$2,000,000/Job
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 1998
Posts: 1,719
Likes: 1
From: Blue Ridge Mountains, GA
$2,000,000/Job
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 1998
Posts: 1,719
Likes: 1
From: Blue Ridge Mountains, GA
Please read the article in the link posted.
Trending Topics
Technical Article Contributor
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 10,511
Likes: 10
From: Under the flightpath of old ORD 22R
Between 2009 and 2013, the Department of Energy expects battery costs to drop by half as 20 Recovery Act-funded factories begin to achieve economies of scale. By the end of 2013, a comparable 100 mile range battery is expected to cost only $16,000.
By the end of 2015, Recovery Act investments should help lower the cost of some electric car batteries by nearly 70 percent to $10,000.
If the cost reduction is correct, to break even on the govt $ 1.2B investment, saving 20K per battery, means the there has to be 60,000 batteries built and sold for the same $ 33K number, just to break even on the govt side of the funding ( the 1.2B in funding is 1:1 with the private capitol ), so double this to break even on the corp side, is 120,000 batteries that are anticipated to cost 10K, but still sold for $ 33K, to break even by 2015, if the estimates in economy of scale are correct from the DOE. This means the cost of the volt would not go down 1 cent.
The DOE propaganda put out on the ARRP act of 2009 talks about cost savings, but does not specify this savings would be passed on to the consumer, how the $ 7.5K each Volt sold is being funded, or how the funding is repaid ( under the ATVM program).
The other side are the vehicles to put these 120,000 batteries in, they get $ 378 M over all the applicants.
So how many electric vehicles need to be sold ( at today's pricing ) to recoup the $2M that this one plant got ?
The DOE spent $ 25B of the $ 780B. All 18 pages, and not one word about the terms on the funding. No clue, if it needs to be paid back, when it is paid back, how it is paid back, and let us not forget, these companies still get the domestic manufacturing credit, in addition to this funding.
Keep in mind, all the pages( from the 2 DOE presentations I found), nowhere are these plants limited ( or even required ) to sell these batteries into an electric car.....
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,805
Likes: 2
From: NEVADA
Fuzzy math was a poor choice of words on my part. Misleading math would better describe what that article uses. Media Research Center, CNS, Fox, etc, are all spreading the same story, so first we should examine the source.
True, Johnson Controls did say 500 jobs originally.
The figure of 150 jobs is likely the time cards required at the moment and does not take into account the construction labor and start up costs to renovate the existing plant or to purchase equipment and supplies used for production, or the ripple effect into the surrounding community.
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,805
Likes: 2
From: NEVADA
http://www.mlive.com/business/west-m..._advanced.html
Michigan economic development officials approved a Michigan Business Tax Credit valued at $48.5 million over 15 years. The project also is tapping a new Battery Cell State Tax credit that has a value of $100 million over four years.
That comes from the $555 million in battery tax credits the state Legislature approved late last year and earlier this year.
If you add the $ 7,500 tax incentive per vehicle it gets crazy.
Michigan economic development officials approved a Michigan Business Tax Credit valued at $48.5 million over 15 years. The project also is tapping a new Battery Cell State Tax credit that has a value of $100 million over four years.
That comes from the $555 million in battery tax credits the state Legislature approved late last year and earlier this year.
If you add the $ 7,500 tax incentive per vehicle it gets crazy.
Technical Article Contributor
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 10,511
Likes: 10
From: Under the flightpath of old ORD 22R
Taking a look at the route the Fed Govt is going, is costing money, and not driving any organic growth from companies.
The $ 1.2B from the DOE is part of the $ 25B in funding the DOE got from the ARRP act of 2009.
This is marked as loans, but there is no information from the DOE on how the loans are paid back ( if at all ) and what the interest rate is on them.
The fed govt is requiring a 1:1 money for the funding, so the $ 300M from the Fed is matched by $ 300M from JCI.
To point to the construction, this might have cleared the bench for awhile, but the result could be just restarting the unemployment Insurance clock for those workers, and puts them back on the state money ( and with MI's rate, the fed kicker ) again. This potential cost is not included in the $ 300M.
The suppliers to JCI, depending on the company, also had the ability to apply for part of the $ 1.2B in matching funding, so while JCI might be purchasing parts for the final product, this very well could be from another company that is back stopped by the fed govt ( not organic growth ). The feel good reporting on this case, points to the job creation not only at JCI, but the follow on jobs, but does not say if this actually provided any organic growth at those follow on companies. JCI added 150 ( maybe 500 some day ) jobs to the 114,000 they already have.
MI is at least going the correct route in offering tax credits ( similar to the domestic manufacturing credit from the Fed Govt ) on the state taxes, to drive organic growth, not funding job creation with loans that have some kind of terms to them. To get the tax credits, the company would have to make money.
The MSM always tags tax credits as tax reduction for the wealthy and evil, but this allows SMB to grow by removing the tax burden is how real job growth is made, by not strangling them in taxes.
Not too sure how funding the job creation via a loan is going to work out. We know the other sections of the ARRP act of 2009 to create jobs fell far short of the promises of the govt.
For all the money being given in funding, maybe some actual economic programs to drive organic growth could have been funded and then some by now ( that would not have the US Fed Govt as a business partner with all these companies ). The longer the administration waits to enact any real economic policies, is the harder ( and more costly ) that it will be.
Back in 2009, what was the driving legislation ?
The Health Care law, not economic policy.
The majority in both the upper and lower houses and the POTUS did not care about economic policy, the Health Care law was the #1 concern to them and they got it passed, with it not being fully funded ( or thought out ), and not providing the public health care that Canada, England and the likes have ( in other words, a mess waiting to happen ).
Anyone still wonder why we have to increase the debt ceiling ? we are still paying for the sins of the 111th congress, money going out, and less and less coming back in.
Jimmy Carter has to feel pretty good about this Presidency, it moved him up the ladder as poor performing. At least he defaulted on $ 120M in payments, and did not get the credit rating reduced.
I know the new tag line, S&P does not have the "authority" to reduce the US debt worthiness.. I guess the POTUS thinks the fed Govt is the only one that can do that ( fox watching the hen house ).
The $ 1.2B from the DOE is part of the $ 25B in funding the DOE got from the ARRP act of 2009.
This is marked as loans, but there is no information from the DOE on how the loans are paid back ( if at all ) and what the interest rate is on them.
The fed govt is requiring a 1:1 money for the funding, so the $ 300M from the Fed is matched by $ 300M from JCI.
To point to the construction, this might have cleared the bench for awhile, but the result could be just restarting the unemployment Insurance clock for those workers, and puts them back on the state money ( and with MI's rate, the fed kicker ) again. This potential cost is not included in the $ 300M.
The suppliers to JCI, depending on the company, also had the ability to apply for part of the $ 1.2B in matching funding, so while JCI might be purchasing parts for the final product, this very well could be from another company that is back stopped by the fed govt ( not organic growth ). The feel good reporting on this case, points to the job creation not only at JCI, but the follow on jobs, but does not say if this actually provided any organic growth at those follow on companies. JCI added 150 ( maybe 500 some day ) jobs to the 114,000 they already have.
MI is at least going the correct route in offering tax credits ( similar to the domestic manufacturing credit from the Fed Govt ) on the state taxes, to drive organic growth, not funding job creation with loans that have some kind of terms to them. To get the tax credits, the company would have to make money.
The MSM always tags tax credits as tax reduction for the wealthy and evil, but this allows SMB to grow by removing the tax burden is how real job growth is made, by not strangling them in taxes.
Not too sure how funding the job creation via a loan is going to work out. We know the other sections of the ARRP act of 2009 to create jobs fell far short of the promises of the govt.
For all the money being given in funding, maybe some actual economic programs to drive organic growth could have been funded and then some by now ( that would not have the US Fed Govt as a business partner with all these companies ). The longer the administration waits to enact any real economic policies, is the harder ( and more costly ) that it will be.
Back in 2009, what was the driving legislation ?
The Health Care law, not economic policy.
The majority in both the upper and lower houses and the POTUS did not care about economic policy, the Health Care law was the #1 concern to them and they got it passed, with it not being fully funded ( or thought out ), and not providing the public health care that Canada, England and the likes have ( in other words, a mess waiting to happen ).
Anyone still wonder why we have to increase the debt ceiling ? we are still paying for the sins of the 111th congress, money going out, and less and less coming back in.
Jimmy Carter has to feel pretty good about this Presidency, it moved him up the ladder as poor performing. At least he defaulted on $ 120M in payments, and did not get the credit rating reduced.
I know the new tag line, S&P does not have the "authority" to reduce the US debt worthiness.. I guess the POTUS thinks the fed Govt is the only one that can do that ( fox watching the hen house ).