<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_24_1947208</id>
	<title>Tesla Nabs $465M Government Loan To Build Model S</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1245832080000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>SignalFreq writes <i>"<a href="http://www.teslamotors.com/">Tesla Motors</a>, based in San Carlos, California, was approved yesterday for <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/06/23/tesla.electric.cars/index.html">$465M in loans</a> from the Department of Energy's Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing program.  Tesla plans to use $365M of the money to <a href="http://www.teslamotors.com/media/press\_room.php?id=1539">finance a manufacturing facility</a> for the <a href="http://www.teslamotors.com/models/index.php">Model S</a> (<a href="http://www.wired.com/autopia/2009/03/first-look-of-t/">review</a>, <a href="http://www.oncars.com/video/499/2011-Tesla-Model-S-Part-3-of-3-Showtime">Letterman video</a>) and $100M for a <a href="http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci\_12117938?source=rss">powertrain manufacturing plant in the SF Bay Area</a>. 'Tesla will use the ATVM loan precisely the way that Congress intended &mdash; as the capital needed to build sustainable transport,' said Tesla CEO and Product Architect Elon Musk.  Tesla expects the Model S to ship in late 2011 and the base cost to be $57,400 ($49,900 after a federal tax credit).  Ford received $5.9B and Nissan received $1.6B under the same program."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>SignalFreq writes " Tesla Motors , based in San Carlos , California , was approved yesterday for $ 465M in loans from the Department of Energy 's Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing program .
Tesla plans to use $ 365M of the money to finance a manufacturing facility for the Model S ( review , Letterman video ) and $ 100M for a powertrain manufacturing plant in the SF Bay Area .
'Tesla will use the ATVM loan precisely the way that Congress intended    as the capital needed to build sustainable transport, ' said Tesla CEO and Product Architect Elon Musk .
Tesla expects the Model S to ship in late 2011 and the base cost to be $ 57,400 ( $ 49,900 after a federal tax credit ) .
Ford received $ 5.9B and Nissan received $ 1.6B under the same program .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SignalFreq writes "Tesla Motors, based in San Carlos, California, was approved yesterday for $465M in loans from the Department of Energy's Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing program.
Tesla plans to use $365M of the money to finance a manufacturing facility for the Model S (review, Letterman video) and $100M for a powertrain manufacturing plant in the SF Bay Area.
'Tesla will use the ATVM loan precisely the way that Congress intended — as the capital needed to build sustainable transport,' said Tesla CEO and Product Architect Elon Musk.
Tesla expects the Model S to ship in late 2011 and the base cost to be $57,400 ($49,900 after a federal tax credit).
Ford received $5.9B and Nissan received $1.6B under the same program.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460695</id>
	<title>Re:More bullshit</title>
	<author>Bombula</author>
	<datestamp>1245847200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Pass"?  That's your argument?  It's written on an old piece of paper, therefore you don't need to mount a logical defense of the criticism of privatizing all goods and services in a modern global economy?  Since when does any theory, economic or otherwise, get a pass?  Oh I know - it's like when Copernicus and Galileo said "The Earth goes around the Sun" and the Church pointed to what was written on an old piece of paper and said "pass".</p><p>The truth is, tabloid (i.e. neoclassical) economic theory does a shite job of arguing for privatization of a whole range of public goods and services, particularly those that were traditionally under common property rights regimes.  </p><p>Any real economist will tell you that most markets must be regulated or else they tend toward inefficiency, that profitable markets are inefficient by definition (because economic rents, aka net profit, can only be extracted from an uncompetitive and opaque market), and many markets - like the ones mentioned by the parent poster - are too inefficient for private ownership at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Pass " ?
That 's your argument ?
It 's written on an old piece of paper , therefore you do n't need to mount a logical defense of the criticism of privatizing all goods and services in a modern global economy ?
Since when does any theory , economic or otherwise , get a pass ?
Oh I know - it 's like when Copernicus and Galileo said " The Earth goes around the Sun " and the Church pointed to what was written on an old piece of paper and said " pass " .The truth is , tabloid ( i.e .
neoclassical ) economic theory does a shite job of arguing for privatization of a whole range of public goods and services , particularly those that were traditionally under common property rights regimes .
Any real economist will tell you that most markets must be regulated or else they tend toward inefficiency , that profitable markets are inefficient by definition ( because economic rents , aka net profit , can only be extracted from an uncompetitive and opaque market ) , and many markets - like the ones mentioned by the parent poster - are too inefficient for private ownership at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Pass"?
That's your argument?
It's written on an old piece of paper, therefore you don't need to mount a logical defense of the criticism of privatizing all goods and services in a modern global economy?
Since when does any theory, economic or otherwise, get a pass?
Oh I know - it's like when Copernicus and Galileo said "The Earth goes around the Sun" and the Church pointed to what was written on an old piece of paper and said "pass".The truth is, tabloid (i.e.
neoclassical) economic theory does a shite job of arguing for privatization of a whole range of public goods and services, particularly those that were traditionally under common property rights regimes.
Any real economist will tell you that most markets must be regulated or else they tend toward inefficiency, that profitable markets are inefficient by definition (because economic rents, aka net profit, can only be extracted from an uncompetitive and opaque market), and many markets - like the ones mentioned by the parent poster - are too inefficient for private ownership at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459871</id>
	<title>Re:Government is exactly backwards</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1245843060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's a loan. They aren't 'backing a race horse'. The give loans to companies all the time.</p><p>"...deliver an actually return. "<br>In many cases, that is in no way practical.<br>If the company could build a fleet of these cars, then they wouldn't need the loan at all.<br>They have shown viability, and need a large chunk of change to get to the next stage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a loan .
They are n't 'backing a race horse' .
The give loans to companies all the time .
" ...deliver an actually return .
" In many cases , that is in no way practical.If the company could build a fleet of these cars , then they would n't need the loan at all.They have shown viability , and need a large chunk of change to get to the next stage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a loan.
They aren't 'backing a race horse'.
The give loans to companies all the time.
"...deliver an actually return.
"In many cases, that is in no way practical.If the company could build a fleet of these cars, then they wouldn't need the loan at all.They have shown viability, and need a large chunk of change to get to the next stage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459211</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461153</id>
	<title>quick calculation</title>
	<author>codepunk</author>
	<datestamp>1245850380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Toyota Yaris 14,000 base price give or take<br>Model S 49,000</p><p>That is a price difference 35 grand at three bucks a gallon for gas that is about 11 years worth or more, wow I cannot wait to stand in line to buy<br>one of these bad boys. It is certainly going to be amusing watching the auto industry fail yet again because they are letting the govt push<br>them down the whole green energy road. The are getting ready to produce vehicles again that nobody is going to buy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Toyota Yaris 14,000 base price give or takeModel S 49,000That is a price difference 35 grand at three bucks a gallon for gas that is about 11 years worth or more , wow I can not wait to stand in line to buyone of these bad boys .
It is certainly going to be amusing watching the auto industry fail yet again because they are letting the govt pushthem down the whole green energy road .
The are getting ready to produce vehicles again that nobody is going to buy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Toyota Yaris 14,000 base price give or takeModel S 49,000That is a price difference 35 grand at three bucks a gallon for gas that is about 11 years worth or more, wow I cannot wait to stand in line to buyone of these bad boys.
It is certainly going to be amusing watching the auto industry fail yet again because they are letting the govt pushthem down the whole green energy road.
The are getting ready to produce vehicles again that nobody is going to buy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459159</id>
	<title>Curious parallel to the DeLorean</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245839640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IIRC the DeLorean company got almost as much cash from the Brits to build a factory in Northern Ireland.</p><p>Turned out with all the lack of infrastructure and suppliers, it would have been cheaper to build the factory in Beverly Hills.</p><p>Looks like Tesla is going one step further and actually building the factory right away in a high-cost area.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... And aren't there dozens of GM car factories just sitting idle?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IIRC the DeLorean company got almost as much cash from the Brits to build a factory in Northern Ireland.Turned out with all the lack of infrastructure and suppliers , it would have been cheaper to build the factory in Beverly Hills.Looks like Tesla is going one step further and actually building the factory right away in a high-cost area .
.... And are n't there dozens of GM car factories just sitting idle ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IIRC the DeLorean company got almost as much cash from the Brits to build a factory in Northern Ireland.Turned out with all the lack of infrastructure and suppliers, it would have been cheaper to build the factory in Beverly Hills.Looks like Tesla is going one step further and actually building the factory right away in a high-cost area.
.... And aren't there dozens of GM car factories just sitting idle?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459641</id>
	<title>Re:More bullshit</title>
	<author>tnk1</author>
	<datestamp>1245841800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your poster certainly does not have a liberal viewpoint, but his manner of making his point is tolerably civil and directly relates to the parent post's points.  In other words, he's not being a Troll or Flaming anyone so why would he be modded down?</p><p>Actually, if left of center people are modding him down, that would be abusive moderation, and I promise you, if I find anyone doing "disagree moderation" while I am meta-moderating, verily I shall smite them and they shall go "Ouch".  I don't moderate that way when I get my points every few days, and neither should any other mod.</p><p>You will note that there is no -1 Dsagree or -1 Strict Constructionist or -1 Right/Left-Wingnut.  Some people use Overrated for that, but that's abusive as well.  There's a reason for that.  Read the moderation guidelines if you care to know what it is.</p><p>That said, you do have a right to ignore him and there is a way to do that.</p><p>Find the little graphic next to his Nick and UID and click on it.  It looks like a clear circular button, at least initially.  When you mouse over it, it says Alter Relationship.</p><p>You will then get a new page that allows you to mark him as a "Foe" (or "Friend").</p><p>Once you have made your selection, go into <a href="http://slashdot.org/my/comments" title="slashdot.org">http://slashdot.org/my/comments</a> [slashdot.org] and you can scroll down and there is a place where you can set a comment modifier level of a foe or friend or whoever.  If you set it to -6, then you will never ever see that person no matter how high they are modded up (because the highest mod points is +5).  So basically your Foe list becomes a ban list.  Alternately, +6 means you see that person even if they are marked as a -1 Troll or whatever.</p><p>Congratulations, you have now ignored the poster whose opinion you dislike.<br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your poster certainly does not have a liberal viewpoint , but his manner of making his point is tolerably civil and directly relates to the parent post 's points .
In other words , he 's not being a Troll or Flaming anyone so why would he be modded down ? Actually , if left of center people are modding him down , that would be abusive moderation , and I promise you , if I find anyone doing " disagree moderation " while I am meta-moderating , verily I shall smite them and they shall go " Ouch " .
I do n't moderate that way when I get my points every few days , and neither should any other mod.You will note that there is no -1 Dsagree or -1 Strict Constructionist or -1 Right/Left-Wingnut .
Some people use Overrated for that , but that 's abusive as well .
There 's a reason for that .
Read the moderation guidelines if you care to know what it is.That said , you do have a right to ignore him and there is a way to do that.Find the little graphic next to his Nick and UID and click on it .
It looks like a clear circular button , at least initially .
When you mouse over it , it says Alter Relationship.You will then get a new page that allows you to mark him as a " Foe " ( or " Friend " ) .Once you have made your selection , go into http : //slashdot.org/my/comments [ slashdot.org ] and you can scroll down and there is a place where you can set a comment modifier level of a foe or friend or whoever .
If you set it to -6 , then you will never ever see that person no matter how high they are modded up ( because the highest mod points is + 5 ) .
So basically your Foe list becomes a ban list .
Alternately , + 6 means you see that person even if they are marked as a -1 Troll or whatever.Congratulations , you have now ignored the poster whose opinion you dislike .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your poster certainly does not have a liberal viewpoint, but his manner of making his point is tolerably civil and directly relates to the parent post's points.
In other words, he's not being a Troll or Flaming anyone so why would he be modded down?Actually, if left of center people are modding him down, that would be abusive moderation, and I promise you, if I find anyone doing "disagree moderation" while I am meta-moderating, verily I shall smite them and they shall go "Ouch".
I don't moderate that way when I get my points every few days, and neither should any other mod.You will note that there is no -1 Dsagree or -1 Strict Constructionist or -1 Right/Left-Wingnut.
Some people use Overrated for that, but that's abusive as well.
There's a reason for that.
Read the moderation guidelines if you care to know what it is.That said, you do have a right to ignore him and there is a way to do that.Find the little graphic next to his Nick and UID and click on it.
It looks like a clear circular button, at least initially.
When you mouse over it, it says Alter Relationship.You will then get a new page that allows you to mark him as a "Foe" (or "Friend").Once you have made your selection, go into http://slashdot.org/my/comments [slashdot.org] and you can scroll down and there is a place where you can set a comment modifier level of a foe or friend or whoever.
If you set it to -6, then you will never ever see that person no matter how high they are modded up (because the highest mod points is +5).
So basically your Foe list becomes a ban list.
Alternately, +6 means you see that person even if they are marked as a -1 Troll or whatever.Congratulations, you have now ignored the poster whose opinion you dislike.
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458899</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461013</id>
	<title>Re:Green Car on a Budget - Innovation Not Required</title>
	<author>Gordonjcp</author>
	<datestamp>1245849240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>45MPG isn't really that impressive.  My Mum's 15-year-old VW Golf diesel turns in that kind of fuel economy if you drive it like you stole it.  It's actually hard to get the fuel consumption down that far.</p><p>With three large adults and around half a tonne of radio gear and cabling, it got a bit sluggish on hills.  Before you complain that the engine is too small, show me even *one* American car that is safe to use on UK roads.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>45MPG is n't really that impressive .
My Mum 's 15-year-old VW Golf diesel turns in that kind of fuel economy if you drive it like you stole it .
It 's actually hard to get the fuel consumption down that far.With three large adults and around half a tonne of radio gear and cabling , it got a bit sluggish on hills .
Before you complain that the engine is too small , show me even * one * American car that is safe to use on UK roads .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>45MPG isn't really that impressive.
My Mum's 15-year-old VW Golf diesel turns in that kind of fuel economy if you drive it like you stole it.
It's actually hard to get the fuel consumption down that far.With three large adults and around half a tonne of radio gear and cabling, it got a bit sluggish on hills.
Before you complain that the engine is too small, show me even *one* American car that is safe to use on UK roads.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458453</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459507</id>
	<title>Re:Tesla Fanboi</title>
	<author>mzs</author>
	<datestamp>1245841200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I've been watching Tesla since day one. The make cars the way they should be made. You place an order for your car, then the car is built..." up to two and a half years later, for nearly $10K more in base price, plus all the extra for the higher priced options, and without meeting the promised performance numbers.</p><p>You may want to buy your cars like that, but I certainly don't.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I 've been watching Tesla since day one .
The make cars the way they should be made .
You place an order for your car , then the car is built... " up to two and a half years later , for nearly $ 10K more in base price , plus all the extra for the higher priced options , and without meeting the promised performance numbers.You may want to buy your cars like that , but I certainly do n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I've been watching Tesla since day one.
The make cars the way they should be made.
You place an order for your car, then the car is built..." up to two and a half years later, for nearly $10K more in base price, plus all the extra for the higher priced options, and without meeting the promised performance numbers.You may want to buy your cars like that, but I certainly don't.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458389</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459339</id>
	<title>Re:More bullshit</title>
	<author>AnotherUsername</author>
	<datestamp>1245840420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Good thing we have government funded public schools so that <i>anyone</i> can eventually become a literate Supreme Court judge, not just rich kids whose parents could send them to a private school their whole life(which is still a form of socialism, since the kids themselves are relying on someone else [in this case, their parents] to pay for their education).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Good thing we have government funded public schools so that anyone can eventually become a literate Supreme Court judge , not just rich kids whose parents could send them to a private school their whole life ( which is still a form of socialism , since the kids themselves are relying on someone else [ in this case , their parents ] to pay for their education ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good thing we have government funded public schools so that anyone can eventually become a literate Supreme Court judge, not just rich kids whose parents could send them to a private school their whole life(which is still a form of socialism, since the kids themselves are relying on someone else [in this case, their parents] to pay for their education).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459337</id>
	<title>Re:Nissan?</title>
	<author>compro01</author>
	<datestamp>1245840360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Nissan? Why is the United States government giving money to Nissan? Shouldn't the Japanese government do that and not the U. S. taxpayer?</p></div><p>Nissan has 3 auto manufacturing plants in the US, 2 in Tennessee and one in Mississippi.</p><p>The old "domestic vs. import" doesn't really have much meaning anymore.  Practically all cars sold by the "foreign" manufacturers in the US and Canada are built on this continent.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nissan ?
Why is the United States government giving money to Nissan ?
Should n't the Japanese government do that and not the U. S. taxpayer ? Nissan has 3 auto manufacturing plants in the US , 2 in Tennessee and one in Mississippi.The old " domestic vs. import " does n't really have much meaning anymore .
Practically all cars sold by the " foreign " manufacturers in the US and Canada are built on this continent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nissan?
Why is the United States government giving money to Nissan?
Shouldn't the Japanese government do that and not the U. S. taxpayer?Nissan has 3 auto manufacturing plants in the US, 2 in Tennessee and one in Mississippi.The old "domestic vs. import" doesn't really have much meaning anymore.
Practically all cars sold by the "foreign" manufacturers in the US and Canada are built on this continent.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458459</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459661</id>
	<title>Re:Battery replacement cost?</title>
	<author>h4rr4r</author>
	<datestamp>1245841920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Telsa  says the batteries have 70\% capacity at 5 years. So you are looking at the batteries making it to more like 10 years and they don't cost 25k.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Telsa says the batteries have 70 \ % capacity at 5 years .
So you are looking at the batteries making it to more like 10 years and they do n't cost 25k .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Telsa  says the batteries have 70\% capacity at 5 years.
So you are looking at the batteries making it to more like 10 years and they don't cost 25k.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460837</id>
	<title>Re:Fleet Car</title>
	<author>timeOday</author>
	<datestamp>1245848040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>At $50,000 the Model S is more likely to be used as a fleet car then something you use at home.</p></div></blockquote><p>

Huh?  Tell me the <a href="http://www.wired.com/images\_blogs/autopia/images/2009/03/26/tesla1.jpg" title="wired.com">Model S</a> [wired.com] does't resemble other <a href="http://autos.yahoo.com/2009\_lexus\_is\_f/;\_ylt=AhGHXyJynuYNAFL7fBmERL40eL8F;\_ylv=3" title="yahoo.com">consumer vehicles</a> [yahoo.com] in that price range.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>At $ 50,000 the Model S is more likely to be used as a fleet car then something you use at home .
Huh ? Tell me the Model S [ wired.com ] does't resemble other consumer vehicles [ yahoo.com ] in that price range .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At $50,000 the Model S is more likely to be used as a fleet car then something you use at home.
Huh?  Tell me the Model S [wired.com] does't resemble other consumer vehicles [yahoo.com] in that price range.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458555</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461783</id>
	<title>Re:Nissan?</title>
	<author>falconwolf</author>
	<datestamp>1245855540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Why is the United States government giving money to Nissan?</i></p><p>Because Nissan has US factories and employees Americans.  Giving Nissan money keeps Americans employed.</p><p>

Falcon</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is the United States government giving money to Nissan ? Because Nissan has US factories and employees Americans .
Giving Nissan money keeps Americans employed .
Falcon</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is the United States government giving money to Nissan?Because Nissan has US factories and employees Americans.
Giving Nissan money keeps Americans employed.
Falcon</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458459</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460971</id>
	<title>Re:More bullshit</title>
	<author>DragonWriter</author>
	<datestamp>1245848880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Roads are specifically mentioned in the US Constitution.</p></div></blockquote><p>Only <i>post</i> roads are mentioned.</p><blockquote><div><p>US Taxpayer money to a private automaker? Fail. Unless you can point me to the clause I missed that specifically grants the US government that power</p></div> </blockquote><p>The article I, sec. 8, powers to operate a postal service and to build and maintain post roads, together with the necessary and proper clause, certainly give Congress the power to assure that there are vehicles available, which can be used by the postal service, which are, in the judgement of the Congress, appropriate for use the roads it funds under its authority to create post roads (appropriate including, in this case, having desirable environmental or other operational characteristics.) Just as the post roads Congress has the authority to fund may also be used for other purposes, so can the vehicles; if Congress finds that the most expeditious way to meet the needs is to make funds available for general purpose vehicles.</p><p>Alternatively, one could go the easier and shorter route and say, insofar as it is subsidizing particular activities in national and international commerce, Congress action is authorized under the Interstate Commerce Clause.</p><p>Or, if one wanted to appeal to people who are concerned that the principle legitimate function of the government is national defense, you could, noting that personal vehicles are important to the mobility of the informal militia, appeal to the Art. I, Sec. 8 power " to provide for...arming...the militia"; or since no doubt, insofar as even the regular military uses, for many purposes, vehicles available on the general market, and that Congress may deem it more efficient to acquire vehicles by making them generally available through loans rather than paying (rather than loaning) money for custom development where the vehicles would be of more general utility, simply the powers "to raise and support armies" and "to provide and maintain a navy".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Roads are specifically mentioned in the US Constitution.Only post roads are mentioned.US Taxpayer money to a private automaker ?
Fail. Unless you can point me to the clause I missed that specifically grants the US government that power The article I , sec .
8 , powers to operate a postal service and to build and maintain post roads , together with the necessary and proper clause , certainly give Congress the power to assure that there are vehicles available , which can be used by the postal service , which are , in the judgement of the Congress , appropriate for use the roads it funds under its authority to create post roads ( appropriate including , in this case , having desirable environmental or other operational characteristics .
) Just as the post roads Congress has the authority to fund may also be used for other purposes , so can the vehicles ; if Congress finds that the most expeditious way to meet the needs is to make funds available for general purpose vehicles.Alternatively , one could go the easier and shorter route and say , insofar as it is subsidizing particular activities in national and international commerce , Congress action is authorized under the Interstate Commerce Clause.Or , if one wanted to appeal to people who are concerned that the principle legitimate function of the government is national defense , you could , noting that personal vehicles are important to the mobility of the informal militia , appeal to the Art .
I , Sec .
8 power " to provide for...arming...the militia " ; or since no doubt , insofar as even the regular military uses , for many purposes , vehicles available on the general market , and that Congress may deem it more efficient to acquire vehicles by making them generally available through loans rather than paying ( rather than loaning ) money for custom development where the vehicles would be of more general utility , simply the powers " to raise and support armies " and " to provide and maintain a navy " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Roads are specifically mentioned in the US Constitution.Only post roads are mentioned.US Taxpayer money to a private automaker?
Fail. Unless you can point me to the clause I missed that specifically grants the US government that power The article I, sec.
8, powers to operate a postal service and to build and maintain post roads, together with the necessary and proper clause, certainly give Congress the power to assure that there are vehicles available, which can be used by the postal service, which are, in the judgement of the Congress, appropriate for use the roads it funds under its authority to create post roads (appropriate including, in this case, having desirable environmental or other operational characteristics.
) Just as the post roads Congress has the authority to fund may also be used for other purposes, so can the vehicles; if Congress finds that the most expeditious way to meet the needs is to make funds available for general purpose vehicles.Alternatively, one could go the easier and shorter route and say, insofar as it is subsidizing particular activities in national and international commerce, Congress action is authorized under the Interstate Commerce Clause.Or, if one wanted to appeal to people who are concerned that the principle legitimate function of the government is national defense, you could, noting that personal vehicles are important to the mobility of the informal militia, appeal to the Art.
I, Sec.
8 power " to provide for...arming...the militia"; or since no doubt, insofar as even the regular military uses, for many purposes, vehicles available on the general market, and that Congress may deem it more efficient to acquire vehicles by making them generally available through loans rather than paying (rather than loaning) money for custom development where the vehicles would be of more general utility, simply the powers "to raise and support armies" and "to provide and maintain a navy".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461369</id>
	<title>Re:More bullshit</title>
	<author>Quothz</author>
	<datestamp>1245852060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Unless you can point me to the clause I missed that specifically grants the US government that power the 10th Amendment forbids it.  Again, good luck finding five Supremes who can read.</p></div><p>That's not the case. A clause that grants powers <i>generally</i> is as good as one that grants it specifically. Congress has the power to pass laws which are necessary and proper to promote the general welfare. Now, you might disagree that the <b>loan</b> to automakers is not necessary and proper, but surprisingly, the Constitution doesn't require Congress to get your opinion. Instead, it provides for other ways to determine when Congress has overstepped its bounds.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless you can point me to the clause I missed that specifically grants the US government that power the 10th Amendment forbids it .
Again , good luck finding five Supremes who can read.That 's not the case .
A clause that grants powers generally is as good as one that grants it specifically .
Congress has the power to pass laws which are necessary and proper to promote the general welfare .
Now , you might disagree that the loan to automakers is not necessary and proper , but surprisingly , the Constitution does n't require Congress to get your opinion .
Instead , it provides for other ways to determine when Congress has overstepped its bounds .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Unless you can point me to the clause I missed that specifically grants the US government that power the 10th Amendment forbids it.
Again, good luck finding five Supremes who can read.That's not the case.
A clause that grants powers generally is as good as one that grants it specifically.
Congress has the power to pass laws which are necessary and proper to promote the general welfare.
Now, you might disagree that the loan to automakers is not necessary and proper, but surprisingly, the Constitution doesn't require Congress to get your opinion.
Instead, it provides for other ways to determine when Congress has overstepped its bounds.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459347</id>
	<title>Actually you are illiterate</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1245840420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Roads are specifically mentioned in the US Constitution. Pass"<br>the federal highways is specifically mentioned? wow!<br>However the poster was pointing out that is was a major government program that was done very well, and saved people money.</p><p>"A Navy is specifically mentioned. The Marines are a sub unit of the Navy. Pass"<br>Still missing the point. The Marine are run quit well, like the Air Force. Good luck finding that in the constitution.</p><p>"Postal service is permitted. Pass. But note that most packages use private carriers these days, the postal service is mostly for bills and junk mail."</p><p>Irrelevant, it's a government program that can get a piece of paper from your house, across the country and to someone elses house in a few days.<br>The fact that there are less letters is a product of modern communications, not a failure on the government.</p><p>". Federal money for those purposes are unconstitutional. "<br>No, it's not. Do you even have a basis for your argument?</p><p>Here is the tenth:</p><p>"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."</p><p>The state do not have to take the money from the government, they chose to do so. I fact, they don't have to pay many of the taxes to the feds that they do, they choose to. Usually becasue there is something for them in the deal.</p><p>The people don't seem to mind either.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Roads are specifically mentioned in the US Constitution .
Pass " the federal highways is specifically mentioned ?
wow ! However the poster was pointing out that is was a major government program that was done very well , and saved people money .
" A Navy is specifically mentioned .
The Marines are a sub unit of the Navy .
Pass " Still missing the point .
The Marine are run quit well , like the Air Force .
Good luck finding that in the constitution .
" Postal service is permitted .
Pass. But note that most packages use private carriers these days , the postal service is mostly for bills and junk mail .
" Irrelevant , it 's a government program that can get a piece of paper from your house , across the country and to someone elses house in a few days.The fact that there are less letters is a product of modern communications , not a failure on the government. " .
Federal money for those purposes are unconstitutional .
" No , it 's not .
Do you even have a basis for your argument ? Here is the tenth : " The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution , nor prohibited by it to the States , are reserved to the States respectively , or to the people .
" The state do not have to take the money from the government , they chose to do so .
I fact , they do n't have to pay many of the taxes to the feds that they do , they choose to .
Usually becasue there is something for them in the deal.The people do n't seem to mind either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Roads are specifically mentioned in the US Constitution.
Pass"the federal highways is specifically mentioned?
wow!However the poster was pointing out that is was a major government program that was done very well, and saved people money.
"A Navy is specifically mentioned.
The Marines are a sub unit of the Navy.
Pass"Still missing the point.
The Marine are run quit well, like the Air Force.
Good luck finding that in the constitution.
"Postal service is permitted.
Pass. But note that most packages use private carriers these days, the postal service is mostly for bills and junk mail.
"Irrelevant, it's a government program that can get a piece of paper from your house, across the country and to someone elses house in a few days.The fact that there are less letters is a product of modern communications, not a failure on the government.".
Federal money for those purposes are unconstitutional.
"No, it's not.
Do you even have a basis for your argument?Here is the tenth:"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
"The state do not have to take the money from the government, they chose to do so.
I fact, they don't have to pay many of the taxes to the feds that they do, they choose to.
Usually becasue there is something for them in the deal.The people don't seem to mind either.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459025</id>
	<title>Re:A requirement for the loan</title>
	<author>joocemann</author>
	<datestamp>1245839160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are wrong.  My friend's father built an electric porche for 12k in the early 90s.  The car has a range of nearly 200 miles if I recall, and still runs wonderfully to this day.</p><p>Please, by all means, STFU and quit spewing paid-pundit lies from TV.</p><p>Learn and know for yourself -- Get involved and quit echoing the words of liars that you love to trust.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are wrong .
My friend 's father built an electric porche for 12k in the early 90s .
The car has a range of nearly 200 miles if I recall , and still runs wonderfully to this day.Please , by all means , STFU and quit spewing paid-pundit lies from TV.Learn and know for yourself -- Get involved and quit echoing the words of liars that you love to trust .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are wrong.
My friend's father built an electric porche for 12k in the early 90s.
The car has a range of nearly 200 miles if I recall, and still runs wonderfully to this day.Please, by all means, STFU and quit spewing paid-pundit lies from TV.Learn and know for yourself -- Get involved and quit echoing the words of liars that you love to trust.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458393</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459571</id>
	<title>Re:More bullshit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245841440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How is funding a boutique luxury car manufacturer at the rate of half a billion similar to funding interstates, military, postal service, etc.? Tesla does not even hope to provide shared infrastructure or essential services to the country as do these programs. I don't get it.</p></div><p>I am so sick of this argument! They are NOT just a boutique luxury car manufacturer, they started that way to get enough money for their company but they are now working on selling the first truly viable all electric family sedan, that is within the range of most other nice sedans like Audis, etc, which many familys have.</p><p>They are the first company with the balls to say FU to the oil companies and actually do some real innovative work, and they deserve every fucking penny of what they got.</p><p>While every other automaker in the world has treated electric cars like a curiosity, Tesla came right out and saw them as the future. If anyone *doesn't* deserve the money, it's the major automakers that ignored anything efficient until oil blew up and being green became fashionable.<br>-Taylor</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How is funding a boutique luxury car manufacturer at the rate of half a billion similar to funding interstates , military , postal service , etc. ?
Tesla does not even hope to provide shared infrastructure or essential services to the country as do these programs .
I do n't get it.I am so sick of this argument !
They are NOT just a boutique luxury car manufacturer , they started that way to get enough money for their company but they are now working on selling the first truly viable all electric family sedan , that is within the range of most other nice sedans like Audis , etc , which many familys have.They are the first company with the balls to say FU to the oil companies and actually do some real innovative work , and they deserve every fucking penny of what they got.While every other automaker in the world has treated electric cars like a curiosity , Tesla came right out and saw them as the future .
If anyone * does n't * deserve the money , it 's the major automakers that ignored anything efficient until oil blew up and being green became fashionable.-Taylor</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is funding a boutique luxury car manufacturer at the rate of half a billion similar to funding interstates, military, postal service, etc.?
Tesla does not even hope to provide shared infrastructure or essential services to the country as do these programs.
I don't get it.I am so sick of this argument!
They are NOT just a boutique luxury car manufacturer, they started that way to get enough money for their company but they are now working on selling the first truly viable all electric family sedan, that is within the range of most other nice sedans like Audis, etc, which many familys have.They are the first company with the balls to say FU to the oil companies and actually do some real innovative work, and they deserve every fucking penny of what they got.While every other automaker in the world has treated electric cars like a curiosity, Tesla came right out and saw them as the future.
If anyone *doesn't* deserve the money, it's the major automakers that ignored anything efficient until oil blew up and being green became fashionable.-Taylor
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458343</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458861</id>
	<title>Re:Overpriced.</title>
	<author>Dunbal</author>
	<datestamp>1245838560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Seems silly to dump such a large sum into a company that is in fact making luxury cars. Sustainable? Sure, if you're upper-class white America.</i></p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; If you look at the history of cars, they were always owned by the rich people first. EVENTUALLY Joe Average was able to afford one. But as GM and Chrysler (and numerous banks) have proven, you can't make money by selling something to the poor - by definition they don't have any money. If you want a poor person's car, TATA motors has a vehicle for you. But for under $3k, expect it to be a disposable piece of garbage. But hey, it beats waiting at the bus stop, and if you're not THAT poor, just buy two.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seems silly to dump such a large sum into a company that is in fact making luxury cars .
Sustainable ? Sure , if you 're upper-class white America .
      If you look at the history of cars , they were always owned by the rich people first .
EVENTUALLY Joe Average was able to afford one .
But as GM and Chrysler ( and numerous banks ) have proven , you ca n't make money by selling something to the poor - by definition they do n't have any money .
If you want a poor person 's car , TATA motors has a vehicle for you .
But for under $ 3k , expect it to be a disposable piece of garbage .
But hey , it beats waiting at the bus stop , and if you 're not THAT poor , just buy two .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seems silly to dump such a large sum into a company that is in fact making luxury cars.
Sustainable? Sure, if you're upper-class white America.
      If you look at the history of cars, they were always owned by the rich people first.
EVENTUALLY Joe Average was able to afford one.
But as GM and Chrysler (and numerous banks) have proven, you can't make money by selling something to the poor - by definition they don't have any money.
If you want a poor person's car, TATA motors has a vehicle for you.
But for under $3k, expect it to be a disposable piece of garbage.
But hey, it beats waiting at the bus stop, and if you're not THAT poor, just buy two.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458359</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458303</id>
	<title>Re:A requirement for the loan</title>
	<author>TooMuchToDo</author>
	<datestamp>1245836640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You want to restrict their ability to get paid back for their R&amp;D? Their expensive cars are paying for the R&amp;D for them to make cheaper cars.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You want to restrict their ability to get paid back for their R&amp;D ?
Their expensive cars are paying for the R&amp;D for them to make cheaper cars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You want to restrict their ability to get paid back for their R&amp;D?
Their expensive cars are paying for the R&amp;D for them to make cheaper cars.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459627</id>
	<title>Re:More bullshit</title>
	<author>jmorris42</author>
	<datestamp>1245841740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One question.  If the 'general welfare' clause were intended to be as open ended as you guys believe it to be, why did they feel a need to carefully enumerate the powers and limitations in the lines directly under that header?</p><p>So we have two competing theories:</p><p>1.  The 'general welfare' clause, along with the other all purpose commerce clause, grant unlimited powers to the Federal government making the 9th and 10th Amendments (passed as Amendments btw which can override the original document) null and void.</p><p>2.  The words 'general welfare' appear in the section heading describing the general flavor of the more specific defined powers granted in the section which taken together define the limits of Congress's powers to 'provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States.'</p><p>But since you posted as an AC it is doubtful you will man up and even try to answer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One question .
If the 'general welfare ' clause were intended to be as open ended as you guys believe it to be , why did they feel a need to carefully enumerate the powers and limitations in the lines directly under that header ? So we have two competing theories : 1 .
The 'general welfare ' clause , along with the other all purpose commerce clause , grant unlimited powers to the Federal government making the 9th and 10th Amendments ( passed as Amendments btw which can override the original document ) null and void.2 .
The words 'general welfare ' appear in the section heading describing the general flavor of the more specific defined powers granted in the section which taken together define the limits of Congress 's powers to 'provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States .
'But since you posted as an AC it is doubtful you will man up and even try to answer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One question.
If the 'general welfare' clause were intended to be as open ended as you guys believe it to be, why did they feel a need to carefully enumerate the powers and limitations in the lines directly under that header?So we have two competing theories:1.
The 'general welfare' clause, along with the other all purpose commerce clause, grant unlimited powers to the Federal government making the 9th and 10th Amendments (passed as Amendments btw which can override the original document) null and void.2.
The words 'general welfare' appear in the section heading describing the general flavor of the more specific defined powers granted in the section which taken together define the limits of Congress's powers to 'provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States.
'But since you posted as an AC it is doubtful you will man up and even try to answer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458721</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460687</id>
	<title>Wasn't there a better video than that?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245847140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Letterman video that the story links to is terrible, to put it kindly.  No meaningful specifications given:<ul> <li>How much does it cost?</li><li>Where can it be purchased?</li><li>When can it be purchased?</li><li>How long to charge the batteries?</li><li>How long do the batteries last?</li><li>How fast does it go?</li><li>What is the warranty?</li><li>Where is it serviced?</li></ul><p>Are just a few of the pertinent questions that weren't even brought up in that lousy clip.  Instead they showed us a bunch of people drinking (some of them seemed a bit tipsy on camera) and talking in vague generalizations.<br> <br>
That ad video was so bad, I can't help but wonder if it was done by IBM employees.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Letterman video that the story links to is terrible , to put it kindly .
No meaningful specifications given : How much does it cost ? Where can it be purchased ? When can it be purchased ? How long to charge the batteries ? How long do the batteries last ? How fast does it go ? What is the warranty ? Where is it serviced ? Are just a few of the pertinent questions that were n't even brought up in that lousy clip .
Instead they showed us a bunch of people drinking ( some of them seemed a bit tipsy on camera ) and talking in vague generalizations .
That ad video was so bad , I ca n't help but wonder if it was done by IBM employees .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Letterman video that the story links to is terrible, to put it kindly.
No meaningful specifications given: How much does it cost?Where can it be purchased?When can it be purchased?How long to charge the batteries?How long do the batteries last?How fast does it go?What is the warranty?Where is it serviced?Are just a few of the pertinent questions that weren't even brought up in that lousy clip.
Instead they showed us a bunch of people drinking (some of them seemed a bit tipsy on camera) and talking in vague generalizations.
That ad video was so bad, I can't help but wonder if it was done by IBM employees.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465695</id>
	<title>Re:A requirement for the loan</title>
	<author>Anivair</author>
	<datestamp>1245941220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Give it time.  You can't make an affordable car until you make them in large numbers in more than one state.  if I were handcrafting cars one at a time, you can bet your ass they wouldn't cost 25,000.  Think how much a gas powered car would cost without the infrastructure in place to support it.  the price will come down if the cars are made.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Give it time .
You ca n't make an affordable car until you make them in large numbers in more than one state .
if I were handcrafting cars one at a time , you can bet your ass they would n't cost 25,000 .
Think how much a gas powered car would cost without the infrastructure in place to support it .
the price will come down if the cars are made .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Give it time.
You can't make an affordable car until you make them in large numbers in more than one state.
if I were handcrafting cars one at a time, you can bet your ass they wouldn't cost 25,000.
Think how much a gas powered car would cost without the infrastructure in place to support it.
the price will come down if the cars are made.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461067</id>
	<title>Re:A requirement for the loan</title>
	<author>falconwolf</author>
	<datestamp>1245849660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>should have been a 25K car cost cap.</i></p><p>As with computers early adopters will help finance more affordable cars.</p><p>In general I oppose subsidies but at least this money has to be repaid, and some of the money will be used to open a factory employing people.</p><p>

Falcon</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>should have been a 25K car cost cap.As with computers early adopters will help finance more affordable cars.In general I oppose subsidies but at least this money has to be repaid , and some of the money will be used to open a factory employing people .
Falcon</tokentext>
<sentencetext>should have been a 25K car cost cap.As with computers early adopters will help finance more affordable cars.In general I oppose subsidies but at least this money has to be repaid, and some of the money will be used to open a factory employing people.
Falcon</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459727</id>
	<title>Re:Geography</title>
	<author>hguorbray</author>
	<datestamp>1245842280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Although I don't doubt that there are political reasons for having some Tesla mfg in the US (not to mention tariffs, etc) there are also some practical ones:<br><br>1) You can't just take some laid off Mexican auto assemblers from an old GM plant, put them in a new building and tell them to start making Electric car drivetrains -there are probably entirely new process steps (not to mention components) which would make this a non-starter<br>2) they probably need to tweak that process as well as being able to introduce changes in parts as the design is tested and improved<br><br>therefore it makes sense for the factory to be close to where design/engineering takes place -not to mention that there is also a highly trained, technologically able workforce in the Bay Area.<br><br>Also, thanks to Hitech, Lockheed, Lawrence Livermore Labs, etc there are a great many machine tooling shops in the area which are second to none.<br><br>Think of this as a pilot mfg plant -they will no doubt try to go somewhere cheaper when it comes time to produce quantities in the 100ks<br><br>On the other hand, we have the only large scale auto manufacturing plant left on the West Coast just down the street from me: http://www.nummi.com/ , so stranger things have happened.<br><br>-I'm just sayin'</htmltext>
<tokenext>Although I do n't doubt that there are political reasons for having some Tesla mfg in the US ( not to mention tariffs , etc ) there are also some practical ones : 1 ) You ca n't just take some laid off Mexican auto assemblers from an old GM plant , put them in a new building and tell them to start making Electric car drivetrains -there are probably entirely new process steps ( not to mention components ) which would make this a non-starter2 ) they probably need to tweak that process as well as being able to introduce changes in parts as the design is tested and improvedtherefore it makes sense for the factory to be close to where design/engineering takes place -not to mention that there is also a highly trained , technologically able workforce in the Bay Area.Also , thanks to Hitech , Lockheed , Lawrence Livermore Labs , etc there are a great many machine tooling shops in the area which are second to none.Think of this as a pilot mfg plant -they will no doubt try to go somewhere cheaper when it comes time to produce quantities in the 100ksOn the other hand , we have the only large scale auto manufacturing plant left on the West Coast just down the street from me : http : //www.nummi.com/ , so stranger things have happened.-I 'm just sayin'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Although I don't doubt that there are political reasons for having some Tesla mfg in the US (not to mention tariffs, etc) there are also some practical ones:1) You can't just take some laid off Mexican auto assemblers from an old GM plant, put them in a new building and tell them to start making Electric car drivetrains -there are probably entirely new process steps (not to mention components) which would make this a non-starter2) they probably need to tweak that process as well as being able to introduce changes in parts as the design is tested and improvedtherefore it makes sense for the factory to be close to where design/engineering takes place -not to mention that there is also a highly trained, technologically able workforce in the Bay Area.Also, thanks to Hitech, Lockheed, Lawrence Livermore Labs, etc there are a great many machine tooling shops in the area which are second to none.Think of this as a pilot mfg plant -they will no doubt try to go somewhere cheaper when it comes time to produce quantities in the 100ksOn the other hand, we have the only large scale auto manufacturing plant left on the West Coast just down the street from me: http://www.nummi.com/ , so stranger things have happened.-I'm just sayin'</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459101</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465559</id>
	<title>Re:quick calculation</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1245940440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Toyota Yaris 14,000 base price give or take<br>Model S 49,000</p></div><p>Toyota Yaris econobox shitpile descendant of echo</p><p>Model S luxury car descended from a Mercedes</p><p><div class="quote"><p>That is a price difference 35 grand at three bucks a gallon for gas that is about 11 years worth or more, wow I cannot wait to stand in line to buy one of these bad boys.</p></div><p>You are not part of the target market, so no one should care what you think.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The are getting ready to produce vehicles again that nobody is going to buy.</p></div><p>Again, the target market is successful people with money, not you. Even if they were targeting lawn-defending curmudgeons who drive shitboxes, the market would still be larger than just YOU, so whether YOU will buy this car or not is not interesting.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Toyota Yaris 14,000 base price give or takeModel S 49,000Toyota Yaris econobox shitpile descendant of echoModel S luxury car descended from a MercedesThat is a price difference 35 grand at three bucks a gallon for gas that is about 11 years worth or more , wow I can not wait to stand in line to buy one of these bad boys.You are not part of the target market , so no one should care what you think.The are getting ready to produce vehicles again that nobody is going to buy.Again , the target market is successful people with money , not you .
Even if they were targeting lawn-defending curmudgeons who drive shitboxes , the market would still be larger than just YOU , so whether YOU will buy this car or not is not interesting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Toyota Yaris 14,000 base price give or takeModel S 49,000Toyota Yaris econobox shitpile descendant of echoModel S luxury car descended from a MercedesThat is a price difference 35 grand at three bucks a gallon for gas that is about 11 years worth or more, wow I cannot wait to stand in line to buy one of these bad boys.You are not part of the target market, so no one should care what you think.The are getting ready to produce vehicles again that nobody is going to buy.Again, the target market is successful people with money, not you.
Even if they were targeting lawn-defending curmudgeons who drive shitboxes, the market would still be larger than just YOU, so whether YOU will buy this car or not is not interesting.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461153</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465359</id>
	<title>Re:A requirement for the loan</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1245939240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>For the american market that is not that excited about electric cars and is not going to drive a car without 10 cup holders and a movie screen, it is simply not feasable to build a very small car unless it is a highly tuned and precise machine.</p> </div><p>Simply not true. Small, economical cars short on features have been sold all along. Most people don't care if they can lower their econobox and drift it around corners. You are FUDding.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For the american market that is not that excited about electric cars and is not going to drive a car without 10 cup holders and a movie screen , it is simply not feasable to build a very small car unless it is a highly tuned and precise machine .
Simply not true .
Small , economical cars short on features have been sold all along .
Most people do n't care if they can lower their econobox and drift it around corners .
You are FUDding .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For the american market that is not that excited about electric cars and is not going to drive a car without 10 cup holders and a movie screen, it is simply not feasable to build a very small car unless it is a highly tuned and precise machine.
Simply not true.
Small, economical cars short on features have been sold all along.
Most people don't care if they can lower their econobox and drift it around corners.
You are FUDding.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459383</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311</id>
	<title>Re:More bullshit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245836640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; I know. Just like those silly Interstate highways</p><p>Roads are specifically mentioned in the US Constitution.  Pass</p><p>&gt; the US Marine Corps</p><p>A Navy is specifically mentioned.  The Marines are a sub unit of the Navy.  Pass</p><p>&gt; the US Postal Service that'll deliver</p><p>Postal service is permitted.  Pass.  But note that most packages use private carriers these days, the postal service is mostly for bills and junk mail.</p><p>&gt; and those terribly inefficient and socialized Firefighters and that neo-communist socialized Police Department</p><p>Those services are not provided by the US government.  Federal money for those purposes are unconstitutional.  Good luck getting enough literate Supremes to be able to figure that out any time soon.</p><p>US Taxpayer money to a private automaker?  Fail. Unless you can point me to the clause I missed that specifically grants the US government that power the 10th Amendment forbids it.  Again, good luck finding five Supremes who can read.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; I know .
Just like those silly Interstate highwaysRoads are specifically mentioned in the US Constitution .
Pass &gt; the US Marine CorpsA Navy is specifically mentioned .
The Marines are a sub unit of the Navy .
Pass &gt; the US Postal Service that 'll deliverPostal service is permitted .
Pass. But note that most packages use private carriers these days , the postal service is mostly for bills and junk mail. &gt; and those terribly inefficient and socialized Firefighters and that neo-communist socialized Police DepartmentThose services are not provided by the US government .
Federal money for those purposes are unconstitutional .
Good luck getting enough literate Supremes to be able to figure that out any time soon.US Taxpayer money to a private automaker ?
Fail. Unless you can point me to the clause I missed that specifically grants the US government that power the 10th Amendment forbids it .
Again , good luck finding five Supremes who can read .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; I know.
Just like those silly Interstate highwaysRoads are specifically mentioned in the US Constitution.
Pass&gt; the US Marine CorpsA Navy is specifically mentioned.
The Marines are a sub unit of the Navy.
Pass&gt; the US Postal Service that'll deliverPostal service is permitted.
Pass.  But note that most packages use private carriers these days, the postal service is mostly for bills and junk mail.&gt; and those terribly inefficient and socialized Firefighters and that neo-communist socialized Police DepartmentThose services are not provided by the US government.
Federal money for those purposes are unconstitutional.
Good luck getting enough literate Supremes to be able to figure that out any time soon.US Taxpayer money to a private automaker?
Fail. Unless you can point me to the clause I missed that specifically grants the US government that power the 10th Amendment forbids it.
Again, good luck finding five Supremes who can read.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458117</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459701</id>
	<title>Re:loans for everyone!</title>
	<author>zevans</author>
	<datestamp>1245842160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because Nissan have a clue and the Detroit companies don't, perhaps? No, surely not, America must know best!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because Nissan have a clue and the Detroit companies do n't , perhaps ?
No , surely not , America must know best !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because Nissan have a clue and the Detroit companies don't, perhaps?
No, surely not, America must know best!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458221</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459817</id>
	<title>Re:Fleet Car</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245842820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is not designed as a "fleet car". Fleets are composed of base line ford crown vic's and dodge stratus'. Maybe the odd caddilac here and there but no company or agency would be able to justify a fleet $50k cars. Meanwhile, millions of consumers have no problem buying BMW's, Mercedes, etc. This is absolutely designed for a consumer's driveway...or garage with a power outlet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is not designed as a " fleet car " .
Fleets are composed of base line ford crown vic 's and dodge stratus' .
Maybe the odd caddilac here and there but no company or agency would be able to justify a fleet $ 50k cars .
Meanwhile , millions of consumers have no problem buying BMW 's , Mercedes , etc .
This is absolutely designed for a consumer 's driveway...or garage with a power outlet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is not designed as a "fleet car".
Fleets are composed of base line ford crown vic's and dodge stratus'.
Maybe the odd caddilac here and there but no company or agency would be able to justify a fleet $50k cars.
Meanwhile, millions of consumers have no problem buying BMW's, Mercedes, etc.
This is absolutely designed for a consumer's driveway...or garage with a power outlet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458555</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459559</id>
	<title>Re:Nissan?</title>
	<author>CorporateSuit</author>
	<datestamp>1245841440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why would you get modded troll for asking an honest, critical question about something that appears in the summary?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would you get modded troll for asking an honest , critical question about something that appears in the summary ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would you get modded troll for asking an honest, critical question about something that appears in the summary?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458459</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459217</id>
	<title>Re:loans for everyone!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245839820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Global markets where foreign owned companies own companies here in the US that manufacture and put together the parts to make a car. Therefore the money loaned to the foreign name is actually going to local business and has to pay local taxes which happen to be cheaper than import duty fees and out of country to in country vehicle compliance testing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Global markets where foreign owned companies own companies here in the US that manufacture and put together the parts to make a car .
Therefore the money loaned to the foreign name is actually going to local business and has to pay local taxes which happen to be cheaper than import duty fees and out of country to in country vehicle compliance testing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Global markets where foreign owned companies own companies here in the US that manufacture and put together the parts to make a car.
Therefore the money loaned to the foreign name is actually going to local business and has to pay local taxes which happen to be cheaper than import duty fees and out of country to in country vehicle compliance testing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458221</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28464929</id>
	<title>Model T</title>
	<author>jimbob666</author>
	<datestamp>1245936120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I read the title to the article as "to build a Model T". Back in time we go!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I read the title to the article as " to build a Model T " .
Back in time we go !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I read the title to the article as "to build a Model T".
Back in time we go!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459067</id>
	<title>Re:loans for everyone!</title>
	<author>mzs</author>
	<datestamp>1245839340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because the money is going to a Nissan plant in TN that is being retrofitted to develop, manufacture, and test cutting edge batteries. Would you rather that the DOE does not provided to money on some idiotic jingoistic grounds only so that a future industry in and that portion of the economy is cornered in Japan?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because the money is going to a Nissan plant in TN that is being retrofitted to develop , manufacture , and test cutting edge batteries .
Would you rather that the DOE does not provided to money on some idiotic jingoistic grounds only so that a future industry in and that portion of the economy is cornered in Japan ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because the money is going to a Nissan plant in TN that is being retrofitted to develop, manufacture, and test cutting edge batteries.
Would you rather that the DOE does not provided to money on some idiotic jingoistic grounds only so that a future industry in and that portion of the economy is cornered in Japan?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458221</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459213</id>
	<title>Re:Battery replacement cost?</title>
	<author>amorsen</author>
	<datestamp>1245839820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Their FAQ claims the car is a great lasting investment due to lack of complexity and moving parts, but having to drop $25k every 6 years for a new battery would be a deal breaker.</p></div><p>There should be good chances that the old batteries will be worth a decent amount of money, because the raw materials are so expensive. There are also batteries on the way using much cheaper materials, so it is possible that the second battery will only be a fraction of the price (but in that case you probably won't get much for your now-obsolete battery).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Their FAQ claims the car is a great lasting investment due to lack of complexity and moving parts , but having to drop $ 25k every 6 years for a new battery would be a deal breaker.There should be good chances that the old batteries will be worth a decent amount of money , because the raw materials are so expensive .
There are also batteries on the way using much cheaper materials , so it is possible that the second battery will only be a fraction of the price ( but in that case you probably wo n't get much for your now-obsolete battery ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Their FAQ claims the car is a great lasting investment due to lack of complexity and moving parts, but having to drop $25k every 6 years for a new battery would be a deal breaker.There should be good chances that the old batteries will be worth a decent amount of money, because the raw materials are so expensive.
There are also batteries on the way using much cheaper materials, so it is possible that the second battery will only be a fraction of the price (but in that case you probably won't get much for your now-obsolete battery).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460543</id>
	<title>To really be effective</title>
	<author>kilodelta</author>
	<datestamp>1245846300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They have to get the price below $20,000 per car. The technology does in fact exist to do this.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They have to get the price below $ 20,000 per car .
The technology does in fact exist to do this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They have to get the price below $20,000 per car.
The technology does in fact exist to do this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460861</id>
	<title>Re:Overpriced.</title>
	<author>couchslug</author>
	<datestamp>1245848160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"What about those of us who want a reliable, energy efficient car without sacrificing our children's education to get it?"</p><p>Odd to see this on a geek forum, where people (usually) get that the EARLY ADOPTERS pay for what is cutting-edge gear one day but promptly filters down to the rest of us for much lower prices. Remember when RAM was over a dollar a meg?</p><p>If you want a reliable, energy efficient car right now you have plenty of gasoline and diesel options, all of which were funded over time by...early adopters.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" What about those of us who want a reliable , energy efficient car without sacrificing our children 's education to get it ?
" Odd to see this on a geek forum , where people ( usually ) get that the EARLY ADOPTERS pay for what is cutting-edge gear one day but promptly filters down to the rest of us for much lower prices .
Remember when RAM was over a dollar a meg ? If you want a reliable , energy efficient car right now you have plenty of gasoline and diesel options , all of which were funded over time by...early adopters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"What about those of us who want a reliable, energy efficient car without sacrificing our children's education to get it?
"Odd to see this on a geek forum, where people (usually) get that the EARLY ADOPTERS pay for what is cutting-edge gear one day but promptly filters down to the rest of us for much lower prices.
Remember when RAM was over a dollar a meg?If you want a reliable, energy efficient car right now you have plenty of gasoline and diesel options, all of which were funded over time by...early adopters.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458359</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458359</id>
	<title>Overpriced.</title>
	<author>r1v3t3d</author>
	<datestamp>1245836760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seems silly to dump such a large sum into a company that is in fact making luxury cars. Sustainable? Sure, if you're upper-class white America.

What about those of us who want a reliable, energy efficient car without sacrificing our children's education to get it?

Tesla is doing good work, but I don't think they should be getting taxpayer dollars for something that ultimately I won't be able to afford anytime in the foreseeable future.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seems silly to dump such a large sum into a company that is in fact making luxury cars .
Sustainable ? Sure , if you 're upper-class white America .
What about those of us who want a reliable , energy efficient car without sacrificing our children 's education to get it ?
Tesla is doing good work , but I do n't think they should be getting taxpayer dollars for something that ultimately I wo n't be able to afford anytime in the foreseeable future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seems silly to dump such a large sum into a company that is in fact making luxury cars.
Sustainable? Sure, if you're upper-class white America.
What about those of us who want a reliable, energy efficient car without sacrificing our children's education to get it?
Tesla is doing good work, but I don't think they should be getting taxpayer dollars for something that ultimately I won't be able to afford anytime in the foreseeable future.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458165</id>
	<title>Green Car on a Budget - Innovation Not Required</title>
	<author>abroadst</author>
	<datestamp>1245836220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm anti-subsidy for luxury car manufacturers. Starting at $49,900 -- bah! How about spending a fraction of this to rip out the engine of a Chevy Aveo and put in an electric motor? How about an electric car people can actually buy? Innovation not required!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm anti-subsidy for luxury car manufacturers .
Starting at $ 49,900 -- bah !
How about spending a fraction of this to rip out the engine of a Chevy Aveo and put in an electric motor ?
How about an electric car people can actually buy ?
Innovation not required !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm anti-subsidy for luxury car manufacturers.
Starting at $49,900 -- bah!
How about spending a fraction of this to rip out the engine of a Chevy Aveo and put in an electric motor?
How about an electric car people can actually buy?
Innovation not required!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458743</id>
	<title>Model Tee Hee Hee</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1245838080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If they are on "S" now, then the next model in line is "T". The potential confusion cannot be good for marketing. Reminds me of the door company that made a "Commodoor-64".<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If they are on " S " now , then the next model in line is " T " .
The potential confusion can not be good for marketing .
Reminds me of the door company that made a " Commodoor-64 " .
       </tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they are on "S" now, then the next model in line is "T".
The potential confusion cannot be good for marketing.
Reminds me of the door company that made a "Commodoor-64".
       </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459385</id>
	<title>Re:Geography</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245840660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I  suspect the factory location is more political than practical.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Actually my initial thought was the opposite.  Who is the most likely to buy (read, afford) these cars?  Silicon Valley nerds and Hollywood liberals.  (And I don't mean to disparage either of those groups; if I were in either of their socioeconomic strata I would be standing in line with them.)  Factor in the stricter emission standards of California as extra incentive, and one has to wonder why it would make sense to build them 2000 miles away when all of the output will be going to the West Coast anyway.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I suspect the factory location is more political than practical .
Actually my initial thought was the opposite .
Who is the most likely to buy ( read , afford ) these cars ?
Silicon Valley nerds and Hollywood liberals .
( And I do n't mean to disparage either of those groups ; if I were in either of their socioeconomic strata I would be standing in line with them .
) Factor in the stricter emission standards of California as extra incentive , and one has to wonder why it would make sense to build them 2000 miles away when all of the output will be going to the West Coast anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I  suspect the factory location is more political than practical.
Actually my initial thought was the opposite.
Who is the most likely to buy (read, afford) these cars?
Silicon Valley nerds and Hollywood liberals.
(And I don't mean to disparage either of those groups; if I were in either of their socioeconomic strata I would be standing in line with them.
)  Factor in the stricter emission standards of California as extra incentive, and one has to wonder why it would make sense to build them 2000 miles away when all of the output will be going to the West Coast anyway.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459101</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459461</id>
	<title>Re:A requirement for the loan</title>
	<author>cvtan</author>
	<datestamp>1245840960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just so I understand the laws of electric car physics:  Lone individuals in their barn can build a 200-mile electric car, but no major player can do this.  If someone tries to buy said home-made electric vehicle it is "not available" or "it will be in production next year..."  I get it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just so I understand the laws of electric car physics : Lone individuals in their barn can build a 200-mile electric car , but no major player can do this .
If someone tries to buy said home-made electric vehicle it is " not available " or " it will be in production next year... " I get it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just so I understand the laws of electric car physics:  Lone individuals in their barn can build a 200-mile electric car, but no major player can do this.
If someone tries to buy said home-made electric vehicle it is "not available" or "it will be in production next year..."  I get it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459025</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465679</id>
	<title>Re:It's a Loan.</title>
	<author>Anivair</author>
	<datestamp>1245941100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't bother. there are too many drooling tards around to get the difference.  See, they don't like loans when the numbers are big.  Big numbers scare Americans.  Something about maths.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't bother .
there are too many drooling tards around to get the difference .
See , they do n't like loans when the numbers are big .
Big numbers scare Americans .
Something about maths .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't bother.
there are too many drooling tards around to get the difference.
See, they don't like loans when the numbers are big.
Big numbers scare Americans.
Something about maths.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28464607</id>
	<title>Re:More bullshit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245931260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, <em>post roads</em> are specifically mentioned. One lane each way is more than enough to handle USPS traffic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , post roads are specifically mentioned .
One lane each way is more than enough to handle USPS traffic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, post roads are specifically mentioned.
One lane each way is more than enough to handle USPS traffic.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458445</id>
	<title>Re:A requirement for the loan</title>
	<author>wildsurf</author>
	<datestamp>1245837000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>should have been a 25K car cost cap.</i> <br> <br>

In the electric car industry, that's simply too big a jump to make all at once.  If your ultimate goal is to produce 200,000 $25k cars a year, and the current state of the art is 2,000 $100k cars a year (the Tesla Roadster), then it's only reasonable to expect to produce 20,000 $50k cars (the Tesla Model S) as a stepping-stone. The market is there, and those early adopters will facilitate the eventual availability of the $25k mass-market car you're talking about. If you do the math, the "rich" purchasers of the Model S will be kicking in about one billion dollars a year towards this goal, double the government loan amount. So think before you knock 'em.</htmltext>
<tokenext>should have been a 25K car cost cap .
In the electric car industry , that 's simply too big a jump to make all at once .
If your ultimate goal is to produce 200,000 $ 25k cars a year , and the current state of the art is 2,000 $ 100k cars a year ( the Tesla Roadster ) , then it 's only reasonable to expect to produce 20,000 $ 50k cars ( the Tesla Model S ) as a stepping-stone .
The market is there , and those early adopters will facilitate the eventual availability of the $ 25k mass-market car you 're talking about .
If you do the math , the " rich " purchasers of the Model S will be kicking in about one billion dollars a year towards this goal , double the government loan amount .
So think before you knock 'em .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>should have been a 25K car cost cap.
In the electric car industry, that's simply too big a jump to make all at once.
If your ultimate goal is to produce 200,000 $25k cars a year, and the current state of the art is 2,000 $100k cars a year (the Tesla Roadster), then it's only reasonable to expect to produce 20,000 $50k cars (the Tesla Model S) as a stepping-stone.
The market is there, and those early adopters will facilitate the eventual availability of the $25k mass-market car you're talking about.
If you do the math, the "rich" purchasers of the Model S will be kicking in about one billion dollars a year towards this goal, double the government loan amount.
So think before you knock 'em.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458843</id>
	<title>Congrats! You're 'That Guy'</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245838500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Before anyone even opened up this article you knew there were going to be idiots who:</p><p>1. Didn't bother to read the fucking article</p><p>2. Saw a Japanese company name</p><p>3. Immediately posted an idiotic 'US loan going to Japanese company? WTF???' post</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Before anyone even opened up this article you knew there were going to be idiots who : 1 .
Did n't bother to read the fucking article2 .
Saw a Japanese company name3 .
Immediately posted an idiotic 'US loan going to Japanese company ?
WTF ? ? ? ' post</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Before anyone even opened up this article you knew there were going to be idiots who:1.
Didn't bother to read the fucking article2.
Saw a Japanese company name3.
Immediately posted an idiotic 'US loan going to Japanese company?
WTF???' post</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458221</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459821</id>
	<title>Re:Tesla Fanboi</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1245842820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So have I, and lately all he does his lie there and rot.</p><p>", without the need to change the oil or pay at the pump"</p><p>Also, without the need to go very far.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So have I , and lately all he does his lie there and rot .
" , without the need to change the oil or pay at the pump " Also , without the need to go very far .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So have I, and lately all he does his lie there and rot.
", without the need to change the oil or pay at the pump"Also, without the need to go very far.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458389</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465375</id>
	<title>Re:A requirement for the loan</title>
	<author>hesaigo999ca</author>
	<datestamp>1245939360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Funny, but true...if they really were serious about getting us better cars at cheaper prices, get the aoen which is about 9000$ at its cheapest, and take out the motor and replace it with the electric one, for about another 5000$<br>that is still only 14000$ so the 6000$ is profit basically....why not eat the profits and make it back on servicing at least this way everyone gets one of these electric cars right now instead of years from now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Funny , but true...if they really were serious about getting us better cars at cheaper prices , get the aoen which is about 9000 $ at its cheapest , and take out the motor and replace it with the electric one , for about another 5000 $ that is still only 14000 $ so the 6000 $ is profit basically....why not eat the profits and make it back on servicing at least this way everyone gets one of these electric cars right now instead of years from now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Funny, but true...if they really were serious about getting us better cars at cheaper prices, get the aoen which is about 9000$ at its cheapest, and take out the motor and replace it with the electric one, for about another 5000$that is still only 14000$ so the 6000$ is profit basically....why not eat the profits and make it back on servicing at least this way everyone gets one of these electric cars right now instead of years from now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459247</id>
	<title>Re:Battery replacement cost?</title>
	<author>Anynomous Coward</author>
	<datestamp>1245839940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wouldn't worry too much. Over the past four years battery prices have already more than halved while their lifetimes have doubled.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't worry too much .
Over the past four years battery prices have already more than halved while their lifetimes have doubled .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't worry too much.
Over the past four years battery prices have already more than halved while their lifetimes have doubled.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459577</id>
	<title>Re:Electric vehicles aren't great...</title>
	<author>skine</author>
	<datestamp>1245841500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...yet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...yet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458543</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458991</id>
	<title>Re:Green Car on a Budget - Innovation Not Required</title>
	<author>WebCowboy</author>
	<datestamp>1245839040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm anti-subsidy for luxury car manufacturers. Starting at $49,900 -- bah! How about spending a fraction of this to rip out the engine of a Chevy Aveo and put in an electric motor? How about an electric car people can actually buy? Innovation not required!</p></div><p>There is a bit more to the Tesla cars than just ripping out the ICE and putting in a regular electric motor.  There is very advanced liquid-cooled Lithium Ion battery technology, a next-gen 3-phase/4 pole motor, etc.  It performs at par or better than other cars in its price point, and is also practical (can carry 5 passengers and their luggage comfortably).  It is easily 200 to 300 percent more energy efficient than a typical hybrid as well.  Luxury or not, getting such a vehicle to market is very worthwhile.  Remember the Prius was the favourite toy of green-wannabe celebrities and rich folk in its early adoption phase, and this is a much better alternative.</p><p>Given the nature of the technology this is the ONLY way to bring it forward.  I think GM's approach (with bringing out a less exotic Chevy Volt) or yours (an even more austere Aveo) is backwards.  Say it costs $5000 to $10000 to implement the advanced battery and drivetrain at this point in development.  This means the cost of an electric Aveo would be 50+ percent higher than for a gas one, which is "cheap enough" to run in the first place.  NOBODY who is willing to be an "early adopter" would buy an electric aveo at a profitable price point, because green and innovative as the drivetrain would be, the rest of the car is actually rather crappy.</p><p>OTOH, The Tesla S is probably no more tha 10 or 20\% more expensive than a comparable car that runs on petroleum fuel.  Early adopters tend to be more affluent as well, and when you get to that less-than-20\% premium for something cool and new.  This car has a realistic chance of making a profit, or at least paying  back its loans.  The Volt or an electric Aveo would be a guaranteed money loser.</p><p>Remember, that Tesla got its loans specifically because it has committed to re-investing profits from early, more exotic/expensive models into more practical, affordable models.  Even in its early stages on the market it has established a track record:  It followed up an exotic, very expensive roadster with a luxury sedan that is actually very practical and within the price range of upper-middle class households (the ones who buy Escalades, BMW 5 or 7 series, etc).  Ensuring the success of the S means the much more likely possibility of an under $30K vehicle that competes right in the mainstream sedan market.</p><p>If the US is going to get all socialist on us, I'm glad it isn't following the tired old thinking that to support innovation it must have this fixation on immediately addressing the needs of the "masses" or "working poor" or that crap, when it isn't realistic from a business perspective.  Certainly better than taking a controlling interest in a loser bankrupt GM or gifting Chrysler to the unions--doing both with massive loans backing the moves (if taxpayers weren't forced to accept such nonsense, thay'd never in their right mind invest in such shaky enterprises).  GM in particular has been the ABSOLUTE LEAST INNOVATIVE auto company on the entire planet for decades--even its best products are dependable but very boring and un-innovative, and they've invested the least into new technologies in their plants out of EVERY SINGLE company that builds cars in N America.</p><p>If my gov't is going to throw boatloads of cash around on speculative enterprises, I'd MUCH rather it go do something bold, new, exciting and innovative like Tesla than something tired, old and nothing to show for in terms of innovation than words and vague plans crafted for the purpose of begging for alms from the gov't. as GM and Chrysler have done in the last year.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm anti-subsidy for luxury car manufacturers .
Starting at $ 49,900 -- bah !
How about spending a fraction of this to rip out the engine of a Chevy Aveo and put in an electric motor ?
How about an electric car people can actually buy ?
Innovation not required ! There is a bit more to the Tesla cars than just ripping out the ICE and putting in a regular electric motor .
There is very advanced liquid-cooled Lithium Ion battery technology , a next-gen 3-phase/4 pole motor , etc .
It performs at par or better than other cars in its price point , and is also practical ( can carry 5 passengers and their luggage comfortably ) .
It is easily 200 to 300 percent more energy efficient than a typical hybrid as well .
Luxury or not , getting such a vehicle to market is very worthwhile .
Remember the Prius was the favourite toy of green-wannabe celebrities and rich folk in its early adoption phase , and this is a much better alternative.Given the nature of the technology this is the ONLY way to bring it forward .
I think GM 's approach ( with bringing out a less exotic Chevy Volt ) or yours ( an even more austere Aveo ) is backwards .
Say it costs $ 5000 to $ 10000 to implement the advanced battery and drivetrain at this point in development .
This means the cost of an electric Aveo would be 50 + percent higher than for a gas one , which is " cheap enough " to run in the first place .
NOBODY who is willing to be an " early adopter " would buy an electric aveo at a profitable price point , because green and innovative as the drivetrain would be , the rest of the car is actually rather crappy.OTOH , The Tesla S is probably no more tha 10 or 20 \ % more expensive than a comparable car that runs on petroleum fuel .
Early adopters tend to be more affluent as well , and when you get to that less-than-20 \ % premium for something cool and new .
This car has a realistic chance of making a profit , or at least paying back its loans .
The Volt or an electric Aveo would be a guaranteed money loser.Remember , that Tesla got its loans specifically because it has committed to re-investing profits from early , more exotic/expensive models into more practical , affordable models .
Even in its early stages on the market it has established a track record : It followed up an exotic , very expensive roadster with a luxury sedan that is actually very practical and within the price range of upper-middle class households ( the ones who buy Escalades , BMW 5 or 7 series , etc ) .
Ensuring the success of the S means the much more likely possibility of an under $ 30K vehicle that competes right in the mainstream sedan market.If the US is going to get all socialist on us , I 'm glad it is n't following the tired old thinking that to support innovation it must have this fixation on immediately addressing the needs of the " masses " or " working poor " or that crap , when it is n't realistic from a business perspective .
Certainly better than taking a controlling interest in a loser bankrupt GM or gifting Chrysler to the unions--doing both with massive loans backing the moves ( if taxpayers were n't forced to accept such nonsense , thay 'd never in their right mind invest in such shaky enterprises ) .
GM in particular has been the ABSOLUTE LEAST INNOVATIVE auto company on the entire planet for decades--even its best products are dependable but very boring and un-innovative , and they 've invested the least into new technologies in their plants out of EVERY SINGLE company that builds cars in N America.If my gov't is going to throw boatloads of cash around on speculative enterprises , I 'd MUCH rather it go do something bold , new , exciting and innovative like Tesla than something tired , old and nothing to show for in terms of innovation than words and vague plans crafted for the purpose of begging for alms from the gov't .
as GM and Chrysler have done in the last year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm anti-subsidy for luxury car manufacturers.
Starting at $49,900 -- bah!
How about spending a fraction of this to rip out the engine of a Chevy Aveo and put in an electric motor?
How about an electric car people can actually buy?
Innovation not required!There is a bit more to the Tesla cars than just ripping out the ICE and putting in a regular electric motor.
There is very advanced liquid-cooled Lithium Ion battery technology, a next-gen 3-phase/4 pole motor, etc.
It performs at par or better than other cars in its price point, and is also practical (can carry 5 passengers and their luggage comfortably).
It is easily 200 to 300 percent more energy efficient than a typical hybrid as well.
Luxury or not, getting such a vehicle to market is very worthwhile.
Remember the Prius was the favourite toy of green-wannabe celebrities and rich folk in its early adoption phase, and this is a much better alternative.Given the nature of the technology this is the ONLY way to bring it forward.
I think GM's approach (with bringing out a less exotic Chevy Volt) or yours (an even more austere Aveo) is backwards.
Say it costs $5000 to $10000 to implement the advanced battery and drivetrain at this point in development.
This means the cost of an electric Aveo would be 50+ percent higher than for a gas one, which is "cheap enough" to run in the first place.
NOBODY who is willing to be an "early adopter" would buy an electric aveo at a profitable price point, because green and innovative as the drivetrain would be, the rest of the car is actually rather crappy.OTOH, The Tesla S is probably no more tha 10 or 20\% more expensive than a comparable car that runs on petroleum fuel.
Early adopters tend to be more affluent as well, and when you get to that less-than-20\% premium for something cool and new.
This car has a realistic chance of making a profit, or at least paying  back its loans.
The Volt or an electric Aveo would be a guaranteed money loser.Remember, that Tesla got its loans specifically because it has committed to re-investing profits from early, more exotic/expensive models into more practical, affordable models.
Even in its early stages on the market it has established a track record:  It followed up an exotic, very expensive roadster with a luxury sedan that is actually very practical and within the price range of upper-middle class households (the ones who buy Escalades, BMW 5 or 7 series, etc).
Ensuring the success of the S means the much more likely possibility of an under $30K vehicle that competes right in the mainstream sedan market.If the US is going to get all socialist on us, I'm glad it isn't following the tired old thinking that to support innovation it must have this fixation on immediately addressing the needs of the "masses" or "working poor" or that crap, when it isn't realistic from a business perspective.
Certainly better than taking a controlling interest in a loser bankrupt GM or gifting Chrysler to the unions--doing both with massive loans backing the moves (if taxpayers weren't forced to accept such nonsense, thay'd never in their right mind invest in such shaky enterprises).
GM in particular has been the ABSOLUTE LEAST INNOVATIVE auto company on the entire planet for decades--even its best products are dependable but very boring and un-innovative, and they've invested the least into new technologies in their plants out of EVERY SINGLE company that builds cars in N America.If my gov't is going to throw boatloads of cash around on speculative enterprises, I'd MUCH rather it go do something bold, new, exciting and innovative like Tesla than something tired, old and nothing to show for in terms of innovation than words and vague plans crafted for the purpose of begging for alms from the gov't.
as GM and Chrysler have done in the last year.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458165</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28462167</id>
	<title>Re:Why no diesel-electric cars?</title>
	<author>xsm0kex</author>
	<datestamp>1245858300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually that's basically what the Chevrolet Volt is. It has a 1.3L gasoline generator which is used to keep the battery charged. The volt will use only battery power for a certain range then when that range is met the generator kicks in and produces power for the battery.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually that 's basically what the Chevrolet Volt is .
It has a 1.3L gasoline generator which is used to keep the battery charged .
The volt will use only battery power for a certain range then when that range is met the generator kicks in and produces power for the battery .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually that's basically what the Chevrolet Volt is.
It has a 1.3L gasoline generator which is used to keep the battery charged.
The volt will use only battery power for a certain range then when that range is met the generator kicks in and produces power for the battery.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458389</id>
	<title>Tesla Fanboi</title>
	<author>2obvious4u</author>
	<datestamp>1245836880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been watching Tesla since day one.  The make cars the way they should be made.  You place an order for your car, then the car is built.  It was privately financed until this infusion of funds.  For what the model S is and does the price isn't to high.  I looked at buying a Mitsubishi Lancer Evo and it clocked in at $42,000, while I was shopping I noticed that entry level BMW's and Audi's were also at the $40,000 mark.  So I saved $22,000 and bought a 2009 Corolla.  My next car will be a Tesla as soon as they start selling them on the east coast.  The Model S is as nice a car as an Audi or BMW, without the need to change the oil or pay at the pump.  It makes the Chevy volt look like a joke and puts all the hybrids to shame, it is the ultimate commuter car.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been watching Tesla since day one .
The make cars the way they should be made .
You place an order for your car , then the car is built .
It was privately financed until this infusion of funds .
For what the model S is and does the price is n't to high .
I looked at buying a Mitsubishi Lancer Evo and it clocked in at $ 42,000 , while I was shopping I noticed that entry level BMW 's and Audi 's were also at the $ 40,000 mark .
So I saved $ 22,000 and bought a 2009 Corolla .
My next car will be a Tesla as soon as they start selling them on the east coast .
The Model S is as nice a car as an Audi or BMW , without the need to change the oil or pay at the pump .
It makes the Chevy volt look like a joke and puts all the hybrids to shame , it is the ultimate commuter car .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been watching Tesla since day one.
The make cars the way they should be made.
You place an order for your car, then the car is built.
It was privately financed until this infusion of funds.
For what the model S is and does the price isn't to high.
I looked at buying a Mitsubishi Lancer Evo and it clocked in at $42,000, while I was shopping I noticed that entry level BMW's and Audi's were also at the $40,000 mark.
So I saved $22,000 and bought a 2009 Corolla.
My next car will be a Tesla as soon as they start selling them on the east coast.
The Model S is as nice a car as an Audi or BMW, without the need to change the oil or pay at the pump.
It makes the Chevy volt look like a joke and puts all the hybrids to shame, it is the ultimate commuter car.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28511173</id>
	<title>Re:More bullshit</title>
	<author>laddiebuck</author>
	<datestamp>1246266600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, the US government itself seems to be taking tack 1. And it has been for a century or so at least.<br> <br>

But seriously for a moment. Don't you think it is reasonable that when they say general welfare, they mean just that, and then enumerate a starting list of powers? It would be pretty stupid to keep the list unchanged over centuries of use!<br> <br>

Let me take a guess here and hazard that you're against universal healthcare. Why, when that is one of those things that is most assuredly, under any possible definition, part of "general welfare", both of the individual members of a nation and the nation as a whole? Yet because it wasn't possible, or simply imagined, in 1789, you must stick out against it? I do apologise if you support universal healthcare in the US.<br> <br>

Actually, the libertarian ideas are quite new in US politics. If you look back to speeches and propaganda of the pre-war era, Americans were very proud of their social welfare system, such as it was. It has grown enormously since then, though still lagging behind Europe, so at least it's clear that America as a whole is for social justice and welfare.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , the US government itself seems to be taking tack 1 .
And it has been for a century or so at least .
But seriously for a moment .
Do n't you think it is reasonable that when they say general welfare , they mean just that , and then enumerate a starting list of powers ?
It would be pretty stupid to keep the list unchanged over centuries of use !
Let me take a guess here and hazard that you 're against universal healthcare .
Why , when that is one of those things that is most assuredly , under any possible definition , part of " general welfare " , both of the individual members of a nation and the nation as a whole ?
Yet because it was n't possible , or simply imagined , in 1789 , you must stick out against it ?
I do apologise if you support universal healthcare in the US .
Actually , the libertarian ideas are quite new in US politics .
If you look back to speeches and propaganda of the pre-war era , Americans were very proud of their social welfare system , such as it was .
It has grown enormously since then , though still lagging behind Europe , so at least it 's clear that America as a whole is for social justice and welfare .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, the US government itself seems to be taking tack 1.
And it has been for a century or so at least.
But seriously for a moment.
Don't you think it is reasonable that when they say general welfare, they mean just that, and then enumerate a starting list of powers?
It would be pretty stupid to keep the list unchanged over centuries of use!
Let me take a guess here and hazard that you're against universal healthcare.
Why, when that is one of those things that is most assuredly, under any possible definition, part of "general welfare", both of the individual members of a nation and the nation as a whole?
Yet because it wasn't possible, or simply imagined, in 1789, you must stick out against it?
I do apologise if you support universal healthcare in the US.
Actually, the libertarian ideas are quite new in US politics.
If you look back to speeches and propaganda of the pre-war era, Americans were very proud of their social welfare system, such as it was.
It has grown enormously since then, though still lagging behind Europe, so at least it's clear that America as a whole is for social justice and welfare.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459627</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458533</id>
	<title>It's a Loan.</title>
	<author>0100010001010011</author>
	<datestamp>1245837300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not a handout. It's a loan. You know like the loans you can get for small businesses from the feds and state governments.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not a handout .
It 's a loan .
You know like the loans you can get for small businesses from the feds and state governments .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not a handout.
It's a loan.
You know like the loans you can get for small businesses from the feds and state governments.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458543</id>
	<title>Electric vehicles aren't great</title>
	<author>lordvalrole</author>
	<datestamp>1245837300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://webcast.berkeley.edu/course\_details\_new.php?seriesid=2009-B-51905\%7C2009-B-69390&amp;semesterid=2009-B/" title="berkeley.edu">http://webcast.berkeley.edu/course\_details\_new.php?seriesid=2009-B-51905\%7C2009-B-69390&amp;semesterid=2009-B/</a> [berkeley.edu]</p><p>Lecture 1 - 46 mins in Richard Muller talks about the cost vs pay of an electric vehicle.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //webcast.berkeley.edu/course \ _details \ _new.php ? seriesid = 2009-B-51905 \ % 7C2009-B-69390&amp;semesterid = 2009-B/ [ berkeley.edu ] Lecture 1 - 46 mins in Richard Muller talks about the cost vs pay of an electric vehicle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://webcast.berkeley.edu/course\_details\_new.php?seriesid=2009-B-51905\%7C2009-B-69390&amp;semesterid=2009-B/ [berkeley.edu]Lecture 1 - 46 mins in Richard Muller talks about the cost vs pay of an electric vehicle.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28463395</id>
	<title>Re:Actually you are illiterate</title>
	<author>falconwolf</author>
	<datestamp>1245871680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The state do not have to take the money from the government, they chose to do so. I fact, they don't have to pay many of the taxes to the feds that they do, they choose to. Usually becasue there is something for them in the deal.</i></p><p>If federal taxes weren't so high states could raise their own taxes instead of begging the federal government.  And states don't pay taxes, the residents of the state do, and they have to otherwise IRS goon squads will show up with guns.</p><p>

Falcon</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The state do not have to take the money from the government , they chose to do so .
I fact , they do n't have to pay many of the taxes to the feds that they do , they choose to .
Usually becasue there is something for them in the deal.If federal taxes were n't so high states could raise their own taxes instead of begging the federal government .
And states do n't pay taxes , the residents of the state do , and they have to otherwise IRS goon squads will show up with guns .
Falcon</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The state do not have to take the money from the government, they chose to do so.
I fact, they don't have to pay many of the taxes to the feds that they do, they choose to.
Usually becasue there is something for them in the deal.If federal taxes weren't so high states could raise their own taxes instead of begging the federal government.
And states don't pay taxes, the residents of the state do, and they have to otherwise IRS goon squads will show up with guns.
Falcon</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459347</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459011</id>
	<title>Re:loans for everyone!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245839100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because Nissan can actually do something with the money instead of pissing it away on high priced American union labor?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because Nissan can actually do something with the money instead of pissing it away on high priced American union labor ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because Nissan can actually do something with the money instead of pissing it away on high priced American union labor?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458221</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458221</id>
	<title>loans for everyone!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245836400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anyone left wondering why our tax dollars are funding a loan for Nissan while U.S. auto companies are struggling?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone left wondering why our tax dollars are funding a loan for Nissan while U.S. auto companies are struggling ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone left wondering why our tax dollars are funding a loan for Nissan while U.S. auto companies are struggling?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460843</id>
	<title>It's called the Spending Clause</title>
	<author>mrmike37</author>
	<datestamp>1245848040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"The Congress shall have Power To<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... provide for the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... general Welfare of the United States." Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" The Congress shall have Power To ... provide for the ... general Welfare of the United States .
" Article I , Section 8 , Clause 1 of the United States Constitution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The Congress shall have Power To ... provide for the ... general Welfare of the United States.
" Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465773</id>
	<title>Re:Why no diesel-electric cars?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245941700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I know this is a tangential question, but I've been wondering about this for a while, and this seems like the best forum to get a decent answer from intelligent people:</p><p>Why is all the development on electric and electric-hybrid cars going into fancy new systems with lithium ion batteries or hydrogen fuel cells and (for hybrids) complicated switching between a conventional drive train and electric motors, instead of using and improving upon the time-tested diesel-electric technology which has efficiently powered many trains for quite some time now?</p><p>Build a simple all-electric car - just a body, steering rack, four wheels with a dynamo on each (there's your propulsion and your regenerative brakes), some circuity to control them all, and a small battery that holds just enough charge to get you up to speed, maybe twice that for a safety margin. Then stick the most efficient diesel or gas generator you've got in it to provide electricity to keep the battery charged. You lose a bunch of weight and mechanical complexity by ditching most of the drive train and transmission system for some simple wiring between the generator and the dynamos; the alternator and the standard car battery become redundant with the generator and main battery; heck you could even replace the radiator with a small steam engine for still increased efficiency, turning that excess heat into electricity instead of just disposing of it to the air.</p><p>Yes, it still uses some fossil fuels, but in the end most of our electricity comes from coal anyway (even for a wall-charged all-electric vehicle like the Model S here, which I am very excited about). This just seems like it would have been far cheaper, more efficient (in terms of both money and thermodynamics), and simpler a solution than the complicated hybrids they've been building for a while now; plus the technology has already existed in widespread use on trains for decades!</p><p>So why isn't anybody doing it in cars? Is there a good technical or economic reason?</p></div><p>They actually have this system being tested on buses, just do a search for "diesel-electric bus." I can't verify whatever or not these buses omit the trans. I agree that this seems to make more sense, but the problem with this system is with its scale. A drive system that omits the trans is economical on a large scale, with small cars - not so much.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know this is a tangential question , but I 've been wondering about this for a while , and this seems like the best forum to get a decent answer from intelligent people : Why is all the development on electric and electric-hybrid cars going into fancy new systems with lithium ion batteries or hydrogen fuel cells and ( for hybrids ) complicated switching between a conventional drive train and electric motors , instead of using and improving upon the time-tested diesel-electric technology which has efficiently powered many trains for quite some time now ? Build a simple all-electric car - just a body , steering rack , four wheels with a dynamo on each ( there 's your propulsion and your regenerative brakes ) , some circuity to control them all , and a small battery that holds just enough charge to get you up to speed , maybe twice that for a safety margin .
Then stick the most efficient diesel or gas generator you 've got in it to provide electricity to keep the battery charged .
You lose a bunch of weight and mechanical complexity by ditching most of the drive train and transmission system for some simple wiring between the generator and the dynamos ; the alternator and the standard car battery become redundant with the generator and main battery ; heck you could even replace the radiator with a small steam engine for still increased efficiency , turning that excess heat into electricity instead of just disposing of it to the air.Yes , it still uses some fossil fuels , but in the end most of our electricity comes from coal anyway ( even for a wall-charged all-electric vehicle like the Model S here , which I am very excited about ) .
This just seems like it would have been far cheaper , more efficient ( in terms of both money and thermodynamics ) , and simpler a solution than the complicated hybrids they 've been building for a while now ; plus the technology has already existed in widespread use on trains for decades ! So why is n't anybody doing it in cars ?
Is there a good technical or economic reason ? They actually have this system being tested on buses , just do a search for " diesel-electric bus .
" I ca n't verify whatever or not these buses omit the trans .
I agree that this seems to make more sense , but the problem with this system is with its scale .
A drive system that omits the trans is economical on a large scale , with small cars - not so much .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know this is a tangential question, but I've been wondering about this for a while, and this seems like the best forum to get a decent answer from intelligent people:Why is all the development on electric and electric-hybrid cars going into fancy new systems with lithium ion batteries or hydrogen fuel cells and (for hybrids) complicated switching between a conventional drive train and electric motors, instead of using and improving upon the time-tested diesel-electric technology which has efficiently powered many trains for quite some time now?Build a simple all-electric car - just a body, steering rack, four wheels with a dynamo on each (there's your propulsion and your regenerative brakes), some circuity to control them all, and a small battery that holds just enough charge to get you up to speed, maybe twice that for a safety margin.
Then stick the most efficient diesel or gas generator you've got in it to provide electricity to keep the battery charged.
You lose a bunch of weight and mechanical complexity by ditching most of the drive train and transmission system for some simple wiring between the generator and the dynamos; the alternator and the standard car battery become redundant with the generator and main battery; heck you could even replace the radiator with a small steam engine for still increased efficiency, turning that excess heat into electricity instead of just disposing of it to the air.Yes, it still uses some fossil fuels, but in the end most of our electricity comes from coal anyway (even for a wall-charged all-electric vehicle like the Model S here, which I am very excited about).
This just seems like it would have been far cheaper, more efficient (in terms of both money and thermodynamics), and simpler a solution than the complicated hybrids they've been building for a while now; plus the technology has already existed in widespread use on trains for decades!So why isn't anybody doing it in cars?
Is there a good technical or economic reason?They actually have this system being tested on buses, just do a search for "diesel-electric bus.
" I can't verify whatever or not these buses omit the trans.
I agree that this seems to make more sense, but the problem with this system is with its scale.
A drive system that omits the trans is economical on a large scale, with small cars - not so much.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459501</id>
	<title>Re:More bullshit</title>
	<author>AaronW</author>
	<datestamp>1245841200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know a couple of people who work at Tesla. Their goal is to bring the prices down. Right now the most expensive part is the batteries, and the price of batteries is dropping. They can't just use laptop batteries since the batteries must meet specific requirements for reliability and performance. Their manufacturing cost is also fairly high, especially for the roadster. The costs will go down for the new car since they can apply what they learned from the roadster to the manufacturing and design of the new car plus they will have their own manufacturing plant, but their cost will still be fairly high. The price dropping from $100K to $60K is fairly significant. I imagine their price will continue to drop as they mature and get more experience and when the cost of the batteries drops.</p><p>If you're going to spend a lot of money on a car you generally expect it to have all the cool gizmos and options, hence the luxury model. Costs will continue to go down as they improve their design and manufacturing and as the cost for batteries decreases. They also have a lot of NRE to recover. They're basically making a brand new car from the ground up with significant changes from the roadster.</p><p>I can't imagine that all the luxury features and options add a significant amount to the cost of the car, probably no more than 25\% of the cost of the car.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know a couple of people who work at Tesla .
Their goal is to bring the prices down .
Right now the most expensive part is the batteries , and the price of batteries is dropping .
They ca n't just use laptop batteries since the batteries must meet specific requirements for reliability and performance .
Their manufacturing cost is also fairly high , especially for the roadster .
The costs will go down for the new car since they can apply what they learned from the roadster to the manufacturing and design of the new car plus they will have their own manufacturing plant , but their cost will still be fairly high .
The price dropping from $ 100K to $ 60K is fairly significant .
I imagine their price will continue to drop as they mature and get more experience and when the cost of the batteries drops.If you 're going to spend a lot of money on a car you generally expect it to have all the cool gizmos and options , hence the luxury model .
Costs will continue to go down as they improve their design and manufacturing and as the cost for batteries decreases .
They also have a lot of NRE to recover .
They 're basically making a brand new car from the ground up with significant changes from the roadster.I ca n't imagine that all the luxury features and options add a significant amount to the cost of the car , probably no more than 25 \ % of the cost of the car .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know a couple of people who work at Tesla.
Their goal is to bring the prices down.
Right now the most expensive part is the batteries, and the price of batteries is dropping.
They can't just use laptop batteries since the batteries must meet specific requirements for reliability and performance.
Their manufacturing cost is also fairly high, especially for the roadster.
The costs will go down for the new car since they can apply what they learned from the roadster to the manufacturing and design of the new car plus they will have their own manufacturing plant, but their cost will still be fairly high.
The price dropping from $100K to $60K is fairly significant.
I imagine their price will continue to drop as they mature and get more experience and when the cost of the batteries drops.If you're going to spend a lot of money on a car you generally expect it to have all the cool gizmos and options, hence the luxury model.
Costs will continue to go down as they improve their design and manufacturing and as the cost for batteries decreases.
They also have a lot of NRE to recover.
They're basically making a brand new car from the ground up with significant changes from the roadster.I can't imagine that all the luxury features and options add a significant amount to the cost of the car, probably no more than 25\% of the cost of the car.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458343</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458393</id>
	<title>Re:A requirement for the loan</title>
	<author>644bd346996</author>
	<datestamp>1245836880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The technology does not exist yet to make a $25k electric car that can succeed in the American market. Tesla is right to start with the high-price, high-profit end of the market and work their way down to the high-volume mainstream as the technology matures and the supply chain scales up. Trying to start out by making a capable electric car for the mainstream American market is a much riskier move, and requires much more up-front money - hence the much larger handouts that have gone to the more established automakers. Tesla, on the other hand, has already established their electric vehicle business as profitable, and can use their profits and experience from the Roadster to help subsidize the development of the Model S.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The technology does not exist yet to make a $ 25k electric car that can succeed in the American market .
Tesla is right to start with the high-price , high-profit end of the market and work their way down to the high-volume mainstream as the technology matures and the supply chain scales up .
Trying to start out by making a capable electric car for the mainstream American market is a much riskier move , and requires much more up-front money - hence the much larger handouts that have gone to the more established automakers .
Tesla , on the other hand , has already established their electric vehicle business as profitable , and can use their profits and experience from the Roadster to help subsidize the development of the Model S .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The technology does not exist yet to make a $25k electric car that can succeed in the American market.
Tesla is right to start with the high-price, high-profit end of the market and work their way down to the high-volume mainstream as the technology matures and the supply chain scales up.
Trying to start out by making a capable electric car for the mainstream American market is a much riskier move, and requires much more up-front money - hence the much larger handouts that have gone to the more established automakers.
Tesla, on the other hand, has already established their electric vehicle business as profitable, and can use their profits and experience from the Roadster to help subsidize the development of the Model S.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079</id>
	<title>A requirement for the loan</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245835920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>should have been a 25K car cost cap.<br>That way most people could only barely not afford it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>should have been a 25K car cost cap.That way most people could only barely not afford it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>should have been a 25K car cost cap.That way most people could only barely not afford it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459353</id>
	<title>Re:It's a Loan.</title>
	<author>sexconker</author>
	<datestamp>1245840480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Loan my ass.<br>That money is fucking gone.</p><p>Spent on hookers and blow in private jets.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Loan my ass.That money is fucking gone.Spent on hookers and blow in private jets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Loan my ass.That money is fucking gone.Spent on hookers and blow in private jets.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458999</id>
	<title>Re:loans for everyone!</title>
	<author>blitzkrieg3</author>
	<datestamp>1245839100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Easy:<p><div class="quote"><p>The loans are part of the Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing Program, which provides incentives to new and established automakers to build more fuel-efficient vehicles.</p></div><p>It's better to give companies loans for actually <em>doing</em> something.  Rather then giving them <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/autos/autobeat/archives/2008/10/bush\_approves\_a.html" title="businessweek.com">25 billion dollars</a> [businessweek.com] just for "struggling".
<br> <br>
Especially if the reason they're struggling is because they make shitty cars.  At least the when we fund companies that create electric cars we get a quality product out of it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Easy : The loans are part of the Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing Program , which provides incentives to new and established automakers to build more fuel-efficient vehicles.It 's better to give companies loans for actually doing something .
Rather then giving them 25 billion dollars [ businessweek.com ] just for " struggling " .
Especially if the reason they 're struggling is because they make shitty cars .
At least the when we fund companies that create electric cars we get a quality product out of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Easy:The loans are part of the Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing Program, which provides incentives to new and established automakers to build more fuel-efficient vehicles.It's better to give companies loans for actually doing something.
Rather then giving them 25 billion dollars [businessweek.com] just for "struggling".
Especially if the reason they're struggling is because they make shitty cars.
At least the when we fund companies that create electric cars we get a quality product out of it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458221</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459977</id>
	<title>Re:Fleet Car</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245843660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Even so, it raises the question: If electric vehicles are such a worthwhile and wonderful investment where are the private investors? Why couldn't Tesla have raised their $465 million loan(s) from the billionaire club or the private equity investment markets? Like stem cells in here in California, it is always the public that is asked to "take one for the team" and finance a high-risk investment in exchange for little or no reward a <b> <i>long</i> </b> way down the road. I am very suspicious of people who claim that a particular technology (anyone remember the corn ethanol boondoggle?) is such a great investment that the public simply must finance it while the investors of the world, even those who tolerate higher risks and emerging companies, won't touch it with a ten (10) foot pole.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Even so , it raises the question : If electric vehicles are such a worthwhile and wonderful investment where are the private investors ?
Why could n't Tesla have raised their $ 465 million loan ( s ) from the billionaire club or the private equity investment markets ?
Like stem cells in here in California , it is always the public that is asked to " take one for the team " and finance a high-risk investment in exchange for little or no reward a long way down the road .
I am very suspicious of people who claim that a particular technology ( anyone remember the corn ethanol boondoggle ?
) is such a great investment that the public simply must finance it while the investors of the world , even those who tolerate higher risks and emerging companies , wo n't touch it with a ten ( 10 ) foot pole .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even so, it raises the question: If electric vehicles are such a worthwhile and wonderful investment where are the private investors?
Why couldn't Tesla have raised their $465 million loan(s) from the billionaire club or the private equity investment markets?
Like stem cells in here in California, it is always the public that is asked to "take one for the team" and finance a high-risk investment in exchange for little or no reward a  long  way down the road.
I am very suspicious of people who claim that a particular technology (anyone remember the corn ethanol boondoggle?
) is such a great investment that the public simply must finance it while the investors of the world, even those who tolerate higher risks and emerging companies, won't touch it with a ten (10) foot pole.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458555</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459285</id>
	<title>Re:It's a Loan.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245840120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>inb4 default</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>inb4 default</tokentext>
<sentencetext>inb4 default</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458997</id>
	<title>Re:Fleet Car</title>
	<author>mzs</author>
	<datestamp>1245839100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1: GM never made a production version of the Impact (EV-1) since the CARB changed course mid stream and no longer required any zero emissions vehicles per  automaker fleet.</p><p>2: They are using the money for plants. They have almost no money for actual development of the Model S. That money is likely being laundered via those plants at this point. Multiple times now Musk has made claims regarding funding that have proven to be false, like that they had already gotten approved for this program or the VC funds earlier. They are likely using the deposits on the Model S to build roadsters at this point.</p><p>3: There is no edit, but there is a preview.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 : GM never made a production version of the Impact ( EV-1 ) since the CARB changed course mid stream and no longer required any zero emissions vehicles per automaker fleet.2 : They are using the money for plants .
They have almost no money for actual development of the Model S. That money is likely being laundered via those plants at this point .
Multiple times now Musk has made claims regarding funding that have proven to be false , like that they had already gotten approved for this program or the VC funds earlier .
They are likely using the deposits on the Model S to build roadsters at this point.3 : There is no edit , but there is a preview .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1: GM never made a production version of the Impact (EV-1) since the CARB changed course mid stream and no longer required any zero emissions vehicles per  automaker fleet.2: They are using the money for plants.
They have almost no money for actual development of the Model S. That money is likely being laundered via those plants at this point.
Multiple times now Musk has made claims regarding funding that have proven to be false, like that they had already gotten approved for this program or the VC funds earlier.
They are likely using the deposits on the Model S to build roadsters at this point.3: There is no edit, but there is a preview.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458555</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465443</id>
	<title>Re:Why no diesel-electric cars?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245939900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well a quick reply is that trains don't use a diesel-electric drive train to improve efficiency...they use it to increase power available to start the train from a standstill.  In a conventional engine-transmission drive train the engine starts out in low gear with low RPMs to avoid the the "pop the clutch" effect of dumping lots of torque out the transmission.  Train are diesel and have low RPMs anyway, so at start up there either wouldn't be enough power to move the train or the wheels would begin to slip and the train wouldn't move, depending on the gearing and throttle position.  With a diesel electric, the diesel engine can run at full throttle, driving MW of electricity directly to the drive wheels.  With all of the available power the engineer can creep the electric motors start the train moving without spinning the wheels.  Once the train is up to speed and has some momentum, the diesel engine can be throttled back.  Since diesel electrics don't usually have batteries, the electricity generated during "dynamic braking" is dumped into a bank of resistors.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well a quick reply is that trains do n't use a diesel-electric drive train to improve efficiency...they use it to increase power available to start the train from a standstill .
In a conventional engine-transmission drive train the engine starts out in low gear with low RPMs to avoid the the " pop the clutch " effect of dumping lots of torque out the transmission .
Train are diesel and have low RPMs anyway , so at start up there either would n't be enough power to move the train or the wheels would begin to slip and the train would n't move , depending on the gearing and throttle position .
With a diesel electric , the diesel engine can run at full throttle , driving MW of electricity directly to the drive wheels .
With all of the available power the engineer can creep the electric motors start the train moving without spinning the wheels .
Once the train is up to speed and has some momentum , the diesel engine can be throttled back .
Since diesel electrics do n't usually have batteries , the electricity generated during " dynamic braking " is dumped into a bank of resistors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well a quick reply is that trains don't use a diesel-electric drive train to improve efficiency...they use it to increase power available to start the train from a standstill.
In a conventional engine-transmission drive train the engine starts out in low gear with low RPMs to avoid the the "pop the clutch" effect of dumping lots of torque out the transmission.
Train are diesel and have low RPMs anyway, so at start up there either wouldn't be enough power to move the train or the wheels would begin to slip and the train wouldn't move, depending on the gearing and throttle position.
With a diesel electric, the diesel engine can run at full throttle, driving MW of electricity directly to the drive wheels.
With all of the available power the engineer can creep the electric motors start the train moving without spinning the wheels.
Once the train is up to speed and has some momentum, the diesel engine can be throttled back.
Since diesel electrics don't usually have batteries, the electricity generated during "dynamic braking" is dumped into a bank of resistors.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459487</id>
	<title>Re:Green Car on a Budget - Innovation Not Required</title>
	<author>Jeremi</author>
	<datestamp>1245841080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i> How about an electric car people can actually buy? Innovation not required!</i></p><p>It's not sufficient to build a car that people <i>can</i> buy, it also has to be a car they <i>want</i> to buy, or it won't sell.</p><p>Various companies have tried the "rip out the engine of a standard car and replace it with an electric motor" route before, and it doesn't work.  You end up selling what looks like a $15,000 car for $35,000, and the car has a top speed of 70 miles an hour, a range of 40 miles, and takes 6 hours to "refill".  The public has already said thanks, but no thanks, to that type of product.</p><p>If you actually want to sell electric cars, you have to make them good enough that people will want to buy them, and that means designing them from the ground up as electric cars, not retrofitting an electric motor into an inappropriate framework.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about an electric car people can actually buy ?
Innovation not required ! It 's not sufficient to build a car that people can buy , it also has to be a car they want to buy , or it wo n't sell.Various companies have tried the " rip out the engine of a standard car and replace it with an electric motor " route before , and it does n't work .
You end up selling what looks like a $ 15,000 car for $ 35,000 , and the car has a top speed of 70 miles an hour , a range of 40 miles , and takes 6 hours to " refill " .
The public has already said thanks , but no thanks , to that type of product.If you actually want to sell electric cars , you have to make them good enough that people will want to buy them , and that means designing them from the ground up as electric cars , not retrofitting an electric motor into an inappropriate framework .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> How about an electric car people can actually buy?
Innovation not required!It's not sufficient to build a car that people can buy, it also has to be a car they want to buy, or it won't sell.Various companies have tried the "rip out the engine of a standard car and replace it with an electric motor" route before, and it doesn't work.
You end up selling what looks like a $15,000 car for $35,000, and the car has a top speed of 70 miles an hour, a range of 40 miles, and takes 6 hours to "refill".
The public has already said thanks, but no thanks, to that type of product.If you actually want to sell electric cars, you have to make them good enough that people will want to buy them, and that means designing them from the ground up as electric cars, not retrofitting an electric motor into an inappropriate framework.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458165</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458459</id>
	<title>Nissan?</title>
	<author>SiO2</author>
	<datestamp>1245837060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>"...Nissan received $1.6B under the same program."</i></p><p>Nissan? Why is the United States government giving money to Nissan? Shouldn't the Japanese government do that and not the U. S. taxpayer?</p><p>I know that I'm going to catch hell for this and probably get modded a troll. So be it. However, as a currently unemployed U. S. citizen who has had a job and paying into the system since I was twelve, I have to wonder where the hell is my federal government bailout money? State unemployment doesn't pay hardly anything. The U. S. government gave over a billion dollars to a foreign company, but a hard working citizen like myself, who really wants to work, gets next to nothing.</p><p>I apologize for the rant.</p><p>If anybody is looking for a systems/network administrator, who has over twenty years of solid experience, in the NE Ohio area, let me know.</p><p>SiO2</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" ...Nissan received $ 1.6B under the same program. " Nissan ?
Why is the United States government giving money to Nissan ?
Should n't the Japanese government do that and not the U. S. taxpayer ? I know that I 'm going to catch hell for this and probably get modded a troll .
So be it .
However , as a currently unemployed U. S. citizen who has had a job and paying into the system since I was twelve , I have to wonder where the hell is my federal government bailout money ?
State unemployment does n't pay hardly anything .
The U. S. government gave over a billion dollars to a foreign company , but a hard working citizen like myself , who really wants to work , gets next to nothing.I apologize for the rant.If anybody is looking for a systems/network administrator , who has over twenty years of solid experience , in the NE Ohio area , let me know.SiO2</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"...Nissan received $1.6B under the same program."Nissan?
Why is the United States government giving money to Nissan?
Shouldn't the Japanese government do that and not the U. S. taxpayer?I know that I'm going to catch hell for this and probably get modded a troll.
So be it.
However, as a currently unemployed U. S. citizen who has had a job and paying into the system since I was twelve, I have to wonder where the hell is my federal government bailout money?
State unemployment doesn't pay hardly anything.
The U. S. government gave over a billion dollars to a foreign company, but a hard working citizen like myself, who really wants to work, gets next to nothing.I apologize for the rant.If anybody is looking for a systems/network administrator, who has over twenty years of solid experience, in the NE Ohio area, let me know.SiO2</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461889</id>
	<title>Re:Fleet Car</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245856440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, the car looks pretty sweet to me.  The style and specs compare favorably to $50K luxury cars.  I probably wont quite have enough money to justify spending $50K on a car in 2011, but if I do, the Model S is about the top of list for me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , the car looks pretty sweet to me .
The style and specs compare favorably to $ 50K luxury cars .
I probably wont quite have enough money to justify spending $ 50K on a car in 2011 , but if I do , the Model S is about the top of list for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, the car looks pretty sweet to me.
The style and specs compare favorably to $50K luxury cars.
I probably wont quite have enough money to justify spending $50K on a car in 2011, but if I do, the Model S is about the top of list for me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458555</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460825</id>
	<title>Re:Green Car on a Budget - Innovation Not Required</title>
	<author>David Greene</author>
	<datestamp>1245847980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I think GM's approach (with bringing out a less exotic Chevy Volt) or yours (an even more austere Aveo) is backwards. Say it costs $5000 to $10000 to implement the advanced battery and drivetrain at this point in development. This means the cost of an electric Aveo would be 50+ percent higher than for a gas one, which is "cheap enough" to run in the first place.</p></div><p>Don't confuse the Volt and an electric Aveo.  The Volt has a range extender.  That makes it very different than an electric Aveo or a Tesla and will probably be more attractive to the avereage person due to the range anxiety issue.  The Volt is not any less advanced technologically than the Tesla (who cares about "exotic?").  It's just different.  An arguably a better investment.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>GM in particular has been the ABSOLUTE LEAST INNOVATIVE auto company on the entire planet for decades--even its best products are dependable but very boring and un-innovative, and they've invested the least into new technologies in their plants out of EVERY SINGLE company that builds cars in N America.</p></div><p>Depends on what you look at.  For production vehicles, that may be true.  But GM did do the EV1 and has a done a ton of research into electric, hybrid and range-extended vehicles.  The Tesla's downfall is the huge battery pack.  It seems a poor engineering tradeoff to spend $$$ to get 200 miles on a change when 40 miles will do just fine for the average commuter (i.e. 80\% or more of us) and a simple ICE running at its most efficient RPM can supply extra range when necessary.  This is borne out in the price difference between the Model S and the Volt.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think GM 's approach ( with bringing out a less exotic Chevy Volt ) or yours ( an even more austere Aveo ) is backwards .
Say it costs $ 5000 to $ 10000 to implement the advanced battery and drivetrain at this point in development .
This means the cost of an electric Aveo would be 50 + percent higher than for a gas one , which is " cheap enough " to run in the first place.Do n't confuse the Volt and an electric Aveo .
The Volt has a range extender .
That makes it very different than an electric Aveo or a Tesla and will probably be more attractive to the avereage person due to the range anxiety issue .
The Volt is not any less advanced technologically than the Tesla ( who cares about " exotic ? " ) .
It 's just different .
An arguably a better investment.GM in particular has been the ABSOLUTE LEAST INNOVATIVE auto company on the entire planet for decades--even its best products are dependable but very boring and un-innovative , and they 've invested the least into new technologies in their plants out of EVERY SINGLE company that builds cars in N America.Depends on what you look at .
For production vehicles , that may be true .
But GM did do the EV1 and has a done a ton of research into electric , hybrid and range-extended vehicles .
The Tesla 's downfall is the huge battery pack .
It seems a poor engineering tradeoff to spend $ $ $ to get 200 miles on a change when 40 miles will do just fine for the average commuter ( i.e .
80 \ % or more of us ) and a simple ICE running at its most efficient RPM can supply extra range when necessary .
This is borne out in the price difference between the Model S and the Volt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think GM's approach (with bringing out a less exotic Chevy Volt) or yours (an even more austere Aveo) is backwards.
Say it costs $5000 to $10000 to implement the advanced battery and drivetrain at this point in development.
This means the cost of an electric Aveo would be 50+ percent higher than for a gas one, which is "cheap enough" to run in the first place.Don't confuse the Volt and an electric Aveo.
The Volt has a range extender.
That makes it very different than an electric Aveo or a Tesla and will probably be more attractive to the avereage person due to the range anxiety issue.
The Volt is not any less advanced technologically than the Tesla (who cares about "exotic?").
It's just different.
An arguably a better investment.GM in particular has been the ABSOLUTE LEAST INNOVATIVE auto company on the entire planet for decades--even its best products are dependable but very boring and un-innovative, and they've invested the least into new technologies in their plants out of EVERY SINGLE company that builds cars in N America.Depends on what you look at.
For production vehicles, that may be true.
But GM did do the EV1 and has a done a ton of research into electric, hybrid and range-extended vehicles.
The Tesla's downfall is the huge battery pack.
It seems a poor engineering tradeoff to spend $$$ to get 200 miles on a change when 40 miles will do just fine for the average commuter (i.e.
80\% or more of us) and a simple ICE running at its most efficient RPM can supply extra range when necessary.
This is borne out in the price difference between the Model S and the Volt.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458991</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28467051</id>
	<title>Re:Why no diesel-electric cars?</title>
	<author>zx-15</author>
	<datestamp>1245948240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually the efficiency of a diesel engine has more to do with the greater <a href="http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/thermo/diesel.html" title="gsu.edu">compression ratio</a> [gsu.edu] rather than density of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel#Fuel\_value\_and\_price" title="wikipedia.org">diesel</a> [wikipedia.org] <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel#Use\_as\_vehicle\_fuel" title="wikipedia.org">fuel</a> [wikipedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually the efficiency of a diesel engine has more to do with the greater compression ratio [ gsu.edu ] rather than density of diesel [ wikipedia.org ] fuel [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually the efficiency of a diesel engine has more to do with the greater compression ratio [gsu.edu] rather than density of diesel [wikipedia.org] fuel [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461815</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458037</id>
	<title>More bullshit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245835800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>courtesy of the U.S. Gubmint!</htmltext>
<tokenext>courtesy of the U.S. Gubmint !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>courtesy of the U.S. Gubmint!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28463557</id>
	<title>Re:A requirement for the loan</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1245960000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>For the american market that is not that excited about electric cars and is not going to drive a car without 10 cup holders and a movie screen</p></div><p>Wake up! The American car market has changed a lot in the last year. Smaller, more fuel-efficient cars are actually being considered now that penny-counting is in fashion.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For the american market that is not that excited about electric cars and is not going to drive a car without 10 cup holders and a movie screenWake up !
The American car market has changed a lot in the last year .
Smaller , more fuel-efficient cars are actually being considered now that penny-counting is in fashion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For the american market that is not that excited about electric cars and is not going to drive a car without 10 cup holders and a movie screenWake up!
The American car market has changed a lot in the last year.
Smaller, more fuel-efficient cars are actually being considered now that penny-counting is in fashion.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459383</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458129</id>
	<title>Model S</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245836100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The S is for socialism.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The S is for socialism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The S is for socialism.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460849</id>
	<title>Why no diesel-electric cars?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245848100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I know this is a tangential question, but I've been wondering about this for a while, and this seems like the best forum to get a decent answer from intelligent people:<br><br>Why is all the development on electric and electric-hybrid cars going into fancy new systems with lithium ion batteries or hydrogen fuel cells and (for hybrids) complicated switching between a conventional drive train and electric motors, instead of using and improving upon the time-tested diesel-electric technology which has efficiently powered many trains for quite some time now?<br><br>Build a simple all-electric car - just a body, steering rack, four wheels with a dynamo on each (there's your propulsion and your regenerative brakes), some circuity to control them all, and a small battery that holds just enough charge to get you up to speed, maybe twice that for a safety margin. Then stick the most efficient diesel or gas generator you've got in it to provide electricity to keep the battery charged. You lose a bunch of weight and mechanical complexity by ditching most of the drive train and transmission system for some simple wiring between the generator and the dynamos; the alternator and the standard car battery become redundant with the generator and main battery; heck you could even replace the radiator with a small steam engine for still increased efficiency, turning that excess heat into electricity instead of just disposing of it to the air.<br><br>Yes, it still uses some fossil fuels, but in the end most of our electricity comes from coal anyway (even for a wall-charged all-electric vehicle like the Model S here, which I am very excited about). This just seems like it would have been far cheaper, more efficient (in terms of both money and thermodynamics), and simpler a solution than the complicated hybrids they've been building for a while now; plus the technology has already existed in widespread use on trains for decades!<br><br>So why isn't anybody doing it in cars? Is there a good technical or economic reason?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know this is a tangential question , but I 've been wondering about this for a while , and this seems like the best forum to get a decent answer from intelligent people : Why is all the development on electric and electric-hybrid cars going into fancy new systems with lithium ion batteries or hydrogen fuel cells and ( for hybrids ) complicated switching between a conventional drive train and electric motors , instead of using and improving upon the time-tested diesel-electric technology which has efficiently powered many trains for quite some time now ? Build a simple all-electric car - just a body , steering rack , four wheels with a dynamo on each ( there 's your propulsion and your regenerative brakes ) , some circuity to control them all , and a small battery that holds just enough charge to get you up to speed , maybe twice that for a safety margin .
Then stick the most efficient diesel or gas generator you 've got in it to provide electricity to keep the battery charged .
You lose a bunch of weight and mechanical complexity by ditching most of the drive train and transmission system for some simple wiring between the generator and the dynamos ; the alternator and the standard car battery become redundant with the generator and main battery ; heck you could even replace the radiator with a small steam engine for still increased efficiency , turning that excess heat into electricity instead of just disposing of it to the air.Yes , it still uses some fossil fuels , but in the end most of our electricity comes from coal anyway ( even for a wall-charged all-electric vehicle like the Model S here , which I am very excited about ) .
This just seems like it would have been far cheaper , more efficient ( in terms of both money and thermodynamics ) , and simpler a solution than the complicated hybrids they 've been building for a while now ; plus the technology has already existed in widespread use on trains for decades ! So why is n't anybody doing it in cars ?
Is there a good technical or economic reason ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know this is a tangential question, but I've been wondering about this for a while, and this seems like the best forum to get a decent answer from intelligent people:Why is all the development on electric and electric-hybrid cars going into fancy new systems with lithium ion batteries or hydrogen fuel cells and (for hybrids) complicated switching between a conventional drive train and electric motors, instead of using and improving upon the time-tested diesel-electric technology which has efficiently powered many trains for quite some time now?Build a simple all-electric car - just a body, steering rack, four wheels with a dynamo on each (there's your propulsion and your regenerative brakes), some circuity to control them all, and a small battery that holds just enough charge to get you up to speed, maybe twice that for a safety margin.
Then stick the most efficient diesel or gas generator you've got in it to provide electricity to keep the battery charged.
You lose a bunch of weight and mechanical complexity by ditching most of the drive train and transmission system for some simple wiring between the generator and the dynamos; the alternator and the standard car battery become redundant with the generator and main battery; heck you could even replace the radiator with a small steam engine for still increased efficiency, turning that excess heat into electricity instead of just disposing of it to the air.Yes, it still uses some fossil fuels, but in the end most of our electricity comes from coal anyway (even for a wall-charged all-electric vehicle like the Model S here, which I am very excited about).
This just seems like it would have been far cheaper, more efficient (in terms of both money and thermodynamics), and simpler a solution than the complicated hybrids they've been building for a while now; plus the technology has already existed in widespread use on trains for decades!So why isn't anybody doing it in cars?
Is there a good technical or economic reason?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461815</id>
	<title>Re:Why no diesel-electric cars?</title>
	<author>bobdotorg</author>
	<datestamp>1245855840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Why is all the development on electric and electric-hybrid cars going into fancy new systems with lithium ion batteries or hydrogen fuel cells and (for hybrids) complicated switching between a conventional drive train and electric motors, instead of using and improving upon the time-tested diesel-electric technology which has efficiently powered many trains for quite some time now?...<br>SNiP<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...the technology has already existed in widespread use on trains for decades!</p><p>So why isn't anybody doing it in cars? Is there a good technical or economic reason?</p></div></blockquote><p>Diesel locomotives use turbine engines, aren't regularly subjected to stop and go traffic, can pollute like crazy, and don't need as high a power to weight ratio as passenger cars.</p><p>In a passenger car a diesel hybrid would be essentially be a gasoline hybrid with a piston diesel engine.</p><p>Volkswagon had a 70MPG prototype, but I don't believe it made it to production.  Much of the increase in mileage of a diesel hybrid over a Prius would be due to the fact that diesel has about 12\% more energy per volume.</p><p>Gasoline engines are more suited than diesels to the rapid start / stop cycles in hybrid cars.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is all the development on electric and electric-hybrid cars going into fancy new systems with lithium ion batteries or hydrogen fuel cells and ( for hybrids ) complicated switching between a conventional drive train and electric motors , instead of using and improving upon the time-tested diesel-electric technology which has efficiently powered many trains for quite some time now ? ...SNiP ...the technology has already existed in widespread use on trains for decades ! So why is n't anybody doing it in cars ?
Is there a good technical or economic reason ? Diesel locomotives use turbine engines , are n't regularly subjected to stop and go traffic , can pollute like crazy , and do n't need as high a power to weight ratio as passenger cars.In a passenger car a diesel hybrid would be essentially be a gasoline hybrid with a piston diesel engine.Volkswagon had a 70MPG prototype , but I do n't believe it made it to production .
Much of the increase in mileage of a diesel hybrid over a Prius would be due to the fact that diesel has about 12 \ % more energy per volume.Gasoline engines are more suited than diesels to the rapid start / stop cycles in hybrid cars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is all the development on electric and electric-hybrid cars going into fancy new systems with lithium ion batteries or hydrogen fuel cells and (for hybrids) complicated switching between a conventional drive train and electric motors, instead of using and improving upon the time-tested diesel-electric technology which has efficiently powered many trains for quite some time now?...SNiP ...the technology has already existed in widespread use on trains for decades!So why isn't anybody doing it in cars?
Is there a good technical or economic reason?Diesel locomotives use turbine engines, aren't regularly subjected to stop and go traffic, can pollute like crazy, and don't need as high a power to weight ratio as passenger cars.In a passenger car a diesel hybrid would be essentially be a gasoline hybrid with a piston diesel engine.Volkswagon had a 70MPG prototype, but I don't believe it made it to production.
Much of the increase in mileage of a diesel hybrid over a Prius would be due to the fact that diesel has about 12\% more energy per volume.Gasoline engines are more suited than diesels to the rapid start / stop cycles in hybrid cars.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458117</id>
	<title>Re:More bullshit</title>
	<author>fiannaFailMan</author>
	<datestamp>1245836040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>More bullshit courtesy of the U.S. Gubmint!</p></div><p>I know. Just like those silly Interstate highways, the US Marine Corps, the US Postal Service that'll deliver a package of paper to any door in the US within a day or two for an affordable flat fee, and those terribly inefficient and socialized Firefighters and that neo-communist socialized Police Department.  Government. Pah! Who needs it?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>More bullshit courtesy of the U.S. Gubmint ! I know .
Just like those silly Interstate highways , the US Marine Corps , the US Postal Service that 'll deliver a package of paper to any door in the US within a day or two for an affordable flat fee , and those terribly inefficient and socialized Firefighters and that neo-communist socialized Police Department .
Government. Pah !
Who needs it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More bullshit courtesy of the U.S. Gubmint!I know.
Just like those silly Interstate highways, the US Marine Corps, the US Postal Service that'll deliver a package of paper to any door in the US within a day or two for an affordable flat fee, and those terribly inefficient and socialized Firefighters and that neo-communist socialized Police Department.
Government. Pah!
Who needs it?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458037</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459573</id>
	<title>Re:A requirement for the loan</title>
	<author>c\_jonescc</author>
	<datestamp>1245841500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>My friend's father built an electric porche for 12k in the early 90s.</p></div><p>Shit, if the starting cost of a Porsche was so low, that even after buying expensive batteries and investing in the install tools, it still comes out to 12 grand, the brand must not be nearly as fancy as I was led to believe.  I have a $12k Toyota, maybe I'll trade it in for a pair of Porsches with gas engines!  I hope you're referring to the 911!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>My friend 's father built an electric porche for 12k in the early 90s.Shit , if the starting cost of a Porsche was so low , that even after buying expensive batteries and investing in the install tools , it still comes out to 12 grand , the brand must not be nearly as fancy as I was led to believe .
I have a $ 12k Toyota , maybe I 'll trade it in for a pair of Porsches with gas engines !
I hope you 're referring to the 911 !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My friend's father built an electric porche for 12k in the early 90s.Shit, if the starting cost of a Porsche was so low, that even after buying expensive batteries and investing in the install tools, it still comes out to 12 grand, the brand must not be nearly as fancy as I was led to believe.
I have a $12k Toyota, maybe I'll trade it in for a pair of Porsches with gas engines!
I hope you're referring to the 911!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459025</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458967</id>
	<title>Re:More bullshit</title>
	<author>Rei</author>
	<datestamp>1245838980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How is giving a loan to a financially solvent private company that has a market valuation of $550B (at least as judged by Daimler) the same as the sort of giveaway that you portray it as??</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How is giving a loan to a financially solvent private company that has a market valuation of $ 550B ( at least as judged by Daimler ) the same as the sort of giveaway that you portray it as ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is giving a loan to a financially solvent private company that has a market valuation of $550B (at least as judged by Daimler) the same as the sort of giveaway that you portray it as?
?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458343</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459855</id>
	<title>Re:Government is exactly backwards</title>
	<author>cowdung</author>
	<datestamp>1245843000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I disagree.. it is good for the Government to gamble a bit on loans as long as overall they have more success stories than failures.</p><p>Even failures can pay off in the long run by producing new technology and new know-how. Otherwise, why invest in education?</p><p>Telsa has a good idea and has shown some ability to execute. If they succeed the taxpayer will benefit in more ways than just monetary.</p><p>If we were to follow what you suggest then you might as well just give all your money to banks and let them do the lending.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I disagree.. it is good for the Government to gamble a bit on loans as long as overall they have more success stories than failures.Even failures can pay off in the long run by producing new technology and new know-how .
Otherwise , why invest in education ? Telsa has a good idea and has shown some ability to execute .
If they succeed the taxpayer will benefit in more ways than just monetary.If we were to follow what you suggest then you might as well just give all your money to banks and let them do the lending .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I disagree.. it is good for the Government to gamble a bit on loans as long as overall they have more success stories than failures.Even failures can pay off in the long run by producing new technology and new know-how.
Otherwise, why invest in education?Telsa has a good idea and has shown some ability to execute.
If they succeed the taxpayer will benefit in more ways than just monetary.If we were to follow what you suggest then you might as well just give all your money to banks and let them do the lending.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459211</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465777</id>
	<title>Re:loans for everyone!</title>
	<author>AP31R0N</author>
	<datestamp>1245941700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe it's like handing out fertilized chicken eggs.  You hand out 12 with the assumption that some klutz will drop a few and some will yield males.  The 5 females that hatch can produce enough to make up for the few that hit the floor.  So the predictable losses are acceptable, because the gains will/should outweigh them.  In 3 years my 12 eggs could be a few dozen hens and a truck full of scrambled eggs, despite a few losses.  Where there is reward, there is generally risk.  Balancing the two is the trick.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe it 's like handing out fertilized chicken eggs .
You hand out 12 with the assumption that some klutz will drop a few and some will yield males .
The 5 females that hatch can produce enough to make up for the few that hit the floor .
So the predictable losses are acceptable , because the gains will/should outweigh them .
In 3 years my 12 eggs could be a few dozen hens and a truck full of scrambled eggs , despite a few losses .
Where there is reward , there is generally risk .
Balancing the two is the trick .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe it's like handing out fertilized chicken eggs.
You hand out 12 with the assumption that some klutz will drop a few and some will yield males.
The 5 females that hatch can produce enough to make up for the few that hit the floor.
So the predictable losses are acceptable, because the gains will/should outweigh them.
In 3 years my 12 eggs could be a few dozen hens and a truck full of scrambled eggs, despite a few losses.
Where there is reward, there is generally risk.
Balancing the two is the trick.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459185</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460155</id>
	<title>Re:Tesla Fanboi</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245844560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>All good, except that the car has not been performing well, take for example the top gear episode featuring 2 of the cars, both cars ended up out of commission due to failures.  Battery life is another thing, the cars were dead after short stints of hard driving, when they weren't overheating, its not a sports car if you can't drive in a sporting manner.  It is for sure a boutique car at best.  In time it will improve but for now utterly impractical.</htmltext>
<tokenext>All good , except that the car has not been performing well , take for example the top gear episode featuring 2 of the cars , both cars ended up out of commission due to failures .
Battery life is another thing , the cars were dead after short stints of hard driving , when they were n't overheating , its not a sports car if you ca n't drive in a sporting manner .
It is for sure a boutique car at best .
In time it will improve but for now utterly impractical .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All good, except that the car has not been performing well, take for example the top gear episode featuring 2 of the cars, both cars ended up out of commission due to failures.
Battery life is another thing, the cars were dead after short stints of hard driving, when they weren't overheating, its not a sports car if you can't drive in a sporting manner.
It is for sure a boutique car at best.
In time it will improve but for now utterly impractical.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458389</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459783</id>
	<title>Re:A requirement for the loan</title>
	<author>Slugster</author>
	<datestamp>1245842580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>should have been a 25K car cost cap.
That way most people could only barely not afford it.</p></div><p>Well that's silly. <br>
<br>
This is what Warren Buffet <i> <strong>really</strong> </i> meant when he said that there was going to be huge profits to be made in "green technology". Not that said green technology would be any more efficient than what we've already got, but that <i>certain interests will pay more for it</i>, for whatever reason. <br>
~</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>should have been a 25K car cost cap .
That way most people could only barely not afford it.Well that 's silly .
This is what Warren Buffet really meant when he said that there was going to be huge profits to be made in " green technology " .
Not that said green technology would be any more efficient than what we 've already got , but that certain interests will pay more for it , for whatever reason .
~</tokentext>
<sentencetext>should have been a 25K car cost cap.
That way most people could only barely not afford it.Well that's silly.
This is what Warren Buffet  really  meant when he said that there was going to be huge profits to be made in "green technology".
Not that said green technology would be any more efficient than what we've already got, but that certain interests will pay more for it, for whatever reason.
~
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459123</id>
	<title>Re:It's a Loan.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245839520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>It's not a handout. It's a loan. You know like the loans you can get for small businesses from the feds and state governments.<br></i></p><p>And what happens when they don't pay?  We get a bankrupt companies on our hands that have billions of dollars in unfunded healthcare costs?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not a handout .
It 's a loan .
You know like the loans you can get for small businesses from the feds and state governments.And what happens when they do n't pay ?
We get a bankrupt companies on our hands that have billions of dollars in unfunded healthcare costs ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not a handout.
It's a loan.
You know like the loans you can get for small businesses from the feds and state governments.And what happens when they don't pay?
We get a bankrupt companies on our hands that have billions of dollars in unfunded healthcare costs?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458533</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458721</id>
	<title>Re:More bullshit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245838020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and *general Welfare* of the United States"  U.S. Const. Article I, Section 8, Clause 1.</p><p>Libertarians, most. annoying. fanboys. ever.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes , Duties , Imposts and Excises , to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and * general Welfare * of the United States " U.S. Const. Article I , Section 8 , Clause 1.Libertarians , most .
annoying. fanboys .
ever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and *general Welfare* of the United States"  U.S. Const. Article I, Section 8, Clause 1.Libertarians, most.
annoying. fanboys.
ever.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458241</id>
	<title>News for nerds, not ideologues.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245836460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Good grief. This is awesome. What's wrong with you people?<br> <br>

Why are you such knee-jerk ideologues? A government spending money is socialism? Are you that stupid?<br> <br>

This is an honest-to-goodness American technology company building some very cool 21st century vehicles. <br> <br>

I'm really ashamed of America sometimes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Good grief .
This is awesome .
What 's wrong with you people ?
Why are you such knee-jerk ideologues ?
A government spending money is socialism ?
Are you that stupid ?
This is an honest-to-goodness American technology company building some very cool 21st century vehicles .
I 'm really ashamed of America sometimes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good grief.
This is awesome.
What's wrong with you people?
Why are you such knee-jerk ideologues?
A government spending money is socialism?
Are you that stupid?
This is an honest-to-goodness American technology company building some very cool 21st century vehicles.
I'm really ashamed of America sometimes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460969</id>
	<title>Re:A requirement for the loan</title>
	<author>dakameleon</author>
	<datestamp>1245848880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You are wrong.  My friend's father built an electric porche for 12k in the early 90s.</p></div><p>Did he get the Porsche body for free, or was that in the $12k price there? Unless you're only quoting $12k on top of original costs, in which case you'll need to make a $13k car first and then convert it. Oh but don't forget that a Porsche's aerodynamics is likely to give it far better range than anything you'll get in the low teens.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You are wrong .
My friend 's father built an electric porche for 12k in the early 90s.Did he get the Porsche body for free , or was that in the $ 12k price there ?
Unless you 're only quoting $ 12k on top of original costs , in which case you 'll need to make a $ 13k car first and then convert it .
Oh but do n't forget that a Porsche 's aerodynamics is likely to give it far better range than anything you 'll get in the low teens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are wrong.
My friend's father built an electric porche for 12k in the early 90s.Did he get the Porsche body for free, or was that in the $12k price there?
Unless you're only quoting $12k on top of original costs, in which case you'll need to make a $13k car first and then convert it.
Oh but don't forget that a Porsche's aerodynamics is likely to give it far better range than anything you'll get in the low teens.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459025</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28463787</id>
	<title>Re:loans for everyone!</title>
	<author>jusdisgi</author>
	<datestamp>1245962700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>One big reason is that if they only gave money to US companies they'd be sued through the WTO immediately.</htmltext>
<tokenext>One big reason is that if they only gave money to US companies they 'd be sued through the WTO immediately .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One big reason is that if they only gave money to US companies they'd be sued through the WTO immediately.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458221</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28462877</id>
	<title>Re:Why no diesel-electric cars?</title>
	<author>MaWeiTao</author>
	<datestamp>1245865320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I'm not mistaken that's essentially how the GM Volt works. The gasoline engine generates electricity and doesn't actually motivate the vehicle. In my opinion, by far the smart idea for a hybrid I've seen to date, but the media couldn't help but shitt on the concept because it's GM.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I 'm not mistaken that 's essentially how the GM Volt works .
The gasoline engine generates electricity and does n't actually motivate the vehicle .
In my opinion , by far the smart idea for a hybrid I 've seen to date , but the media could n't help but shitt on the concept because it 's GM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I'm not mistaken that's essentially how the GM Volt works.
The gasoline engine generates electricity and doesn't actually motivate the vehicle.
In my opinion, by far the smart idea for a hybrid I've seen to date, but the media couldn't help but shitt on the concept because it's GM.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460239</id>
	<title>Re:Battery replacement cost?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245844980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>That thing looks hot.</p><p>My only concern is battery replacement.  Replacing a UPS battery is roughly half the cost of the UPS.  If cars like these get the same battery economy that would mean $25k every 5-7 years according to their FAQ.  (I'm just guessing here based on battery life; they made no mention of battery replacement costs)</p></div><p>A UPS shell is not the same as a car.  IIRC the goal is to get battery costs down to the 2-3k range.  But you'll never see that if they don't start building a plant to get things moving.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That thing looks hot.My only concern is battery replacement .
Replacing a UPS battery is roughly half the cost of the UPS .
If cars like these get the same battery economy that would mean $ 25k every 5-7 years according to their FAQ .
( I 'm just guessing here based on battery life ; they made no mention of battery replacement costs ) A UPS shell is not the same as a car .
IIRC the goal is to get battery costs down to the 2-3k range .
But you 'll never see that if they do n't start building a plant to get things moving .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That thing looks hot.My only concern is battery replacement.
Replacing a UPS battery is roughly half the cost of the UPS.
If cars like these get the same battery economy that would mean $25k every 5-7 years according to their FAQ.
(I'm just guessing here based on battery life; they made no mention of battery replacement costs)A UPS shell is not the same as a car.
IIRC the goal is to get battery costs down to the 2-3k range.
But you'll never see that if they don't start building a plant to get things moving.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460805</id>
	<title>Re:Battery replacement cost?</title>
	<author>AaronW</author>
	<datestamp>1245847860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One thing to keep in mind is that the cost of batteries will drop significantly as they mature and their life will be extended further as new technologies make it to market.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One thing to keep in mind is that the cost of batteries will drop significantly as they mature and their life will be extended further as new technologies make it to market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One thing to keep in mind is that the cost of batteries will drop significantly as they mature and their life will be extended further as new technologies make it to market.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28462059</id>
	<title>Re:Geography</title>
	<author>Whatsmynickname</author>
	<datestamp>1245857460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The reason they are manufacturing this in the SF Bay area is due to <a href="http://gov.ca.gov/press-release/10038/" title="ca.gov">California making a deal with Tesla</a> [ca.gov].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The reason they are manufacturing this in the SF Bay area is due to California making a deal with Tesla [ ca.gov ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The reason they are manufacturing this in the SF Bay area is due to California making a deal with Tesla [ca.gov].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459101</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458343</id>
	<title>Re:More bullshit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245836760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>How is funding a boutique luxury car manufacturer at the rate of half a billion similar to funding interstates, military, postal service, etc.? Tesla does not even hope to provide shared infrastructure or essential services to the country as do these programs. I don't get it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How is funding a boutique luxury car manufacturer at the rate of half a billion similar to funding interstates , military , postal service , etc. ?
Tesla does not even hope to provide shared infrastructure or essential services to the country as do these programs .
I do n't get it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is funding a boutique luxury car manufacturer at the rate of half a billion similar to funding interstates, military, postal service, etc.?
Tesla does not even hope to provide shared infrastructure or essential services to the country as do these programs.
I don't get it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458117</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461945</id>
	<title>My only concern is battery replacement.</title>
	<author>falconwolf</author>
	<datestamp>1245856800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>f cars like these get the same battery economy that would mean $25k every 5-7 years according to their FAQ.</i></p><p>After 5 year their batteries are supposed to hold 70\% of their new charge capacity, so they really don't need to be replaced, unless the owner needs the range.</p><p>

Falcon</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>f cars like these get the same battery economy that would mean $ 25k every 5-7 years according to their FAQ.After 5 year their batteries are supposed to hold 70 \ % of their new charge capacity , so they really do n't need to be replaced , unless the owner needs the range .
Falcon</tokentext>
<sentencetext>f cars like these get the same battery economy that would mean $25k every 5-7 years according to their FAQ.After 5 year their batteries are supposed to hold 70\% of their new charge capacity, so they really don't need to be replaced, unless the owner needs the range.
Falcon</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28482633</id>
	<title>Re:A requirement for the loan</title>
	<author>holmstar</author>
	<datestamp>1246031640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You are presuming that the drive train of a miata costs the same as an equivalent electric drive train + batteries.  The problem is, enough batteries to drive 200 miles equates to about 8-10k in cost right now.  That doesn't even include the electric motor and electronics to power the motor properly.  Your miata would likely end up being $40k instead of $25k.  How many people would buy a $40k miata?</htmltext>
<tokenext>You are presuming that the drive train of a miata costs the same as an equivalent electric drive train + batteries .
The problem is , enough batteries to drive 200 miles equates to about 8-10k in cost right now .
That does n't even include the electric motor and electronics to power the motor properly .
Your miata would likely end up being $ 40k instead of $ 25k .
How many people would buy a $ 40k miata ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are presuming that the drive train of a miata costs the same as an equivalent electric drive train + batteries.
The problem is, enough batteries to drive 200 miles equates to about 8-10k in cost right now.
That doesn't even include the electric motor and electronics to power the motor properly.
Your miata would likely end up being $40k instead of $25k.
How many people would buy a $40k miata?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459383</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28462497</id>
	<title>elon musk</title>
	<author>strack</author>
	<datestamp>1245861000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>imho, elon musk is doing what billionaires should be doing. taking risks that their fortune enables only them to make, with companies like tesla motors, and spacex.</htmltext>
<tokenext>imho , elon musk is doing what billionaires should be doing .
taking risks that their fortune enables only them to make , with companies like tesla motors , and spacex .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>imho, elon musk is doing what billionaires should be doing.
taking risks that their fortune enables only them to make, with companies like tesla motors, and spacex.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459835</id>
	<title>Re:loans for everyone!</title>
	<author>Slugster</author>
	<datestamp>1245842880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I heard on the radio (AM broadcast) that the main reason was to avert anti-trade sanctions that would have been likely, had only US companies been given these handouts. <br>
<br>
(and yes, it is a handout. It's called "gambling with someone else's money". If you go broke anyway, you don't pay it back, because <i>you can't</i>-)<br>
<br>
As to why ANY of them are getting any government money,,,,, that would have to do with a certain musty piece of paper, and of a number of politicians who have no use for it.<br>
~</htmltext>
<tokenext>I heard on the radio ( AM broadcast ) that the main reason was to avert anti-trade sanctions that would have been likely , had only US companies been given these handouts .
( and yes , it is a handout .
It 's called " gambling with someone else 's money " .
If you go broke anyway , you do n't pay it back , because you ca n't- ) As to why ANY of them are getting any government money,,,, , that would have to do with a certain musty piece of paper , and of a number of politicians who have no use for it .
~</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I heard on the radio (AM broadcast) that the main reason was to avert anti-trade sanctions that would have been likely, had only US companies been given these handouts.
(and yes, it is a handout.
It's called "gambling with someone else's money".
If you go broke anyway, you don't pay it back, because you can't-)

As to why ANY of them are getting any government money,,,,, that would have to do with a certain musty piece of paper, and of a number of politicians who have no use for it.
~</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458221</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458453</id>
	<title>Re:Green Car on a Budget - Innovation Not Required</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1245837060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>AS it turns out, electric cars people will buy are costly to make.<br>Not teslaa expensive, but expensive.</p><p>How about selling a 45MPG car base model at cost +2000. If they have a working trad in more then 10 years old, drop the price to cost.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>AS it turns out , electric cars people will buy are costly to make.Not teslaa expensive , but expensive.How about selling a 45MPG car base model at cost + 2000 .
If they have a working trad in more then 10 years old , drop the price to cost .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>AS it turns out, electric cars people will buy are costly to make.Not teslaa expensive, but expensive.How about selling a 45MPG car base model at cost +2000.
If they have a working trad in more then 10 years old, drop the price to cost.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458165</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459165</id>
	<title>Re:A requirement for the loan</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245839640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The technology does not exist yet to make a $25k electric car [...]</p></div><p>So EV tech hasn't advanced at all since <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General\_Motors\_EV1" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">1996</a> [wikipedia.org]?<br>When $33k could get you a car with a range of 160 miles on a single-charge.</p><p>I think what you meant to say is that the technology to make them is tied up in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent\_encumbrance\_of\_large\_automotive\_NiMH\_batteries" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">patent hell</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The technology does not exist yet to make a $ 25k electric car [ ... ] So EV tech has n't advanced at all since 1996 [ wikipedia.org ] ? When $ 33k could get you a car with a range of 160 miles on a single-charge.I think what you meant to say is that the technology to make them is tied up in patent hell [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The technology does not exist yet to make a $25k electric car [...]So EV tech hasn't advanced at all since 1996 [wikipedia.org]?When $33k could get you a car with a range of 160 miles on a single-charge.I think what you meant to say is that the technology to make them is tied up in patent hell [wikipedia.org].
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458393</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28472671</id>
	<title>Re:Why no diesel-electric cars?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245925500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>VW is:</p><p>http://www.wired.com/autopia/2008/03/revealed-volksw/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>VW is : http : //www.wired.com/autopia/2008/03/revealed-volksw/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>VW is:http://www.wired.com/autopia/2008/03/revealed-volksw/</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461347</id>
	<title>electricity rates</title>
	<author>falconwolf</author>
	<datestamp>1245851940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Only thing you need is electricity (which with most utilities you can get a time of use nighttime rate which is extremely cheap),</i></p><p>Most utilities in CA maybe but not in the US.  CA is the only state I know that has different rates for different tymes of the day.</p><p>

Falcon</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Only thing you need is electricity ( which with most utilities you can get a time of use nighttime rate which is extremely cheap ) ,Most utilities in CA maybe but not in the US .
CA is the only state I know that has different rates for different tymes of the day .
Falcon</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only thing you need is electricity (which with most utilities you can get a time of use nighttime rate which is extremely cheap),Most utilities in CA maybe but not in the US.
CA is the only state I know that has different rates for different tymes of the day.
Falcon</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458477</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458477</id>
	<title>Re:Green Car on a Budget - Innovation Not Required</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245837060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Though it's not exactly inexpensive, the cost of ownership of these things is very low.  They have 10\% of the moving parts of a standard ICE vehicle.  No transmission.  Batteries will last 7-10 years.  No oil changes, no belts, no nothing.  Only thing you need is electricity (which with most utilities you can get a time of use nighttime rate which is extremely cheap), and tires every few tens of thousands of miles.  Over its lifetime, the Model S will compare favorably to a car costing more like $35k (not cheap, but getting there), particularly if you charge on cheap nighttime rates.</p><p>A point about nighttime rates.  Most utilities actually have this, but are not allowed to offer it publicly to customers (regulators don't want customers to feel pressured into signing up for these rate classes which help the utility balance load more easily).  However, if you call your utility and ask, you'll find many have a residential rate class which will give you peak rates during the day (maybe 10-15 cents/kWh) and night time rates after 9pm (2-4 cents/kWh).  This is huge if you have an EV.  The most basic charging set up these days has a built in timer so you can set them automatically to charge only during certain times, on a preset schedule, so you get home, plug in as soon as you get there, and the system handles the rest. <br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Though it 's not exactly inexpensive , the cost of ownership of these things is very low .
They have 10 \ % of the moving parts of a standard ICE vehicle .
No transmission .
Batteries will last 7-10 years .
No oil changes , no belts , no nothing .
Only thing you need is electricity ( which with most utilities you can get a time of use nighttime rate which is extremely cheap ) , and tires every few tens of thousands of miles .
Over its lifetime , the Model S will compare favorably to a car costing more like $ 35k ( not cheap , but getting there ) , particularly if you charge on cheap nighttime rates.A point about nighttime rates .
Most utilities actually have this , but are not allowed to offer it publicly to customers ( regulators do n't want customers to feel pressured into signing up for these rate classes which help the utility balance load more easily ) .
However , if you call your utility and ask , you 'll find many have a residential rate class which will give you peak rates during the day ( maybe 10-15 cents/kWh ) and night time rates after 9pm ( 2-4 cents/kWh ) .
This is huge if you have an EV .
The most basic charging set up these days has a built in timer so you can set them automatically to charge only during certain times , on a preset schedule , so you get home , plug in as soon as you get there , and the system handles the rest .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Though it's not exactly inexpensive, the cost of ownership of these things is very low.
They have 10\% of the moving parts of a standard ICE vehicle.
No transmission.
Batteries will last 7-10 years.
No oil changes, no belts, no nothing.
Only thing you need is electricity (which with most utilities you can get a time of use nighttime rate which is extremely cheap), and tires every few tens of thousands of miles.
Over its lifetime, the Model S will compare favorably to a car costing more like $35k (not cheap, but getting there), particularly if you charge on cheap nighttime rates.A point about nighttime rates.
Most utilities actually have this, but are not allowed to offer it publicly to customers (regulators don't want customers to feel pressured into signing up for these rate classes which help the utility balance load more easily).
However, if you call your utility and ask, you'll find many have a residential rate class which will give you peak rates during the day (maybe 10-15 cents/kWh) and night time rates after 9pm (2-4 cents/kWh).
This is huge if you have an EV.
The most basic charging set up these days has a built in timer so you can set them automatically to charge only during certain times, on a preset schedule, so you get home, plug in as soon as you get there, and the system handles the rest.
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458165</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459845</id>
	<title>Re:More bullshit</title>
	<author>johnlcallaway</author>
	<datestamp>1245842940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We have state and local funded schools that the government weaseled their way into via blackmail, i.e. do it our way or you won't get federal funds. Then the US Congress kept increasing the federal income tax so that states and local government are unable to tax their citizens an appropriate amount to fund them without the funds.
<br> <br>
All under the guise of general welfare, but really to allow the US government to force it's will upon the states IN DIRECT CONFLICT with state rights.  Our 50 states are the ultimate experiment in free market, if you don't like the state you live in, move to one that you do like or try to adopt their policies in your home state, without all that messy patent business that keeps commercial businesses from doing the same thing.  The federal government has for the most part eliminated this experiment because some states weren't as good at it as others.
<br> <br>
And now the federal government is doing the same thing to commercial enterprises.  All under the guise of 'general welfare'. They can't have loans unless they conform to federal rules about pay and benefits.  They can't import any of their cars from overseas anymore. No check on whether or not the loan is viable, just imposing rules from a man who has never run a business in his life. Meanwhile, thousands for dealers are closing their doors forcing thousands more unemployed out onto the street so the government can impose it's version how how a business should operate on those that today can't afford to live without it.  Just like they did the schools, one school system at a time.
<br> <br>
Be careful what you ask for,  you just might get it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We have state and local funded schools that the government weaseled their way into via blackmail , i.e .
do it our way or you wo n't get federal funds .
Then the US Congress kept increasing the federal income tax so that states and local government are unable to tax their citizens an appropriate amount to fund them without the funds .
All under the guise of general welfare , but really to allow the US government to force it 's will upon the states IN DIRECT CONFLICT with state rights .
Our 50 states are the ultimate experiment in free market , if you do n't like the state you live in , move to one that you do like or try to adopt their policies in your home state , without all that messy patent business that keeps commercial businesses from doing the same thing .
The federal government has for the most part eliminated this experiment because some states were n't as good at it as others .
And now the federal government is doing the same thing to commercial enterprises .
All under the guise of 'general welfare' .
They ca n't have loans unless they conform to federal rules about pay and benefits .
They ca n't import any of their cars from overseas anymore .
No check on whether or not the loan is viable , just imposing rules from a man who has never run a business in his life .
Meanwhile , thousands for dealers are closing their doors forcing thousands more unemployed out onto the street so the government can impose it 's version how how a business should operate on those that today ca n't afford to live without it .
Just like they did the schools , one school system at a time .
Be careful what you ask for , you just might get it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We have state and local funded schools that the government weaseled their way into via blackmail, i.e.
do it our way or you won't get federal funds.
Then the US Congress kept increasing the federal income tax so that states and local government are unable to tax their citizens an appropriate amount to fund them without the funds.
All under the guise of general welfare, but really to allow the US government to force it's will upon the states IN DIRECT CONFLICT with state rights.
Our 50 states are the ultimate experiment in free market, if you don't like the state you live in, move to one that you do like or try to adopt their policies in your home state, without all that messy patent business that keeps commercial businesses from doing the same thing.
The federal government has for the most part eliminated this experiment because some states weren't as good at it as others.
And now the federal government is doing the same thing to commercial enterprises.
All under the guise of 'general welfare'.
They can't have loans unless they conform to federal rules about pay and benefits.
They can't import any of their cars from overseas anymore.
No check on whether or not the loan is viable, just imposing rules from a man who has never run a business in his life.
Meanwhile, thousands for dealers are closing their doors forcing thousands more unemployed out onto the street so the government can impose it's version how how a business should operate on those that today can't afford to live without it.
Just like they did the schools, one school system at a time.
Be careful what you ask for,  you just might get it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459209</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28464319</id>
	<title>Re:Why no diesel-electric cars?</title>
	<author>Franso6</author>
	<datestamp>1245926220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>mod parent up!<br>
I've also wondered why the hybrids still had direct heat engine to wheels transmission.</htmltext>
<tokenext>mod parent up !
I 've also wondered why the hybrids still had direct heat engine to wheels transmission .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>mod parent up!
I've also wondered why the hybrids still had direct heat engine to wheels transmission.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458545</id>
	<title>Fisker Karma</title>
	<author>supermegadope</author>
	<datestamp>1245837300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hopefully Fisker can get the same deal from the feds to make the Karma !!!
Which would really help me because I am loaded up on QTWW stock<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hopefully Fisker can get the same deal from the feds to make the Karma ! ! !
Which would really help me because I am loaded up on QTWW stock ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hopefully Fisker can get the same deal from the feds to make the Karma !!!
Which would really help me because I am loaded up on QTWW stock ;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459425</id>
	<title>Another high-priced toy...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245840840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>for angst-ridden yuppies.  *YAWN*  Wake me up when the base price is $20k without a gov't subsidy (a.k.a. taxpayer robbery).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>for angst-ridden yuppies .
* YAWN * Wake me up when the base price is $ 20k without a gov't subsidy ( a.k.a .
taxpayer robbery ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>for angst-ridden yuppies.
*YAWN*  Wake me up when the base price is $20k without a gov't subsidy (a.k.a.
taxpayer robbery).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458195</id>
	<title>My Unstoppable Tesla Prediction: +1, True</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245836340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Tesla will be out of business ( a.k.a. Chapter 7 Bankruptcy) by Jan. 1, 2012 along with Chrysler and General Motors.</p><p>Go China.</p><p>Yours In Communism,<br>Kilgore Trout</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Tesla will be out of business ( a.k.a .
Chapter 7 Bankruptcy ) by Jan. 1 , 2012 along with Chrysler and General Motors.Go China.Yours In Communism,Kilgore Trout</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tesla will be out of business ( a.k.a.
Chapter 7 Bankruptcy) by Jan. 1, 2012 along with Chrysler and General Motors.Go China.Yours In Communism,Kilgore Trout</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28464463</id>
	<title>Re:A requirement for the loan</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245928560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Speaking for the working poor, until someone makes one for less then 15k they should have kept the money and given us a tax break.  Like the 4500$ credit for trading in your clunker for better fuel economy.  That's great for people who can afford to drop at least 15k on a new car, but for us who can't afford a mortgage it's just another oversite.  I have 2 vehicles neither which are worth 4500$.  Good thing there's another credit that's not for me.  While we are at it let's throw some more money at car makers and pretend tax payers get something out of it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Speaking for the working poor , until someone makes one for less then 15k they should have kept the money and given us a tax break .
Like the 4500 $ credit for trading in your clunker for better fuel economy .
That 's great for people who can afford to drop at least 15k on a new car , but for us who ca n't afford a mortgage it 's just another oversite .
I have 2 vehicles neither which are worth 4500 $ .
Good thing there 's another credit that 's not for me .
While we are at it let 's throw some more money at car makers and pretend tax payers get something out of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Speaking for the working poor, until someone makes one for less then 15k they should have kept the money and given us a tax break.
Like the 4500$ credit for trading in your clunker for better fuel economy.
That's great for people who can afford to drop at least 15k on a new car, but for us who can't afford a mortgage it's just another oversite.
I have 2 vehicles neither which are worth 4500$.
Good thing there's another credit that's not for me.
While we are at it let's throw some more money at car makers and pretend tax payers get something out of it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28481271</id>
	<title>Re:More bullshit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246027260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'll reply - and I'm trying to agree with you, we have two competing theories.  One held by me, and the Supreme Court of the United States since at least 1941 (see U.S. v. Darby), and one held by you and the states rights groups.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll reply - and I 'm trying to agree with you , we have two competing theories .
One held by me , and the Supreme Court of the United States since at least 1941 ( see U.S. v. Darby ) , and one held by you and the states rights groups .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll reply - and I'm trying to agree with you, we have two competing theories.
One held by me, and the Supreme Court of the United States since at least 1941 (see U.S. v. Darby), and one held by you and the states rights groups.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459627</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458885</id>
	<title>Re:loans for everyone!</title>
	<author>JM78</author>
	<datestamp>1245838680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Anyone left wondering why our tax dollars are funding ANY car company not showing considerable focus on sustainable tech? Tesla I get - the other two don't deserve a penny.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone left wondering why our tax dollars are funding ANY car company not showing considerable focus on sustainable tech ?
Tesla I get - the other two do n't deserve a penny .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone left wondering why our tax dollars are funding ANY car company not showing considerable focus on sustainable tech?
Tesla I get - the other two don't deserve a penny.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458221</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465483</id>
	<title>Re:Why no diesel-electric cars?</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1245940080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why is all the development on electric and electric-hybrid cars going into fancy new systems with lithium ion batteries or hydrogen fuel cells and (for hybrids) complicated switching between a conventional drive train and electric motors, instead of using and improving upon the time-tested diesel-electric technology which has efficiently powered many trains for quite some time now?</p></div><p>Lead-acid batteries do not provide sufficient energy density to make practical electric cars.</p><p>Diesel-electric locomotives do not store braking power in batteries because there is too much of it, and so far all attempts to remedy that situation have been gross failures. There ARE various people working on series hybrids though, so your basic assertion is a <strong>FAILURE</strong>.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Build a simple all-electric car - just a body, steering rack, four wheels with a dynamo on each (there's your propulsion and your regenerative brakes), some circuity to control them all, and a small battery that holds just enough charge to get you up to speed, maybe twice that for a safety margin. Then stick the most efficient diesel or gas generator you've got in it to provide electricity to keep the battery charged.</p></div><p>God, will you <a href="http://www.autoblog.com/2007/01/30/volvo-c30-hybrid-concept/" title="autoblog.com">please shut the fuck up</a> [autoblog.com]? You did not invent series hybrids.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>the alternator and the standard car battery become redundant with the generator and main battery; heck you could even replace the radiator with a small steam engine for still increased efficiency, turning that excess heat into electricity instead of just disposing of it to the air.</p></div><p>BMW tried the "small steam engine" thing on a gasoline (or was it diesel?) ICE and extended their range by like 10\%. On a smaller, lighter vehicle it would be a net loss due to weight.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Yes, it still uses some fossil fuels, but in the end most of our electricity comes from coal anyway</p></div><p>If it's a plug-in hybrid, then it doesn't need to use fossil fuels if you don't outrun the battery-only range.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>So why isn't anybody doing it in cars? Is there a good technical or economic reason?</p></div><p>It's harder to get right, EVERYONE is working on it, and you are a dumbass. Your question is invalid because people ARE doing it in cars.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is all the development on electric and electric-hybrid cars going into fancy new systems with lithium ion batteries or hydrogen fuel cells and ( for hybrids ) complicated switching between a conventional drive train and electric motors , instead of using and improving upon the time-tested diesel-electric technology which has efficiently powered many trains for quite some time now ? Lead-acid batteries do not provide sufficient energy density to make practical electric cars.Diesel-electric locomotives do not store braking power in batteries because there is too much of it , and so far all attempts to remedy that situation have been gross failures .
There ARE various people working on series hybrids though , so your basic assertion is a FAILURE.Build a simple all-electric car - just a body , steering rack , four wheels with a dynamo on each ( there 's your propulsion and your regenerative brakes ) , some circuity to control them all , and a small battery that holds just enough charge to get you up to speed , maybe twice that for a safety margin .
Then stick the most efficient diesel or gas generator you 've got in it to provide electricity to keep the battery charged.God , will you please shut the fuck up [ autoblog.com ] ?
You did not invent series hybrids.the alternator and the standard car battery become redundant with the generator and main battery ; heck you could even replace the radiator with a small steam engine for still increased efficiency , turning that excess heat into electricity instead of just disposing of it to the air.BMW tried the " small steam engine " thing on a gasoline ( or was it diesel ?
) ICE and extended their range by like 10 \ % .
On a smaller , lighter vehicle it would be a net loss due to weight.Yes , it still uses some fossil fuels , but in the end most of our electricity comes from coal anywayIf it 's a plug-in hybrid , then it does n't need to use fossil fuels if you do n't outrun the battery-only range.So why is n't anybody doing it in cars ?
Is there a good technical or economic reason ? It 's harder to get right , EVERYONE is working on it , and you are a dumbass .
Your question is invalid because people ARE doing it in cars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is all the development on electric and electric-hybrid cars going into fancy new systems with lithium ion batteries or hydrogen fuel cells and (for hybrids) complicated switching between a conventional drive train and electric motors, instead of using and improving upon the time-tested diesel-electric technology which has efficiently powered many trains for quite some time now?Lead-acid batteries do not provide sufficient energy density to make practical electric cars.Diesel-electric locomotives do not store braking power in batteries because there is too much of it, and so far all attempts to remedy that situation have been gross failures.
There ARE various people working on series hybrids though, so your basic assertion is a FAILURE.Build a simple all-electric car - just a body, steering rack, four wheels with a dynamo on each (there's your propulsion and your regenerative brakes), some circuity to control them all, and a small battery that holds just enough charge to get you up to speed, maybe twice that for a safety margin.
Then stick the most efficient diesel or gas generator you've got in it to provide electricity to keep the battery charged.God, will you please shut the fuck up [autoblog.com]?
You did not invent series hybrids.the alternator and the standard car battery become redundant with the generator and main battery; heck you could even replace the radiator with a small steam engine for still increased efficiency, turning that excess heat into electricity instead of just disposing of it to the air.BMW tried the "small steam engine" thing on a gasoline (or was it diesel?
) ICE and extended their range by like 10\%.
On a smaller, lighter vehicle it would be a net loss due to weight.Yes, it still uses some fossil fuels, but in the end most of our electricity comes from coal anywayIf it's a plug-in hybrid, then it doesn't need to use fossil fuels if you don't outrun the battery-only range.So why isn't anybody doing it in cars?
Is there a good technical or economic reason?It's harder to get right, EVERYONE is working on it, and you are a dumbass.
Your question is invalid because people ARE doing it in cars.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458381</id>
	<title>ABOUT freakin' time</title>
	<author>Ralph Spoilsport</author>
	<datestamp>1245836880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We need electric cars, and they will only "happen" with economies of scale. This money will get the ball rolling and hopefully a viable electric vehicle will result. We need them. NOW. Not 10 years from now. NOW.
<p>
Now, if eeStor's ultracapacitors can ramp up, we might actually have a private transportation sector in 10 years.
</p><p>
RS</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We need electric cars , and they will only " happen " with economies of scale .
This money will get the ball rolling and hopefully a viable electric vehicle will result .
We need them .
NOW. Not 10 years from now .
NOW . Now , if eeStor 's ultracapacitors can ramp up , we might actually have a private transportation sector in 10 years .
RS</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We need electric cars, and they will only "happen" with economies of scale.
This money will get the ball rolling and hopefully a viable electric vehicle will result.
We need them.
NOW. Not 10 years from now.
NOW.

Now, if eeStor's ultracapacitors can ramp up, we might actually have a private transportation sector in 10 years.
RS</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458659</id>
	<title>Re:More bullshit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245837720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>interstate commerce clause??</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>interstate commerce clause ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>interstate commerce clause?
?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459209</id>
	<title>Re:More bullshit</title>
	<author>kingrooster</author>
	<datestamp>1245839820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and <strong>general Welfare</strong> of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;"<br> <br>

Say what you will about that being to vague, but a loan to a car company to produce affordable, clean transportation definitely qualifies for general welfare... Transportation has become critical for economic success. <br> <br>

Telephone service in areas where capital expense is to high is treated the same way: <a href="http://www.usda.gov/rus/telecom/telecomact/act.htm" title="usda.gov" rel="nofollow">http://www.usda.gov/rus/telecom/telecomact/act.htm</a> [usda.gov]</htmltext>
<tokenext>" The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes , Duties , Imposts and Excises , to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States ; but all Duties , Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States ; " Say what you will about that being to vague , but a loan to a car company to produce affordable , clean transportation definitely qualifies for general welfare... Transportation has become critical for economic success .
Telephone service in areas where capital expense is to high is treated the same way : http : //www.usda.gov/rus/telecom/telecomact/act.htm [ usda.gov ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;" 

Say what you will about that being to vague, but a loan to a car company to produce affordable, clean transportation definitely qualifies for general welfare... Transportation has become critical for economic success.
Telephone service in areas where capital expense is to high is treated the same way: http://www.usda.gov/rus/telecom/telecomact/act.htm [usda.gov]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28484115</id>
	<title>Re:quick calculation</title>
	<author>holmstar</author>
	<datestamp>1246036500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You really think that someone that would be in their target demographic would even so much as give a passing glance at the Yaris??<br>
<br>
The Yaris is far from being a luxury car and cannot compare in terms of performance to the model S.  If you want to make a legitimate comparison, you would need to compare the model S to an equivalent luxury car (equivilant in terms of features and performance)  If you do that, I bet you will see a much different result.  <br>
<br>
You could compare a cheap 12ft aluminum fishing boat to an expensive 50ft luxury yacht too, after all, they both get you to the other side of the lake, but there is a huge difference in the experience.  That experience is worth a lot.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You really think that someone that would be in their target demographic would even so much as give a passing glance at the Yaris ? ?
The Yaris is far from being a luxury car and can not compare in terms of performance to the model S. If you want to make a legitimate comparison , you would need to compare the model S to an equivalent luxury car ( equivilant in terms of features and performance ) If you do that , I bet you will see a much different result .
You could compare a cheap 12ft aluminum fishing boat to an expensive 50ft luxury yacht too , after all , they both get you to the other side of the lake , but there is a huge difference in the experience .
That experience is worth a lot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You really think that someone that would be in their target demographic would even so much as give a passing glance at the Yaris??
The Yaris is far from being a luxury car and cannot compare in terms of performance to the model S.  If you want to make a legitimate comparison, you would need to compare the model S to an equivalent luxury car (equivilant in terms of features and performance)  If you do that, I bet you will see a much different result.
You could compare a cheap 12ft aluminum fishing boat to an expensive 50ft luxury yacht too, after all, they both get you to the other side of the lake, but there is a huge difference in the experience.
That experience is worth a lot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461153</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28464815</id>
	<title>Re:Why no diesel-electric cars?</title>
	<author>Lonewolf666</author>
	<datestamp>1245934980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's not so different from the Chevrolet Volt:<br>The main diference is that the Volt has a larger battery and an additional wall charger, so you can drive short distances entirely on battery.</p><p>The comparison to the Prius III will be interesting<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's not so different from the Chevrolet Volt : The main diference is that the Volt has a larger battery and an additional wall charger , so you can drive short distances entirely on battery.The comparison to the Prius III will be interesting ; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's not so different from the Chevrolet Volt:The main diference is that the Volt has a larger battery and an additional wall charger, so you can drive short distances entirely on battery.The comparison to the Prius III will be interesting ;-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28489785</id>
	<title>Re:A requirement for the loan</title>
	<author>joocemann</author>
	<datestamp>1246019880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is misinformation.  Do not trust what has been said.  It is merely an echo of false memes propagated by ill-informed or ill-intending pundits.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is misinformation .
Do not trust what has been said .
It is merely an echo of false memes propagated by ill-informed or ill-intending pundits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is misinformation.
Do not trust what has been said.
It is merely an echo of false memes propagated by ill-informed or ill-intending pundits.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458393</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458759</id>
	<title>Re:More bullshit</title>
	<author>lee1026</author>
	<datestamp>1245838140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is always the good old general welfare clause. It is not hard to argue that getting us off of oil is beneficial to the general welfare of the nation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is always the good old general welfare clause .
It is not hard to argue that getting us off of oil is beneficial to the general welfare of the nation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is always the good old general welfare clause.
It is not hard to argue that getting us off of oil is beneficial to the general welfare of the nation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458985</id>
	<title>Re:More bullshit</title>
	<author>joocemann</author>
	<datestamp>1245839040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, FYI the government is also supposed to protect its countrymen.  This is to include promoting a market for more sensible transportation that is not sourced from fossil fuels (given we change our ways of electricity production as well).</p><p>The damage to be incurred by not making serious changes yesterday (said "now") is worth your attention whether you're educated enough to understand it or not.  If you don't understand why this is important, get the education and understand, or sit back and trust those that do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , FYI the government is also supposed to protect its countrymen .
This is to include promoting a market for more sensible transportation that is not sourced from fossil fuels ( given we change our ways of electricity production as well ) .The damage to be incurred by not making serious changes yesterday ( said " now " ) is worth your attention whether you 're educated enough to understand it or not .
If you do n't understand why this is important , get the education and understand , or sit back and trust those that do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, FYI the government is also supposed to protect its countrymen.
This is to include promoting a market for more sensible transportation that is not sourced from fossil fuels (given we change our ways of electricity production as well).The damage to be incurred by not making serious changes yesterday (said "now") is worth your attention whether you're educated enough to understand it or not.
If you don't understand why this is important, get the education and understand, or sit back and trust those that do.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465815</id>
	<title>Why Ford?</title>
	<author>JobyOne</author>
	<datestamp>1245941940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why does Ford get such a big help?  Because they've been such a leader, and shown such promise in the world of alternative transportation?<br> <br>

Jesus, they were still making almost nothing but giant, dick-substitute trucks until like 2007.  Fuck them, they're stupid and shortsighted, let them flounder and fail.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does Ford get such a big help ?
Because they 've been such a leader , and shown such promise in the world of alternative transportation ?
Jesus , they were still making almost nothing but giant , dick-substitute trucks until like 2007 .
Fuck them , they 're stupid and shortsighted , let them flounder and fail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does Ford get such a big help?
Because they've been such a leader, and shown such promise in the world of alternative transportation?
Jesus, they were still making almost nothing but giant, dick-substitute trucks until like 2007.
Fuck them, they're stupid and shortsighted, let them flounder and fail.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461165</id>
	<title>Re:Geography</title>
	<author>Facegarden</author>
	<datestamp>1245850380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>$100M for a powertrain manufacturing plant in the SF Bay Area</p></div><p>How on earth can that be the cheapest place to manufacture something?</p><p>I suspect the factory location is more political than practical ("I've love to help you get that loan, but you know, it'd sure be nice if you located that factory in my state").</p></div><p>They're building it in Alviso, near Milpitas, on a plot of land that no one has built on because it's right next to a dump. I've you've ever driven through milpitas you know it, it smells horrible over there, all the time.</p><p>So they build a plant on land no one wants, and they get to have manufacturing near their engineers, which is really a boon for efficiency.</p><p>So it's not bad.</p><p>Plus, everyone gets to stay in the bay area, which is probably the real reason they did it!<br>-Taylor</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>$ 100M for a powertrain manufacturing plant in the SF Bay AreaHow on earth can that be the cheapest place to manufacture something ? I suspect the factory location is more political than practical ( " I 've love to help you get that loan , but you know , it 'd sure be nice if you located that factory in my state " ) .They 're building it in Alviso , near Milpitas , on a plot of land that no one has built on because it 's right next to a dump .
I 've you 've ever driven through milpitas you know it , it smells horrible over there , all the time.So they build a plant on land no one wants , and they get to have manufacturing near their engineers , which is really a boon for efficiency.So it 's not bad.Plus , everyone gets to stay in the bay area , which is probably the real reason they did it ! -Taylor</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$100M for a powertrain manufacturing plant in the SF Bay AreaHow on earth can that be the cheapest place to manufacture something?I suspect the factory location is more political than practical ("I've love to help you get that loan, but you know, it'd sure be nice if you located that factory in my state").They're building it in Alviso, near Milpitas, on a plot of land that no one has built on because it's right next to a dump.
I've you've ever driven through milpitas you know it, it smells horrible over there, all the time.So they build a plant on land no one wants, and they get to have manufacturing near their engineers, which is really a boon for efficiency.So it's not bad.Plus, everyone gets to stay in the bay area, which is probably the real reason they did it!-Taylor
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459101</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460211</id>
	<title>Where does this "electricity" come from?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245844920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I find it amusing that nobody even mentioned this? Do they really polute less - or are the emmissions just happening somewhere else?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;) (*Cough* Coal, Natural gas, etc.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I find it amusing that nobody even mentioned this ?
Do they really polute less - or are the emmissions just happening somewhere else ?
; ) ( * Cough * Coal , Natural gas , etc .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find it amusing that nobody even mentioned this?
Do they really polute less - or are the emmissions just happening somewhere else?
;) (*Cough* Coal, Natural gas, etc.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459211</id>
	<title>Government is exactly backwards</title>
	<author>jackspenn</author>
	<datestamp>1245839820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The US government is retarded.  They are investing money in exactly the wrong way.  By funding Tesla, we have government boobs deciding on a winner with little or nothing to show they can deliver.  So the tax payer foots the bill and may or may bot get a return.
<br> <br>
The ideal and proper method for government grants, funding, etc. should never be paid out for those promising a return, but instead to those who deliver an actually return.  Think of the X prize or the Android Developer Challenges where money is paid upon completion of successful projects/objectives.
<br> <br>
The reasons are clear:<ul>
<li>It prevents political payoffs or those who are connected (thought they could rig challenge it is harder and more transparent)</li>
<li>Tax payers are never put on the hook in the hope of repayment, rather they only pay for successes</li>
<li>It changes the money structure, instead of universities, non-profits or businesses being built around a model where they get the most money by extending government funding periods, deals, or contracts, they get only money by solving problems.</li>
<li>It gives everyone a chance.  From a company with a cool name like Tesla (an insult to a great American) to Joe Slashdot and his two friends who are working out of their parents garage.</li>
</ul></htmltext>
<tokenext>The US government is retarded .
They are investing money in exactly the wrong way .
By funding Tesla , we have government boobs deciding on a winner with little or nothing to show they can deliver .
So the tax payer foots the bill and may or may bot get a return .
The ideal and proper method for government grants , funding , etc .
should never be paid out for those promising a return , but instead to those who deliver an actually return .
Think of the X prize or the Android Developer Challenges where money is paid upon completion of successful projects/objectives .
The reasons are clear : It prevents political payoffs or those who are connected ( thought they could rig challenge it is harder and more transparent ) Tax payers are never put on the hook in the hope of repayment , rather they only pay for successes It changes the money structure , instead of universities , non-profits or businesses being built around a model where they get the most money by extending government funding periods , deals , or contracts , they get only money by solving problems .
It gives everyone a chance .
From a company with a cool name like Tesla ( an insult to a great American ) to Joe Slashdot and his two friends who are working out of their parents garage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The US government is retarded.
They are investing money in exactly the wrong way.
By funding Tesla, we have government boobs deciding on a winner with little or nothing to show they can deliver.
So the tax payer foots the bill and may or may bot get a return.
The ideal and proper method for government grants, funding, etc.
should never be paid out for those promising a return, but instead to those who deliver an actually return.
Think of the X prize or the Android Developer Challenges where money is paid upon completion of successful projects/objectives.
The reasons are clear:
It prevents political payoffs or those who are connected (thought they could rig challenge it is harder and more transparent)
Tax payers are never put on the hook in the hope of repayment, rather they only pay for successes
It changes the money structure, instead of universities, non-profits or businesses being built around a model where they get the most money by extending government funding periods, deals, or contracts, they get only money by solving problems.
It gives everyone a chance.
From a company with a cool name like Tesla (an insult to a great American) to Joe Slashdot and his two friends who are working out of their parents garage.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461073</id>
	<title>Re:Green Car on a Budget - Innovation Not Required</title>
	<author>dakameleon</author>
	<datestamp>1245849720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm anti-subsidy for luxury car manufacturers. Starting at $49,900 -- bah! How about spending a fraction of this to rip out the engine of a Chevy Aveo and put in an electric motor? How about an electric car people can actually buy? Innovation not required!</p></div><p>Maybe if Americans changed their definition of "luxury" prices and paid more for their damn cars like the rest of us elsewhere the world, you wouldn't be in this mess. Far be it for one of us non-Americans to criticise the bastion of capitalism, but my guess is at some point GM &amp; Chrysler lost sight of the goal of actually making some fucking money on their cars, and the desire to always pay bottom dollar to snatch it from the hands of a worker elsewhere in the country... maybe, just maybe, leads to the current result.</p><p>Germans buy German cars, Japanese buy Japanese cars, Koreans buy Korean cars. Americans buy whatever is cheapest. Result? China and Japan together own your treasury from money you handed over to them wilfully.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm anti-subsidy for luxury car manufacturers .
Starting at $ 49,900 -- bah !
How about spending a fraction of this to rip out the engine of a Chevy Aveo and put in an electric motor ?
How about an electric car people can actually buy ?
Innovation not required ! Maybe if Americans changed their definition of " luxury " prices and paid more for their damn cars like the rest of us elsewhere the world , you would n't be in this mess .
Far be it for one of us non-Americans to criticise the bastion of capitalism , but my guess is at some point GM &amp; Chrysler lost sight of the goal of actually making some fucking money on their cars , and the desire to always pay bottom dollar to snatch it from the hands of a worker elsewhere in the country... maybe , just maybe , leads to the current result.Germans buy German cars , Japanese buy Japanese cars , Koreans buy Korean cars .
Americans buy whatever is cheapest .
Result ? China and Japan together own your treasury from money you handed over to them wilfully .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm anti-subsidy for luxury car manufacturers.
Starting at $49,900 -- bah!
How about spending a fraction of this to rip out the engine of a Chevy Aveo and put in an electric motor?
How about an electric car people can actually buy?
Innovation not required!Maybe if Americans changed their definition of "luxury" prices and paid more for their damn cars like the rest of us elsewhere the world, you wouldn't be in this mess.
Far be it for one of us non-Americans to criticise the bastion of capitalism, but my guess is at some point GM &amp; Chrysler lost sight of the goal of actually making some fucking money on their cars, and the desire to always pay bottom dollar to snatch it from the hands of a worker elsewhere in the country... maybe, just maybe, leads to the current result.Germans buy German cars, Japanese buy Japanese cars, Koreans buy Korean cars.
Americans buy whatever is cheapest.
Result? China and Japan together own your treasury from money you handed over to them wilfully.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458165</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459089</id>
	<title>Re:Overpriced.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245839400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The number of so-called "smart" people who flat out don't get how the real world works is dumbfounding. There isn't a sustainable technology around that didn't start off expensive and adopted by the rich first. Expecting any new tech to be mass produced cheaply right out of the gate is akin to recycling your own waste for nourishment. It's just plain dumb. Pull your head out of your ass and look at the world through objective realism and not your own freaking wallet. Grow up.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The number of so-called " smart " people who flat out do n't get how the real world works is dumbfounding .
There is n't a sustainable technology around that did n't start off expensive and adopted by the rich first .
Expecting any new tech to be mass produced cheaply right out of the gate is akin to recycling your own waste for nourishment .
It 's just plain dumb .
Pull your head out of your ass and look at the world through objective realism and not your own freaking wallet .
Grow up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The number of so-called "smart" people who flat out don't get how the real world works is dumbfounding.
There isn't a sustainable technology around that didn't start off expensive and adopted by the rich first.
Expecting any new tech to be mass produced cheaply right out of the gate is akin to recycling your own waste for nourishment.
It's just plain dumb.
Pull your head out of your ass and look at the world through objective realism and not your own freaking wallet.
Grow up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458359</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461401</id>
	<title>Re:A requirement for the loan</title>
	<author>mattwarden</author>
	<datestamp>1245852360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, government price fixing... That's what we need to save the car industry and promote innovation!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , government price fixing... That 's what we need to save the car industry and promote innovation !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, government price fixing... That's what we need to save the car industry and promote innovation!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459005</id>
	<title>Re:A requirement for the loan</title>
	<author>Hognoxious</author>
	<datestamp>1245839100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Tesla is right to start with the high-price, high-profit end of the market and work their way down to the high-volume mainstream as the technology matures and the supply chain scales up.</p></div></blockquote><p>That's exactly how the whole industry started out.  Until the Model T, only the very wealthey could afford to buy a car (and the ongoing costs, such as a servant to drive and look after it).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Tesla is right to start with the high-price , high-profit end of the market and work their way down to the high-volume mainstream as the technology matures and the supply chain scales up.That 's exactly how the whole industry started out .
Until the Model T , only the very wealthey could afford to buy a car ( and the ongoing costs , such as a servant to drive and look after it ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tesla is right to start with the high-price, high-profit end of the market and work their way down to the high-volume mainstream as the technology matures and the supply chain scales up.That's exactly how the whole industry started out.
Until the Model T, only the very wealthey could afford to buy a car (and the ongoing costs, such as a servant to drive and look after it).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458393</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459383</id>
	<title>Re:A requirement for the loan</title>
	<author>fermion</author>
	<datestamp>1245840660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>For the american market that is not that excited about electric cars and is not going to drive a car without 10 cup holders and a movie screen, it is simply not feasable to build a very small car unless it is a highly tuned and precise machine.
<p>
However, that does not mean that one cannot produce a base car, that is minimal but effective, in the $25K entry market with the expectation to sell under 50,000 units a year.  Look at the Miata.  Small car, 20-25K, as few as 30,000 were sold in a year.  Rip out the engine, put in an effecient drive and batteries, don't make it hybrid, I think we have a car that can be sold, base, 25K.  It would require some engineering, would not make a huge profit, but it could be done.  Remember that the Tesla is partially designed and built by Lotus, so it can be considered a Lotus like car. The cost of the Tesla  and a Lotus Elise are not that significantly different.
</p><p>
The problem, as always, is there is little market incentive to do so.  Look at the market incentive to make the SUV.  It was a family car that did not have to respect the clean air rights of others.  It was a car created by a legislative act.  The electric car is require such an accidental side effect.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For the american market that is not that excited about electric cars and is not going to drive a car without 10 cup holders and a movie screen , it is simply not feasable to build a very small car unless it is a highly tuned and precise machine .
However , that does not mean that one can not produce a base car , that is minimal but effective , in the $ 25K entry market with the expectation to sell under 50,000 units a year .
Look at the Miata .
Small car , 20-25K , as few as 30,000 were sold in a year .
Rip out the engine , put in an effecient drive and batteries , do n't make it hybrid , I think we have a car that can be sold , base , 25K .
It would require some engineering , would not make a huge profit , but it could be done .
Remember that the Tesla is partially designed and built by Lotus , so it can be considered a Lotus like car .
The cost of the Tesla and a Lotus Elise are not that significantly different .
The problem , as always , is there is little market incentive to do so .
Look at the market incentive to make the SUV .
It was a family car that did not have to respect the clean air rights of others .
It was a car created by a legislative act .
The electric car is require such an accidental side effect .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For the american market that is not that excited about electric cars and is not going to drive a car without 10 cup holders and a movie screen, it is simply not feasable to build a very small car unless it is a highly tuned and precise machine.
However, that does not mean that one cannot produce a base car, that is minimal but effective, in the $25K entry market with the expectation to sell under 50,000 units a year.
Look at the Miata.
Small car, 20-25K, as few as 30,000 were sold in a year.
Rip out the engine, put in an effecient drive and batteries, don't make it hybrid, I think we have a car that can be sold, base, 25K.
It would require some engineering, would not make a huge profit, but it could be done.
Remember that the Tesla is partially designed and built by Lotus, so it can be considered a Lotus like car.
The cost of the Tesla  and a Lotus Elise are not that significantly different.
The problem, as always, is there is little market incentive to do so.
Look at the market incentive to make the SUV.
It was a family car that did not have to respect the clean air rights of others.
It was a car created by a legislative act.
The electric car is require such an accidental side effect.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458445</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28466091</id>
	<title>Funny how....</title>
	<author>hesaigo999ca</author>
	<datestamp>1245943380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Funny how when you compare the loan they got to others, how it shows very little the importance on finding new energy.<br>The big companies (that should be standing on their own feet..thank you ford for putting us into the ground)...seem to get a bigger piece with no real realization of this promise towards different energy...while a company like this one which is pure 100\% electric only,<br>gets no real support....I mean 5billion, they could buy a car for each family in the us with that,.....how is this help...and tesla gets a few million...at least give them 1 billion, see what they make out of it!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Funny how when you compare the loan they got to others , how it shows very little the importance on finding new energy.The big companies ( that should be standing on their own feet..thank you ford for putting us into the ground ) ...seem to get a bigger piece with no real realization of this promise towards different energy...while a company like this one which is pure 100 \ % electric only,gets no real support....I mean 5billion , they could buy a car for each family in the us with that,.....how is this help...and tesla gets a few million...at least give them 1 billion , see what they make out of it ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Funny how when you compare the loan they got to others, how it shows very little the importance on finding new energy.The big companies (that should be standing on their own feet..thank you ford for putting us into the ground)...seem to get a bigger piece with no real realization of this promise towards different energy...while a company like this one which is pure 100\% electric only,gets no real support....I mean 5billion, they could buy a car for each family in the us with that,.....how is this help...and tesla gets a few million...at least give them 1 billion, see what they make out of it!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28489755</id>
	<title>Re:Fleet Car</title>
	<author>Hells</author>
	<datestamp>1246019700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>1) The liquidity crisis and it's impact on their planned IPO
2) very long prospects for actually paying out investors
3) They have raised 50M from daimler and is intent on reinvesting roadster/drive train profits into Model S
4) You are right Tesla is a high-risk bet</htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) The liquidity crisis and it 's impact on their planned IPO 2 ) very long prospects for actually paying out investors 3 ) They have raised 50M from daimler and is intent on reinvesting roadster/drive train profits into Model S 4 ) You are right Tesla is a high-risk bet</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) The liquidity crisis and it's impact on their planned IPO
2) very long prospects for actually paying out investors
3) They have raised 50M from daimler and is intent on reinvesting roadster/drive train profits into Model S
4) You are right Tesla is a high-risk bet</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459977</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465429</id>
	<title>Re:A requirement for the loan</title>
	<author>Thumper\_SVX</author>
	<datestamp>1245939780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes and no. The Tesla S, as well as being a "family sedan" will also be a "luxury sedan".</p><p>The article implies that there's a good possibility that there will be technology sharing between Mercedes and Tesla, which will effectively mean that if suspension development and body development both come out of Mercedes (or are assisted by Mercedes), then we have a family sedan that's a technological step forward, but in all probability positioned in the marketplace right alongside the BMW 3 series, Mercedes C-Class and Audi A4. These are the low-end of the luxury sedan line these days, and $50,000 is not unheard of... and in fact is pretty much the going rate for an optioned up 335, C350 or S4 (or any of the numerous Japanese marques that fill that niche)</p><p>I don't think it'd be unlikely to see the technology flow back the other way so we see a C-class running electric within 5 years... though BMW are betting more on diesel than electric from what I see today.</p><p>The average base family sedan today runs around $20K... add a few options and the price rapidly rockets up to $25K or even $30K. Tesla aren't making a car for "Joe and Jane Average"... yet. They've already made a car for the successful "I want a supercar" crowd... and it's a wonderful piece of technology in my opinion. Their next logical step is the premium small family sedan market currently being eaten up by the Germans and the Cadillac CTS (which is the only American car I would currently put in that class... and a damned fine competitor it is, easily a match for the Germans...). Yes, it's a tough market but one in which Tesla CAN succeed, particularly with the help of Mercedes Benz. I think it'll be awesome to see another American competitor in the market, and the fact that it'll be one that also happens to be such a technological step forward makes it even more attractive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes and no .
The Tesla S , as well as being a " family sedan " will also be a " luxury sedan " .The article implies that there 's a good possibility that there will be technology sharing between Mercedes and Tesla , which will effectively mean that if suspension development and body development both come out of Mercedes ( or are assisted by Mercedes ) , then we have a family sedan that 's a technological step forward , but in all probability positioned in the marketplace right alongside the BMW 3 series , Mercedes C-Class and Audi A4 .
These are the low-end of the luxury sedan line these days , and $ 50,000 is not unheard of... and in fact is pretty much the going rate for an optioned up 335 , C350 or S4 ( or any of the numerous Japanese marques that fill that niche ) I do n't think it 'd be unlikely to see the technology flow back the other way so we see a C-class running electric within 5 years... though BMW are betting more on diesel than electric from what I see today.The average base family sedan today runs around $ 20K... add a few options and the price rapidly rockets up to $ 25K or even $ 30K .
Tesla are n't making a car for " Joe and Jane Average " ... yet. They 've already made a car for the successful " I want a supercar " crowd... and it 's a wonderful piece of technology in my opinion .
Their next logical step is the premium small family sedan market currently being eaten up by the Germans and the Cadillac CTS ( which is the only American car I would currently put in that class... and a damned fine competitor it is , easily a match for the Germans... ) .
Yes , it 's a tough market but one in which Tesla CAN succeed , particularly with the help of Mercedes Benz .
I think it 'll be awesome to see another American competitor in the market , and the fact that it 'll be one that also happens to be such a technological step forward makes it even more attractive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes and no.
The Tesla S, as well as being a "family sedan" will also be a "luxury sedan".The article implies that there's a good possibility that there will be technology sharing between Mercedes and Tesla, which will effectively mean that if suspension development and body development both come out of Mercedes (or are assisted by Mercedes), then we have a family sedan that's a technological step forward, but in all probability positioned in the marketplace right alongside the BMW 3 series, Mercedes C-Class and Audi A4.
These are the low-end of the luxury sedan line these days, and $50,000 is not unheard of... and in fact is pretty much the going rate for an optioned up 335, C350 or S4 (or any of the numerous Japanese marques that fill that niche)I don't think it'd be unlikely to see the technology flow back the other way so we see a C-class running electric within 5 years... though BMW are betting more on diesel than electric from what I see today.The average base family sedan today runs around $20K... add a few options and the price rapidly rockets up to $25K or even $30K.
Tesla aren't making a car for "Joe and Jane Average"... yet. They've already made a car for the successful "I want a supercar" crowd... and it's a wonderful piece of technology in my opinion.
Their next logical step is the premium small family sedan market currently being eaten up by the Germans and the Cadillac CTS (which is the only American car I would currently put in that class... and a damned fine competitor it is, easily a match for the Germans...).
Yes, it's a tough market but one in which Tesla CAN succeed, particularly with the help of Mercedes Benz.
I think it'll be awesome to see another American competitor in the market, and the fact that it'll be one that also happens to be such a technological step forward makes it even more attractive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458909</id>
	<title>gn44</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245838740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Disturbing.  If you</htmltext>
<tokenext>Disturbing .
If you</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Disturbing.
If you</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459493</id>
	<title>Re:A requirement for the loan</title>
	<author>lymond01</author>
	<datestamp>1245841140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>should have been a 25K car cost cap.<br>That way most people could only barely not afford it.</i></p><p>Tell me about it.  House or car?  House...or car?  We went with the house as at one point in recent American history owning a home was considered an investment.  And we're a DIGK (dual income graduated kids) family.  I don't understand what it takes to own a $30K+ car.  The 4\% loan on a Subaru WRX wagon at $24K was $450/month.  Without serious money down on a $30K car, I wouldn't bother.  Buy used.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>should have been a 25K car cost cap.That way most people could only barely not afford it.Tell me about it .
House or car ?
House...or car ?
We went with the house as at one point in recent American history owning a home was considered an investment .
And we 're a DIGK ( dual income graduated kids ) family .
I do n't understand what it takes to own a $ 30K + car .
The 4 \ % loan on a Subaru WRX wagon at $ 24K was $ 450/month .
Without serious money down on a $ 30K car , I would n't bother .
Buy used .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>should have been a 25K car cost cap.That way most people could only barely not afford it.Tell me about it.
House or car?
House...or car?
We went with the house as at one point in recent American history owning a home was considered an investment.
And we're a DIGK (dual income graduated kids) family.
I don't understand what it takes to own a $30K+ car.
The 4\% loan on a Subaru WRX wagon at $24K was $450/month.
Without serious money down on a $30K car, I wouldn't bother.
Buy used.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458623</id>
	<title>Battery replacement cost?</title>
	<author>grumpygrodyguy</author>
	<datestamp>1245837600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That thing looks hot.</p><p>My only concern is battery replacement.  Replacing a UPS battery is roughly half the cost of the UPS.  If cars like these get the same battery economy that would mean $25k every 5-7 years according to their FAQ.  (I'm just guessing here based on battery life; they made no mention of battery replacement costs)</p><p>Their FAQ claims the car is a great lasting investment due to lack of complexity and moving parts, but having to drop $25k every 6 years for a new battery would be a deal breaker.</p><p>I do wish them luck though, it's way past time we stopped supporting extremists in the middle east.  Not to mention that fact that a <i>complete</i> 300 mile recharge would cost about $4.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That thing looks hot.My only concern is battery replacement .
Replacing a UPS battery is roughly half the cost of the UPS .
If cars like these get the same battery economy that would mean $ 25k every 5-7 years according to their FAQ .
( I 'm just guessing here based on battery life ; they made no mention of battery replacement costs ) Their FAQ claims the car is a great lasting investment due to lack of complexity and moving parts , but having to drop $ 25k every 6 years for a new battery would be a deal breaker.I do wish them luck though , it 's way past time we stopped supporting extremists in the middle east .
Not to mention that fact that a complete 300 mile recharge would cost about $ 4 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That thing looks hot.My only concern is battery replacement.
Replacing a UPS battery is roughly half the cost of the UPS.
If cars like these get the same battery economy that would mean $25k every 5-7 years according to their FAQ.
(I'm just guessing here based on battery life; they made no mention of battery replacement costs)Their FAQ claims the car is a great lasting investment due to lack of complexity and moving parts, but having to drop $25k every 6 years for a new battery would be a deal breaker.I do wish them luck though, it's way past time we stopped supporting extremists in the middle east.
Not to mention that fact that a complete 300 mile recharge would cost about $4.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461511</id>
	<title>We are all socialists</title>
	<author>Ichijo</author>
	<datestamp>1245853320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...whenever it benefits us. For example, we're perfectly willing to distort the market for transportation by paying for freeways with regressive sales taxes. We also like to force property owners to provide off-street parking spaces in the name of "free" parking.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...whenever it benefits us .
For example , we 're perfectly willing to distort the market for transportation by paying for freeways with regressive sales taxes .
We also like to force property owners to provide off-street parking spaces in the name of " free " parking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...whenever it benefits us.
For example, we're perfectly willing to distort the market for transportation by paying for freeways with regressive sales taxes.
We also like to force property owners to provide off-street parking spaces in the name of "free" parking.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458129</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458555</id>
	<title>Fleet Car</title>
	<author>W.Mandamus</author>
	<datestamp>1245837300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>At $50,000 the Model S is more likely to be used as a fleet car then something you use at home.  For those who say this is a waste of money I'd like to point three things out:

1.  GM spend 1.2 BILLION to build a PROTOTYPE electric car, which they didn't put into productions.  This is money to build a factory that will actually um make cars.

2.  Tesla is going to use this money to build electric vehicle components in the US for other companies.  Having that kind of production is the US is BIG DEAL for our balance ot trade.

3.  Tesla is more likely to pay</htmltext>
<tokenext>At $ 50,000 the Model S is more likely to be used as a fleet car then something you use at home .
For those who say this is a waste of money I 'd like to point three things out : 1 .
GM spend 1.2 BILLION to build a PROTOTYPE electric car , which they did n't put into productions .
This is money to build a factory that will actually um make cars .
2. Tesla is going to use this money to build electric vehicle components in the US for other companies .
Having that kind of production is the US is BIG DEAL for our balance ot trade .
3. Tesla is more likely to pay</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At $50,000 the Model S is more likely to be used as a fleet car then something you use at home.
For those who say this is a waste of money I'd like to point three things out:

1.
GM spend 1.2 BILLION to build a PROTOTYPE electric car, which they didn't put into productions.
This is money to build a factory that will actually um make cars.
2.  Tesla is going to use this money to build electric vehicle components in the US for other companies.
Having that kind of production is the US is BIG DEAL for our balance ot trade.
3.  Tesla is more likely to pay</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460831</id>
	<title>Re:More bullshit</title>
	<author>mqduck</author>
	<datestamp>1245847980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So if they amended the constitution, you'd suddenly feel like it's the kind of thing that IS the government's business?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So if they amended the constitution , you 'd suddenly feel like it 's the kind of thing that IS the government 's business ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So if they amended the constitution, you'd suddenly feel like it's the kind of thing that IS the government's business?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459789</id>
	<title>Re:Green Car on a Budget - Innovation Not Required</title>
	<author>beef curtains</author>
	<datestamp>1245842580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your post is intelligent, insightful, civil, and well-written.</p><p>Clearly it has no business appearing in this thread.  Shoo!  Begone from this repository of flamebait &amp; personal attacks!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your post is intelligent , insightful , civil , and well-written.Clearly it has no business appearing in this thread .
Shoo ! Begone from this repository of flamebait &amp; personal attacks !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your post is intelligent, insightful, civil, and well-written.Clearly it has no business appearing in this thread.
Shoo!  Begone from this repository of flamebait &amp; personal attacks!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458991</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461849</id>
	<title>Do they have a PIN #?</title>
	<author>recharged95</author>
	<datestamp>1245856140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Looks like the gov't is a <b>AT</b> <i>v</i> <b>M</b>...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Looks like the gov't is a AT v M.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Looks like the gov't is a AT v M...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460053</id>
	<title>Re:A requirement for the loan</title>
	<author>Ritz\_Just\_Ritz</author>
	<datestamp>1245844020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The AVERAGE cost for a vehicle purchased in the US today is about $28k.  So with the government backhand to the industry in the form of tax incentives, a sticker price in the mid-30's would be within the grasp of the "average" auto buyer.</p><p>Best,</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The AVERAGE cost for a vehicle purchased in the US today is about $ 28k .
So with the government backhand to the industry in the form of tax incentives , a sticker price in the mid-30 's would be within the grasp of the " average " auto buyer.Best,</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The AVERAGE cost for a vehicle purchased in the US today is about $28k.
So with the government backhand to the industry in the form of tax incentives, a sticker price in the mid-30's would be within the grasp of the "average" auto buyer.Best,</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459185</id>
	<title>Re:loans for everyone!</title>
	<author>Bigjeff5</author>
	<datestamp>1245839700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Loans to people/companies who can actually pay them back yield a lot of money.  Average return on a 15 year mortgage, for example, is about double.  It's also frontloaded, so they make most of the profit by year 10 and all that is left is the principal that needs to be paid back.</p><p>Corporate loans work similarly, so if Company X pays back a 1 billion dollar loan in 10 years, the loaner has made a profit of probably around 50-75\%.</p><p>That's a whole lot different than a grant, in which case the money is free so long as it is used for the specific purpose it was granted for.</p><p>Loans are a good thing as long as there is a good reassurance that the loan will be paid back.  I don't mind a loan to Nissan, since they have a number of US factories and have a very solid business.  That means more jobs and money for the US.</p><p>Loans should NOT be given to US companies that look like they might fail.  That's what got the mortgage industry into trouble and helped cause this crisis in the first place.  Propping up a failing business is bad practice, but helping a viable business become more viable and more profitable is good practice, especially when you can get a good return on your investment.  All we should care about when granting these loans are two things: Will it create more lasting jobs in the US, and will we get are money back and then some.  If we start fudging the second one just because it is a US based company, then we'll be headed for more heartache.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Loans to people/companies who can actually pay them back yield a lot of money .
Average return on a 15 year mortgage , for example , is about double .
It 's also frontloaded , so they make most of the profit by year 10 and all that is left is the principal that needs to be paid back.Corporate loans work similarly , so if Company X pays back a 1 billion dollar loan in 10 years , the loaner has made a profit of probably around 50-75 \ % .That 's a whole lot different than a grant , in which case the money is free so long as it is used for the specific purpose it was granted for.Loans are a good thing as long as there is a good reassurance that the loan will be paid back .
I do n't mind a loan to Nissan , since they have a number of US factories and have a very solid business .
That means more jobs and money for the US.Loans should NOT be given to US companies that look like they might fail .
That 's what got the mortgage industry into trouble and helped cause this crisis in the first place .
Propping up a failing business is bad practice , but helping a viable business become more viable and more profitable is good practice , especially when you can get a good return on your investment .
All we should care about when granting these loans are two things : Will it create more lasting jobs in the US , and will we get are money back and then some .
If we start fudging the second one just because it is a US based company , then we 'll be headed for more heartache .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Loans to people/companies who can actually pay them back yield a lot of money.
Average return on a 15 year mortgage, for example, is about double.
It's also frontloaded, so they make most of the profit by year 10 and all that is left is the principal that needs to be paid back.Corporate loans work similarly, so if Company X pays back a 1 billion dollar loan in 10 years, the loaner has made a profit of probably around 50-75\%.That's a whole lot different than a grant, in which case the money is free so long as it is used for the specific purpose it was granted for.Loans are a good thing as long as there is a good reassurance that the loan will be paid back.
I don't mind a loan to Nissan, since they have a number of US factories and have a very solid business.
That means more jobs and money for the US.Loans should NOT be given to US companies that look like they might fail.
That's what got the mortgage industry into trouble and helped cause this crisis in the first place.
Propping up a failing business is bad practice, but helping a viable business become more viable and more profitable is good practice, especially when you can get a good return on your investment.
All we should care about when granting these loans are two things: Will it create more lasting jobs in the US, and will we get are money back and then some.
If we start fudging the second one just because it is a US based company, then we'll be headed for more heartache.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458221</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458899</id>
	<title>Re:More bullshit</title>
	<author>bagorange</author>
	<datestamp>1245838680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>since i imagine this user is the most lunatic i will ever come across, i should ask here:


<br>as a newbie scum commie, I can't find a way of ignoring posts by specific users.
<br>Can anyone point me to a way of starting an ignore list.

<br>It would be good not to waste bandwidth and screen space with the Fevered Founding Father Fundamentalism of this complete and utter loony.



<br>(I wonder if jmorris's goal is to get left of centre people to waste their mod points on him?)</htmltext>
<tokenext>since i imagine this user is the most lunatic i will ever come across , i should ask here : as a newbie scum commie , I ca n't find a way of ignoring posts by specific users .
Can anyone point me to a way of starting an ignore list .
It would be good not to waste bandwidth and screen space with the Fevered Founding Father Fundamentalism of this complete and utter loony .
( I wonder if jmorris 's goal is to get left of centre people to waste their mod points on him ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>since i imagine this user is the most lunatic i will ever come across, i should ask here:


as a newbie scum commie, I can't find a way of ignoring posts by specific users.
Can anyone point me to a way of starting an ignore list.
It would be good not to waste bandwidth and screen space with the Fevered Founding Father Fundamentalism of this complete and utter loony.
(I wonder if jmorris's goal is to get left of centre people to waste their mod points on him?
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459785</id>
	<title>Re:A requirement for the loan</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1245842580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My real point was hidden in this sentence:</p><p>"That way most people could only barely not afford it."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My real point was hidden in this sentence : " That way most people could only barely not afford it .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My real point was hidden in this sentence:"That way most people could only barely not afford it.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458445</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459101</id>
	<title>Geography</title>
	<author>afabbro</author>
	<datestamp>1245839460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>$100M for a powertrain manufacturing plant in the SF Bay Area</p></div><p>How on earth can that be the cheapest place to manufacture something?</p><p>I suspect the factory location is more political than practical ("I've love to help you get that loan, but you know, it'd sure be nice if you located that factory in my state").</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>$ 100M for a powertrain manufacturing plant in the SF Bay AreaHow on earth can that be the cheapest place to manufacture something ? I suspect the factory location is more political than practical ( " I 've love to help you get that loan , but you know , it 'd sure be nice if you located that factory in my state " ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$100M for a powertrain manufacturing plant in the SF Bay AreaHow on earth can that be the cheapest place to manufacture something?I suspect the factory location is more political than practical ("I've love to help you get that loan, but you know, it'd sure be nice if you located that factory in my state").
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458405</id>
	<title>Re:loans for everyone!</title>
	<author>sweatyboatman</author>
	<datestamp>1245836880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>just a guess, but it could be because of the 3 manufacturing plants and 1100 dealerships Nissan has in the US.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>just a guess , but it could be because of the 3 manufacturing plants and 1100 dealerships Nissan has in the US .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>just a guess, but it could be because of the 3 manufacturing plants and 1100 dealerships Nissan has in the US.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458221</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458749</id>
	<title>Re:A requirement for the loan</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245838140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's a luxury sedan. That's about in line with other cars in its class.<br>
<br>
I still wouldn't buy it even if I was in the market (I occasionally have trips longer than the range, so I'd rather not drive almost all the way there, get towed the rest of the way, charge, drive most of the way back, get towed the rest of the way...)</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a luxury sedan .
That 's about in line with other cars in its class .
I still would n't buy it even if I was in the market ( I occasionally have trips longer than the range , so I 'd rather not drive almost all the way there , get towed the rest of the way , charge , drive most of the way back , get towed the rest of the way... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a luxury sedan.
That's about in line with other cars in its class.
I still wouldn't buy it even if I was in the market (I occasionally have trips longer than the range, so I'd rather not drive almost all the way there, get towed the rest of the way, charge, drive most of the way back, get towed the rest of the way...)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458791</id>
	<title>Gaycart</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245838320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Gaycart.  Wankermobile.  Teabagtrolley.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Gaycart .
Wankermobile. Teabagtrolley .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gaycart.
Wankermobile.  Teabagtrolley.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465797</id>
	<title>Re:More bullshit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245941820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Um. Interstate commerce clause? Anyone?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Um .
Interstate commerce clause ?
Anyone ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um.
Interstate commerce clause?
Anyone?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461387</id>
	<title>Re:Battery replacement cost?</title>
	<author>jvin248</author>
	<datestamp>1245852180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actual battery replacement will be earlier than published projections.

These cars run on laptop batteries, a whole lot of them.  Only takes a few bad ones to stop the vehicle.  How long has the battery worked in your laptop?

A lot of technology to still get worked out.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actual battery replacement will be earlier than published projections .
These cars run on laptop batteries , a whole lot of them .
Only takes a few bad ones to stop the vehicle .
How long has the battery worked in your laptop ?
A lot of technology to still get worked out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actual battery replacement will be earlier than published projections.
These cars run on laptop batteries, a whole lot of them.
Only takes a few bad ones to stop the vehicle.
How long has the battery worked in your laptop?
A lot of technology to still get worked out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28462103</id>
	<title>The US government is retarded.</title>
	<author>falconwolf</author>
	<datestamp>1245857760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Government was already fund Detroit.  While I don't like government subsidies whereas 2 of the Detroit big 3 are bankrupt, Tesla looks to be profitable.</p><p><i>The ideal and proper method for government grants</i></p><p>These are loans not grants and have to be repaid.</p><p>

Falcon</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Government was already fund Detroit .
While I do n't like government subsidies whereas 2 of the Detroit big 3 are bankrupt , Tesla looks to be profitable.The ideal and proper method for government grantsThese are loans not grants and have to be repaid .
Falcon</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Government was already fund Detroit.
While I don't like government subsidies whereas 2 of the Detroit big 3 are bankrupt, Tesla looks to be profitable.The ideal and proper method for government grantsThese are loans not grants and have to be repaid.
Falcon</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459211</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458165
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458991
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460825
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458393
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28489785
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460831
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458555
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460837
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459559
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459101
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28462059
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459209
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459845
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461369
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461153
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28484115
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_101</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458555
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458997
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458303
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_95</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461153
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465559
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458221
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458405
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458445
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459383
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465359
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458343
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459571
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458359
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460861
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458721
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28481271
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458555
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461889
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459101
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459385
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460971
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459425
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459339
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460849
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465443
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465375
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458359
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458861
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461945
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458221
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458999
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458221
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459217
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_98</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458393
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459025
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459573
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465695
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461387
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458445
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459785
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460695
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459211
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459855
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460849
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28472671
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460849
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461815
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28467051
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_99</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458221
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458885
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458389
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459821
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28464607
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458221
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28463787
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460053
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460843
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460849
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465483
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465429
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_102</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458221
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458843
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460849
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28462877
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_96</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460849
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465773
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458165
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458477
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461347
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458165
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458453
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461013
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458543
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459577
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459101
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461165
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465797
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458221
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459067
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460805
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458221
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459011
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458759
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458985
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458343
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459501
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458343
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458967
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458389
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460155
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459783
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459493
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461783
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458555
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459817
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458165
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458991
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459789
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459347
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28463395
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460849
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28462167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460849
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28464815
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458165
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459487
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458749
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458165
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461073
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458129
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461511
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459211
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459871
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458445
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459383
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28463557
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458533
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459123
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458659
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461067
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458721
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28511173
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28464463
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458393
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459005
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461401
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458445
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459383
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28482633
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458389
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459507
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459101
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459727
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458359
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459089
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458555
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28489755
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458393
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459165
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460239
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458533
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459285
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458533
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465679
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459337
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_97</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458221
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459701
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458221
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459185
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465777
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458393
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459025
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459461
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460849
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28464319
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458533
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459353
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458899
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459641
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_100</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459661
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459211
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28462103
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459247
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458393
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459025
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460969
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_24_1947208_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458221
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1947208.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458381
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1947208.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459101
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459385
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28462059
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459727
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461165
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1947208.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458037
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458117
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458311
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458759
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458985
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458721
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459627
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28511173
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28481271
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28464607
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458533
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459123
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459285
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459353
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465679
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460843
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460695
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458659
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459339
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461369
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460831
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459347
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28463395
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459209
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459845
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465797
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460971
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458899
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459641
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458343
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459571
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459501
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458967
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1947208.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458165
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458991
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459789
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460825
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459487
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458453
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461013
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461073
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458477
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461347
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1947208.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458241
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1947208.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458129
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461511
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1947208.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458543
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459577
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1947208.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28466091
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1947208.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458195
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1947208.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458221
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459835
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458405
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458885
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459185
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465777
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459011
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459067
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458999
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459701
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28463787
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458843
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459217
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1947208.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458359
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459089
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458861
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460861
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1947208.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458555
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458997
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460837
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459817
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461889
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459977
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28489755
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1947208.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458743
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1947208.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459211
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459871
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459855
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28462103
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1947208.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460211
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1947208.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458623
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460805
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461945
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459247
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461387
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459661
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460239
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459213
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1947208.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461153
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465559
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28484115
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1947208.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458389
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460155
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459507
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459821
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1947208.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460849
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461815
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28467051
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465483
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465773
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28462877
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28464319
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465443
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28472671
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28462167
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28464815
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1947208.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460687
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1947208.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459159
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1947208.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458079
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461401
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458393
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459025
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459573
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459461
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460969
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459005
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28489785
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459165
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458303
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461067
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465695
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465375
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458445
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459383
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28463557
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28482633
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465359
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459785
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459493
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28464463
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459783
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458749
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28465429
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28460053
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459425
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_24_1947208.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28458459
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28461783
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459337
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_24_1947208.28459559
</commentlist>
</conversation>
