Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Raw Deal in Michigan

teslamotors.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 201 posts

Re: A Raw Deal in Michigan

#181

Post by Dylan16807 »

greedo wrote: post #175
spacefight wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hence, lobbying equals corruption. Period.

How do you reconcile freedom of speech with restrictions on campaign contributions. The courts have been pretty consistent in finding the various campaign finance laws to be overly broad and restrictive when it comes to the 1st Amendment.

Reconcile? Money isn't speech.

Sure, people can spend money on tools for speech, but that's not what causes problems. It's when people give money to a political group that things get nasty and voting power starts to shift to those with cash.

Re: A Raw Deal in Michigan

#182

Post by Dylan16807 »

JibberMeTimbers wrote: post #137
67726e wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Solution: Only a candidate can pay for ads, campaigning, and the like. There is a campaign contribution cap reasonably low as your average citizen could reach it. None of these BS PACs, none of this "I'll make a large donation if you 'listen' to what I want".

What happens in the rich candidate vs poorer candidate elections then? The richer one would get a lot more viewership and exposure, increasing his chances to win. It doesn't solve the problem.

Easy, limit them to the same campaign contribution as everybody else.

Re: A Raw Deal in Michigan

#183

Post by dbrower »

saturdaysaint wrote: post #93

The funny thing is that Michigan's legislature is run by yokel conservatives who made a big show of becoming a "right to work" state (i.e. making it illegal to have mandatory all-union workplaces) - when corporate interests and Fox News talking points were at stake, they were remarkably eager to thump their chests about free association.

Automobile franchisees (car dealers) skew overwhelmingly conservative. Draw your own conclusions.

Re: A Raw Deal in Michigan

#184

Post by Dylan16807 »

cellis wrote: post #157

Tesla wants to have its cake and eat it too. You can't take a 500 million loan from taxpayers ( the vast majority of whom DON'T benefit from and can't afford your product ) and then on the other hand claim unfair treatment by local governments.

Cake and eat it too? These are completely unrelated issues. They took a loan and also they want to be able to sell their product. Sounds fair to me.

Re: A Raw Deal in Michigan

#185

Post by anigbrowl »

By striking a single, but critical, word from MCLA 445.1574(14)(1)(i), the law governing franchise relations in Michigan, the dealers seek to force Tesla [...]

Well, don't tell us what it is or provide any links to it... /eyeroll. I believe their complaint is about line 3 on page 6 of the following document: http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2013-2014/billengros...

I support Tesla's efforts and deplore the legislative pandering to incumbent industries, but drumming up support for a legal/political conflict without articulating the actual issue is counter-productive. All that happens is that people send emails or make phone calls to the legislative body saying they're outraged, and then get fobbed off with technicalities because >95% of the outraged people don't actually know what they're complaining about, they only know one party's assertion of what the downsides will be. If you want an internet army to go into battle for you, arm them properly with the facts.

Re: A Raw Deal in Michigan

#186

Post by akgerber »

john_b wrote: post #144
exDM69 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in a very cold place with weather comparable to Norway. There are lots of problems when it comes to dealing with cars in the winter. I have no doubt that Tesla could be a decent choice for a car, but it makes perfect sense to be a bit wary about electric vehicles manufactured in California sunshine, especially if you don't have a garage to store the car in. In addition to battery life and cabin heating issues,…

> "it makes perfect sense to be a bit wary about electric vehicles manufactured in California sunshine" It makes no more sense than a Florida driver being wary of overheating a car made in Detroit. There may actually be some winter weather technical problems that Tesla has yet to resolve, I honestly don't know. But everything in your post is either speculation or a fallacy called argumentum ad populum [1]. If I were…

Detroit manufacturers have desert proving grounds for hot weather. Tesla doesn't seem to have the same for the cold, having just done 'days' of pre-launch testing in the cold: http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/cold-weather-climate-testing.... Even my parents' Prius, from a long-established manufacturer, runs far less efficiently in Wisconsin winter.

Re: A Raw Deal in Michigan

#188

Post by canvia »

protonfish wrote: post #138
KayEss wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This just came up in another comment on HN: http://www.ted.com/talks/lawrence_lessig_we_the_people_and_t...

I watched the whole thing waiting for his proposed solution. There are plenty of people that at the end of that talk would be willing to give of themselves (time and money) to fix the problem. So what does he give us? ? I dunno, love or something This is so disappointing. If we really cared, then wouldn't it be worth starting with a strategy, a plan with steps that could result in a solution? Drumming up enthusiasm t…

He has a plan: https://mayday.us/

Re: A Raw Deal in Michigan

#189

Post by canvia »

sbierwagen wrote: post #140
oatmeal_coffee wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't paint all lobbying with the same brush. There are beneficial lobbying groups out there helping to bring a voice to issues in an arena where they would otherwise normally be drowned out. We just focus on the bad ones because they tend to have greater influence. Absolutist positions such as this are rarely true and sensible.

There are beneficial lobbying groups out there helping to bring a voice to issues in an arena where they would otherwise normally be drowned out. Lobbying is like advertising[1] in that it's a vicious cycle. If company A spends $100 on advertising, then they capture the market, and push out company B. In retaliation, company B spends $150, and company A spends $200... In 2010, Coca-cola spent $2.9 billion on advertis…

Companies like coca cola and mcdonalds have to advertise that much because they offer poor quality products that would otherwise be irrelevant: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8344345
Post reply on HN