Just free market small government conservative capitalism...

[.blank cd]

Nothing to see here.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/nightlin...140842349.html

[Vteckidd]

50% of the article is missing valuable info. Why are they banned? What are the specific franchise rules that are keeping Tesla from opening?

Also Tesla was on the verge of bankruptcy right? Didn't they get bailed out?

[David88vert]

It's not a federal law - it's a state commerce law (Texas).

In TX, new dealers have to be franchises. Tesla wants no franchises, only a direct sell from the manufacturer. If Tesla wants to sell in Texas, they have to abide by Texas law. They could do that if they wanted to sell a franchise right to someone in Texas. Tesla is not banned from being sold in Texas, they just don't want to sell in the manner that Texas state law currently allows.
See Form LF101 and LF121 from the TX DMV. LP202 has more info as well.
The TX Dealer Manual: TxDMV - Downloads | Dealer Manual | Dealers | Publications

[.blank cd]

Tesla wants Texas to modify the legislation

Dealers are pushing back

Dealers are winning.

[-EnVus-]

Dealers can't make money off cars that can sell the selves....More interesting Post below
http://www.forbes.com/sites/michelin...apped-by-feds/

[David88vert]

Tesla wants Texas to modify the legislation

Dealers are pushing back

Dealers are winning.

There is nothing wrong with that. That is how our legal system is structured. Tesla may prevail, or Tesla may not. Ultimately, if Tesla wants to sell cars there, they can, but they have to stay within the confines of Texas law. The law is not preventing Tesla from selling cars in Texas, it just doesn't allow the method that Tesla wants to use to sell cars.

[Sinfix_15]

Selective outrage machine at work here. Blank wouldnt care if this were an oil, gas or coal company or a gun manufacturer in a blue state. If this is the type of thing that outrages you, i can probably point out 50 different businesses being hindered by "liberal policy", not that the topic you posted had anything to do with conservatism.

Does Texas not have the same rights as Detroit? I personally dont think it's right for Texas to ban Tesla based on their desired business model, but theyre doing it to support the existing auto industry in Texas. Bailing out Detroit, who failed for no other reason their own mismanagement was not the "right" thing to do, but the government decided that Detroit failing would damage the economy too much, even though Detroit did in fact deserve to fail. So, how is this any different? Texas' ruling to make Tesla be a franchise was a ruling made with the Texas economy in mind. Thankfully Elon Musk is white, otherwise i'm sure the racist allegations would have been made already.

I dont agree with Texas on this one and i think what Tesla wants to do is innovative and good for the people. With that said, Texas is one of the few states in the united states who is self sufficient and not going bankrupt like California, so i assume there's a reason for it. If Tesla becomes the next big thing and brings jobs and business to other states, then that's Texas' loss.

The future i hope to see is a future where the electric car parks between the duramax diesel and the corvette zr1

[.blank cd]

There is nothing wrong with that. That is how our legal system is structured. Tesla may prevail, or Tesla may not. Ultimately, if Tesla wants to sell cars there, they can, but they have to stay within the confines of Texas law. The law is not preventing Tesla from selling cars in Texas, it just doesn't allow the method that Tesla wants to use to sell cars.

Texas is using government legislation to regulate a free market though, and lobbyists are trying to convince other states to follow suit. I understand why the law is in place, but I'm just pointing out that this approach seems to challenge a core tenet of capitalism. The "market" is neither "free" nor "competitive". One could say its...."well regulated". Hehehehehe

[.blank cd]

Selective outrage machine at work here. Blank wouldnt care if this were an oil, gas or coal company or a gun manufacturer in a blue state. If this is the type of thing that outrages you, i can probably point out 50 different businesses being hindered by "liberal policy", not that the topic you posted had anything to do with conservatism.

Who's outraged? I think this article is pretty funny to tell the truth.

[David88vert]

Selective outrage machine at work here. Blank wouldnt care if this were an oil, gas or coal company or a gun manufacturer in a blue state. If this is the type of thing that outrages you, i can probably point out 50 different businesses being hindered by "liberal policy", not that the topic you posted had anything to do with conservatism.

Does Texas not have the same rights as Detroit? I personally dont think it's right for Texas to ban Tesla based on their desired business model, but theyre doing it to support the existing auto industry in Texas. Bailing out Detroit, who failed for no other reason their own mismanagement was not the "right" thing to do, but the government decided that Detroit failing would damage the economy too much, even though Detroit did in fact deserve to fail. So, how is this any different? Texas' ruling to make Tesla be a franchise was a ruling made with the Texas economy in mind. Thankfully Elon Musk is white, otherwise i'm sure the racist allegations would have been made already.

I dont agree with Texas on this one and i think what Tesla wants to do is innovative and good for the people. With that said, Texas is one of the few states in the united states who is self sufficient and not going bankrupt like California, so i assume there's a reason for it. If Tesla becomes the next big thing and brings jobs and business to other states, then that's Texas' loss.

The future i hope to see is a future where the electric car parks between the duramax diesel and the corvette zr1

There is a difference between a federal government bailing out a failed city municipality, and a state regulating the method by which a consumed product may be offered to consumers. They are not in any way relatable.

[David88vert]

Texas is using government legislation to regulate a free market though, and lobbyists are trying to convince other states to follow suit. I understand why the law is in place, but I'm just pointing out that this approach seems to challenge a core tenet of capitalism. The "market" is neither "free" nor "competitive". One could say its...."well regulated". Hehehehehe

News flash: Tesla can still sell their cars in Texas. Texas has not banned or prohibited the sale of Tesla-produced cars in their state.

Another news flash: EVERY state has regulations on how you can sell new cars - dealer laws and regulations are nothing new, in any state.

I'm not saying that I agree or disagree with each state's approach to regulation of commodities - I'm saying that this is just Tesla wishing to change the current rules/regulations/laws and their request was denied - that's all this is, and it happens every day in many industries and in many states.

We have it in GA as well:
http://www.georgiapolicy.org/how-new...n-competition/
http://www.lexology.com/library/deta...7-3f0896c3d342
http://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/...art-5/10-1-664

[.blank cd]

News flash: Tesla can still sell their cars in Texas. Texas has not banned or prohibited the sale of Tesla-produced cars in their state.

Another news flash: EVERY state has regulations on how you can sell new cars - dealer laws and regulations are nothing new, in any state.

I'm not saying that I agree or disagree with each state's approach to regulation of commodities - I'm saying that this is just Tesla wishing to change the current rules/regulations/laws and their request was denied - that's all this is, and it happens every day in many industries and in many states.

We have it in GA as well:
http://www.georgiapolicy.org/how-new...n-competition/
http://www.lexology.com/library/deta...7-3f0896c3d342
http://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/...art-5/10-1-664

News flash: What are you talking about? I never said they were banned from selling cars.

[.blank cd]

Tesla is prohibited from using their business model in TX, so tesla is choosing not to sell cars IN Texas. Customer in TX goes to a "showroom" in Texas, test drives a car, buys one online from CA, does a title transfer.

[Sinfix_15]

Texas is using government legislation to regulate a free market though, and lobbyists are trying to convince other states to follow suit. I understand why the law is in place, but I'm just pointing out that this approach seems to challenge a core tenet of capitalism. The "market" is neither "free" nor "competitive". One could say its...."well regulated". Hehehehehe

With pain...... i am about to click a button. You'll know which one it is.

[Sinfix_15]

There is a difference between a federal government bailing out a failed city municipality, and a state regulating the method by which a consumed product may be offered to consumers. They are not in any way relatable.

Speaking on the principle. In both cases, i feel a governing body made the wrong decision because they felt it was what was best for the economy. The core problem is that the government manipulates the economy in any regard....

Like Blank said, the market is not free.

[.blank cd]

blank CD - Bullshit-o-meter (established 8/13/13) - Count: 11

The 0 key is on the other side of the keyboard brah.

[Vteckidd]

Tesla wants Texas to modify the legislation

Dealers are pushing back

Dealers are winning.

thats the legal process. The same can be said for BP trying to drill for oil on leases they own, but the FEDs wont let them.

Newsflash: We dont live in a pure capitalism environment, and I agree with you that there are rank inconsistencies with policies regarding whats allowed to be for sale and whats not. however , this is a states rights issue, and nothing is wrong with it, legally. Browning would love to sell firearms in NY, but NY (like texas) doesnt allow firearms directly for sale in their state (not in the same manner GA or TN allow firearm sales).

Surprise this is news to you.

However, your broad generalization that this represents the GOP and "capitalism" not being such a free market is kind of funny, in a totally biased way.

[Sinfix_15]

thats the legal process. The same can be said for BP trying to drill for oil on leases they own, but the FEDs wont let them.

Newsflash: We dont live in a pure capitalism environment, and I agree with you that there are rank inconsistencies with policies regarding whats allowed to be for sale and whats not. however , this is a states rights issue, and nothing is wrong with it, legally. Browning would love to sell firearms in NY, but NY (like texas) doesnt allow firearms directly for sale in their state (not in the same manner GA or TN allow firearm sales).

Surprise this is news to you.

However, your broad generalization that this represents the GOP and "capitalism" not being such a free market is kind of funny, in a totally biased way.

I know what will make it better.....

more government!!

































..... see how stupid that sounds blank?

[Vteckidd]

I think he just read an article, didnt think it through, and posted it thinking it was somehow an attack on republicans

[Sinfix_15]

I think he just read an article, didnt think it through, and posted it thinking it was somehow an attack on republicans

"didnt think it through"....

pretty much summed up every single person who voted for Obama.

[.blank cd]

I think he just read an article, didnt think it through, and posted it thinking it was somehow an attack on republicans

I thought it through plenty. Nothing here is news to me. Like I said. I understand the legal implications. Just highlighting an recent example to point out the fact that the market is neither "free" nor "competitive" through ways of legislation to anyone who champions small government and free market capitalism. Hehehe.

[Sinfix_15]

I thought it through plenty. Nothing here is news to me. Like I said. I understand the legal implications. Just highlighting an recent example to point out the fact that the market is neither "free" nor "competitive" through ways of legislation to anyone who champions small government and free market capitalism. Hehehe.

but the problem is that you are a champion for big government and socialism..... i suppose you're happy that Texas is doing this? or mad that Obama didnt do it first? i'm confused.

[.blank cd]

but the problem is that you are a champion for big government and socialism..... i suppose you're happy that Texas is doing this? or mad that Obama didnt do it first? i'm confused.

Except that I'm not a champion of big government, or socialism, or your interpretation of either of those.

[Sinfix_15]

Except that I'm not a champion of big government, or socialism, or your interpretation of either of those.

[Vteckidd]

I thought it through plenty. Nothing here is news to me. Like I said. I understand the legal implications. Just highlighting an recent example to point out the fact that the market is neither "free" nor "competitive" through ways of legislation to anyone who champions small government and free market capitalism. Hehehe.

but, you ignore your own parties exact actions. At least if youre going to make inaccurate statements , make them about both sides.

I dont think you like holding your own party accountable.

I do.

This topic is what I like to call a drive by, low information voter topic. Uneducated people (not saying YOU, but others ) will read it and go WOW, CANT BELIEVE IT, WHAT A BUNCH OF HYPOCRITES , but they dont GET IT. They dont understand that this isnt GOP exclusive, and that is has nothing to do with PARTY politics or ideologies.

This is about MONEY, LOBBYISTS, REGULATION. That is something that is NOT party neutral.

your attempt to trash a political party over 1 law you have picked out over 1209048398239018092890s is funny, and to less educated people, probably makes sense. What I find funny is that this is a type of law the Dems would support, and instead of saying "good job" you use it to act like you dont like it, and point out the hypocrisy of a party (when in reality, its not hypocrisy, its just a law ).

I was unaware that Texas was 100% GOP either

[.blank cd]

but, you ignore your own parties exact actions. At least if youre going to make inaccurate statements , make them about both sides.

I dont think you like holding your own party accountable.

What party? Independent is not a party. I've said nothing about any parties at all.

[.blank cd]

What party? Independent is not a party. I've said nothing about any parties at all.

whoops

[Sinfix_15]

What party? Independent is not a party. I've said nothing about any parties at all.

Quit being in denial. You are a far left liberal democrat.

[Vteckidd]

whoops

youre the most liberal ind i have ever seen

[.blank cd]

youre the most liberal ind i have ever seen

If you say so.

[Vteckidd]

If you say so.

Im going by your words. Im an actual registered IND. I can name SEVERAL policies I differ with the GOP on. Ready? GO!

1- Legalize Marijuana
2- Im Pro-Choice
3- Im against lobbying , like for realz, not that fake "anti lobbying" the GOP says they dont like.
4- Im against most regulation (contrary to popular belief, this is not a GOP stance, this is IND.)
5- Im more in favor of a less world police foreign policy than the GOP is. But more than the Dems
6- Im pro gay marriage


Please, tell me some independent policies you support. Id love to hear them, because I have not seen you champion them

[BanginJimmy]

I thought it through plenty. Nothing here is news to me. Like I said. I understand the legal implications. Just highlighting an recent example to point out the fact that the market is neither "free" nor "competitive" through ways of legislation to anyone who champions small government and free market capitalism. Hehehe.

This tells me you simply dont understand what you are reading. Just look at the highly biased and inflammatory title to the article you linked to.

48 of the 50 states do not currently allow direct sales of cars. The laws were designed several decades ago to prevent manufacturers from under cutting their own franchised dealerships.

I can see both sides of this. On the dealership side of it the question is simple. Why shouldnt Tesla have to play by the same rules as every other dealership in the state? Tesla can come back and simply point out they they dont currently operate any dealerships, therefore there is no one to undercut, so these laws dont apply to them.

In the end, Tesla has a FAR better business model. Less overhead because they can build cars as the orders come in. No more building a car that ends up sitting on a lot for 6 months or more. Far more customizable options if they choose to do so.


This still has nothing to do with big govt or small govt, or even free markets though.

[.blank cd]

This still has nothing to do with big govt or small govt, or even free markets though.

It has everything to do with markets. There's no debate about that. Lol