Tesla is Putting a Supercharging Station Between Dallas and Austin Next Month

Categories: Transportation

TeslaModelS.jpg
Tesla
Tesla's bid to sell cars directly to Texas consumers, thus bypassing the state's deep-pocketed car dealers, came up short this legislative session. But that's not stopping the electric car company from edging its way into the Texas automotive market.

Tesla announced Thursday that it's tripling the number of Tesla Supercharger stations, with plans to open one by the end of June between Dallas and Austin. Within a year, the network will "stretch across the continent, covering almost the entire population of the U.S. and Canada," the company says.

The stations, which currently cover California and Nevada, as well as the Washington, D.C.-to-Boston corridor, are designed "for city to city travel," Tesla says, "enabling Model S electric vehicle drivers to travel for about three hours, take a 20- to 30-minute break to grab lunch or a soda or coffee, and get back on the road charged up. For free."

Free refueling sounds nice. Buying a $63,000 car, not so much.


Sponsor Content

My Voice Nation Help
33 comments
everlastingphelps
everlastingphelps topcommenter

How much do they get in federal subsidies to build the charging station?  Are they even paying for it, or are WE paying for it through a federal grant?

Crony "Capitalism" from DC needs to end.

JustSaying
JustSaying

63 grand for a Tesla? Their biggest hit "Signs" was written by someone else. "Love Song" was the only really good song that they wrote themselves. For 63 grand, those bastards would have to come to my place every day of the 5 year note and be my live alarm clock. I would make them work for their money with some generous usage of the snooze button.

PersistentID2345
PersistentID2345

Tesla can still sell directly to Texas consumers online. They cannot do the delivery.

North Carolina is the battleground where dealers are attempting to ban the online sales.

State governments want the increased tax revenues that local dealers provide.

Its one more outdated business model being protected by the powers that be. 

Other examples :AMA requiring doctors instead of nurse practitioners for certain trivial procedures, ABA fighting pro se divorce streamlining. Universities requiring brick and mortar instruction.

Such villainy tends to bring out the libertarian in the best of us.

ChrisYu
ChrisYu

who knew hair bands were earth friendly?

holmantx
holmantx topcommenter

Tesla is Solyndra

weaponzero
weaponzero

@JustSaying Tesla Motor's Model S car, not Tesla the band lol

BushwoodSmithie
BushwoodSmithie

@PersistentID2345

"State governments want the increased tax revenues that local dealers provide."

No, state legislators want the very substantial campaign contributions that car dealers provide.

weaponzero
weaponzero

@PersistentID2345 You would still have to pay taxes on the car if you order online. The reason they passed these laws is because of auto dealer lobbying, not even due to the taxes.

holmantx
holmantx topcommenter

@ScottsMerkin @holmantx

Tesla Is Worse Than Solyndra - Slate Magazine 5/29/2013

"How the U.S. government’s bungled investment in the car company cost taxpayers at least $1 billion."

http://tinyurl.com/l3x8uu4

We socialize the losses while the gains are privatized.

It's called a Moral Hazard.

markzero
markzero

@weaponzero @holmantx "The problem is your not understanding that if the government took the stock options, they would be putting the tax payers in MORE risk.

That is because when the money is loaned, you are earning interest back. But when you take stock options your assuming stock will go up when in reality there is no such guarantee"


The argument is that the government should have demanded options in addition. Even if the stock options became worthless, tax payers wouldn't have been at any more risk. This was leaving money on the table. 

holmantx
holmantx topcommenter

@kduble @weaponzeroThe 501(c)3s include charities, the (c)4s cover social-welfare groups, the (c)6s include business groups, and the (c)5s cover labor unions.

Wipe that out too.  Go to a flat tax.

holmantx
holmantx topcommenter

@kduble @holmantx red herring.  The Treasury has already suspended auctions when it was apparent the private sector was unwilling to buy at the velocity the govt needed to sell.

kduble
kduble

"...if the last century is any indicator, they will war on themselves when times get tough."

This is like saying that if the 19th century is any guide, the U.S. will dissolve into Civil War. The last century really isn't a guide. We're entering uncharted waters. Modern European nation states are simply too small to be viable in a 21st century global economy. Though the European experiment may look a little wobbly at times, Europe won't be turning back.

Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia broke up, and the UK, Spain and Belgium will likely break into smaller pieces as well. The EU is the only structure that keeps Europe relevant and gives Europeans a voice in the global economic system.

kduble
kduble

"...if the last century is any indicator, they will war on themselves when times get tough."

This is like saying that if the 19th century is any guide, the U.S. will dissolve into Civil War. The last century really isn't a guide. We're entering uncharted waters. Modern European nation states are simply too small to be viable in a 21st century global economy. Though the European experiment may look a little wobbly at times, Europe won't be turning back.

Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia broke up, and the UK, Spain and Belgium will likely break into smaller pieces as well. The EU is the only structure that keeps Europe relevant and gives Europeans a voice in the global economic system.

kduble
kduble

@weaponzero @holmantx The big challenge with the EU hasn't been expansion, but rather, the smaller fiscal union. While there are 17 countries in the Euro zone, there are 27 in the EU; 28 effective July 1 when Croatia joins.

I think everyone recognizes the EU made a mistake in creating monetary union without first creating a tighter common fiscal policy. It's rather like the Articles of Confederation in the 1780s. This thing is evolving. It's always been two steps forward and one step back over the six decades or so that the EU has been evolving.

kduble
kduble

@holmantx I have trouble following the right's line of reasoning. With one breath, the talk about how the Fed is devaluing the dollar. When it's convenient, however, they point out that the dollar has held its own over time with most all major currencies. I note here, of course, that the Swiss Frank is not a major currency.

Of course, the reason the government buys up most of its own debt is because the Social Security Trust Fund is required by statute to purchase U.S. debt. Nothing new here.

kduble
kduble

@holmantx @weaponzero  I never ceased to be amazed that your wrath is always directed at the Lincoln head cents of alternative energy funding rather than the Ben Franklins of the oil depletion allowance. If you advocate withdrawal of all tax support for the fossil fuels industries, then I'm good with what you're saying. Whata ya say?

holmantx
holmantx topcommenter

@weaponzero @holmantx

¯Fly me to the moon¯

I’m a little frustrated is all.  I’m looking over some guidelines put out by the Department of Justice on the appraisal of Federal land acquisitions.  There is 4,000 acres out in New Mexico a land trust (a 501(c)3, BTW) who wants to buy the ranch, then flip it to the federal government and get tax credits.  Millions of acres are either being bought directly by the federal government or held in perpetuity through conservation easements. 

And this is what I mean by Leviathan – it operates without direction, no matter if it is funded or not, and comp[lately unaccountable to elected politicians much less the American people.  Here’s one of many really telling paragraphs in the “guideline”.  The DOJ is addressing the use of “comparable sales” to estimate Market Value of the ranchlands: 

"In this same context, there is another category of sales that needs careful verification if the sales are going to be used as comparables. Occasionally, a government project will be created and acquisition will be authorized, but adequate funds for the entire acquisition project will not be appropriated. When the government project involves conservation/ preservation lands, environmental organizations will sometimes acquire lands within the project area for the sole purpose of transferring those lands, often at the organization’s cost, to the government when funding becomes available. Sales to environmental organizations under such circumstances, like direct sales to the government, are suspect as reliable comparable sales, because the purchaser’s motivation was not economically driven by typical market forces." 

I can be prosecuted by the DOJ if I do not adhere strictly to this 144-page “guideline”.  I have to sign the donor’s tax return along with a statement the IRS will hold me personally liable for any mistakes. 

You see, this is the same IRS that is targeting our fellow Americans who formed an anti-tax organizations.  In this case, the IRS is putting everyone in my profession on notice they will prosecute if the data and resulting analysis used in these reports is subjective. But the guideline demands subjectivity. 

IRS Crushes Appraiser https://ria.thomsonreuters.com/journals/vlrart.pdf 

I stand properly intimidated.  I just turned the job down.

Millions of acres are being transferred to the federal government.  

and it's just the tip of the iceberg.

weaponzero
weaponzero

@holmantx Europe is not really ahead of us, part of the European union is that it requires a level of transparency. So unlike the US who can put everything under the rug, Europe does not have that option. Though to be honest Europe is not doing as badly as people make it out to be either. The silly thing the European Union did was it got too desperate in adding European countries to the union. This in turn entered a lot of weak economies into the union. The part of Europe that is failing are the weaker economies and they are dragging down the rest of the Union.

With that said, we do have some other advantages, that is that the dollar is the world currency. So effectively our economy works by draining out the economies of the smaller economies that rely on us through keeping inflation rate low(despite it being much higher). This is what happened to countries like Egypt, Greece, Ice land and etc. China actually did a similar thing to us when they froze their currency.

And sure the Fortune 50 can talk about trillions. How many of them are playing in the derivatives market? That market is estimated to be 600 trillion - 1.2 quadrillion. That is why the federal reserve spent 14 trillion dollars, to prevent the derivatives market from crashing.

Personally in the long run I see there is only 1 way to get out of this mess. And that is the space industry. There is enough resources on the moon alone to cover our entire global economy 100x over in resources. Not to mention asteroids and others. Its not easy and the odds are against us, but it is the only way to generate enough value to fill in the gap all this "imaginary money" that was created. Otherwise, the only option will be a total global economic collapse.


CogitoErgoSum
CogitoErgoSum topcommenter

@holmantx No worries, Jeebus is comin' any day now to take us to the Promise Land. Ain't no national debt in Heaven.

holmantx
holmantx topcommenter

@weaponzero @holmantx 

The only reason we have not experienced a total financial collapse is because Europe is a couple years ahead of us.  Our currency remains a safe harbor relative to the Euro and Europe.  Europe is certain to collapse and if the last century is any indicator, they will war on themselves when times get tough.

The Treasury is buying 70% of its own debt it issues.  The Fed is juicing the stock market to the tune of $85 Billion a month, and the Congress is spending a trillion more a year more than they collect.  A spike in interest rates alone will doom the ship of state.

An no Fortune 50 company on this planet can talk in terms of Trillions.  It is a number the finite mind cannot comprehend.

10,000 Yuppies turned sixty today.  And ten thousand more will turn sixty every day for the next seventeen years.  They will no longer be producing income to be taxed yet they are the ones who have been demanding we spend FAR more than we collect by borrowing it.  The debt wall now darkens the skies.

And when the generations behind them realize what $20 Trillion is, and what the $100 Trillion means in unfunded entitlements as a direct claim on their future labor . . . the Boomers, I fear, will not be anointed their Greatest Generation.

I fear for the country.

weaponzero
weaponzero

@holmantx If the US isolates itself from the rest of the world or we have 1 world government that would be possible. But in a global economy the rules are different.

For the state to not be part of society requires that the state be outside of society. How the rules change in a global economy is that the other states are not following the same rules our state is. So effectively, other states can prey on the weakness of our state to protect itself. This is partly why our economy is in such a mess, other countries are stealing our jobs while the federal government is not doing anything, and the states are left infighting for jobs within themselves but ultimately none of our states have the ability to fend off the other countries.

The ATVM program allowed for keeping jobs and spending in the US while putting us on a road to closing our import/export deficit.

I assure you one thing, if society would get rid off lobbying and campaign contributions. You would be surprised how much more efficient the state can be.

primi_timpano
primi_timpano topcommenter

If you are serious about this argument, don't waste your time or breath on these energy experiments. Go to the real money: our financial system. The government (both Bush, and too a lesser extent, Obama) contributed huge infusions of capital into nearly every bank and insurance company) whebthe Fed did the same for many more. But many conservatives objected to the government taking equity stakes, a la GM and Chrysler. This is the real game, not those energy sideshows.

holmantx
holmantx topcommenter

@weaponzero @holmantx And you are not understanding the state is not society. Society and the state are two different entities, even though their members may be the same and even though they may intermesh with each other intimately. The state is the entity charged with the task of protecting society, but the society over-flows the bounds of the state into fields where the state has no right to go.

A free society will sustain itself when the only form of equality which may be sought by the state is equality before the law. With equality before the law, the goddess of justice is rightly depicted as blind as she holds the scales evenly; blind because she is no respecter of persons.  This is no longer true, and we are slugging down.

The state may not command, direct, control or regulate the economic activity of the people, except where it can be convincingly shown that such a measure is an essential means of preventing the people from encroaching upon each other's liberty or rightful property.  We are dying.

Our federal government is now a Leviathan.  It is out of control.  Even the President's top advisor swerved into it by saying it's too big to control (that he cannot be held accountable).  This bureaucracy now employs more than two million and dispenses equity to those who are pleased to sustain its existence, often against the will of the people.

Tesla, like Solyndra, is but a symptom.


weaponzero
weaponzero

@holmantx The problem is your not understanding that if the government took the stock options, they would be putting the tax payers in MORE risk.

That is because when the money is loaned, you are earning interest back. But when you take stock options your assuming stock will go up when in reality there is no such guarantee.

To add to that, lets use solyndra as an example which took around 500 million, the government was able to recover back around 150 million after it failed. If the government had stock instead, the money would have been fully lost.

We can argue about the merits of the program and the government's role in it all day, but I don't see what Tesla has to do with it.

But if you want to know the goal of the ATVM program was to make keep jobs in the US while helping the US become energy independent. The program was expecting a loss of 30%. So far, the program is only at a loss of 2%, in a year that will be 0% (as long as no other company fails).

holmantx
holmantx topcommenter

@weaponzero @holmantx

Had Tesla lost, the taxpayer takes the lick.  

"Too big to fail" is the same dynamic.  And when you privatize the gains but socialize the losses, the free enterprise system bogs down or collapses.

It is a usurpation of the risk/return equation that underpins the capitalist system which delivered this miracle we call America.  The hardest steel must go through the fire.

We must not allow the Limited State to participate to such an extent in larger society.

Government has no business in this area of American life.  And to allow them this kind of faceless bureaucratic power is to invite unequal treatment.

See:  Troubling Stories About IRS Continue to Mount - The Oklahoman

weaponzero
weaponzero

@holmantx That is just silly. First of all, the government is not a venture capital firm. Second of all, the government has a stake in everyone in form of taxes even without owning any stock.

Plus, it is easy to say "hey the government should have gotten stock". But not that simple.  Just because a company is successful does not mean their stock is going to skyrocket like Tesla is. The government for example took stock of Chrysler after a different loan program, paid themselves off. Except the government lost 1.6 billion. Simply because even though Chrysler got out, their stock went down in value.

Don't fall into the old, "lets take the money to the casino, look that guy won that could have been you" trick.

Tesla paid off their loan, government made over 20 million profit, Solyndra ended up losing the government 300 million. There is no way you can say Tesla is worse the Solyndra.

ScottsMerkin
ScottsMerkin topcommenter

@holmantx oh, so since Tesla became a successful company, all you can bitch about now is the government didnt make enough money off of it!  What a fucking joke.  

Now Trending

Dallas Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

General

Loading...