"A Tesla ran over a bear", "a Tesla accelerated into a gym" and other nonsense.

Discussion in 'General' started by 101101, Apr 29, 2018.

  1. 101101

    101101 Well-Known Member

    ICE cars do this stuff all the time but its only news when its petrol/ICE's radically better replacement that does it.

    Seems to me what is going on is the typical Machiavellian PR people for petrol who very much believe the Goebbel's assertion that if you repeat a lie loud enough and often enough, for long enough it will become accepted and right now they are trying to use this approach to associate with a couple themes they think were already present in the public consciousness to help make the lies seem more plausible and less outlandish.

    You see some years ago some Lexus (Toyota) vehicles did have stuck accelerators that caused some deaths, including the death of a policeman if memory serves. So they try to play on that. Did those Lexus vehicles actually have that problem or were the Machiavellians messing with Toyota over the trojan horse Prius? Don't know. And of course it is true that a Tesla can accelerate like nothing else if you intend it to which is the other point they want to connect to and try to paint it as a disadvantage. Another one of their stupid Nazi press tricks- and this one is total tell-tail is to always try to paint the opponents strengths as a weakness e.g., acceleration is a strength so it must be bad. This right here really helps you spot their lies. Oh Tesla's accelerate like nothing else well then say that makes them not the better competitor but makes their products dangerous, but do it through repetitive implication.

    My personal sense of this is the petrol villains are just paying people to have accidents and faking accidents and using crisis actors and all the BS they do ( for context these people push pre-emptive war to make their obsolete product seem relevant)- wouldn't be shocked if they didn't have various corrupt paid-for politicians and agencies helping them. Notice that when the accidents seems more real like someone jumping a creek in a model 3 and planting in a tree and walking away unscathed- the shill media doesn't want that because it wasn't manufactured. I think that person worked for Tesla- so they can't touch that because it's not a crisis actor.

    Note Sandy Munro's review. He talked of defense type tech in the electronics, that plays on the subsidy angle- and there may have been some of that a while back under Obama, but petrol is pure welfare never not underwater so it tries to project this on green stuff which isn't. Munro makes some points about too many sub panels, fine but criticizes wasted material in the body- whereas it may well be a safety feature as Tesla says but the press turns it into a case where Tesla is using Dinosaur tech (usless Bloomberg,) notice Munro's initial claim was all makers have Dinosaur areas of tech that they must engage to make a car and Tesla is struggling with the simple stuff- that message goes out but possibly even before it went out it was tuned so they could riff on it and say Tesla uses Dinosaur tech- again try to pain a strength Tesla's superior technology as an actual weakness. Notice Munro was suggesting that Tesla should have prioritized bean counting and cost cutting over safety again trying a comparative Tesla strength as an advantage. A bit like trying to get away with complaining that air bags are a waste of money to criticize a competitor for using them. You can see why Musk refuses to give the idiot press or lie manufacturing industry money as not giving them money is simply the right thing to do. Imagine that we give these people money in elections so that they can turn everything including law and honest discourse about our unnecessarily declining standard of living into bribery and criminality.

    Every dollar spent on ICE is a dollar going for another unnecessary war. Also the financial sector has a huge conflict of interest in reporting on petrol because they have been totally held hostage by insuring petrol debt with all of that debt tied to political and economically stranded petrol assets in a way that isn't remediable which makes that debt and insurance of it total junk. But they have this sunk cost and Tesla will sink them because petrol has already sunk them. Its inevitable. But they out themselves when they tell the truth about Tesla so they tell lies.

    What is going on here with Auto Pilot is petrol panic over self-driving autonomy because self-driving quite foreseeable catalyzes pump cutting electrification of everything like nothing else. It also drives their panic over guaranteed annual incomes because if they can't enslave people with wage slavery or worse they lose their illegitimate evil power. Takes more skill to drive than to do 90% of jobs so it becomes even on an unconscious level clear that labor is over when driving is over which means capital is over- but labor being over and hence capital being over was recognized 50 years ago by people paying attention who subsequently response took all the wrong steps especially with petrol. Clearly part of why the USSR collapsed- after all what was the reason for its being 20 years after the permanent collapse of capitalism- the end of capital was presciently predicted by Keynes. I am pretty sure the people folding up the USSR shop thought things would go better otherwise why give up?

    So for petrol and so-called elites generally automation (auto pilot and wage slavery free factories) is unsafe, because it leads away from the safety they find in having people enslaved in useless helpless positions that treadmill the life out of the victims so they can't resist and certainly can't rise up against the oppression. Ask yourself what the fair wage is? What is the true competitive wage? It is the wage that allows the worker to become a direct competitor of the employer- at this point employment is crime- has been for a long time at least 50 years. Ask yourself what the maximum wage should be?
    Continued in next post-
  2. 101101

    101101 Well-Known Member

    Ars Technic and Chanos and all the others of similar ilk, if you line them all up in a paragraph name to name you see how moronic the Tesla opposition is, its terminal stupidity most are knowingly literally arguing against their own physical survival for money or short term gain- the kind of people that would sell you the rope you need to hang them with. Is that kind of foolishness in any way remotely credible? Much worse they are also arguing against the physical survival of other people for money. You have to know that petrol for at least 50 years now has been the greatest risk factor for nuclear war because its leading to 7 billion people (or more) totally unnecessarily living in anguish and strife and in constant conflict (which leads to more population)- it is almost like a lit fuse on nuclear war and it has to be at least half the doomsday clock weighting if looked at correctly. So what is the real risk adjusted weighting and value proposition for obsolete petrol products? Has to be way, way into the negative so far that it breaks the scale. In a just society the so-called rights expanded out of proportion of the terminally stupid and the criminal would not slow us down at all from pulling the plug on petrol immediately. Because, what rights have these entities, when petrol is the primary means of undermining everyone's rights?

    Petrol fuel energy could be replaced instantly, it's been that obsolete for a long long time. When Christopher Hitchens was saying people act like petrol isn't important right after 911- his trying to be a petrol apologist for Iraq II, well I am glad George Galloway clocked him in the debates that ensued. There is this whole industry that tries to say petrol fuel energy is still relevant and not obsolete and not quickly replaceable, it does stuff like trying to imply that petrol would be worth nuclear war over Iran and petrol imperialism or that hydro is needed as a back-up but that hydro is too limited so we're stuck with petrol fuel energy and can't go 100% green. Iran was one of the first cases in the 1950s with a petrol bailout where they got rid of a power sharing democracy to favor petrarchy. It you look at the patent suppression law you see it will classify patents- gag ordering them if they threaten economic disruption- in every case and in every sense this was likely more petrol bailout stuff- but now lowly battery backed solar is a total replacement in every way, a plug in over-night replacement and is out of the bag.

    Scott Pruitt has said his group or he himself recognizes climate change and recognize that it is to some degree man made but wants to take
    an indeterminate amount of time to figure out to what degree it is. That is fine but in the mean time we eliminate the petrol subsides
    and thereby eliminate completely far in excess of 100% any petrol profits because its always been pure welfare, but we also completely eliminate its economic viability because green is way way below parity at all latitudes now and without the subsidies or the need for tariffs (naked subsides or more exposed subsides for petrol) It going to cut the right's money but its about time as the right has a huge bill to pay.
  3. 101101

    101101 Well-Known Member

    Now with a change to Google News the new format shows triplets to make it look like consensus of clustered headlines from shill outlets. For Tesla the top ad-stories say "Tesla Banned." And this is in response to governments banning petrol in more and more places this is their attempt to balance mind share with lies. And in this case the shills paid someone months in advance to do a stunt so they could set up this headline in Torrey British news.

Share This Page