@kcblitzkrieg
Well when you reference rate of change and do not completely address the why and throw in Biden vs Trump what do you think I am going to say? Come on...
The increase in interest costs pretty much make up the difference you are referencing in rate of change, so why not state all of that and not make the assumptions as general as you did?
The FED is a huge reason why our deficit looks worse one president to another, if you remove the change in interest costs that number drops as it would if we were not in the middle of both of these military quagmires.
@BigGame90
Interest costs are up because the FED raised interest rates, that is the chart and that is the correlation.
To your public transport comment, I addressed it...if you want a clean and safe public transport then INVEST in keeping it clean and safe, Calif does not have the funds and labor to properly maintain their public transit system, so my example of two car owners is the answer. If you build something with good intent but do not maintain it and supervise it then it will not keep clean and serve the purpose it could. Its all about how you maintain the investment and they do not, many metro areas do not. It isnt about Calif vs Europe or Calif vs PHX or Detroit or Philly, many public transports are not kept up and properly supervised and it makes for an unsafe unclean experience.
@wallstreetcappers
jfc.... I already addressed that:
I am 100% well aware of all of that....
I should've just used 2016-2020 then 2020-2023 and left out "Trump" and "Biden" so that maybe I wouldn't have gotten that response....although it is a good read for the uneducated masses.
Who is "you cannot say that it is Biden's fault" ??? Did I say anything about "who's" fault it is ?? NO, I did not.
The point of my post was the future impact of what is occurring and what is going to occur, hence my main comment of "the rate of increase is the primary concern". I was responding to CDOG so I put in the 2016-2020 Trump numbers as a reference point, perhaps he was not aware of what occurred in that time frame and the fact that debt levels rose $7 TRILLION under the Trump Admin while the FED was running ZIRP and NEGATIVE rates. That was it, I made no comment or innuendo on "who's fault" it is as if I wanted to comment on the "how" and "why" we have ended up in this position then I'd likely need to start a new thread or at the very least, it would take me 3-4 max posts to fit all of that narrative into this thread.
See that part where I said "I should've just left out Trump & Biden and used the years 2016-2020 and 2020-2023". That is me admitting I confused the reader (you) by leaving the door open for someone to take a partisan defensive spin on it (you).
Then I said "I was responding to CDOG" aka I have a strong suspicion that he may support Trump so I included the $7 TRILLION in deficit added under HIS administration. I was being "nice" and "respectful" in a way that also showed him what happened UNDER TRUMP. End of story.
Again, as I said, if I wanted to go into the "how" and "why" I'd need several pages of posts. I'm not interested in that, primarily because NO ONE F-ING CARES around here to discuss reality so why WASTE my time, ya know....
@wallstreetcappers
"Calif does not have the FUNDS and LABOR to properly maintain their public transit system"
Why is that? I REMEMBER WHEN CALIFORNIA had the 4th largest ECONOMY in the WORLD and was the Envy of most. It wouldn't be that they Taxed themselves out of existence by using those stolen dollars to pay the Healthcare and other FREE Goodies they hand out to newly arrivals and Career Welfare Recpients therefore taking away any incentive on creating a powerful LABOR force to maintain those roads, would it?
@kcblitzkrieg
No problem, I think its worth explaining the why more because it gives perspective so I was able to explain quite a bit of the why in just a few words it didnt take that much but for someone who IS partisan I will go into more depth to give context because to me NOTHING is partisan and yet here in this forum and these members everything is partisan because most here WANT things to be partisan and make it personal when I think not much at all IS partisan in the end of it all.
So when you say the deficit went up 2T more and do not say what might have caused it and you say it to a blatantly partisan member what do you think is happening? You are validating a misconception and completely missed the truth in the process. I do not like Biden, the guy is a dope but the deficit is not due to one politician vs another alone and ALONE is a partisan term, it is inaccurate and creates divide when we entertain it.
The reality is both sides are to blame, all politicians are to blame, corps are to blame, the war machine is to blame. One of the things that ticks me off the most regarding the ZIRP saga is that NEITHER side took the opportunity to take a wrecking ball to the existing deficit...you get this gift in your mailbox and all that the politicians do is spend more, give more to corps, blow it on wars and stupid stuff making reckless decisions over and over. Trump had the best interest rate environment in the history of US presidents and yet the deficit went UP UP UP, he was not a fiscal conservative, he is as out of control as any other politician and if anything the time for the GOP to really take a stand was during ZIRP and yet they did not.
Government spending is due to corporate interference and manipulation, vote grab and the lack of fiscal responsibility and it is not at all partisan or the deficit chart would not be shaped in a straight line up for the last 30 years.
Do you think the costs to repair and maintain would be roughly the same as what the state wants to provide for "free" health care to illegals? Do you think the state cares more about the tax paying citizens, or illegals? Maybe the state should budget properly and spend conservatively and maybe then, the state could support and maintain public transit so people would choose public over private. The state of CA doesn't seem to care about the tax paying citizens which is likely why crime is out of control and homeless is at record highs. Obviously having other states send their homeless to CA isn't helping, but when the state offers "free" drug sites, the homeless will flock. People do not want to be out in public when homeless are around which also plays a roll in public transportation. It's all connected.
@BigGame90
You cant combine or mix items, I know what you are trying to do which is blame illegals and the state using resources for that purpose and if they were not spending on that then they would have extra funds...that is faulty thinking, those two items are not the only outlays the state has and if one is eliminated it does not impact the other so you suggesting such is just a partisan attempt to deflect again.
Transit systems have been under serviced for decades in numerous states and local service areas, not just Calif. That is why I gave the comment about you cannot compare Calif and Europe or Calif and Detroit or Calif and Phoenix, most metro areas do not properly maintain metro systems, they are not a priority and if Calif spends 1T on illegals or if they spend ZERO it would not impact the quality of the transit, especially since the transit collects fees to use so in theory the collected fares could be allocated to only maintaining the asset but it does not work that way, all collected fees and monies go into the state and all outlays come out and no matter how much the receipts it still would highly likely NOT be maintained as it should be.
There are also many areas in Europe that the transit systems are poor, you changed the topic of conversation to complain about California transit quality because of ILLEGALS which is a boring partisan comment when my original reply was about reducing DEMAND, which Europe does by promoting transit and wind and solar, I did not mention complaints about transit conditions in Calif, that was your attempt to blame illegals and liberals as always.
@wallstreetcappers
Understood....yes, what you wrote was great and factual and provided the proper perspective, which is why I said "it was a great read for the uneducated masses". You just were responding directly to me in a manner that was "let me teach you son" when that was not needed at all. Go tell CDOG that, not me.
The reality is both sides are to blame, all politicians are to blame, corps are to blame, the war machine is to blame. One of the things that ticks me off the most regarding the ZIRP saga is that NEITHER side took the opportunity to take a wrecking ball to the existing deficit...you get this gift in your mailbox and all that the politicians do is spend more, give more to corps, blow it on wars and stupid stuff making reckless decisions over and over. Trump had the best interest rate environment in the history of US presidents and yet the deficit went UP UP UP, he was not a fiscal conservative, he is as out of control as any other politician and if anything the time for the GOP to really take a stand was during ZIRP and yet they did not.
Government spending is due to corporate interference and manipulation, vote grab and the lack of fiscal responsibility and it is not at all partisan or the deficit chart would not be shaped in a straight line up for the last 30 years.
@wallstreetcappers
I did not mix illegals and transit (you changed the topic of conversation to complain about California transit quality because of ILLEGALS), this statement by you is incorrect and you're putting words in my mouth that I did not say. I just asked if the costs of supporting illegals, would be better spent on the transit system. I did not say the transits system are poorly ran because of illegals.
You're trying to say the US needs more demand in transit so we can cars off the roads, like Europe, I am trying to say that demand is down because the system is garbage and nobody feels safe and allocating more funds to transit would help. Recently the state of CA just announced they'll be covering health care costs for almost 1 million illegals. If you're saying the budget for transit is down or that the transit system is under funded, why is the state taking care of illegals, when the transit system could use more funding? The state is running a deficit, why fund illegals when the state is running a deficit before helping the people actually paying the bills?
most metro areas do not properly maintain metro systems Here is your answer to why demand is down on public transit in the US. Fix the problem, create more demand. Pretty simple, right?
@wallstreetcappers
I know what you are trying to do which is blame illegals and the state using resources for that purpose and if they were not spending on that then they would have extra funds...that is faulty thinking, those two items are not the only outlays the state has and if one is eliminated it does not impact the other so you suggesting such is just a partisan attempt to deflect again.
Pretty simple, defund illegals ---> more funding elsewhere, transit or literally anywhere else. Pretty simple actually. When liberal areas defunded police, where were those funds reallocated to? Nowhere?
@BigGame90
Well it took you two tries to see the point I was making, the first reply was wrong I did not say illegals are wrecking the transit system so good you saw and corrected your comment. But to the original reply above you are quite mistaken trying to equate the spending for illegals either up or down would have any impact on transit, that is a deflection of the original point and it is wrong. You would need proof and plenty of it that there is a correlation and that would be by proving Calif in the past say 20-30 yrs ago when illegal count was not increasing as much that it equated to a better transit system. Of course it does not and you ARE trying to force a partisan agenda as you always do. Illegal funding, homeless funding whatever funding does not mean there is more or less for transit upkeep. As I said above if ANYTHING the state would take the transit fees and use those for maintenance and enforcement, but they never have and they do not. The coffers are all combined, the state budget is all combined and the only way you could support your illegals partisan complaints is if they were the only two items in the budget, they are not and you cannot do so with any proof. It would also be super easy to shoot down your contention because transit systems in other parts of the country with little to no illegal costs are crappy just the same, so why are you trying to prove such a limp point?
And this is a third go at your other comment...I did not say that the US should remove car driving and go to transit, I said Europe focuses on overall demand reduction and it takes shape in many forms, they have a connecting transit system that is for sure more inclusive and extensive than the US does, they also invest in wind, solar, their citizens drive smaller cars and they tax gas more to create a motivation to seek out more fuel economy vehicles and use transit. The US and especially the GOP focus on supply as the narrative and think that drilling is the answer, which it is not for a multitude of listed reasons. Trump is obtuse and acts like the US should drill more, well production is at all time highs and yet oil is still high and why is that? Unless you 100% control supply and isolate that supply you have limited control over an OPEC monopoly so unless the GOP wants to kick out the capitalist corps and have the government own all the oil assets and control production, that drill baby routine is for the lesser intelligent and is a weak vote grab. The US does not control its energy supply, corps seek profits and are not loyal to keep production here, so focusing on supply as a means is a losing battle. It is interesting how the DNC focus on demand is shunned and ridiculed and not embraced when DEMAND we have 100% control over, and if you want to break a monopoly you break it by shifting the demand curve, that is the best and longest lasting way to defeat OPEC.
@cdog8043
Excuse me but can’t seem to find your posts when Trump added his 7.9 Trillion! Heck OBama needed 8 years to spend that while rebuilding from the savings & loan disaster caused by the Republicans and there love of deregulation! It’s amazing how time and time again the Grand Old Party has huge Tax cuts and pays for it with more debt !
@wallstreetcappers As I said above if ANYTHING the state would take the transit fees and use those for maintenance and enforcement, but they never have and they do not
Above is your answer to why the US will not spend more on public transit and why citizens will not increase demand on public transit. Public transit is just not safe and people do not feel safe on public transit. Case in point, did you see what happened in Phi the other day in the sub station? Your wet dream is more public transportation, but it's clearly not going to happen. You've said it yourself, they just don't want to spend to keep up.
Obviously illegals and transit are not the only items in the budget. But if we have so many issues in state of CA (for example), why does illegals get a priority in funding when there are so many other cracks in the system? (Grandstanding) What is the point of funding illegals? You'll never answer this because the truth is against your side. The answer is, CA shouldn't be funding illegals at the rate they do. Maybe if the state was running a surplus, they can afford to fund illegals. You said it yourself, as the US sees inflation, EVERYONE should change their spending habits and focus on the essentials or "deals" to help fight inflation. Is the US spending on illegals, helping, or hurting the states deficit?
The DNC is trying to shift the demand curve and look what that's doing. It's driving prices higher! But the DNC either fails to see that, or they will keep trying to shift demand while hurting everyone's pockets in this magical quest to find a unicorn. Maybe it works, maybe it doesn't. It's not a quick fix, yet the DNC is pushing this crap like it's going to flip over night and the world will be saved! The infrastructure is not there to fully support what there DNC is trying to accomplish.
If wind and solar was so great like you think it is, private business would be all over it and investing everything they could to bring that energy source to the US. But they are not, because it's not as great as everyone thinks. DNC needs to stop shoving that idea down everyone's throat because it just doesn't work as other sources. How do you power a wind turbine when there's no wind? That is the reason why this wind project was shut down. Financially, it doesn't work. Lets be real, Gov't is pretty shitty at budgets and they are very wasteful. Wasteful with tax payers money and that's a shame to tax payers.
Europe can focus on lowering demand because they have a greater population in a much smaller area, so it makes sense, for them. Trying to expand public transit in the US is not fiscally responsible, no matter how much it MIGHT save the environment. Are you still working on trying to find all the info for the bullet train that CA was supposed to be completed with by now? That was supposed to be a great achievement at your wet dream of public transportation. How's that coming? Hint. It. Doesn't. Work.
I know the DNC thinks they're going to save the world and they preach that daily to the blind, but they are living in fantasy land and actively destroying everything while trying to accomplish their unrealistic expectations. It's like giving a child a participation trophy. I work with liberals often and they have very wild imaginations and when they see the price of what they envision, they run because it's not economically reasonable and they just waste time. Great ideas, but unrealistic expectations when it comes to pricing.
My wet dream is public transit, wow you got me figured out, props for your sleuth skills. I think you like to deflect and divert and turn things into a partisan fight while blaming groups you do not associate well with as the cause for all the problems in society. I guess that works because your candidates turn to the illegals lolly every time an election comes around so it for sure resonates with your crowd, I guess illegals is your "wet dream" right?? lol what a joke.
This started because someone blasted wind generation costs and efficiency, then I point out that the program was based on cost analysis which was flawed due to loss leader bidding and the concept that technology drives costs down over time and that the engineering assumptions of turbine and parts lasting longer than they did. And then I said the concept of approaching demand is what Europe does more than just the blanket supply based drill baby mantra which does not work, supply control when the energy complex is controlled by an monopoly AND domestic supply is controlled by corporatist profit maximizing companies means we have very little control over supply, yet the GOP focuses on the supply side where the curve is inflexible and set by a monopoly. The GOP is so against a demand focus for some reason and we wonder why pricing does not shift even though our domestic supply is at an all time high? Americans do not want to curb consumption and do not want to make sacrifices and our government does not impose restrictions to guide demand to any degree and we are strongly against alternative supply due to limitations and cost, so here we are going nowhere but pointing fingers at partisan enemies.
Then you decide to say that Calif transit stinks and if they spent less on illegals healthcare that the transit system would be flush with cash, that is your contention and toss in some silly wet dream liberals bad GOP good stuff and here we are. You are driven by partisan divide and faulty blame oriented thinking, your arguments lack proof and substance, you try to connect two completely different issues to form a narrative when really all you want to do is say that illegals and liberals are the blame for whatever the deficiency is even though you have no proof, you have no examples or historical reference, you have nothing but name calling and partisan bit chomping nonsense as a reply.
@wallstreetcappers Then you decide to say that Calif transit stinks and if they spent less on illegals healthcare that the transit system would be flush with cash
Please show me where those words were said by me.
I just did a quick search. CA budgets ~33B a year on transit which includes; The budget package provides a total of $33.2 billion for transportation-related programs in 2023-24, including for the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), California State Transportation Agency (CalSTA), local streets and roads (shared revenues), California Highway Patrol (CHP), Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), and High-Speed Rail Authority
If reports are somewhat accurate and CA is going spend ~3B on illegal immigrants health care, that's 10% of the budget for ALL OF CA'S TRANSIST THAT EVERY CITIZEN CAN USE. That's nuts. Maybe that 10% is what the budget needs to go above and beyond? Look, I know there's a lot more to the budget than transpiration and 3B is a drop in the bucket when you consider the entire budget. I never said the transportation budget would be flush with cash if CA didn't spend on illegal immigrants health care. I asked if you thought spending money on illegal immigrants health care was justified given that transportation budgets are underfunded and the whole system is poorly ran. Which you wouldn't answer.
If wind and solar was so great and was going to save the planet, private and/or Gov't would be all over it. But. It. Stinks. Most people installing solar in my area are trying to be righteous and they'll never admit their "investment" never lives up to what was sold to them. Just like gamblers never admit their loses, but only their wins. I would imagine most people installing solar believe they are saving the world. Maybe they are, maybe they're being lied to. Time will tell. Solar, wind and whatever alternative energy sources there is are all relative to the area. You just want to blame Trump for everything and claim it's all Trumps and the GOPs fault. You say Americans do not want to curb consumption or make sacrifices, but you said so yourself, the state of CA doesn't fund public transportation like it should. This isn't a right or left issue, this is a safety issue. If you think public transportation is a step to curbing consumption, why doesn't the state invest more in public transpiration to clean it up? You still haven't answered my questions about the high speed rail system that is grossly over budget and far behind schedule. That shit will never finish and is literally burning money but people in favor of it, pushed that it was going to save the environment but that tugs at the heart strings and people are emotional when emotions shouldn't be connected with finance. You have all your ideas about trying to become more like Europe but you only want to blame Trump and the GOP instead of looking at the poorly run system and the funding and the fact that whatever you think will work, might actually not be financially feasible or responsible to a budget. The DMV took 3 months to send my registration out. They also sent a late notice but my bill was paid on time, they were just so far behind. Lets be real, gov't runs business like shit and gov't employees just do not give a shit like private employees do because margins are tight for private while gov't just spends (and loses) recklessly. Gov't is spending other peoples money while private pinches pennies.
@wallstreetcappers
This started because someone blasted wind generation costs and efficiency, then I point out that the program was based on cost analysis which was flawed due to loss leader bidding and the concept that technology drives costs down over time and that the engineering assumptions of turbine and parts lasting longer than they did
This seems to be a common trend with these projects. How many times are estimations grossly incorrect? (Nancy-"we have to pass the bill so you can find out what's in it". same shit as these estimates) Same shit with the high speed rail. Maybe, just maybe, they screw the estimates to being with and miss represent the numbers to get the bills/budgets passed? But when you fine comb the numbers, they are usually BS which leads to the project being a complete waste. Can you name any large govt project that was delivered under budget and on time? It's the same shit with solar. Most get lied to so the sale goes through. Same with EVs and their battery range. Sure, the range works correctly in perfect climates and conditions. But take the EV out of that climate and the numbers are not even close to what was sold.
@BigGame90
So in the case of forecasting future costs, what should they base those estimates on? The estimates were based on existing, current, ongoing projects actual in-play farms and systems that are current. The government is not doing the bidding, they take bids and award based on cost and experience etc so you have some government group who is in charge of the project of estimating costs for future possible opportunities and they take the information they have and probably include some cost reductions as I explained concerning technology driving costs down and they form their best forecast and go with it. The benefit of course would also be based on industry data, project data etc and they go with that.
It does not mean the concept of wind or solar or hydro is not of value even if there is a greater cost than benefit in the current period. I installed solar on my current house over ten years ago and it has paid for itself 2-3x over and I have another good 15-20 years of use or longer. The issue with wide adoption solar is the same with most all aspects of human nature, people are not wiling to do the leg work required to make sure that solar is a correct decision based on your house, your location and orientation the area you live in and then what your power bill is, how much solar you need to offset or remove your power consumption and how much that will cost you, THEN you have to actually make sure you monitor it an maintain it and know MORE about it than you need to so you can make sure the investment is working for you. Most people are sloppy lazy unmotivated and then complain when they are not receiving what they thought they would. People spend more time whining about the partisan lies and deception then try and pin the blame for their own lack of intelligence or research on the company who sold them the system or the lease rather than blaming themselves for being stupid and not investigating their investment to make sure it was correct. Solar is awesome, probably one of the best decisions I've ever made, a super awesome return on investment and I am not subject to the local utility raising rates and in my case I actually was able to increase my production by upgrading many of my panels for cheap and now my production is 40-50% higher for little extra cost. So for the lazy blaming public solar is not for you, for someone who wants to know what they are investing in and educate how to make the proper decision, solar is a superb investment. I could talk hours about it and I probably know more about solar than most sales doobs who pitch it as their jobs.
We are many years away from having solar or wind or hydro being cheaper than other older options but that does not mean they are not of high value or that we should not make decisions because of CURRENT costs, if companies and people made decisions based solely on current profitability and costs, the cost curve would never come down, so often there are years or decades of losses to gain market share and technology innovations and infrastructure to drive costs down. When I first started looking at solar, the cost for a panel per watt was 2.50 to 3.00 and higher per watt and thats just the panel not the racking and not the inverter and the wiring etc, those costs have come WAY down and can come down further, but if we followed you and most peoples mentality we would scrap it and just drill baby drill then cry every time OPEC decided to pinch us on supply and blame liberals for something as for why our lives suck.
@wallstreetcappers
Congrats on your SP's. You're in a location where it makes sense. In the PNW, specifically west of the Cascades, it's not as great......lot's of cloudy, 8 hour days in the winter where the sun doesn't hardly get above the southern horizon when it is clear outside. For 2-3 months when we have 15-16 hours of sun it works well, provided you're in a location where you can take advantage of it........lots of hills & trees up here. We are fortunate to have fairly inexpensive hydroelectric power. But the Biden admin. insists it's a good idea to tear down some HE dams up here with no way to replace the multi-MW's of power they produce every day. Granted, this will likely never happen as any of these proposals will be overturned before any demolition is even contracted, but it highlights some of what BigGame speaks of..........THINK before you act. They're wasting millions trying to create a problem that doesn't exist & then come up with a solution. They claim it's all in the name of salmon runs,but it would be much more efficient to just quit netting them.
As for EV's, I believe they have a place in the world......but at this point they're far from being ready to take over as a main source of transport. My SIL has had one for about three years......nothing special, just a cheap sedan. It's a cool little car but even he admits it's not all it's cracked up to be.......the stated range was never what was claimed @ full charge & has dwindled slightly since new (expected)......& if you drive through heavy traffic it'll drop quicker too. He paid about $1500 to have a level 2 charger installed at home (the level 3 charge unit isn't possible for 99% of homes) but charging stations are still rather scarce even in Bellevue. Some days he eats his lunch in the car while charging. It works as a commuter but when they go out of town it's in their gas vehicle.
What's going to happen in the next 6-10 years when millions of these cars need a battery swap? 
Bottom line is they need to let people transition naturally & quit forcing it. If it really was a solution they wouldn't need to subsidize the car companies to make them & give customers incentives to buy them.
@THEMUGG
I do not own an EV for the reasons you state plus there is no history of how the vehicle will hold up longer term. I also will not purchase a product from Musk so maybe if Honda comes out with a product I might consider, Honda has taken a very very very long time dipping their toe in the water, they will not put out a crappy product and they are not afraid to take time and do it right. The cars now and especially the monster SUVs I see from Rivan I do not trust they will last and the value of an EV isnt high enough for me personally. I could use my SP wattage and pay for an EV but I do not think that is a smart use of the asset I have so it might never be a choice I make.
You are 100% right about the PNW and solar panels, but I will say that the days you get the awesome sun exposure are high value days, my long days are at temps over 110 and that actually degrades the output. So once you get over 100 the panel will not perform as well and the output reduces so on days where its 110 and noon I will see my micro inverters decline into the peak sun due to the high temps. I would be very curious how my array would do in low temps and long days, I would imagine it would be much better than here for those days.
People need to invest time knowing what they are getting into but that effort is more than most want to make and then you have to monitor and watch how the array is doing and few do that properly. I like keeping up with my array and I actually got my ladder out and lugged up 30 panels up and down off my roof to swap out, they are 40 lbs each and it was a precarious act going up and down the ladder but I did and it was a cheap way to increase production so it was ok and I survived.
...those costs have come WAY down and can come down further, but if we followed you and most peoples mentality, we would scrap it and just drill baby drill, then cry every time OPEC decided to pinch us on supply, and blame liberals for something as for why our lives suck.
@wallstreetcappers
I do not own an EV...I also will not purchase a product from Musk so maybe if Honda comes out with a product...The cars now and especially the monster SUVs I see from Rivan I do not trust they will last and the value of an EV isnt high enough for me personally. I could use my SP wattage and pay for an EV but I do not think that is a smart use of the asset I have so it might never be a choice I make.
This is a very negative attitude from you. You should reconsider the new cutting-edge technology and jump onboard!
Yes --do NOT buy from Elon and do NOT wait on Honda. BUY FROM RIVIAN!
You should go order one now. Get one for your wife, one for your kid. Tell your friends to get a couple.
I need everyone on COVERS.com to order a couple.
You are right -- you already have the wattage to keep them charged too! You can charge your neighbors to charge theirs. 
I am just kidding -- because I am thinking about trying to find a good point to get a position in RIVN. Technically, I have a couple of spots picked out. But, fundamentally, they are not improving in the areas they need to.
But...maybe soon!
@Raiders22
I see tons of Rivan vehicles down here and I just do not like their designs and costs. I dont see how these first generation Rivan vehicles wont have tons of problems and will be very expensive to repair.
The Rivan stock is too expensive and they will keep needing to raise cash to finance their losses and expand production. I think they are doing a good job with their Amazon trucks, those are all over the place here too. I see tons of EV's down here and if I were to purchase one it would either be the Volvo SUV or the Volkswagen SUV, or for super cheap cost I would get an older Leaf and drive it around locally short distance.
@wallstreetcappers
Volvo?? Had no idea on them. For sure, an EV would be good to get around town. I know you do not like Elon, but they for sure have a lot of the kinks worked out. The folks I know that have them seem to like them. The issue they say is getting repairs, etc.
Yes, RIVN is too pricey and all the numbers are negative and bad. But I feel if anyone is getting positioned to take advantage of the market to directly compete in the market it is them. They seem to be trying to specialize a bit more and not directly compete with Tesla.
But I am considering a spot to get in, because I do see a run-up soon. But whether they can sustain it is another matter. So, I will have my exit point picked out before I even get in.
Weird -- I have never considered geography. Is that area more apt to have EVs than other areas? I know by simply the location S Cal has a lot. But does AZ have more than normal you think?
Established in 1995,
Hot Forum Topics
