
Operating an electric car is very costly and ongoing, which makes it troublesome even to environmentally conscious customers.
3. Style
Tesla does its best to sleek and cool electric cars. Electric car Model 3, introduced earlier this year, marks an significant step forward. The fact, however, is that many electric cars on the market today look like Nissan Leaf and Renault Twizy. This makes it difficult to imagine consumer-aware electric cars marketing – particularly for younger drivers that marketers and advertisers covet.
Many automotive industry analysts agree that for electric cars to really take hold and become main stream, they will need to become more stylish and cool looking. Adding some sex appeal to electric cars could help these vehicles mightily. After all, a lot of people identify themselves by the vehicle they drive. And what does a Renault Twizy say about you?
2. Gas Prices
Consumers do not buy electric vehicles by themselves in significant numbers. Consumers need to be moved to get there. And most experts believe that the move will occur once gas rates are overpriced. This didn’t happen though, unfortunately. As the price of gas rises, it still falls as quickly and, to date, the price of gas has not reached the point that the customer considers it excessive and ready to alter.
It remains to be seen how long petrol rates would take for vehicles to hit a tipping-point. Nevertheless, the consensus is that, in order for customers to convert in significant numbers, the costs of owning a traditional gas-fired car must be much superior to the costs of owning and operating an electric vehicle.
1. Sticker Price
The bottom line is that it is too expensive to drive an electric vehicle. For its ModelS, Tesla changed the electric car market. But it cost $80,000! Real, Tesla 3 would be cheaper, but still starts for approximately $35,000. Therefore, you have to add additional costs to pay the electric car to see how many people can not afford to drive electric cars. Especially when they can get a comparable size for less than $15,000 for a conventional car, which is a brand new one.
The affordability of electric cars is the main factor that keeps these vehicles back and prevents them from being universally embraced. Until the price is adjusted, the customers are unlikely, until electric cars become more affordable. Of course, we all like the feeling that we are responsible for the environment. What’s the size, however? New technology is often super costly in the first place, but the revolution in electric cars will not start until costs are comparable.Two Russian Revelations
Two dancers in St. Petersburg’s Mikhailovsky Ballet are among the most remarkable in the world, as they demonstrated in recent performances in New York
New York
Whatever else one can say about the opening night of “Giselle, ou Les Wilis,” which marked the U.S. debut of St. Petersburg’s Mikhailovsky Ballet last week, its presentation of Natalia Osipova and Leonid Sarafanov in the production’s leading roles confirmed that these dancers are among today’s most remarkable ballet artists.
Nikita...Rep. Michele Bachmann highlighted the Orwellian thinking of the president's health care advisor, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of the White House chief of staff, in a floor speech to the House of Representatives. I commend her for being a voice for the most precious members of our society, our children and our seniors.
Pleez oh pleez oh pleez let this be a trial balloon for a Palin-Bachmann ticket in 2012.
Last edited by Sauron; 08-08-2009 at 01:35 AM.
This argument in the US about healthcare is so incredibily ridiculous. What you have at the moment under private health care is a bunch of private bureaucrats who are solely profit driven (not care driven) who decide whether grandma or the down's syndrome baby are worthy of health care or not based on how profitable or costly that individual will be to the private company.
 Acid?
Be careful what you wish for. I don't credit the average right wing American with enough brains to see how laughable such a leadership would be.
Think of the lulz that could be had if they won.
To be honest, I would be fine with saying that severely mentally retarded children will not be covered by the state health insurance (I'm talking the kind that's immobile or will require significant assistance their entire life and expensive medical interventions).
We have in utero testing, we have legal abortion - for me the decision is obvious. We will also still have private insurance, and so if you have a child like that, I think it should be your decision to find a way to pay for it or not.

2. The expression of genes, including trisomy 21 can be variable. Some are profoundly effected, some you couldn't tell have it.
3. There aren't tests for every genetic disease around.
It's never as cut and dried as one would wish.
Genetic testing is still coming along. Who pays for this research -- hmm?
Interesting: BBC reports that the 3rd largest company in the world is the Brittish Health establishment. The mortality statistics would alarm Flo. Nightengale: aka Crimean Barbie in your parlance. The source material for those stats came from far less credible folk.
These "Obama death panels, where do they go, where do they go?"
To be honest, I would be fine with saying that severely mentally retarded children will not be covered by the state health insurance... We have in utero testing, we have legal abortion - for me the decision is obvious. We will also still have private insurance, and so if you have a child like that, I think it should be your decision to find a way to pay for it or not.
Then it's hard to see why you'd think there should be any public health care for children, except perhaps if parents could prove that they'd lost resources through no fault of their own since electing to carry their child to term.
Except if no-one had kids = no future taxpayers. That is also why education is and should be free.
There's these two comments on the health care bill at opencongress.org about family planning services that I feel I should share with everyone.
They're under the table of contents for Division B, Title vii, Subtitle b, Sec. 1714: State eligibility option for family planning services.
This is the root of our economic crisis: we equate family planning with prevention, i.e., preventing children from existing. Children are our future workers and consumers, yet when we can't prevent them, we resort to murder. We're killing our own economy, literally.
I've never understood this. With the ever-increasing amount of future taxpayer dollars being spent to take us down the road to socialism, you'd think we'd be encouraging larger families to create more future taxpayers for the government to bleed to sate it's greed.
Just thought I'd share those with you, in case you'd started to regain some faith in humanity.
Hey, I know where we could get some future taxpayers, assuming no one minds that they won't be white and...oh...yah, what was I thinking.
What bugs me is the whole us vs. them feel about the government. Do people even realize that they themselves pick the people who will be making all these laws, that they will be representatives of the people as a whole? That you get a government that looks like the people. Or in popular terms, the people get the government they deserve?
This has always struck me as a particularly American thing. It is prolly all genetic. These are the descendants of people who emigrated from Europe to escape the evils of government, then emigrated West into new frontiers to get away from the evils of government etc. They are genetically programmed not to change the government but to get away from it.
Either that or it's culch'ral.
True, evolution says that too, that those who were most anti-government were the ones that came over and probably did the bulk of the breeding in every generation, and this is the result. It is leading them towards the inevitable end result, a new species; Homo anarchista.
That is the intermediate form.
Hey now, some us were just trying to escape pogroms, feudalism and religious intolerance, not all government.
And some were even trying to get away from religious tolerance.
I don't know whether to laugh, cry, vomit or throw my hands up in despair. Y'all may have know this already, but I didn't. The Senator who co-sponsored the End of Life act is a Republican from Georgia.
I can only hope that Sarah Palin's distortions of this issue backfire dramatically on her and every other nutjob rallying to the "death panel" cry.
Caribou Barbie is the perfect argument for retroactive birth control and chlorinating the gene pool.

If cost isn’t a factor, CMU is probably the place to be. Academics-wise I doubt there’s that huge of a difference, and stress-wise both universities are quite rigorous, but at CMU you won’t struggle with an underfunded CS department and will have an arguably slightly-better brand name. The one benefit to Berkeley is location (proximity to silicon valley &amp; opportunities in SF), but it’d definitely be foolish to assume CMU students don’t have access to just as many if not more opportunities given its prestige.Shares of Kier Group (KIE), which rose over 12% yesterday, were trading 1% higher at