Geniuses of The Left and the Glory of Cars

Former Theranos CEO Elizabeth Holmes is most likely going to jail.  She wasn’t Steve Jobs with a vagina, she was a fraud.

George Soros is not a “billionaire philanthropist” anymore than Hillary Clinton is the “most qualified person to ever run for President.”  He’s a cross between a virus and a vulture, first indiscriminately killing whole colonies of prey and looting their corpses long after they are dead.

Mark Zuckerberg is not the kid who brought the world together.  He’s just a creepy stalker with powerful friends.

Elon Musk isn’t “the smartest guy in the room”.  He’s a huckster.  A talented huckster, for sure.  But, the lies of the huckster always catch up with them, like right now.

All of these people are the New Geniuses championed relentlessly by the Left. They are the media darlings of the past decade presented to us as the new faces of capitalism while pulling the strings of the political system to prove to us there is a better way forward for humanity.

But, there isn’t.  This con job of Soros’ “open society” is nothing more than a front for the same Utopian Trotskyism that destroyed Russia a century ago.  They are the same tired, pampered control freaks, the forces of centralization I call The Davos Crowd, set upon us to steal our wealth and and limit our choices.

Musk, in particular, is the worst of the three innovators listed above.  Why?  Because he’s trying to destroy the car.

And the car is the most important invention of the 20th century.  It gave us freedom of movement in ways our ancestors could only dream about.

Freedom of movement enhances trade and resource collection/distribution by orders of magnitude.  It gave us on-demand mechanical advantage not capable with block and tackle or teams of horses.

And Musk wants to tie the car to the centralized, massively inefficient electrical grid, owned and operated around the world by the State.  He wants to chuck a century of perfecting the internal combustion engine be it powered by gasoline or diesel.

But, if he really wanted to free the masses from the tyranny of oil he wouldn’t have built Tesla the way he has.

The Tesla isn’t purpose-built to revolutionize travel, it was purpose-built to serve the Myth of Man-Made Global Warming.  It’s the Toyota Prius Americanized — fattened up to be a luxury sedan with the implicit message that you can have your cake and eat it too.

You can have a car that is powerful, good-looking, luxurious and socially-conscious.

It may be all of those things.  But, the Model S is something more sinister than that.  It is a con job because it trades the reliability of access to power and storage of said power for a dream no one should have been having in the first place.

It is a sad reflection on a world awash in cheap credit and malinvested capital.  Tesla has never produced one car at a price point that doesn’t cost the company thousands of dollars per item.

And therefore its promise is a lie, as it not only eats the cake it also eats your neighbor’s cake as well.

And now the narrative is all about the Model 3 being the new Volkswagen, the people’s car.  To bring our higher community spirit to a consumer-level package.  Because that’s the society this world of bank-owned corporatocracy has created, one where intentions  are more valuable than actually producing things people use.

This is in stark contrast to the original Volkswagen, which truly was a revolutionary product.  In the same way that the original Mustang was the American car perfected for the middle class of the mid-1960’s.

The point of electric cars and, worse, self-driving cars is too make travel unreliable and further ensure that in times of societal crisis all the State would have to do to stop us from getting around is shut down the grid.

Compared to electricity, gasoline production is massively decentralized.  You can’t store electricity reliably.  It’s an on-demand product no matter what the form.

And reliable electricity is the one thing that separates the first world from the third.

Without it a modern economy withers.

And that’s exactly what the Geniuses of the Left have planned for us, a homogeneous world of quiet desperation and tyranny of isolation sold to us as ‘shared community responsibility.’

It’s a good thing none of it is sustainable.

So, when watching this livestream today forgive the digressions into geeking out about cars and understand that this is why Tesla and the Geniuses of the Left are all but finished.  As always NFSW rules apply.

The Apotheosis of George Soros
https://tomluongo.me/2018/08/21/peak-soros-end-history/

Has Tesla Become a Literal Dumpster Fire?
https://tomluongo.me/2018/08/24/has-tesla-become-a-literal-dumpster-fire/

Putin and Merkel hold a Noncommittal Summit on Nordstream 2, Ukraine, Sanctions

You can support my work over at Patreon (http://www.patreon.com/goldgoatsnguns)

 

 

 

 

 

20 thoughts on “Geniuses of The Left and the Glory of Cars

  1. “Compared to electricity, gasoline production is massively decentralized.”
    Ah yes, love to buy my small-batch artisanal gasoline from my friendly neighbor. Imagine thinking that hydrocarbon extraction is more decentralized then say, strapping solar panels to your roof.

    • And do you think you can seriously recharge your Tesla in a reasonable amount of time using solar panels?

      Do you really think the electricity needed to run an economy where electric cars dominate can be generated by solar panels?

      If you do, then you are terminally naive.

      • No I’m saying you have no clue how the hydrocarbon industry works. Oil extraction is such a large, capital-intensive endeavor it’s carried out by massive corporations or nation states. Same basically goes for maintaining the transportation infrastructure and distillation facilities to produce and distribute oil products. There’s a reason one of the largest monopolies (i.e. massive centralization) ever was Standard Oil.

        Sure, a couple of expensive electric cars on the road isn’t going to change much. But public transportation systems and high-speed rail are vastly more efficient and far less dependent on a single energy source than any car-based system electric or IC.

      • And yet, that industry brings you unbelievable energy density to your door at ridiculously low prices. So low, in fact, that solar can’t compete.

        I have a better clue than you, my friend, since I study and recommend not only oil stocks, but oil and natural gas shipping companies to subscribers to my newsletter.

        Don’t think because you read a polemic about Musk that you think you know anything about the person you are criticizing. My work is out there for all to see, from here to Seeking Alpha, Investing.com and my for-hire work.

        So, put down the keyboard and step away from the Musk Fandom. There is a place for ‘renewables’ but and mass transit systems, but they aren’t a solution to anything.

        Life isn’t SimCity my friend.

        The electrical grid is insanely inefficient with nearly 70% of generated electricity going to ground rather than used.

        And who gives a rat’s ass about public transport? No one is arguing against those things. But, they have their limits as to usefulness.

        How are you going to bring that to the vast majority of people who don’t live in cities and who produce most of the food?

        People don’t choose their cars over public transport in mid-sized cities. I’ve been watching this play out in Gainesville, Fl for 30 years now.

        The traffic is terrible and the bus system cannot fix it because people have specific needs that the buses cannot provide a service for.

        Moreover, how are you going to transport goods and people around the world on solar power?

        I think you don’t have any clue as to what a real first world economy needs in terms of energy usage.

        I’m not against solar. I’m not against wind or renewables. But they are and will always be marginal producers (in the economic sense of that word, marginal). Reliability is poor, return on investment is low.

        I have looked into solar over and over again for my house in North Florida. I want to be free of the tyranny of the grid. But, the time and expense are simply not worth the hassle.

      • Here’s one more thing, Russ. I’m a former electro-chemist. You know, conversion of chemical energy into electrical energy. And guess what? That conversion is expensive energetically. Is it tougher than magnetic induction through translational motion of a magnet in a copper coil? At this point? Yes.

        It certainly has a lot of process-loss and maintenance associated with it. What do you think the problem is here? It’s energy density and load. It’s being able to call up thousands of volt-amps of power for short periods of time to spark a reaction that becomes self-sustaining, like starting a simple 1/2 hp pump to pull water out of the ground and pressurize a tank.

        That kind of power is really unavailable reliably via solar. And you aren’t getting there without a feedstock of extremely high energy density already.

        Solar is great but it’s diffuse. Plants are, on average, 3% thermally efficient. Raise a goat and see how much grass it takes to feed one, no less get a gallon of milk a day from it, and you will quickly come to appreciate the greatness of hydrocarbons.

      • It’d be cool if you could actually explain why gasoline production is ‘massively decentralized’ since you seem to consider yourself such an expert. Cuz nothing you just said actually suggests you have a clue what you’re talking about.

        No, mass transit is far cheaper than car ownership. The actual vast majority (80%) of Americans live in urban areas and putting money into mass transit systems would benefit them since they are cheaper, scalable, and more efficient. More than half the world lives in urban areas and it will be closer to two-thirds in a couple of decades. Transit systems that can handle those demographics are needed and the IC-car model simply cannot handle it. When the choice is between a polluted 3-hour commute in gridlock traffic or sitting on a train and browsing the internet for 30 minutes, it won’t be much of a choice.

        There will probably always be a need for IC-engines: container shipping, diesel freight, air travel, but that’s a far cry from literally everyone driving around in an IC car on clogged roads. The industry you think brings ‘unbelievable energy density to your door at ridiculously low prices’ is built on an unstable model that relies on massive amounts of government subsidies and protective policies. If oil companies couldn’t lease land from the government for pennies or didn’t have the near trillion dollar US military apparatus to protect trade lines and pliant dictatorships in places like Saudi Arabia, the system would rapidly run into crisis. If the Straight of Hormuz were shut down for a couple of days it would cripple the US economy. It’s not a robust system.

        Yeah the electric grid loses 70%. How efficient do you think an IC engine is? They’re literally around 30% efficient as well. And that’s before you factor the energy involved in actually finding the oil, extracting it from – say – thousands of feet below the sea floor, running it through thousands of miles of pipe, shipping it thousands of miles on a tanker, heating it in a refinery, and then shipping the products by truck to your local gas station. You just ignore all the inputs that are hidden from your direct view as a consumer so you think it’s super efficient.

      • And renewables like wind and solar are far more potentially decentralizing then hydrocarbon energy. As the technology continues to improve you may see rural communities invest in wind farms, solar, etc. Rural communities in the US were some of the fiercest opponents monopolies like Standard Oil and the railways because they saw how the centralized control of private monopolies can exploit people. Rural co-op initiatives are another example. Rural communities may embrace renewables for much the same reasons.

        Or new models of agriculture may replace the high-input industrial model of today. No one knows for sure but there is far more possibility than your limited imagination will admit.

  2. ….well Toyota has gone full bore into hydrogen fuel cells.
    Re battery power, when batteries are doing 1000km, and people are making their own wind and solar power, it seems fairly simply to conceive of a private network of charging facilities.

    • Hyderogen fuel cells are completely different than batteries being charged from the grid. PEM fuel cells convert hydrocarbons into electricity directly.

      The concept is as old as the internal combustion engine. We chose that one versus the fuel cell. Now, the fuel cell is reaching thermal efficiencies that rival on a cost/KWhr basis that of traditional turbine generation. But… make no mistake, hydrogen or natural gas is the input. Not hooking us up to a grid whose access is fully controlled by the state.

      Those laws will not be liberalized anytime soon, in fact, they are getting more onerous, certainly here in my home state.

      If Tesla were buiit asa fuel cell car I’d be all over it. If Musk was the CEO of Fisker? Happy to see them succeed. But, that still doesn’t absolve the issues of his skill set as the CEO of a car company, which is a separate issue altogether.

      • Guess who plans, builds, and maintains the massive grid of roads in any country… It’s the state.

      • I am not a chemist, but what is to stop a private Company buying a few acres by a highway, setting up a solar or wind farm, and charging batteries in situ.
        Your battery is down to 25%. You pull in, and simply exchange your battery for another one, and you are off and running for several hundred kilometers…

        I mentioned HFC simply because there is a global push to jettison smog machines.

        No reason why several systems cannot compete. If I lived in a Metropolis, I’d want a 2 seater 40 mph battery car . No more no less. Plug n play. They even now have made a solar panel car.

  3. Russ, Yeah, and as a libertarian I tell you the state is terrible at it. But, it’s far better than the bus system built on top of it.

    That’s not a ringing endorsement. Tyranny is all around us. Sure, but let’s not argue for more of it simply because some exists. That’s like advocating for murder because some people do it.

    • The state is terrible at it? Compared to what? Italy turned over infrastructure maintenance to private companies and look at how that’s working out for them.

  4. Anyhow, if the serious motor Companies all abandon hydrocarbons, and America digs its heels in, then I guess maybe next it will be sanctions on any country trading Toyotas…Hondas….Hyundais…(sorry, couldn’t resist)

  5. First they banned the IC auto.
    So, that banned the uncity dweller.
    And that banned choice.
    And that banned freedom, and liberty.
    All ants named Winstons.
    Circle complete.

    All chant, “Technocracy Now.”
    And you will get it, good and hard.

  6. Pingback: Geniuses of The Left and the Glory of Cars, by Tom Luongo | STRAIGHT LINE LOGIC

  7. I’ve always had those suspicions about electric cars, too. I wouldn’t want something that I know could be hacked by someone that may not have my best interests in mind.

    The Mustang problem is those stupid government saaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaafety requirements. Even the smaller Frontier is a good one.

    I will second your motion about the Mazda engines; I am seeing it in my MX-5 Miata.

  8. The condescension of “Russ” here is quite clarifying on the issue. Textbook indoctrinated leftist stamping her feet over anything to the right of Bernie Sanders. If we’re not careful, useful idiots like her will enslave us all.

Leave a Reply