Slashdot Mirror
Chinese Firm Wins Bid For US-Backed Battery Maker
theodp writes "On September 13, 2010, President Obama called A123 Systems from the Oval Office to congratulate them on opening the nation's first manufacturing facility to mass-produce electric vehicle batteries, which the White House noted was made possible by a $249 million Recovery Act grant the company received the prior August. 'When folks lift up their hoods on the cars of the future,' the President said, 'I want them to see engines and batteries that are stamped: Made in America. And that's what you guys are helping to make happen.' But on Saturday, the assets of A123 Systems were auctioned off to the Wanxiang Group, a large Chinese auto parts maker. Wanxiang agreed to pay $256 million for A123's automotive and commercial operations, including its three factories in the United States. Forbes reports that A123's stock, which closed at 7 cents a share on Friday, is now worthless."
But it still sucks.
Free market my ass. This is corporatism. Allow the corporation to do what they want at all costs. There is no reason that the government should NOT be allowed to designate that funds it spends benefits its citizens over other people. EVERY OTHER country in the world does this.
Let the nitpicking and the corporate hothead flaming begin below....
There isn't a free market on the global level. There pretty much isn't a legal free market in the US. You can keep cawing on about the free market but it doesn't make it true.
This is the free market in action. Would you rather the White House block the sale?
I'd rather the White House not give them $250M in taxpayer money in the first place. How exactly was that free market in action?
The Recovery and Investment Act was supposed to stimulate America's economy, not go to further prop up a regime with numerous humans rights violations. The last thing we need is more traffic because of these cheap batteries blowing up on the interstate.
It gets kinda embarrassing when nerds reinforce their own negative stereotypes to proclaim that anything that might actually relevant they're not interested in.
I love Firefly and Game of Thrones as much as the next nerd, but we're not helping our self image by throwing a temper tantrum every time "real" news shows up in the feed.
"People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
all the IP will go to the Chinese.
At least this time we got them to pay for it.
If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
I'd like to say this is speculative investment, and I'd also rather my governmenet not use tax dollars to engage in such speculative investment at all.
But it is, in fact, crony capitalism, or worse, pure fraud.
No, wait, it's just fraud. We are being robbed.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
In a free market, a failing company would fail. In this case, the government took $249 million in tax dollars and gave it away. This is not the free market.
Love sees no species.
The united states of fail giving away their incomptetenly mismanaged and dearly needed money to their future masters. Why keep it partisan when it's your whole nation sinking?
A123 had actual contracts to put batteries in cars and had actual products. Does this mean that electric car batteries are not expensive enough? This is pitiful.
Sorry, but gray text on gray background is making my eyes bleed.
As of 2012 $129 million of the grant was used to build plants in Michigan (Romulus and Livonia); the remaining grant money has not been tapped (the grant was extended to 2014, but with the company in bankruptcy...) Originally Johnson Controls was going to buy (and use) the plants; it is still unknown if the plants will be used, but speculation is that at least one of the plants will be used. Note that the grants were backed by all of the Michigan members of Congress, despite the party. All of them wrote letters of endorsement to the DOE. The loan program that issued the grants was created in fall of 2008. The loan program predates Obama's presidency; the company applied in January and Obama because president January 2009. Please don't make this a partisan thread. This is what looked like a promising company that had a market in 2009 and needed to build manufacturing capacity - and the market disappeared (Chrysler closing its EV division was the major hit)
Where were A123's "campaign contributions"? Where were the elected representatives busy pulling strings to shield A123 from failure? Where's the legislation to protect them to the detriment of everyone else? Couldn't Obama have started a war and provided some demand for batteries? Democrats have a boner for Hollywood and little else. You want to survive changes of administration? Okay, have all of the following under your business plan:
Oil, corn and military hardware (republicans)
Movies, music and homosexual weddings (democrats)
Gold, guns and assorted supplies for running personal armies and outfitting strongholds (Ron Paul)
That's your Obamanation! I hope you enjoy another four years of it.
I have to admit that I'm irritated that as a US taxpayer my pocket was picked to redistribute $250 million to a company now owned by China.
Because that is not how they play this game.
Look at how they dumped solar cells as a great example.
If we add that A123 is the sole provider of batteries for the Fisker Karma, would you start to care? That A123 is a provider of MW-scale batteries to AES Corp, for use in windfarm smoothing and grid services?
I would have preferred that the government not gotten in the business of payouts to its campaign contributors, but elections have consequences. Usually corrupt consequences, but what can you do.
When nation security interests are involved, yes. Take the time to read the article.
Tell that to Exxon Mobile
This is the free market in action. Would you rather the White House block the sale?
I'd rather the White House not give them $250M in taxpayer money in the first place. How exactly was that free market in action?
To go even further with that point, it's not the free market in action any more, as they already ruined that. Free market means if your management is all idiots and your manufacturing process sucks and your expenses are out of control and your downline is basically only 2 customers, you will fail. With $250 mil dropped in your lap, free market "survival of the fittest" goes away but all those problems don't go away. It just means you fail later, with more money because your company still sucks. Yes, that kind of grant accelerates what would take 10 years to build up but it has no way of knowing if the company would have succeeded, given enough time.
That statement is foolish, at best. This is not the "free market". US industry has been under attack for a couple of decades now, and this is just another footnote in the grand globalization scheme.
I would suspect, though I haven't looked for proof, that the Chinese government may have been involved. A small subsidy maybe, to enable the Chinese company to bid a bit higher than they might have been able to?
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
The Republican politicians who voted for the energy policy act of 2007 were for sale. And like any good investment, they paid off, leaving somebody else to hold the bill.
Lets take a look at the Senate roll call on the bill that actually gave them this money, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009:
Democrats - 55 yeas - 0 nays
Republicans - 3 yeas - 38 nays
Independents - 2 yeas - 0 nays (one is an "Independent Democrat")
Now lets take a look at the House roll call on this bill:
Democrats - 244 yeas - 11 nays
Republicans - 0 yeas - 177 nays
Yet again the Democrats blame the Republicans for what the Democrats did all by themselves.
"His name was James Damore."
The investment, made with it without an expectation of reimbursement, was nonetheless an investment. I assume it was made with the expectation of a successful venture, jobs and tax revenue, and development of a domestic battery manufacturer.
the failure began the question of whether there was a reasonable chance of success.
I expect my government to have such an expectation, but the market is a harsh place, and companies do fail.
I would prefer we do it differently.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
You never know, this might be part of the trend in manufacturing returning to US soil; with ultra-cheap material from China sailed in through the great lakes, they can slap the stuff together with the help of minimum wage machine operators, keep the "Made in USA" label, and stick them in $100,000 cars with the profit sailing back to China (and probably some fresh water out of the lake while they are at it).
Free market advocates will be filling this thread with more vitriol about how it always backfires when the government picks winners or losers, but the Chinese will basically be the only source of battery technology in a future where everything relies on electricity... Are you OK with the free market picking the US as the loser?
Public money is best spent on things private companies can't/won't do.
The best long term thing Government can do to help the country is finance research and education that form the building blocks for new companies. By comparison there are boat loads of investment dollars floating around in the private sector, the Government has no special way of knowing who the winners will be over private investors and the dollars are less needed there anyway. Financing companies is much riskier always, I guess I can see floating a loan to an established company in a crisis, but that is about it.
Republicans and, worse yet, Democrats both have become overly hypnotized with the power of "Private Enterprise". But people who run private companies are still just people. Better for Government to refocus on what is does well and assure plentiful funding for that. So if you really want to help produce electric cars, put out money for research at Universities and have open contracts for US manufacturers to sell the Government electric cars.
Xerox Parc were famous for innovating like hell, but being completely unable to monetize that innovation. Other people took their inventions and ran with them.
The USA is doing this on a national level. America innovates -- China, buys or steals the IP, then destroys American business, and yet people whine about the lack of 'pure' free markets, as if the beggar-thy-neighbour, merchantilist Chinese are doing everything they can to destroy Western business.
Time for people, especially the free market idealists to pull their heads out of their arses, and realise that the crypto-fascist Chinese Communist Party is waging a long, generational war against the West, and are hell bent on world domination.
When competing with the Chinese, all options must be on the table. If that means we're not simon-sure free-marketers, so what? If the government puts up seed money to kick-start American national champions and the bet turns sour, so what?
Ideological purity will get us nowhere at the end of the day. Only winning matters. Time to grow some balls, and learn how to fight as dirty as the Red Chinese.
How can you be robbed of something you gave away?
Because in the constitution it said *nothing* about giving grants to US-based high tech battery manufacturers... therefore it is illegal for the federal government to do so (according to him). Pretty simple, really.
I'd like to say this is speculative investment,
No it wasn't. It was a grant , not a loan, not an investment. That means the government just gave them the money with no requirement or expectation that it would be paid back.
Yes, but I'd like to think the gov't doesn't just give away money for the hell of it.
'When folks lift up their hoods on the cars of the future,' the President said, 'I want them to see engines and batteries that are stamped: Made in America. And that's what you guys are helping to make happen.'
That sounds like an expectation to me.
We are being robbed.
How can you be robbed of something you gave away?
Because I didn't give it away. Some group of assholes did. Most of whom I did not vote for.
all the IP will go to the Chinese.
At least this time we got them to pay for it.
But who receives payment of the auction proceeds? I'm guessing it won't be the people who put up the $249 recovery funds.
The company that accepted the grant had to sell itself. Without reading further, this tells me: the company took the grant, spent all of it, and never produced a sustainable USA made product. Basically, the now previous owners took the money and ran. They were a little smarter than other people who have tried since they managed to sell off the company before declaring bankruptcy.
It gets kinda embarrassing when nerds reinforce their own negative stereotypes to proclaim that anything that might actually relevant they're not interested in.
I love Firefly and Game of Thrones as much as the next nerd, but we're not helping our self image by throwing a temper tantrum every time "real" news shows up in the feed.
The A123 story has been beaten to death though; this whole story should be modded flamebait since Slashdot editors know full well that the ensuing discussion will be a firestorm of politically motivated bickering that will stretch for 500+ posts (and generate a heap of ad impressions). Sure, for experienced users it's easy to ignore this kind of rabbit hole and never enter the discussion to begin with, but what kind of message are we sending out when the site's most active stories are all political ones? "Real" news would be some breakthrough (or letdown) on a line of battery r&d, or how a company is starting or stopping. This story is barely an addendum to their obituary (already over-covered on slashdot) and it will still get way more attention than a story about Linux or arduinos or other "properly" geeky pursuits.
Lets take a look at the Senate roll call on the bill that actually gave them this money, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009:
Wrong funding. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Technology_Vehicles_Manufacturing_Loan_Program (passed in fall of 2008) which was part of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Independence_and_Security_Act_of_2007 Have a wonderful day. (If you had read my post, you would have caught the "program from 2008" and realized you had the wrong funding. )
Free markets are largely fictitious. They can only be maintained through heavy government intervention *cough* anti trust laws *cough* and require strong public infrastructure and an educated population. In short, there is not and never has been a "free market" except that which has been fostered and tended by a government relatively free of corruption. Without this government oversight, a "free market" quickly gets taken over by privately held monopolies that are then leveraged against other markets. The market then degrades into a highly capitalized form of fascism, as is happening now in the USA.
For example, even the USA at its height had much of its "private enterprise" industrial strength funded by public entities. here is an excellent example, makes for a fascinating read.
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
Nice misdirection, picking the wrong act.
:. Ultimate Control Dedicated/VM Servers
This is not the free market.
First and foremost, what do you think a free market is?
Second, we haven't had *free markets for over 100 years and we don't want free markets.
Competitive markets are where the real growth is found and the only way to get competition is to restrain the worst impulses of the free market.
Third, this is what we have: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed_economy
It's better than a completely free market.
*For all definitions of "free"
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
It depends on what other creditors have a claim to their assets, but yes, the money from liquidation actually should at least in part go back to the government... though it looks like a big part of their debt is actually to the company buying them, so that increases the chances that other creditors will get paid.
Such competition is backed by the Chinese Government. If we want our companies to be able to compete, we need to have our own government actually support young industries, not just old embedded ones.
So using tax dollars to lower the price of your products to drive competitors out of business is competition?
So what is your bar for cheating?
Bzzt wrong.
Mod this idiot down please. The funding act he refers to is the wrong one.
It's a relatively free market here in the US. There is no such thing in China. There is no way a foreign company could buy a bankrupt company in China. They don't even let you do business there without a lot of concession which may involve allowing a Chinese competitor to make your product for their local market while you're allowed to export your shit out of the country. There's also the recent clamp down on export of some raw materials (rare earths) in order to bring their own manufacturers up to speed (Look at the price of NdFeB magnets over the last couple years). Also, the government over there is funding a lot of companies - this one may be partially state owned - I don't recall. Then there's the (lack of) regulatory environment over there which further tilts the playing field. So while it's a free market over here, it's anything but free over there. They view our openness with large grins.
If you view money as wealth you're an idiot. Warren Buffet views ones wealth as how much of the physical and economic world one "owns" - in that light the Chinese are gradually buying America with it's own money, while we have a bunch of dip-shits walking around saying "free market". Nothing good can come of this.
This is the free market in action. Would you rather the White House block the sale?
Of course not. That would be Socialism. And everyone knows that Socialism is just another name for Communism and Communism is Evil and we shouldn't allow Communists to infiltrate our red-blooded 'Merican business!
Yes in this case it looks like the Solindra $500M and the A123 $250M could have gone to paying down a fraction of our national debt at least. Small fraction, but it's a start.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Free market in technology means no money coming in for a year, 2 years or more while you develop it.
It means you invest $250 mill of somebody else's money, get even more money if it looks like it's working, and finally get a working salable product years down the road. With the understanding that most investments fail.
That's how Genentech did it. They got substantial government investments. Their original basic research was done under National Science Foundation and National Institutes of Health grants. And now their biggest customer is Medicare.
Thousands of other biotechnology companies (also founded with basic research paid by the government) failed.
The government invests lots of money to keep this free market working. Take the airplane. The Wright brothers succeeded because they got the government to invest in them. The aircraft industry was built on government money (and regulation).
Intel succeeded because they had government (military) contracts. The whole fucking silicon valley was built on military contracts. The military still drives technology. And spends the most money. How many $250 million failed projects did Halliburton and the other government contractors build in Afghanistan and Iraq?
This free market model disappears pretty quickly when you look at the actual history of technology. Most major developments were built on public-private cooperation. Oh, that's right, we're not allowed to major in history any more because history majors can't pay back their student loans.
Why couldn't they waste it on more drug prosecutions and prisons like the Republicans?
No, you're wrong. Government grants are grants--you get money. Private equity funding is loans (you owe money) or significantly smaller. Big ass grants, when managed properly, are the hand and the will of God for just about any business.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
There was an engineering professor in California named Terman who taught his students that they shouldn't just study the technology, they should also look at how to start a business, and keep their eyes out for opportunities.
Two of his students were Hewlett and Packard.
China is not playing chess, they are playing GO (wei chi in Chinese). They have the entire playing field in view and it's huge - both the real world and the board game in the analogy. In chess you have straight forward tactics and what amounts to simple strategies to achieve relatively short term goals - like isolate a pawn or pin down a piece (the king for a win). With GO the game is literally about controlling territory - vast regions or lots of small ones, it doesn't matter - quantity is the only thing that matters. It's a game of world domination.
Is that their goal? I don't know, it's just a better way to play the game.
Citation? I suspect that those numbers are very susceptible to how you do the counting. Does one guy spending his life savings on an idea count as private equity? What is the metric for success?
"Because Science" is one step from "Because old book". Try "Because of my experiment testing my falsifiable assertion".
Well according to the government websites that are linked to in the summary (energy.gov and whitehouse.gov) he got the correct act. Can you provide a link that shows that the government is lying about the law that authorized the funding in question?
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
That is the act cited in both of the links to government websites in the summary. Do you have a source to back up your claim that the White House is lying about what Act authorized the money given to A123 Systems?
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Corporatism
We would have saved USA farms, removed the ethanol subsidy, and had a home grown supply for the Colorado and Washington legalization demand. And we could have reduced the money spent imprisoning pot smokers, and dealt a serious blow to Mexico cartel gangs. Only one problem... we wouldn't have needed $250M in taxpayer funding, they could have accomplished all this success just by executive order, removing marijuana from DEA lists, legalizing it, taxing it, etc.
I don't smoke marijuana (or haven't in decades), but am tired of the prohibition insanity. Maybe the free market capitalists and the capitalism-skeptics on /. can find something here to agree on.
Gently reply
What goes around... comes around. Let the Chinese and the Chinese government do all the R&D to stay competitive in the market and after they've suck billions into it, then let's reverse engineer it and make it here on the cheap.
Works both ways.
I am really horribly surprised that this isn't mentioned more.
Just 4 months ago Wanxiang offered $450M for 80% of A123. Now Wanxiang got it for $260M. A123 lost it's creditors quite a large chunk of money and now Wanxiang gets control of A123 debt free.
http://insideevs.com/wanxiang-takes-control-of-a123-again-as-it-wins-bankruptcy-auction/
A123 has been horribly mismanaged from the start. People have been clamoring for their cells for years - but they wouldn't sell to anyone but OEMs - so many people took to disassembling packs from drills or more recently buying them off the grey market (eBay).
Their batteries are very good, but they have been plagued by bad business decisions and some bad luck (like the big batch of defective cells they sold to Fiskar costing $55M to replace).
I would have rather seen A123 tech been bought by JCI rather than Wanxiang - I can only hope that they are able to sort out A123s problems and finally get their product to market successfully.
You should really read further. Less than half the money was spent, and their sustainable product's sole client pulled out after demanding highly-specialized retooling, rendering their product line worthless without another infusion of cash. The owners have decided to cut their losses and have been in bankruptcy for some time now -- the sale is pending bankruptcy court approval. Outstanding creditors will be repaid out of the $256M sale price, but the US taxpayers (who provided a grant), and the stockholders (who have no recourse), will be left empty-handed. The owners are very likely personally out a very large sum of money, as outstanding creditors will soak up all of the liquid assets, including US grant money, once the sale is complete.
On the upside, as stated, at least taxpayers are not out the entire tab.
You should be more irritated that a handful of US citizens in the form of soon-to-be-paid creditors will absorb every penny of that as part of the bankruptcy proceedings, following the $256M sale. And those creditors are not stockholders, who will be left empty-handed.
China didn't get a $250M check from the US government -- a group of nameless American creditors did.
And rightly so! Why should the owners of a failed company get to keep cash if there are still debts left unpaid?
No one has a right to their *own* opinion. They have a right to the TRUTH.
You're right; I read http://www.a123systems.com/567491e6-ed98-429f-b4a6-3ae3df789b90/media-room-2009-press-releases-detail.htm wrong. That's what I was basing it on.
I think you forgot that the Democrats have controlled the Senate from Jan 2007-Present, and the House from Jan 2007-2010. They were in control of the committees and budgets during the financial collapse of 2008, and steered all of the "bailout" money. Technically everything leading up, causing, and continuing the recession was approved by the Democrats.
But, the public is apparently ok with all of the spending. They voted for it, and re-elected the same people, so what can you do.
Because I didn't give it away. Some group of assholes did. Most of whom I did not vote for.
If it's any consolation, more than half of your fellow countrymen (based on voter participation) are OK with that "group of assholes".
If you look around and everyone else is an asshole, what does that suggest......
No, not really. Considering that somewhere around half of the population pays no taxes at all. I'm pretty much in the middle of middle class and do pay taxes. My wife has MS and cannot work, but I make enough that we don't feel it's right for her to apply for disability, even though she qualifies. If I look around and everyone else is looking for a handout and I'm not, does this make me an asshole? And no, I don't feel any animosity toward those that do either. However I do direct my ire toward the politicians that have been spending MY money (for the past 12 years especially). They are the true assholes IMO.
It doesn't quite work that way. If all the Congresspersons were voted "at large" it would be true, but they aren't.
Wanxiang has submitted the highest bid, but it has not been approved by the bankruptcy courts. There are a number of senators who are trying to have the buyout blocked because of A123's relationship with the Dept. of Defense. So while it's looking like our tech is heading East, it's not a forgone conclusion.
http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20121209/AUTO01/212090327/1148/rss25
I say that because they "dumped" product on the market at what should have been a loss to remove competition.
Post as something other that "Anonymous Coward" or shut up.
Damn right. It's not really corporate welfare, because that implies you KEEP the corporation propped up. It's straight out cronyism and a deliberate policy of raping your own taxpayers and transferring wealth overseas.
Americans should not have any bars when it comes to face a COMMUNIST country.
Hmmm... remind me what would you call the "bailout" that saved some American banks? Or the GM one?
Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
The history of this IP block suggests it was created to prevent the advent of the electric car.
remind me what would you call the "bailout" that saved some American banks
Graft and corruption
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
Because I didn't give it away. Some group of assholes did. Most of whom I did not vote for.
If it's any consolation, more than half of your fellow countrymen (based on voter participation) are OK with that "group of assholes".
If you look around and everyone else is an asshole, what does that suggest......
That the country formerly known as the US is now officially Upper Mexico? And more than half full of assholes.
No, not really. Considering that somewhere around half of the population pays no taxes at all.
The above statement is simply false. The article that you quote says as much, pointing out that not paying income tax is not the same as not paying any taxes. People with low income pay SS and Medicare taxes, state and local taxes, personal property tax, and sales tax. The total tax burden on low income people is substantial.
The reason that low income people do not pay federal income tax is that they are making so little money, and when you add in exemptions, credits, deductions, etc, they are not supposed to pay anything. Retired people, veterans, handicapped people with MS, students, unemployed people don't make enough to justify any taxes as they are written. We can argue about whether those exemptions, deductions, and credits are justifiable. A better idea would be to make sure that they make enough that taxes are justified.
The more people I meet, the better I like my dog.
If you look around and everyone else is an asshole, what does that suggest......
That suggests I'm standing on a battlefield. There is half on one side and half on the other. We'll see how this century ends up.
I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
People with low income pay SS and Medicare taxes, state and local taxes, personal property tax, and sales tax.
And that makes it right?
I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
First and foremost, what do you think a free market is?
"Market" - A set of rules governing trade. Property law being the most fundamental rule, without that there is no trading.
"Free" - Anyone can play. For example the alcohol market in the US is restricted to people over 21.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
No, not really. Considering that somewhere around half of the population pays no taxes at all.
The above statement is simply false. The article that you quote says as much, pointing out that not paying income tax is not the same as not paying any taxes. People with low income pay SS and Medicare taxes, state and local taxes, personal property tax, and sales tax. The total tax burden on low income people is substantial.
The reason that low income people do not pay federal income tax is that they are making so little money, and when you add in exemptions, credits, deductions, etc, they are not supposed to pay anything. Retired people, veterans, handicapped people with MS, students, unemployed people don't make enough to justify any taxes as they are written. We can argue about whether those exemptions, deductions, and credits are justifiable. A better idea would be to make sure that they make enough that taxes are justified.
Sorry, I should have been clearer. Since the funding came from federal tax revenue, I meant that half does not pay federal taxes. I haven't done my own taxes for many years, so I don't know how deductions at the state and local levels are these days. But I thought the deductions you filed on your federal taxes also lowered your state taxes. In my state they also passed a law that retirees and wounded veterans do not pay property taxes.
You also forgot to mention that many of these people are able to collect food stamps, WIC checks, have fixed utility bills, and many other assistance programs. There are also five states with no sales tax. When I lived in Pennsylvania there was not sales tax on necessities either (clothing, soap, etc.)
I couldn't agree more with your last sentence. Why we have a system set up to make people dependent on it is truly baffling. Wouldn't it make more sense to make these programs short term and use more money to get people educated or trained in a vocation?
My father used to work for a program that helped "trouble" kids. He also donated a lot of his time and personal money to helping their families. Many were on programs that gave them fixed payments for electricity, water and other utilities. They would only have to pay $25/ month for unlimited electricity. So they'd run the heat with the windows open all winter long. Any time he would help these kids get jobs, the parent(s) would force them to quite as it would affect their income. I think he really lived for the 1 out of 20 that would actually pull themselves out of the system.
First:
I don't want my government run according to your parenting philosophy.
It sounds like a bad parody of a Monty Python skit.
You seem to be saying that the GOP feels that spin, sarcasm, misleading statements, and lack of trust, etc., are the way to govern/run a country?
NO, THANK YOU!
Second:
Your parenting style sucks donkey bollocks.
Seek therapy/counseling ASAP, for your kid's sake.
How do you expect your kids to become 'rational beings' with your example for them to follow.
I feel sorry for your kids, and all that will have to interact with your kids in the future.
Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
Would you say that Interstate Highways are communist? Maybe they are, but they are essential to the competitiveness of the US economy. Some people have never been on a highway in their entire life, but their taxes were still used to build these highways.
Agreed. But allow me to restate: to certain problems, the appropriate solutions. And let the ideology aside
Again, I'm not saying that bailing out banks was good or bad. I'm saying that it wasn't an easy decision to take, and that it was done for a reason. Saying it's communism does not help much in the debate.
Do you feel you know well the problems in China? Are you absolutely sure that what their are doing now is springing from an ideology?
Because if not, why tag China as communist (as the post I was replying did)? How would this help the debate?
Some notes: /sq.km.
* China - population 1,347,350,000, population density: 141
* US - population: 314,931,000, population density: 34/sq km
The above consideration alone would make one think that maybe, just maybe, the Chinese society is pushed into favoring cooperation as a successful survival behavior and thus stays away from the individualism so characteristic to nowadays US. What the Americans calls "cheating", the Chinese may call "sharing" (you know? One of the values parents used to teach the kids a while back. Are they still teaching it now?)
How does adopting an ideologically rooted terminology helps one understand and deal with the actual realities in China?
Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
I'd say they have to repay the grant, but we owe China so much money anyway, call it a payment.
Chewbacon
The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
(Reliable) citation, or you just made these numbers up. And that doesn't mean a link to some blog that made the numbers up themselves, either. It means a link to an irrefutable source.
When the official source of this information is the government itself, on the official websites which tracks this stuff, which never leaves out any of its voting.. it makes you look like an idiot for not automatically going there where you should have known to go.
Senate Vote
House Vote
Now here is an idea.. instead of pretending to be smart by asking for a citation.. prove that you are smart by actually watching what the government is actually doing through the most authoritative channel possible.. the public one that has never once editorialize.. never once given an opinion.. the one you apparently didnt fucking know about proving that you are just a sheep.
"His name was James Damore."
Where I went to school, you found out which one was correct, and then used the correct one.
"His name was James Damore."
just tax the hell out of them. Believe it or not people aren't just going to leave this country. At least not if we don't send our Military to help them when they get in a bind in a foreign country. If they want to go home that's fine, but they don't get to take the ball. It's ours.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
It's not green energy that's the problem - it's tax dollars going to subsidize any industry. If your product is not cost effective, government money is not going to change that.
+1 Disagree
Technically everything leading up, causing, and continuing the recession was approved by the Democrats.
Not to nitpick too terribly much, but the recession was in the works well before 2007. Republicans blame Democrats, Democrats blame Republicans, and everybody believes they're right and the other guy is wrong because we can't handle the thought that we might have had a part to play.
+1 Disagree
Trolling for page views. Slanted political pieces are possibly even better than Apple/Samsung/Google/Microsoft hit pieces. Just as biased and uninformed (from the headline down to the -1 comments) but reach out to a broader base.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
A123 is the new Acme...