why don't we give one trillion dollars to chevy and ford to make battery powered cars so they recover and lead?

then we can be the best car makers and the cleanest the world has ever seen !

Update:

john , idk, i just wanna see a damn recovery.

13 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    I do not use gasoline. My sailboat had a diesel motor in it, I took it out and replaced it with an electric bench grinder.

    I have a Rutland 913 wind generator, (2) 1000w Photowatt solar panels,

    (10) 92ah AGM batteries, (1)1200w inverter, a charge controller.

    My boat has 1 mainsail, (1) 150 genoa, (1) working jib.

    I use electric motor to get in and out of port, and sails the rest of the way.

    I have a 8' dinghy that is powered by a dual head minn-kota elec. trolling motor for trips ashore.

    My wind and solar setup powers all systems aboard while anchored out or at sea.

    I can motor on windless days for 10 hours with sun, 6 hours without sun.

    I am building a 3 passenger car with a similar setup.

    In first few runs, I was able to drive 60 mph for 5 hours with 3 people in vehicle , 8 hours with just me driving before needing a charge.

    My hybrid vehicle uses 4 Scuba tanks for compressed air turbines, and electric motor independent wheel drive.

    I am about 2 months and $50k away from going public.

    I have been writing and volunteering with Obama campaign since April 2007, and I am hoping to hear from his "car Tsar" soon.

    I have over 30 years experience being a geek with stuff like this, I have built alternative energy homes in remote Montana locations that use solar and wind and passive solar for energy.

    I have advertised in Mother Earth News and have sold several designs to mail-order customers since 1994.

    I agree with you about the clean cars, and a trillion dollars would definitely re-tool all 3 car companies, but is that what American's want?

    My experience with American drivers is that they like to drive fast and rev engines loud and waste fuel to demonstrate how pwerful "they" are because of the big-block engines. Americans love to drive big SUVs at least 75mph on the highways, and my best efforts can only do 60mph.

    My car does not make a throaty macho sound at stoplights, and I do not have over-sized tires and gun rack on my utility truck.

    It is almost impossible to hear my car when it drives by you on a highway, and I do not have a model that towers over other cars.

    If I do spend the next 2 months working on perfecting my car, will anyone in a red state buy one?

    Source(s): Specs for SV REPLICA NC 8377 BA
    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    I hate to bring up what has become an old issue, but American consumers have a lot to say about who succeeds in the auto industry. We didn't buy enough of our own products. We bought too many foreign cars and other foreign made goods. We kind of gave our trillion dollars away to foreign manufacturers. They built nice cars that were good on gas, and Americans bought them by the millions.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    I'd give them grants for them to do so ... not a trillion dollars tho. But grants, like they did in France for the best plane in the world, the airbus A380. It was mainly financed by the government at first and created tons of high quality jobs in the private sector

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    its a great idea but our country is in enough trouble as it is. the real question is why dont ford, chevy, and gmc all merge? because they have tripple the researchers and that will make a faster idea on switching our country from oil to water or even wind power. they can share designs and make everything much smoother...

    Source(s): fox news
    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    Now that's a swell idea. I don't know about give though. How about loan ? Better yet; if they had a great business plan and model: I bet they could survive in a capitol ism society....oooops; except the management part - which seems to be lost on large corporations.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Realistically speaking: they got bailed out in the 90's and mismanaged---they had nothing but losses--but went on as usually---so from that perspective I can understand the reluctance to bail them out again---on the other hand---2.5 million jobs are at stake if we do not help them---so I would say that we should give them the money---and control what they produce from here on......

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    No, because that would not put money in the UAW's pockets which is the REAL reason for Pelosi's charade.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    does that mean each taxpayer then gets stock options? maybe then

    but that'd probably be barked about as being "socialist" - wherein I guess "not socialist" means we just hand over money to big business that holds us all hostage with their failures

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • John V
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago

    Wouldn't that be illegal according to the free trade arrangements we made?

    Edit: I'm not saying it is a bad idea, just that it is not legal

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    What? obama would be impeached than murdered if he allowed this to happen. we can't just throw around a trillion dollars.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.