No. "Worth of work" and "employment" are placeholders for any series funds transaction that is not intra-business. We already know business gets all the breaks, plus leverages ALL taxes off on the consumer in the end, since that's where ALL the money business has comes from. If I earn programming, and I employ the plumber, it goes exactly as I describe it: I get taxed, I employ the painter out of what I have left, he gets taxed, and he will, of course, only give me an amount of exchange that accounts for what ends up in his pocket, which will NOT include the money the government takes from him; but his taxes at the end of the year are on the work he does; he can't get out of them any more than I can. Double taxation.
No. Mr. Yellow has received 153.84 gross. But he, like Mr. Blue, has done only $100 worth of work, the actual amount of money he gets to keep. That's all he can do, because he isn't going to get to keep 153.84, but only $100. Anyone who does $153.84 worth of work for $100 of increase in assets will be worth negative money in a very short time indeed. Nice try, but no cigar. The POINT is that the value of money you receive is ALWAYS adjusted by any amount of it you don't get to keep and receive nothing in return for.
In order for that to work there'd need to be no sales tax also
You're not paying attention. The sales tax would be ALL there is.
I think if something like what you're proposing was ever enacted the cut off
There's no "cut off." Please reread until you understand what is being proposed:
The cost of basic living is determined, probably regionally. Everyone - EVERYONE - gets a check at the beginning of the month for the tax rate (whatever it is, I used 35% as an example only) on that basic living cost. So when you pay the sales tax on your toilet paper, it comes out of that check, meaning, you didn't pay it. That money, btw, goes to the govt, so next month, they give it back to you -- no cumulative cost there.
Now... when you, or the poor guy, or the rich guy, go to buy something above the basic cost, you have to come up with the tax on your own. So what we have here is a tax upon things purchased at that point when you have spent more than the basic cost of living.
All tax revenue comes from this flat sales tax. There is no income tax. It's ALL sales tax applied at the end-user (consumer) level for devices, materials, services AFTER basic cost of living is covered by that monthly check. I am NOT arguing that 35% is the correct number; it's just an example. Whatever the correct number is, that's the one we should end up using. And I'd be fine with that.
The benefits are HUGE. Tax collection is uniform at all retail/consumer outlets. No exemptions. No funny business. No IRS as constituted today, because there's only ONE tax rule, and you deal with it in a perfectly straightforward manner at the cash register or when the utility company bills you, etc. No huge tax hit in April, or quarterly, or whatever. The poor operate tax free up to a very reasonable line in the sand, above which they pay just like the middle class does -- which eliminates anyone who is trying to scam.
The tax rate is determined on a per-year basis, Each year covers the cost of the last year; the current year is financed by bonds, which the investors (the rich) will love to death.
Here's the problem: The rich, who currently benefit HUGELY from the hidden taxes on the poor, the double tax on the middle class, and the tax breaks THEY get, will be taxed just like everyone else for the first time. And they will really, really hate that a lot. And -- here's the kicker -- they control things. Not you or I. And that, and no other reason, is why we will never have a tax system that is fair.
If you're waiving/reimbursing taxes for those with the lowest income then it's not exactly a flat tax anymore is it?
Again, that's not what is being suggested. The basic cost of living is determined; everyone gets it back. everyone. You get to spend $X without having to worry about taxes increasing those prices. For the poor, this eliminates the tax issue. For the middle class, it *also* eliminates it and now allows sensible choices about optional spending to be made. For the rich, they get what everyone else does, so there's no "unfairness", but you know as well as I do that the rich wont' give a damn as it will be meaningless to them. The only concern the rich have here is that this structure takes the *currently* unfair double-tax off the middle class, and taxes them (the rich) just as much as the middle class. Which is why Obama and his rich cronies lie about it.
Not every mention of God in public is a breach to the wall of separation - context matters.
No - but every mention of religion BY THE GOVERNMENT in a manner that incorporates governance or inter-govermental matters is a breach in the wall of separation. The ONLY reference to religion that should EVER be made by the government is by a judge and jury in order to punish government officials for bringing it up in the first place.
If private citizens -- not government employees -- want to speak about religion, that's fine. If those citizens want to put up religious icons or statements (or anti-religious) on their own land, or the land of another agreeable private citizen, that's fine too. But when the government puts religious symbols and sayings on the walls, desks, facades, and paperwork of its own, or gives tax breaks to the religions it "approves of", or throws a bible to "swear on" in the face of anyone in a courtroom, or stamps religious platitudes on the currency the citizens have to use... those are HUGE breaches in the wall of separation, specifically "respect" paid in some religious directions and not others - PRECISELY the thing the bill of rights forbids.
The arguments posted on the "response" page are for the 100-IQ and under crowd. It's like reading the essays of 9th graders who had a really bad civics instructor the previous year.
It's high time we held the judiciary, executive and congress to the oaths they swore. That's the biggest hole in our entire system of governance: the assumption that the government would consist of people of honor who would actually understand, much less obey, an oath.
Bingo: You are a subject, not a citizen. You will do what the royals tell you. If you don't like the current royal, we'll let you replace them with one with exactly the same attitude. Move along now, before we tase you.
The fair tax contains provision for allowing the basics to go untaxed. This is why it is NOT unfair to the middle and lower classes. Not mentioning this is paramount to bald faced deception.
If you increase the concentration of CO2 in a mixture of gases like the atmosphere with infrared radiation passing through it, [the atmosphere] will warm up by capturing more of that IR. That's simple physics.
No, that's simplistic physics.
If you increase the concentration of CO2 in a mixture of gases like the atmosphere with infrared radiation passing through it it will warm up by capturing more of that IR. Because the air is warmer, it will rise higher before cooling, because warmer air is lighter than cooler air. THEN more heat radiates out into space, BOTH because the warm air is higher, and because it is warmer. ALSO, the evaporation of ground water accelerates (more heat, remember?), taking warm moisture into the atmosphere, radiating more of THAT heat to space as well, and returning greatly cooled moisture as rain as the water condenses out, thus countering the IR heating effect. This is known as a "feedback loop" and it's just one of a very large number of them involved in coming to the actual atmospheric temperature at any one location.
And you know what? That's still simplistic physics. I guarantee you three things: One, no one can describe this issue adequately in a slashdot post, and two, that scientists have not resolved exactly what is going on to a degree where there is a clear path to specific ameliorative responses on our part, and three, change is constant, as is our response to it, which may, or may not, appropriately include attempting to counter the forces that are driving whatever change is currently making itself most obvious.
What is that, like calling the individual who washes your car a "dirt mechanic"? lol
Network facing security includes far more than cleansing user inputs; you hire someone as one-dimensional as "web programmer" seems to imply, and I don't think you've much chance at any reasonable level of security. Unless I very much misunderstand what you're trying to describe with the terminology you're using, which could be the case. I've never heard of a "web programmer", and I've been at this since punch cards were all the rage.
Fine. Make it illegal for foreign interests to buy our assets, and require all purchases made in the US to be made with US dollars; make it illegal to buy products made outside the US. Close the borders and mean it. Protectionism doesn't have to be limited to tariffs.
My point stands: We have enough workers, resources, and well enough understood needs that we can build an economy that is independent of other countries -- and this would happen automatically and smoothly if we simply close off trade. We have everything we need.
The problem here is fundamental: We can't compete on labor prices if trade is open. There is no clear, "obviously will work" solution other than closing trade. And if we don't solve the problem, our economy is going to go the rest of the way down the slope and we will be destroyed. I would submit that adding yet additional complexity to open trade doesn't work; our ruined industrial capacity stands as mute evidence.
some of the poor fucks we've hired didn't know how to work w SQL parameters
If a real programmer was hired whose experience didn't include this, tell 'em to look over the version of SQL you're using and they'll know them well enough -- and where to look for details -- ten minutes later. No programmer knows every language right off the hook, and SQL itself isn't exactly groundbreaking, so there's no reason to pay any attention to it (and the DB concepts that support and depend upon it) at all until you have DB work to deal with. Real programmers actually do have a thing or two of "other" nature to deal with in their careers, ya know.:P I might not have known SQL at one point, but on the other hand, I could tell you every 6809 instruction, addressing mode, the timings, the condition code consequences of the instruction, how every interrupt worked... that's what you needed to know for real programming in the environment I was working in. It's all relative. Also, I know SQL now -- but I've had 40 years to run into the various dark corners of programming.
We need to get more power to the 20-30 somethings of the world
Good luck getting them off of facebook and twitter, prying them away from their cellphones, or extricating them from their XBoxes and Playstations. When they read, they type "tl;dr" for anything longer than a few sentences, most of them couldn't get through a book if their life depended on it, and they can't focus on a video or news report that doesn't cut to a new scene every 10 seconds. In the meantime, their children are being babysat by the television. The women dress like men, and the men dress like shit. They have no savings, their life is defined by massive debt, and they have basically zero comprehension of what's going on around them and is happening to them. That generation has well and truly destroyed its value -- to itself and to everyone else.
Oh, they'll appreciate it... as they serve your meaty parts up for dinner and breed your women.:)
When the urban types come storming over the hill with their hats on backwards and their pants hanging down around their asses, it'll take just a few bullets fired from already established cover at *really* long range per person to solve the problem. In fact, if it were me doing the shooting, it'd only take one. The short barreled weapons favored by the urban won't do them a bit of good when an expertly directed high velocity round from a long barreled weapon comes ripping in from ranges the short barrels are useless for. Bullets are inexpensive, and it's *really* important not to let the local resources be overwhelmed or trampled. You work out where that leaves the value of a life in such a diaspora.
Seriously, if the city residents ever decide to mass exit to the country, only the women -- and only the most desirable ones at that -- will be left standing. And when that's over, we'll go into the cities and take your stuff.
If the poo hits the blades, city living is *really* the wrong choice.
No, that's not the only way. Another (just as one example) is to apply a tariff to goods that enter the USA. If it costs, on average, $100 to import item A from a foreign manufacturer, but $150 to purchase that item from the manufacturer in the USA, then add $50 cost at import time, bingo, the playing field is leveled, and the tariffs from any imports can go towards education, social programs, or space stations -- whatever. In the meantime, we have companies of our own who are working on televisions and steel manufacture and cars again, and both pay scales and benefits are in the rage that *our* society wants them to be, instead of "cup of rice and if you're good, no beatings." Repeat as required all across the import spectrum.
Consequences? One is that export markets do the same to us (add tariffs to our goods.) So what? We have nothing to sell them anyway at this point, and we have *plenty* or market right here. The USA has enormous material resources, huge labor reserves... and *terrible* trade policy. Seems to me the answer is the above. China can do the same, and likewise, they have lots of resources, lots of people, etc... they'll be fine. Another is that cost of goods here will escalate. Again, so what? Does every kid *really* need a cellphone? Does every person *really* need an iPod? Do we *really* have to upgrade our computers every year or two?
Ok, well, for your future reference, "astrology" should only be used in conjunction with laughter, derision, and scorn, or outright sympathy in cases when the user is a victim instead of a malefactor. You cannot predict the course of mundane human events by the positions of the stars and planets -- end of story.
Yeah, but you only have such experiences when you're under pressure. You're better off with the vapors, trust me. It'll be a gas. And not like those experiences with the free radicals, either.
You said, and I quote: "astrology related physics".
astrology is a form of deception that uses the positions of the stars and planets relative to the observer (earth, more or less) to pretend to predict future outcomes of such things as romance, finance, etc.
astronomy is that segment of science that generally deals with those things outside (mostly well outside) earth's atmosphere, that is, using the best methods we know how to use, we think that such and such a star is about this far away, is about this old, that nebula is the result of such and such an event, some of the physics of that black hole are theorized to be, etc.
Your use of astrology -- instead of astronomy -- is notable in your post. I was hoping it was a slip you'd see and laugh about. The fact that you didn't see it after I pointed it out kind of makes me squint a bit. Did you troll me? If so, hats off to you, sir, well done. If not... oy.
What most people don't realize about the Tesla is that it is built on a very small chassis. While it is certainly a high performance vehicle, it isn't even as practical as a present-day Camaro or Mustang. When you look at one in person, you get the impression of a slightly over-sized go-cart.
The elephant in the room here is tax. A petrol driven vehicle's per-mile costs are FAR more expensive than just the fuel itself accounts for, because significant road taxes are integral to the price of the fuel. When they add road taxes to the cost of the charge that goes into an electric car, you'll find that the savings you thought you had have been deeply invaded. And you can be sure they will indeed add those taxes. Roads have to be paid for, and if you're not buying petrol... they're not going to let you get out of paying for the roads. Once that happens, there's going to a lot less difference in terms of dollar economy between the two types of vehicles.
I'm still all for electrics, because in the end, they *will* use less fuel (big generators are much more efficient than small ones, IC or otherwise) and we need that, and also because the vehicles become fuel-agnostic; nuclear, coal, whatever. Electrons are all that matter to the car, so we can change the underlying infrastructure at our convenience, which is an awesome benefit. So are independent all-wheel drive, huge torque, lower noise, better operating temp ranges, etc.
What we really need here are good ultracaps. And that still looks to be a few years out. They're improving, but it sure is a gentle curve. Still, when (if) they get near battery performance in terms of energy per space measure and (to a lesser extent) weight per energy measure, that'll change a whole lotta things for the better, from iPods to 18-wheelers and right on up to ocean going ships and spacecraft.
Slashdot Mirror
If you think so, explain how I am wrong. Evidence-free claims are worthless claims.
No. "Worth of work" and "employment" are placeholders for any series funds transaction that is not intra-business. We already know business gets all the breaks, plus leverages ALL taxes off on the consumer in the end, since that's where ALL the money business has comes from. If I earn programming, and I employ the plumber, it goes exactly as I describe it: I get taxed, I employ the painter out of what I have left, he gets taxed, and he will, of course, only give me an amount of exchange that accounts for what ends up in his pocket, which will NOT include the money the government takes from him; but his taxes at the end of the year are on the work he does; he can't get out of them any more than I can. Double taxation.
No. Mr. Yellow has received 153.84 gross. But he, like Mr. Blue, has done only $100 worth of work, the actual amount of money he gets to keep. That's all he can do, because he isn't going to get to keep 153.84, but only $100. Anyone who does $153.84 worth of work for $100 of increase in assets will be worth negative money in a very short time indeed. Nice try, but no cigar. The POINT is that the value of money you receive is ALWAYS adjusted by any amount of it you don't get to keep and receive nothing in return for.
You're not paying attention. The sales tax would be ALL there is.
There's no "cut off." Please reread until you understand what is being proposed:
The cost of basic living is determined, probably regionally. Everyone - EVERYONE - gets a check at the beginning of the month for the tax rate (whatever it is, I used 35% as an example only) on that basic living cost. So when you pay the sales tax on your toilet paper, it comes out of that check, meaning, you didn't pay it. That money, btw, goes to the govt, so next month, they give it back to you -- no cumulative cost there.
Now... when you, or the poor guy, or the rich guy, go to buy something above the basic cost, you have to come up with the tax on your own. So what we have here is a tax upon things purchased at that point when you have spent more than the basic cost of living.
All tax revenue comes from this flat sales tax. There is no income tax. It's ALL sales tax applied at the end-user (consumer) level for devices, materials, services AFTER basic cost of living is covered by that monthly check. I am NOT arguing that 35% is the correct number; it's just an example. Whatever the correct number is, that's the one we should end up using. And I'd be fine with that.
The benefits are HUGE. Tax collection is uniform at all retail/consumer outlets. No exemptions. No funny business. No IRS as constituted today, because there's only ONE tax rule, and you deal with it in a perfectly straightforward manner at the cash register or when the utility company bills you, etc. No huge tax hit in April, or quarterly, or whatever. The poor operate tax free up to a very reasonable line in the sand, above which they pay just like the middle class does -- which eliminates anyone who is trying to scam.
The tax rate is determined on a per-year basis, Each year covers the cost of the last year; the current year is financed by bonds, which the investors (the rich) will love to death.
Here's the problem: The rich, who currently benefit HUGELY from the hidden taxes on the poor, the double tax on the middle class, and the tax breaks THEY get, will be taxed just like everyone else for the first time. And they will really, really hate that a lot. And -- here's the kicker -- they control things. Not you or I. And that, and no other reason, is why we will never have a tax system that is fair.
Again, that's not what is being suggested. The basic cost of living is determined; everyone gets it back. everyone. You get to spend $X without having to worry about taxes increasing those prices. For the poor, this eliminates the tax issue. For the middle class, it *also* eliminates it and now allows sensible choices about optional spending to be made. For the rich, they get what everyone else does, so there's no "unfairness", but you know as well as I do that the rich wont' give a damn as it will be meaningless to them. The only concern the rich have here is that this structure takes the *currently* unfair double-tax off the middle class, and taxes them (the rich) just as much as the middle class. Which is why Obama and his rich cronies lie about it.
From the response:
No - but every mention of religion BY THE GOVERNMENT in a manner that incorporates governance or inter-govermental matters is a breach in the wall of separation. The ONLY reference to religion that should EVER be made by the government is by a judge and jury in order to punish government officials for bringing it up in the first place.
If private citizens -- not government employees -- want to speak about religion, that's fine. If those citizens want to put up religious icons or statements (or anti-religious) on their own land, or the land of another agreeable private citizen, that's fine too. But when the government puts religious symbols and sayings on the walls, desks, facades, and paperwork of its own, or gives tax breaks to the religions it "approves of", or throws a bible to "swear on" in the face of anyone in a courtroom, or stamps religious platitudes on the currency the citizens have to use... those are HUGE breaches in the wall of separation, specifically "respect" paid in some religious directions and not others - PRECISELY the thing the bill of rights forbids.
The arguments posted on the "response" page are for the 100-IQ and under crowd. It's like reading the essays of 9th graders who had a really bad civics instructor the previous year.
It's high time we held the judiciary, executive and congress to the oaths they swore. That's the biggest hole in our entire system of governance: the assumption that the government would consist of people of honor who would actually understand, much less obey, an oath.
Bingo: You are a subject, not a citizen. You will do what the royals tell you. If you don't like the current royal, we'll let you replace them with one with exactly the same attitude. Move along now, before we tase you.
The fair tax contains provision for allowing the basics to go untaxed. This is why it is NOT unfair to the middle and lower classes. Not mentioning this is paramount to bald faced deception.
Current tax mechanism in a nutshell
Why the current tax system is hopelessly regressive
Why a/the fair tax is FAIR
No, that's simplistic physics.
If you increase the concentration of CO2 in a mixture of gases like the atmosphere with infrared radiation passing through it it will warm up by capturing more of that IR. Because the air is warmer, it will rise higher before cooling, because warmer air is lighter than cooler air. THEN more heat radiates out into space, BOTH because the warm air is higher, and because it is warmer. ALSO, the evaporation of ground water accelerates (more heat, remember?), taking warm moisture into the atmosphere, radiating more of THAT heat to space as well, and returning greatly cooled moisture as rain as the water condenses out, thus countering the IR heating effect. This is known as a "feedback loop" and it's just one of a very large number of them involved in coming to the actual atmospheric temperature at any one location.
And you know what? That's still simplistic physics. I guarantee you three things: One, no one can describe this issue adequately in a slashdot post, and two, that scientists have not resolved exactly what is going on to a degree where there is a clear path to specific ameliorative responses on our part, and three, change is constant, as is our response to it, which may, or may not, appropriately include attempting to counter the forces that are driving whatever change is currently making itself most obvious.
"web programmer"?
What is that, like calling the individual who washes your car a "dirt mechanic"? lol
Network facing security includes far more than cleansing user inputs; you hire someone as one-dimensional as "web programmer" seems to imply, and I don't think you've much chance at any reasonable level of security. Unless I very much misunderstand what you're trying to describe with the terminology you're using, which could be the case. I've never heard of a "web programmer", and I've been at this since punch cards were all the rage.
Fine. Make it illegal for foreign interests to buy our assets, and require all purchases made in the US to be made with US dollars; make it illegal to buy products made outside the US. Close the borders and mean it. Protectionism doesn't have to be limited to tariffs.
My point stands: We have enough workers, resources, and well enough understood needs that we can build an economy that is independent of other countries -- and this would happen automatically and smoothly if we simply close off trade.
We have everything we need.
The problem here is fundamental: We can't compete on labor prices if trade is open. There is no clear, "obviously will work" solution other than closing trade. And if we don't solve the problem, our economy is going to go the rest of the way down the slope and we will be destroyed. I would submit that adding yet additional complexity to open trade doesn't work; our ruined industrial capacity stands as mute evidence.
Oh, look, a "-1, disagree" mod (or perhaps it was a "-1, moderator has brain tumor" mod) How cute.
Have I mentioned lately that Slasdot moderation needs to be accountable? Thanks, I'll be here all day. Try the veal.
If a real programmer was hired whose experience didn't include this, tell 'em to look over the version of SQL you're using and they'll know them well enough -- and where to look for details -- ten minutes later. No programmer knows every language right off the hook, and SQL itself isn't exactly groundbreaking, so there's no reason to pay any attention to it (and the DB concepts that support and depend upon it) at all until you have DB work to deal with. Real programmers actually do have a thing or two of "other" nature to deal with in their careers, ya know. :P I might not have known SQL at one point, but on the other hand, I could tell you every 6809 instruction, addressing mode, the timings, the condition code consequences of the instruction, how every interrupt worked... that's what you needed to know for real programming in the environment I was working in. It's all relative. Also, I know SQL now -- but I've had 40 years to run into the various dark corners of programming.
Don't be too hard on m. parent; their life is obviously chaos.
There's a live copy of MSDOS visicalc on that site; I grabbed it, ran it (under XP) -- awesome nostalgia. Thanks!
Good luck getting them off of facebook and twitter, prying them away from their cellphones, or extricating them from their XBoxes and Playstations. When they read, they type "tl;dr" for anything longer than a few sentences, most of them couldn't get through a book if their life depended on it, and they can't focus on a video or news report that doesn't cut to a new scene every 10 seconds. In the meantime, their children are being babysat by the television. The women dress like men, and the men dress like shit. They have no savings, their life is defined by massive debt, and they have basically zero comprehension of what's going on around them and is happening to them. That generation has well and truly destroyed its value -- to itself and to everyone else.
I know, I know... "tl;dr"
Oh, they'll appreciate it... as they serve your meaty parts up for dinner and breed your women. :)
When the urban types come storming over the hill with their hats on backwards and their pants hanging down around their asses, it'll take just a few bullets fired from already established cover at *really* long range per person to solve the problem. In fact, if it were me doing the shooting, it'd only take one. The short barreled weapons favored by the urban won't do them a bit of good when an expertly directed high velocity round from a long barreled weapon comes ripping in from ranges the short barrels are useless for. Bullets are inexpensive, and it's *really* important not to let the local resources be overwhelmed or trampled. You work out where that leaves the value of a life in such a diaspora.
Seriously, if the city residents ever decide to mass exit to the country, only the women -- and only the most desirable ones at that -- will be left standing. And when that's over, we'll go into the cities and take your stuff.
If the poo hits the blades, city living is *really* the wrong choice.
No, that's not the only way. Another (just as one example) is to apply a tariff to goods that enter the USA. If it costs, on average, $100 to import item A from a foreign manufacturer, but $150 to purchase that item from the manufacturer in the USA, then add $50 cost at import time, bingo, the playing field is leveled, and the tariffs from any imports can go towards education, social programs, or space stations -- whatever. In the meantime, we have companies of our own who are working on televisions and steel manufacture and cars again, and both pay scales and benefits are in the rage that *our* society wants them to be, instead of "cup of rice and if you're good, no beatings." Repeat as required all across the import spectrum.
Consequences? One is that export markets do the same to us (add tariffs to our goods.) So what? We have nothing to sell them anyway at this point, and we have *plenty* or market right here. The USA has enormous material resources, huge labor reserves... and *terrible* trade policy. Seems to me the answer is the above. China can do the same, and likewise, they have lots of resources, lots of people, etc... they'll be fine. Another is that cost of goods here will escalate. Again, so what? Does every kid *really* need a cellphone? Does every person *really* need an iPod? Do we *really* have to upgrade our computers every year or two?
Ok, well, for your future reference, "astrology" should only be used in conjunction with laughter, derision, and scorn, or outright sympathy in cases when the user is a victim instead of a malefactor. You cannot predict the course of mundane human events by the positions of the stars and planets -- end of story.
Yeah, but you only have such experiences when you're under pressure. You're better off with the vapors, trust me. It'll be a gas. And not like those experiences with the free radicals, either.
You said, and I quote: "astrology related physics".
astrology is a form of deception that uses the positions of the stars and planets relative to the observer (earth, more or less) to pretend to predict future outcomes of such things as romance, finance, etc.
astronomy is that segment of science that generally deals with those things outside (mostly well outside) earth's atmosphere, that is, using the best methods we know how to use, we think that such and such a star is about this far away, is about this old, that nebula is the result of such and such an event, some of the physics of that black hole are theorized to be, etc.
Your use of astrology -- instead of astronomy -- is notable in your post. I was hoping it was a slip you'd see and laugh about. The fact that you didn't see it after I pointed it out kind of makes me squint a bit. Did you troll me? If so, hats off to you, sir, well done. If not... oy.
Dear sir:
I regret to inform you that your credibility card has been revoked.
signed,
lolz
Clod fusion? What's that, where you rub a Hatfield against a McCoy and get heat?
What most people don't realize about the Tesla is that it is built on a very small chassis. While it is certainly a high performance vehicle, it isn't even as practical as a present-day Camaro or Mustang. When you look at one in person, you get the impression of a slightly over-sized go-cart.
The elephant in the room here is tax. A petrol driven vehicle's per-mile costs are FAR more expensive than just the fuel itself accounts for, because significant road taxes are integral to the price of the fuel. When they add road taxes to the cost of the charge that goes into an electric car, you'll find that the savings you thought you had have been deeply invaded. And you can be sure they will indeed add those taxes. Roads have to be paid for, and if you're not buying petrol... they're not going to let you get out of paying for the roads. Once that happens, there's going to a lot less difference in terms of dollar economy between the two types of vehicles.
I'm still all for electrics, because in the end, they *will* use less fuel (big generators are much more efficient than small ones, IC or otherwise) and we need that, and also because the vehicles become fuel-agnostic; nuclear, coal, whatever. Electrons are all that matter to the car, so we can change the underlying infrastructure at our convenience, which is an awesome benefit. So are independent all-wheel drive, huge torque, lower noise, better operating temp ranges, etc.
What we really need here are good ultracaps. And that still looks to be a few years out. They're improving, but it sure is a gentle curve. Still, when (if) they get near battery performance in terms of energy per space measure and (to a lesser extent) weight per energy measure, that'll change a whole lotta things for the better, from iPods to 18-wheelers and right on up to ocean going ships and spacecraft.