Comments on: On “This Week,” Paul Krugman Dispatches 3 Wingnut Talking Points on Auto Industry in 2 Minutes

By: MarkH

MarkH — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 05:23:04 +0000

Although slightly different there are also government subsidies (one might call them artificial externalities) for things like oil production. If those government actions didn’t exist then the risks of oil drilling would be greater and there would perhaps be more cost borne by the investors and a higher end cost to the public and more return to the investors. But, the way our system works with the hidden subsidy from government these investors get tax write-offs, oil wells get drilled and the price of oil stays lower (I suppose) and the investors get lower Return On Investment (ROI).

But, those socialists like this government interventionist system more than a free market. They don’t like risks. they prefer to socialize the risks (getting the subsidy) instead of going for bigger ROI. I’m told the industry would disappear without those subsidies. How can that be in a capitalist system like ours where the potential for profits will always bring investors to the table?

Try to take away their government handout, their wealth-fare, and they cry like babies.

The costs to taxpayers is the cost of the government taxation, the cost of government operations and to the tax system while we supposedly get lower oil (and gasoline) costs.

Whether we actually do get lower gasoline prices is entirely debatable. But, what isn’t debatable is that these subsidies make it much harder for other energy-source companies to get going and to compete with oil on a level playing field.

By: SadButTrue

SadButTrue — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 05:05:40 +0000

George Will’s take on conservative doctrine is that the government should never interfere with someone’s right to profligate behavior even when that behavior may harm those around you. Odd that it doesn’t extend to non-harmful behaviors like smoking pot or gay marriage.

And KenoshaKid@26 - OMFG, that is just so frickin’ wrong. And here I was naively thinking that people hauling their lard-butts around in mobile air-conditioned living rooms complete with surround sound entertainment systems was just plain old conspicuous consumption.

By: TheKenoshaKid

TheKenoshaKid — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 00:50:55 +0000

I didn’t see it, so I can only hope Krugman brought this up:

Thanks to a generous tax credit, Karl Wizinsky is driving a very large vehicle these days — a 2002 Ford Excursion.

“It doesn’t hurt to have a larger vehicle, but I wouldn’t say it’s a requirement of my business,” he said on a cell phone while driving the Excursion. “But I ended up saving $32,000.”

This year, the perks of buying a large SUV — if you’re a small business owner — got even bigger.

Congress recently passed a tax bill, as proposed in President Bush’s economic stimulus plan, that offers a $100,000 tax credit for business owners who purchase any vehicle weighing 6,000 pounds or more when fully loaded.

It hasn’t exactly been a free market when it comes to cars. Federal policy favored big cars. Now it favors small cars.

By: mamazboy

mamazboy — Sun, 31 May 2009 22:50:41 +0000

Gwen is as stupid as George (Will), I’m afraid. The whole punditocracy is second-rate and has far too much power in determining these narratives. Though with people with logical minds and (gasp) empathy like Paul Krugman being allowed into the discussion, maybe that will change.

By: rwcole

rwcole — Sun, 31 May 2009 22:49:42 +0000

Well toyota makes the Lexus sedan- one of the largest and best testing cars in the world. Not bad. Their large SUVs also have pretty good market share and they finally have winner with the large pickup truck

We should all fail so well

By: citizensue

citizensue — Sun, 31 May 2009 21:26:33 +0000

IMHO the whole big car fiasco was propelled by a kind of mutually assured destruction mindset. The big heavy cars were streaming onto the highways and everyone thought that they had to get a tank to be certain that if they were in an accident they would not be wiped out. If the prevailing model was a lighter national fleet of cars, everyone would feel safer buying and driving smaller, greener vehicles.

By: Hannibal

Hannibal — Sun, 31 May 2009 20:55:42 +0000

To be fair, Toyota and Nissan have both tried their hand at large vehicles, and failed repeatedly. But they still try.

By: damagedone

damagedone — Sun, 31 May 2009 20:36:37 +0000

Krugman also shoots down – inflation is inevitable result of stimulus plan in NYTimes op ed. But that might be at odds with the next article above on FDL?

By: BroadwayCarl

BroadwayCarl — Sun, 31 May 2009 20:29:24 +0000

If the “big car” agrument was a valid one, then Toyota, Honda and Nissan wouldn’t have done so well while the Big Three went down the tubes. Horrible argument and soooo transparent.

By: bobh

bobh — Sun, 31 May 2009 20:23:04 +0000

Why is the sententious, wet blanket George Will, a man way past his sell-by date, the gatekeeper for discussion on this program?

Clement-Greenberg of ABC is much more conservative than I had thought; really just a Republican corporate flack.

At a time when only 1 in 5 Americans will admit to Republicanism, ABC has 3 conservatives and 2 liberals. Just what country is DC the capital of?