevent excess ecological damage, but these should focus not on prohibition of specific products, but instead prohibition against release of stated quantities of specified pollutants. And these laws should be enacted at the state level, because the federal government has no enumerated power to enact them.

Stu


Stu From VT 5 years ago

Frog,

You are a wise old bullfrog. Over time, I suspect many green alternatives will become economically feasible. But we have to get from A to B. At present we have manufacture cost, production scale, distribution, and product compatibility issues with many green energy alternatives. The real answer is to phase in green alternatives as their cost/benefit ratios improve over time, but at the same time not totally give up on any energy resource, even legacy ones. There can be no assurance that a given green alternative might not later be subject to supply issues, just like we have now with oil cartels. It's a matter of changing the mix so we optimize the ecology/economy equation, and prevent over-reliance on any one source.

Stu


Ghost32 5 years ago

There is no doubt whatsoever that our family vehicles are enough to turn the administration a rather SICKLY green--because our 1996 GMC pickup (pre-Govt. Motors version, please note) and 2001 Subaru Outback (pre-Fukushima/tsunami/earthquake version, please note) are NOT being turned in for ANY new vehicles.

Can you read my vehicle titles? NO NEW CAR TAXES!!

And Broc Obama (love that image) can't even grumble about it. Why? 'Cause BOTH of our vehicles are LITERALLY GREEN.

Paint jobs, that is.


Brenda Durham 5 years ago

Great hub, Frog Prince. If it were an empty hub, it would still be great, 'cause, like Ghost, I love the "Broc Obama" image! Hilarious! And as usual you have a great way with words, Frog.


The Frog Princess profile image

The Frog Princess 5 years ago from Florence area of the Great Pee Dee of South Carolina

The Frog--maybe our golfcart could pull the toyhauler for our fall bike trip:)))) Dont you just love my comments.

Oh I have it Saddle up Dixie!


CHRIS57 profile image

CHRIS57 5 years ago from Northern Germany

@Frog and Stu

I would agree, nobody should tell you what (car) to buy. But then what about a little stimulus of taxing gas the European style (8 USD/gallon)?

Oh - may be that´s not necessary. If the world market price for oil goes up further, you will be rushing for cars with good fuel efficiency. You should be grateful for an administration that has a clue at least with this issue. Mm - forgot, it is Obama who is responsible for world market oil pricing, right?

That was a silly sentence, same silly as the comments about toyhaulers and Border Patrol.


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 5 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

Chris - A clue? Have you caught his action in Brazil? If not, read my Hub - Drill, Brazil, Drill. This nation is sitting on very large reserves of oil, some of the largest in the world. Check out the Bakken region and the AWMD. He has thrown up every barrier he could to domestic oil production imaginable.

His administration has been held in contempt of court over his Gulf moratorium. Face the facts. The world operates on oil. That's a fact and all the tree huggers in the world aren't going to change that.

And you think he has a clue. Waiter bring the guy another glass of Koolaid. Read my Brazil hub and then think about what the idiot said. And then why he said it. He's clueless Chris.


Stu From VT 5 years ago

CHRIS57,

Maximum efficiency is obtained when the market determines prices by supply and demand. The government shouldn't be injecting artificial incentives for "policy purposes" which always have the effect of reducing productivity and GNP.

If we really want to solve the energy cost crisis, we need to open up offshore and onshore drilling in a big way. The US has alot of oil, but the admin is issuing only a tiny number of drilling permits, making us hostage to OPEC cartel pricing.

Stu


Stu From VT 5 years ago

Frog,

The Brazil thing is unbelievable. Oblabber is keeping us out of the Gulf, but issued a drilling permit to Petrobras, in addition to loaning them $2 billion of taxpayer money. And Soros has been a historical investor in Petrobras.

Why am I subsidizing Petrobras and possibly Soros? Where's MY ROI?

Stu


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 5 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

Stu - Environmentalists don't read everything about any subject.


Stu From VT 5 years ago

Hi Frog,

Environmentalists never try to find any balance. I too am just as sick as they are of irresponsible resource use and pollution. But if we want to have an advanced, productive society, we have to optimize the relationship between economic efficiency and the ecology, and not adhere to rigid and extreme policies that leave us lacking in one category or the other. As an example, carbon emission limitations might validly be based on economy vs. health, but until you enter the greenhouse factor in, you have to first to prove the theory is true, and also establish what effect it has for a given level of emissions. This is very hard to do, as some scientists who dispute the theory risk getting blackballed from the scientific community if they speak out. So you get a very biased analysis. Sadly, what should be a scientific debate has become an ideological war.

Stu


Mandrake_1975 profile image

Mandrake_1975 5 years ago from Pennsylvania

What exactly is a "green" vehicle? A small car that can't haul large families around, is not made for leaving pavement, and which will crumble into a tiny ball when it hits a telephone pole at 5mph? Is it an electric car that runs on the electricity which is brought to it by a coal-powered plant that the president wants to shut down? Is it a car that runs on not-so-green ethanol? A vehicle that uses natural gas mined from the earth using "fracking", which pollutes our rivers and streams with radioactive materials?

What are "green" vehicles besides another way for us to give somebody more "green", because I don't see it.


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 5 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

Mandrake - You pose some excellent questions. Thanks for your wisdom.

The Frog


Wayne Brown profile image

Wayne Brown 5 years ago from Texas

The idiots will be out in force at the dealerships soon. Most of them are in the process of attempting stop the foreclosure on the home that they have using the current plan Obama has offered in giving taxpayer money to the mortgage companies. But since these idiots subscribe to the premise, "never let anything free from the government get left behind", they will definitely want one of these cars with the %7500 rebate. Now, you don't think the dealership is going to haggle anymore once they cut that discount off the top do ya? Hell no, so in effect, the couple buys the car at what would be MSRP sticker price when you add the refund from the government back to the dealer. Not that ma and pa can afford this car even with the rebate but that is secondary to the fact that they got in line to get one. It will be someone else's problem down at the bank when they realize they are upside down in the car in two years and abandon making payments on it. Then the government will have to step in and bail out the banks who have financed these loans. Of course, we'll use taxpayer dollars...the most covenient kind. What is it with the American voter that we actually have to elect idiots to come up with programs to piss away our tax dollars on programs which are based in symbolism rather than substance? In fact, as a symbol of how dedicated the Obama Administration is to this concept, let's just crush all the vehicles the government currently owns regardless of condition and replace them with the new greenies! What a great idea...let's use taxpayer dollars to buy them. Can you imagine the economic surge in the private sector! Hurrrrrrrrry! Could I get an "Amen" over here? Actually, those in government have assumed for so long that I and others like me are too stupid to realize the pitfalls of such programs. As of late, I am coincidentally feeling rather stupid that I have not noticed sooner what idiots we have in control of our goverment function. We are in serious need of some changes! WB


Minnetonka Twin profile image

Minnetonka Twin 5 years ago from Minnesota

Great hub and love how you weave your sense of humor into it. Love the picture of Obama. He looks good in green.


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 5 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

AMEN Wayne. Let us bow our heads in prayer for those that think there is indeed a free lunch. Let us pray...

MT - If I didn't have a sense of humor all this insanity would drive me totally up the wall.


Stu From VT 5 years ago

MT - He'd look better in tar and feathers. :)


Mitch Alan profile image

Mitch Alan 5 years ago from South Jersey

As always, great hub...Up-Useful-Awesome...

Maybe the headlights will be Gore-bulbs...


Stu From VT 5 years ago

Mitch,

HRH will require us to go back to whale oil, but keep whale hunting illegal.

Stu


Brenda Durham 5 years ago

No kiddin', Stu; that sounds exactly like something the Obama would do.


Stu From VT 5 years ago

Hi Brenda,

It reminds of of when the admin wanted to ban bullets because lead is a pollutant. You could still buy a gun, but ammo would be illegal. I think these guys need a good psychiatrist.

Stu

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working