Ask the Mexican government, since they're Mexicans. Maybe it's because they're not in Mexico? A more relevant question would be why haven't we deported them yet since we've known for years they are ILLEGAL. As long as certain state governments continue to ignore and circumvent Federal Immigration laws they should lose ALL federal funding of any kind for anything. I'm tired of carrying them financially when their debt is self-inflicted through treasonous arrogance.
That's retarded thinking. Break our laws and receive amnesty AND $$$$$$! I pay state income tax, so I guess you'd be for giving me amnesty if I murder someone.
That's a 5-year-old article. And it's very misleading, but in hindsight demonstrates the horrific economic consequences of enabling illegal aliens. While illegal aliens can buy homes here (ostensibly as a vacation home), they cannot legally reside in them as permanent residents. During the housing loan-fraud boom they simply lied about their illlegal staus and mortgage brokers turned a blind eye. But now they would have to prove they were permanent legal US residents, or pay cash. Most of those homes have been foreclosed on by now, and illegals will find it nearly impossible to buy a home here now that financing regulations and enforcement have revisited saneness. The states with the highest rate of illegal aliens are the same states hit hardest with foreclosures. States devoid of illegals fared the best through the housing crash. No lender in this day and age is going to give money to a border-hopper who's entire life is based on lies and deceit. The only loan they might get would be for a vacation home if they apply as a foreigner.
No, they would be deported and Americans would have jobs rather than being on unemployment. And Mexico would have the benefit of their labor and tax contributions and they could afford to fight the cartels and make it a nice place to live. Everything about illegal aliens from Mexico ultimately damages both countries economically, socially, and morally.
I read it too - it was based on NY's really high KW/h prices and the harsh winters that limit the range. If you actually look at the national average price of electricity and compare the volt to cars of the same size (which do not get 50MPG), especially in places with better weather - the price difference is much higher in favor of the electric cars. Of course, if you are going to look at cars that get 40MPG or 50MPG - you should really look at smaller more economical electric vehicles like the Nissan Leaf or the Mitsubishi MiEV. Add the fact that the internal-combustion engine is basically a 19th century technology while electric engines for transportation uses are pretty much at a very early stage of development - and it is pretty clear that you are going to see much bigger advances in the electric vehicles once they reach critical mass. Add the fact that moving to an electric grid infrastructure removes the dependence on foreign oil, electricity can be created using natural resources, coal (where we have more than a century of untapped reserves) - and might actually lead the US to invest again in much cheaper Nuclear power-plants - and it is pretty clear that electricity is the wave of the future when it comes to transportation uses. You are either going to keep sticking your head in the sand and cluck your tongue hoping it will not happen - or realize that it's better to do it when you have a chance to be a leader and not find yourself playing catch-up. Actually, the average American drives 33.4 Miles per day - which is going to be covered by the Volt in many places, only in really harsh conditions the car will not be able to cover this range. Again - if you go to the smaller, more efficient cars like the Leaf/MiEV - you are certainly going to do most of your driving on electric charge.
As if gasoline is not subsidized by the government in the form of "police action" in the middle east... Apples to apples - every time a soccer mom drives her gasoline car - it is government subsidized as well. Might as well use this subsidy for projects that happen in this country than in Katar or Yemen...
Since illegal aliens comprise the largest group of illiterates in our nation, simply deporting them and spending the same amount to educate legal, English-speaking citizens would put us in the #1 spot worldwide for most highly-skilled best educated workforce. Wasting our scarce money educating Mexico's citizens instead of our own will only downgrade our workforce. If you want a bushel of perfectly ripened apples you don't pick up the rotten ones lying under the tree.
True, but it will be 20 years before an all-electric car has the 1-charge range needed to sell widely. By then electricity will be so scarce it will be nearly unaffordable to most people.
Re: Re: How low will California fall? There is actually a demand for gas. Electrics demand are imaginary. X
After playing a role in running California into the ground is this the end of Arnold's political career?
But the technology and the infrastructure was not good enough to be used, for transportation purposes. It is today... I love IC engines - but they are a dead-end when you look at issues such as global demand/supply of the energy source and reliance on foreign sources.
We may not have enough power plants to generate electricity for electric (only) cars if we were to put millions of them on the road in a short time. California imports about 1/3 of its electricity, and 1/3 of the power plants in the state are 40+ years old. Too bad we blew about $4T (if you include TARP, stimulus, and fed easing) in the past two years or we could have used the money to build some nuclear power plants. Something I would have supported. GM's electric car is enormously expensive and only attainable by people with upper middle class due to govt. subsidy. As near as I can tell, the Prius is superior technology and will use incrementally more gasoline than the Volt. I've not looked at the major auto companies' other electric cars (Nissan Leaf, for one), so I can't speak to those. Tessla Motors makes $100K and $50K priced models that get 300 miles to a charge. They actually look like reasonable alternatives to gasoline powered cars. Too bad Daimler and Toyota are the major auto makers with the clue to invest in the company. GM probably should have bought the company a few years ago. Anyhow, you can't get rid of gasoline powered vehicles completely, and probably not reaully as close as you'd like. You can't haul fruits and vegetables from California to Chicago (way more than 300 miles) in some sort of electric semi truck. A 300 mile range isn't sufficient for a lot of people who spend a good chunk of their lives in their car/truck (travelling salespeople, repairmen, etc.).
^^^So if you amortize the cost of building new power plants across all the electric cars sold, plus the subsidies, it's a pretty huge money loser.
I am not stupid enough to think it will be in a short time. It is going to take a long time to do it. The Prius is a much more complicated design - as it uses two drive-trains and combines them, the Volt should be simpler as the gasoline engine should not be providing power directly to the wheels, just to recharge the batteries. Early designs are always expensive - but they are a required step... Of course not, the right tool for the right job - but for the vast majority of Americans that do not drive over 40 miles a day - a gasoline IC engine is a dead-end.
Why do we need to amortize the cost across electric cars sold? It's not as if the current California electric grid is working at a real surplus with no real growth projected even without electric cars. All I am saying is that moving the investment in the sand dunes of the middle-east to guard oil-fields to investment in infrastructure and jobs in the US for electric grid and the like - seems like a good idea... unless you are Saudi royalty, that is...
Last I heard Nevada and the South-western states are sort of a part of the same country. Sure, California imports electricity from them - but it sure is better than importing oil from foreign countries helping (indirectly via commodity prices) the coffers of Venezuela and the middle-east, no?
The prius costs $25,000 without subsidies and requires no new infrastructure. FWIW, I ride a bicycle to and from work every day.
Yeah, but California doesn't produce what it needs and it would need a LOT more if there were a million electric cars plugged in every night. Only 1/2 of oil is converted to gasoline, the rest is mostly used to make electricity (and heat homes and make plastics, etc.). Get rid of the oil burning plants (nuclear!) and you save as much as if every car were electric.
