GM offers buyouts to all U.S. workers

**Phaedrus** · 02-13-2008, 08:27 AM

On the subject of electric vehicles: One of the hazards of electric vehicles is the deadly and explosive gas which builds up as the batteries go through their charging cycle. (lead-acid). With Ni-Cads, you are always running the hazard of deep cycling, and as long as you don't have a problem with your car spontaneously combusting, that shouldn't be a problem.

Other battery technologies may be more promising, but it doesn't take much to make your own electric vehicle, though I would recommend using a pickup, to provide a place to put all those batteries, that allows the hydrogen gas to dissipate.

West County Journal | Life & Style | Engineer goes electric for short trips

Clicky linky for more information.

**CTAClone** · 02-13-2008, 10:44 AM

Originally Posted by bandit

You are talking about business owners, I'm talking about CEO's.
The gentlemen I talk about didn't invent the widget, and he's not the owner, he's the CEO. The business owners are the shareholders left holding the bag (often employees that purchased stock) when yet another CEO takes his/her golden parachute and leaves after running the company straight into the ground (see also: Enron, World Com.) If I were a shareholder in GM (which I am not) and I watched this guy pull down $10 Millon while steering toward record losses year after year I'd be getting a new manager and not handing him a few million more for leaving.

As for business owners: I completely agree with you. If you created an idea/item and put in the hours to make it work you are entitled to rake in the dough-the reason I don't mind Bill Gates. This is America and we are a capitalist society. If you are the one that started the company. My family started a small business in eastern Iowa and I personally know how much work goes into it. If you have the stones to start a company I wish you the best of luck. It's tough as hell and the world can seem to be against you-yet small busines is what really drives this country.

I also lay just about as much blame for GM's debacle at the feet of the Union and their greed-they have long out lived their usefullness.

Best of luck to you if you take the plunge into your own business

True, I agree. With most companies the CEO is also the owner or founder, except when you are talking about fortune 500 companies like GM, Enron, World Com etc. etc. That being said, I was sticking up for most CEO's out there, because a majority of them deserve what they are making while the minority makes all of them look bad.

**cyismydog** · 02-13-2008, 10:46 AM

I was watching the news, and a lot of the workers are not going to take the buy out offer. They like their jobs, and they don't want to quit.

**jdoggivjc** · 02-13-2008, 10:50 AM

Originally Posted by cyismydog

I was watching the news, and a lot of the workers are not going to take the buy out offer. They like their jobs, and they don't want to quit.

I think these quotes by the employees should be saved and posted all over the walls of the factory the next time they threaten to go on strike...

**CYKOFAN** · 02-13-2008, 11:26 AM

Phaedrus-Hundreds of people used the GM electric vehicle for several years before the discontinued production, and do you really think if there had been a battery explosion, it wouldn't have been reported? I'm not questioning your statement that there is a hazard, I really don't know, but look at all the hazards from the use of gasoline. Some people have been killed and many people burned from static electricity explosions while people just fill up their tank. Many others killed and maimed from gasoline explosions after car accidents. As far as disposing of the batteries after their use, I would think they could be recycled, but I don't know. I do know one thing, their disposal would have to be safer and less potentially damaging than getting rid of spent nuclear fuel rods, which not only are deadly for 10,000 years, but attractive to terrorists.

**Phaedrus** · 02-13-2008, 11:35 AM

But wouldn't promoting electric vehicles INCREASE the amount of spent nuclear fuel rods? Unless, of course, you're talking about burning coal or damming up more rivers. I mean, the additional demand has to be met somehow????

I guess there's always those ridiculous windfarms and hideously expensive solar panels....

**CTAClone** · 02-13-2008, 11:46 AM

Originally Posted by CYKOFAN

I do know one thing, their disposal would have to be safer and less potentially damaging than getting rid of spent nuclear fuel rods, which not only are deadly for 10,000 years, but attractive to terrorists.

Just so everyone is clear. Spent fuel rods can not create nuclear bombs. It is not weapons grade material. However, they can create dirty bombs, which isn't that dangerous. The explosion itself of a dirty bomb is much more dangerous than the radioactive material. A dirty bomb just makes for a more costly clean up. So to say that terrorists are after spent fuel rods may be true, but the effort to get them and the resulting harm they can cause with them isn't worth the effort. It's much easier to send a suicide bomber, which would cause almost as much damage as a dirty bomb.

**CYKOFAN** · 02-13-2008, 11:49 AM

You may think windfarms are ridiculous, but I guarantee you that utility companies don't. Do you think windmills on farms are rediculous, because they have been around for hundreds of years? And just like everything else that's new, the cost of wind turbines and solar panels will come down as more money is poured into research and demand increases. It all depends on the country's priorities, and whether the new prez is Clinton, Obama, or McCain, a lot of the taxpayer money that goes to the oil industry will be funneled into clean energy technology. Like I said before, everybody comes out a winner that way except the oil companies, Hugo Chavez, and middle east terrorists. It also should lessen Russian influence as they have the largest oil reserves that remain in the world.

**CYKOFAN** · 02-13-2008, 11:55 AM

CTAClone-I know spent fuel rods can't create nuclear bombs, but my understanding is that a dirty bomb can create much bigger problems than your average car bomb. If that's not the case, somebody needs to tell the terrorists, because our government tells us how much the terrorists would like to get their hands on the material to make a dirty bomb. Is our government blowing the danger out of proportion to scare us?

**ISU4ME** · 02-13-2008, 11:57 AM

Originally Posted by ISUFan22

Cheaper labor = "cheaper" (aka less quality) cars?

I would have to say no. Honda, Nissan and Toyotoa all have cheaper labor and better longer lasting products than GM.

**jdoggivjc** · 02-13-2008, 12:00 PM

Originally Posted by CYKOFAN

You may think windfarms are ridiculous, but I guarantee you that utility companies don't. Do you think windmills on farms are rediculous, because they have been around for hundreds of years? And just like everything else that's new, the cost of wind turbines and solar panels will come down as more money is poured into research and demand increases. It all depends on the country's priorities, and whether the new prez is Clinton, Obama, or McCain, a lot of the taxpayer money that goes to the oil industry will be funneled into clean energy technology. Like I said before, everybody comes out a winner that way except the oil companies, Hugo Chavez, and middle east terrorists. It also should lessen Russian influence as they have the largest oil reserves that remain in the world.

As good an idea as it is to supplement our energy alternatives with solar and wind power, the simple truth is by themselves they're never going to be the main option. I saw something on TV sometime about how if you truly wanted to make solar the main energy source of the US you would basically have to cover the entire states of Arizona, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado with solar panels. A similar amount of wind turbines would be necessary if wind was the option. As great as they are in supplementing the energy in this nation, neither can be the answer by themselves. This is why I do support alternate energy research, not because I believe in global warming nor because nuclear power is unsafe but because no one option we currently have is the the entire solution for the energy problem in the US. Who knows - with research we may run across yet another more efficient energy source. More options is never a bad thing.

**CTAClone** · 02-13-2008, 12:11 PM

Originally Posted by CYKOFAN

CTAClone-I know spent fuel rods can't create nuclear bombs, but my understanding is that a dirty bomb can create much bigger problems than your average car bomb. If that's not the case, somebody needs to tell the terrorists, because our government tells us how much the terrorists would like to get their hands on the material to make a dirty bomb. Is our government blowing the danger out of proportion to scare us?

I think the government is trying to scare us. Read a report done by the Nuclear Regulatory Commision below.

NRC: Fact Sheet on Dirty Bombs

**Phaedrus** · 02-13-2008, 12:44 PM

Yep, the .gov is trying to scare us.

As far as wind generation is concerned, it's actually a pretty neat deal for the DIY kind of person to make a homemade one. It's just that windfarms can't be the main source of electrical energy due to the sheer scale of demand.

Nuke is the way to go, as far as I'm concerned.

And before you get the wrong idea about me, I'm one "green"/frugal dude. I actually have a jeep at home that I plan on converting to electric some day. (The USPS used to have a fleet of electric jeeps.) But in the realm of current reality, the small-engined mid-sized car is the way to go, economics and practicality-wise.

**cybsball20** · 02-13-2008, 12:45 PM

Why is Greg McDermott buying out employees?

**cmoneyr** · 02-13-2008, 03:44 PM

Is our government blowing the danger out of proportion to scare us?

How dare you even think such a thing. Using fear to keep an entire nation of people in check? Preposterous. Next you'll tell me there going to create an elaborate terrorism meter, maybe even color code it.

Why is Greg McDermott buying out employees?

Someone tried that joke a couple pages ago, we ignored it then too.