Interview with Mary Barra

[Mr70]

Charley reminds me of that one dead pixel I can never get to work.

[Tenney]

MicroCyber ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QZ9...ature=youtu.be

[70 copo]

Insider has further commentary:

Says that GM has basically modeled its future around the ideas found in this article from back in 2018:

https://www.greencarcongress.com/201...20-hayden.html

And I went back to read the mission statement from GM and sure enough here is the statement:

"At General Motors, we are in the midst of a company transformation to win in our core automotive business and the future of personal mobility. Our vision is to create a world with Zero Crashes, Zero Emissions and Zero Congestion. The latest step in this journey is the development of our all-new battery electric vehicle architecture, which will pave the way for General Motors’ all-electric future".

Here: https://www.gm.com/our-stories/techn...ic-future.html

[Lee Stewart]

GM unveils 10 future EVs, new batteries and its plan to beat Tesla

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/comp...cid=spartandhp

[70 copo]

Originally Posted by Lee Stewart

GM unveils 10 future EVs, new batteries and its plan to beat Tesla

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/comp...cid=spartandhp

Right now I am a bit creeped out.

The GM insider decided to comment on today's events:

https://www.generalmotors.green/prod...r/0304-ev.html

"The recent Fox Business interview was a complete disaster for the company...many Dealers are up in arms telling GM "Stop you are going to put us out of business" especially dealers outside urban areas".

"Your commentary on the EPA in the other thread hits close to home on many issues but let me red pill you here":

"It is not about the environment but that is the presentation being used, It is about the money, all about the money"

"Gas taxes are tough to raise currently, too many political rear ends in the fire and you are messing with the oil companies and the lobbyists that represent them, so know this big oil wants you to drive your car because that is how they make money and that money gets returned politically.

So why EV's? The money to be gained through taxation is just huge. You will be taxed by the mile. Think of every road as being a toll road. That is the end game here and there is a curve here through adaptation that is anticipated to do the following in this order:

First as more people buy EV's Gas taxes will need to necessarily rise to the point where you will be taxed right out of your ICE car. You will be able to keep it but you will pay so much for fuel EV's will become cheaper to operate.

After EV's are mainstreamed then the combination of tax to operate and the infrastructure and convenience limitations will cause most drivers to actually reduce travel. At this stage autonomous vehicles are projected to take hold with the market causing your car of choice to be a rental,- Meaning you no longer own it you call it for a ride. This all happens in a future projected to have effective urban mass transit for those who need to commute with many teleworking from home.

So here is the take away-GM is chasing a future where you do not own a car, and you do not actually drive one either. It is fully automated and it will take you where you can afford to pay to go.

In other words a futuristic Johnny cab. They do not care about you because you want to drive. If things go to plan GM will not have a product you want to buy - they know that".

[JKZ27]

This has been a topic of interest for me because I work a the dealer.

[jdv69z]

Originally Posted by 70 copo

Right now I am a bit creeped out.

The GM insider decided to comment on today's events:

https://www.generalmotors.green/prod...r/0304-ev.html

"The recent Fox Business interview was a complete disaster for the company...many Dealers are up in arms telling GM "Stop you are going to put us out of business" especially dealers outside urban areas".

"Your commentary on the EPA in the other thread hits close to home on many issues but let me red pill you here":

"It is not about the environment but that is the presentation being used, It is about the money, all about the money"

"Gas taxes are tough to raise currently, too many political rear ends in the fire and you are messing with the oil companies and the lobbyists that represent them, so know this big oil wants you to drive your car because that is how they make money and that money gets returned politically.

So why EV's? The money to be gained through taxation is just huge. You will be taxed by the mile. Think of every road as being a toll road. That is the end game here and there is a curve here through adaptation that is anticipated to do the following in this order:

First as more people buy EV's Gas taxes will need to necessarily rise to the point where you will be taxed right out of your ICE car. You will be able to keep it but you will pay so much for fuel EV's will become cheaper to operate.

After EV's are mainstreamed then the combination of tax to operate and the infrastructure and convenience limitations will cause most drivers to actually reduce travel. At this stage autonomous vehicles are projected to take hold with the market causing your car of choice to be a rental,- Meaning you no longer own it you call it for a ride. This all happens in a future projected to have effective urban mass transit for those who need to commute with many teleworking from home.

So here is the take away-GM is chasing a future where you do not own a car, and you do not actually drive one either. It is fully automated and it will take you where you can afford to pay to go.

In other words a futuristic Johnny cab. They do not care about you because you want to drive. If things go to plan GM will not have a product you want to buy - they know that".

So who gets hurt the most here? The poor who do not have the means to adapt to these changes. Meanwhile politicians spew rhetoric about how they "care" for the poor. The saddest part of all is that too many believe the rhetoric.

[70 copo]

Originally Posted by jdv69z

So who gets hurt the most here? The poor who do not have the means to adapt to these changes. Meanwhile politicians spew rhetoric about how they "care" for the poor. The saddest part of all is that too many believe the rhetoric.

Socialism and its policies has little impact on the wealthy
and the poor.

The middle of the society always carries the cost because they work, and pay the majority of the taxes.

[Lee Stewart]

[Charley Lillard]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/04/busin...Rn5vOMWodpWOAg