CTGuntalk.com

News Related => LOCAL in CT News / Politics and Events. => Topic started by: sbhaven on January 04, 2019, 04:35:36 PM

Title: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: sbhaven on January 04, 2019, 04:35:36 PM
More from the Lamant policy groups including "tougher laws on gun storage". Other WTF suggestions are being made. Suggestions that even the police appear to oppose like raising juvenile offender from 18 to 20. Then there is the bribing of community college students with free tuition so long as they remain in CT after graduation to the tune of $50 million.

Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
https://www.wtnh.com/news/politics/lamont-s-policy-groups-recommend-big-changes-for-first-100-days/1686766809 (https://www.wtnh.com/news/politics/lamont-s-policy-groups-recommend-big-changes-for-first-100-days/1686766809)

 Ned Lamont will be sworn in as Governor next week along with the 187 members of the General Assembly.  The New Governor must propose a new state budget in four weeks.

"I'm going to look like a laser beam in terms of how this impacts economic growth and what it means to the budget." It was with those words on November 27th that the Governor-elect launched 15 policy groups to make recommendations to him.

Melissa Kaplan-Macey was co-chair of the Transportation Policy Committee dropped a major bomb at the committee's final meeting on December 19th saying, "The Gas Tax alone won't be enough, and the committee also recommends enabling tolls for both trucks and passenger vehicles."

That recommendation got the most attention, and concluded that a hike in the Gas Tax and tolls for everyone be on the table despite the fact that Lamont campaigned on only tolling out of state trucks.

Another Policy Committee recommends that tuition at Community Colleges be free,  Lamont floated this idea himself during the campaign linking it to students that promise to stay and work here after graduation.  It would cost about $50 million per year.

The Criminal Justice Policy Committee recommended the age for considering someone a juvenile offender be raised from the current 18 to 20. This despite the fact that law enforcement thinks raising the age from 16 to 18 eight years ago has resulted in a plague of car thefts.

That same committee recommended legalizing marijuana as a job creating revenue raiser and also cleaning the records of those convicted of marijuana offenses in the past. This despite the fact that law enforcement feels there will be driving impairment enforcement issues.  Governor-elect Lamont agreed.

    "Just keeping it illegal here will not keep the black market out, we'll not be able to address the question of folks driving.  I'm going to work with the police very carefully to make sure we take care of that."

His committees also recommended; tougher laws regarding gun storage, a $15 an hour minimum wage,  paid family and medical leave, a phase out of plastic bags, and a mandatory helmet law for motorcycle riders.

Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: imahangtia on January 04, 2019, 04:59:53 PM
COMMUNISTS SUCK
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: mu2bdriver on January 04, 2019, 05:36:50 PM
Yeah. The motorcycle helmet and eliminating plastic bags will save CT.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: imahangtia on January 04, 2019, 05:41:05 PM
Every few years I have to go buy a box of Hippo bags to stockpile incase these a$$holes ban them.  Currently I have about 1,300 bags.  I guess I'll have to buy another thousand or two.

FVCK 'EM!

Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: sbhaven on January 04, 2019, 05:41:14 PM
Notice how EVERYTHING they suggest will make it more expensive to live here in CT? Can they not seriously see it? Do they even understand basic math? Do they even understand what "pass through" taxes are?
 :facepalm:  :eyejack:
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: M1A_All_Day on January 04, 2019, 06:00:06 PM
Just wait until CT residents finish their 2018 Federal tax return and get whacked with the $10k SALT cap. That will encourage even more people to leave.

I work for a Dow 30 company in Hartford. We hire for extraordinary positions and pay extremely well.
Our biggest problem- we cannot find candidates that are willing to relocate to Hartford. It's been a major problem for years and is only getting worse. We can only outsource so much of a certain type of role, we can only get so much quality and productivity out of remote workers. Literally warm bodies with giant brains are what we need and we literally cannot pay them any amount to get them here.

Always the same two reasons: High state & local taxes and high home prices in West Hartford/Farmington/Avon/Simsbury (where everyone wants to be). The car tax perplexes people. The local taxes are met with disbelief. $10-15k/year for a house on a 1/4 acre?? State income tax is repellent. Sales tax, too. Energy prices are another one.

People do their research before uprooting their family to move to CT and it always looks BAD. So bad they don't come here.

It's going to take another few losses of major company HQs to force taxes and spending down.
The state lost GE- I don't care how you spin it- we lost GE.
Start losing more of UTC or any of the P&C companies in Hartford, you're not just losing those companies, you're losing all the employees. Groton/New London got a taste of this years ago before the casinos- towns were almost abandoned.

It's a bleak future for Connecticut's economy that will eventually cause a state budget crisis that no additional tax revenue streams can solve.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: Supes3 on January 04, 2019, 07:07:39 PM
I used to have a lot of hope that a new administration could turn this around.  Now seeing how bad it’s been getting year after year and only seeing “new” people coming in to do the same thing or worse versions of the same policies ... I don’t have a lot of faith left in the state.

A bankruptcy might be the only thing that wakes this state up and forces us to start from scratch !  It is going to take something severe like that for people to understand this isn’t working bc somehow they aren’t getting the message !!!
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: mu2bdriver on January 04, 2019, 07:10:24 PM
You narrowed it down to two. If you’re with UTX, after Otis, Carrier, and maybe one other division is sold off, you’re left with pure aerospace, especially after the RC acquisition, and I’ll bet anything that the company will leave for WPB. Hayes is a finance background guy and there’s no way he’s not aware of what’s going on.

If you’re with Travelers, it will just take one P&C or healthcare insurer to leave, via acquisition or just moving, and that will get the downhill slide rolling.

The wealth and talent that is leaving this State is unconscionable.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: imahangtia on January 04, 2019, 07:13:45 PM
Keep filling the state with ghetto rats and illegal aliens.  Eventually it will fail completely.

Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: edgephoto on January 04, 2019, 08:33:02 PM
CT is all done. This last election turned off the already dim bulb of hope we had for a comeback. Now we will spiral into a complete mess. Once my son figures out where he is going to settle when he leaves the Navy we will move to be near him and his family. He is thinking "somewhere in the southeast"
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: sbhaven on January 04, 2019, 08:36:06 PM
In reality the only thing keeping this state from going completely off the rails beyond the few remaining large companies in Hartford is the gold coast (Fairfield to the NY border). If the uber rich and large finance companies in that corridor start fleeing then the state goes entirely off the rail.

But those folks are not stupid. They have armies of lawyers and tax preparers hard at work protecting their money from anything the politicians they voted for may enact.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: M1A_All_Day on January 04, 2019, 08:49:22 PM
The Gold Coast now runs pretty much the entire length of Long Island Sound. I am a Guilford taxpayer and while the town has always been "fancy", the waterfront has exploded in value in the last 20 years. Anything south of RT1 is in a different league. And yes, there is tremendous tax burden there- which they don't seem to have a problem with compared to the NYC metro. People will never leave there short of a tsunami hitting the reset button. New people move in all time- Madison, too.

But you can't subsidize the MASSIVE social service infrastructure of ex-industrial cities like Waterbury, Bridgeport, Hartford, Meriden, etc on pretty much nothing but the wealthy's state income tax liability, corporate tax, and sales tax. Soon most CT residents will be below the taxable income threshold for ANY tax liability (state or Federal). It's turning into a state of 1% executives and 99% minimum wage workers.

The cliche of the middle class leaving is totally true.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: edgephoto on January 04, 2019, 09:01:30 PM
The rich have multiple homes. I am sure their state of residency is not CT.

Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: LostCanuck on January 04, 2019, 09:08:43 PM
That may be true for the really rich.

But for the kinda-rich who work at the funds and other places in Greenwich, Stamford and Westport, there will absolutely be a breaking point. I don't know exactly where it is, but we'll all only know it once we're past it and these firms are decamping en masse for Charlotte, Austin and other places. And then it's too late. 
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: BerettaBoy213 on January 05, 2019, 12:30:08 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If the uber rich and large finance companies in that corridor start fleeing then the state goes entirely off the rail.

I have a friend who works in one of those ultra-high-end car dealerships along the gold coast. describes his clients as "literally billionaires" and they're pretty much all de-camping since the trump tax cut capped state/local exemptions. jacksonville apparently.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
A bankruptcy might be the only thing that wakes this state up and forces us to start from scratch !  It is going to take something severe like that for people to understand this isn’t working bc somehow they aren’t getting the message !!!

states can't technically go bankrupt, something in the constitution I think. will be bailled out by the fed, so no lesson will be learnt and once refloated will continue on its merry way.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The Gold Coast now runs pretty much the entire length of Long Island Sound.

that'd be news to bridgeport and new london. :huh:
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: nutter on January 05, 2019, 01:04:16 AM
Bring it all baby.......bring it all!
More taxes....... :banana:
Tolls :banana:
free college for errbody :banana:
legal potneedles fur errbody :beer:...........IN!
Empty the jails  :tat:
Bring it baby :banana:
I think we are ready for change :dunno:
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: Mustang on January 05, 2019, 05:03:50 AM
Since when did the Constitution ever matter to socialist connecticut politicians? Next is not directed to nyone, just in general rant bout Connecticut. Going to be all over the subject place. No coffee yet :) The Connecticut politicians want the state to go bankrupt, under the guise of them saying their doing their best. Then blame the republicans and conservatives while looking in the mirror.

Put higher taxes all round and tolls? Next comes more departments made to be manned and the need of maintenance of these, which means what they say will be coming in is a lie - From Connecticut's past I see more money being spent then coming in. (Time to give some politicians kid or family member / friend a job) Lets not forget accidents, when will we see the first truck crash into this tolls and take out all lanes of what ever road its on. Killing people in the process, those tolls are not made of rice paper. When will we see speeding ticket being issued through these either by cameras or speed time between these? Long run tolls and taxes r not the answer.

When they reply with "something has to be done" type of response this means they don't care bout what you think, your family, your Rights, just for you to shut up and give them your Rights, money, and the freedom to do / teach (program)what they want to/with your children.

They want more people being fed by a government with no money, pointing that its the rich mans fault, keeps them in power.  Put more illegals in illegal sanctuary cities, with more corrupt politicians helping these illegals. Keep the masses fed little in big cities and fed with twisted truths, making drugs legal, schooling free, give more pay to unskilled / entry work force labor, free health insurance, while politicians preaching tax the rich to these people- which in turn these people r the ones being taxed every which way and double n triple in some instances - though under different titles to make it sound pretty / or different, preach the Constitution is just a piece of paper and is out dated needing to be stripped away and re made, etc. etc. etc. Ya, Connecticut politicians follow the Constitution very well in Connecticut - The Constitution State, what a joke   
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: JBear on January 05, 2019, 07:29:13 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Bring it all baby.......bring it all!
More taxes....... :banana:
Tolls :banana:
free college for errbody :banana:
legal potneedles fur errbody :beer:...........IN!
Empty the jails  :tat:
Bring it baby :banana:
I think we are ready for change :dunno:
Don't forget hope. The phrase is "...hope and change..."
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: BerettaBoy213 on January 05, 2019, 11:24:22 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Don't forget hope. The phrase is "...hope and change..."

"ye who enter here (I95)..."
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: M1A_All_Day on January 05, 2019, 01:49:22 PM
Debatably a leading or lagging indicator, nonetheless Connecticut home sale prices dropped an average of 4.19% in 2018, with Middlesex County being the worst at a loss of 11.11%.

https://www.middletownpress.com/news/article/Connecticut-real-estate-market-was-in-flux-during-13510672.php (https://www.middletownpress.com/news/article/Connecticut-real-estate-market-was-in-flux-during-13510672.php)

That's extremely bad two ways- first, Connecticut home owners just lost an average of $15-30,000 of fair market value in their homes, in 2018 alone. This is the most liquid and valuable asset the average resident has. And it went the other direction of inflation 3x.

Second, this will only make everyone's home worth far less on the next upcoming municipal revaluation, which will cause every town and city to raise their mill rates to make up the difference. Just a few years of 4% losses in residential property values and you're looking at local tax rates jumping even higher. Don't forget, those magic mill rates are on your cars too- so here's comes more taxes.

The state will almost definitely cut subsidies to towns s part of doing something with the state budget, that will leave towns no choice to increase local mill rates (on top of above described tax pressure). We just did this last year, but not with plummeting residential assessments.

Why is this happening?
PEOPLE ARE LEAVING THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT BECAUSE THE TAXES ARE INSANE.

Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: sbhaven on January 05, 2019, 02:55:02 PM
What is so fracking frustrating is the politicians who control the legislature (and local cities) see only ONE solution. Raise taxes and fees. They simply do not see reducing (significantly) spending as an option, since the largest slices of the budget pie is either Health & Human Services (state) and or Education (both state and towns/cities). Cuts to either angers a significant portion of their voting base. Touching either is the third rail in state/local politics. So they kick the fracking can down the road by making this state even more unattractive to businesses and people.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: BerettaBoy213 on January 05, 2019, 05:47:35 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
What is so fracking frustrating is the politicians who control the legislature (and local cities) see only ONE solution. Raise taxes and fees. They simply do not see reducing (significantly) spending as an option, since the largest slices of the budget pie is either Health & Human Services (state) and or Education (both state and towns/cities). Cuts to either angers a significant portion of their voting base. Touching either is the third rail in state/local politics. So they kick the fracking can down the road by making this state even more unattractive to businesses and people.

a portent of things to come. CT is just the leading edge of a national trend. social security/medicare/medicaid aren't much better nationally, just a bit further down the road.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: WoodBurner on January 05, 2019, 08:30:48 PM
Face it this state is doomed. There is no correcting the mess the assholes have created, it took about 30 years to get here and nothing will turn this around under a decade maybe 2 but I see no reason for that to even happen. The assholes keep voting for the assholes and we get it up the ass. Commie-necticut.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: Bottom Rung on January 05, 2019, 10:28:03 PM
Well, the state won’t turn around until we fix the voter to taxpayer ratio.  We’ve got more voters than taxpayers.

Unfortunately, it seems like this thing isn’t ever getting fixed.

The worse part is, I like my state. It’s pretty and it’s my home. I like my house and my town.

On the one hand, I worry about it quite a bit.  On the other hand, well, Alfred E. Neuman said it best, “What me worry?”

It’s going to get bumpy.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: M1A_All_Day on January 05, 2019, 11:31:51 PM
It’s got to fail like every ex-industrial city in New England failed.
Manufacturing modernized and left the state, cities full of working-class families left.

Look at all the big old family houses in every Connecticut city that are now chiopped-up into slumlord apartments. Those were all family homes for factory workers.

Same thing is beginning to happen now- people are leaving, that’s fact. New England industrial cities like Waterbury, Meriden, New Britain and Middletown never recovered to what they were when manufacturing evaporated. Not even close.

The only answer is to slash state and local spending to such a degree that it’s actually attractive to move to CT.

No sales tax.
No gasoline tax.
No state income tax.
No f_cking car tax!!
Local property taxes 1/2 what they are now.
Get Eversource under control for realistic electricity prices.

Make that real and good people will come to live here.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: JBear on January 06, 2019, 06:17:27 AM
The only thing that's necessary to turn this state around is stop making it outrageously attractive to work for this state. There may or may not be more voters than workers, but there are more workers who will never vote against their own interests and fix the state than there are voters who will never vote against their interest to keep flushing it down the toilet.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: Bottom Rung on January 06, 2019, 08:05:05 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The only thing that's necessary to turn this state around is stop making it outrageously attractive to work for this state. There may or may not be more voters than workers, but there are more workers who will never vote against their own interests and fix the state than there are voters who will never vote against their interest to keep flushing it down the toilet.

All very true. The people depending on the state for pension benefits number over 100,000 if you include state workers, education, etc. It’s a huge voting block. JBear is correct.

I would be overjoyed to see those pensions evaporate as virtually every state worker has voted/demanded more money for themselves.

M1A, Eversource has been hard on the path to collapse since they became publicly traded. Utilities Do Not Belong In The Stock Market. . Getting it back to being a true utility and not the bean counter run mess it is would be a fantastic start.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: sbhaven on January 06, 2019, 09:19:03 AM
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.”

― Alexander Fraser Tytler

That is where we are now. Voters (and politicians) vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. The state is the largest single employer. You have a huge number of voters in the major cities who vote to take money from others for their own gain. Far to many simply b*tch and moan about how bad this state is, then continue to vote Democrat continuing the downward spiral of the state. Far to many WANT to be dependent on the state.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: edgephoto on January 06, 2019, 10:00:42 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
All very true. The people depending on the state for pension benefits number over 100,000 if you include state workers, education, etc. It’s a huge voting block. JBear is correct.

I would be overjoyed to see those pensions evaporate as virtually every state worker has voted/demanded more money for themselves.

M1A, Eversource has been hard on the path to collapse since they became publicly traded. Utilities Do Not Belong In The Stock Market. . Getting it back to being a true utility and not the bean counter run mess it is would be a fantastic start.

Eversource has to  make money just like any business. Where things went wrong with power is deregulation. The power companies were split into several companies. Each company has to now make it's own profit. Generation is the issue. It is very expensive to generate power so the wholesale price is high enough for them to turn a profit. Then Eversource buys this power and marks it up. When it was one company all these costs were factored into the one big company.

Deregulation of utilities has not gone well, with electricity being the worst example. Telephone company break up was not good either. We ended up with poor quality sound, poor customer service, constant bombardment of people trying to sell you a different service. Certain things need to be a monopoly.

In the end our electricity costs are not that bad compared to other parts of the country. The biggest issue here is the tax and spend mentality of government.

Liberals create their own messes. One thing is their "war on climate change" has produced vehicles that get better fuel economy or don't use fossil fuels at all. This reduces the gas tax. These idiots better realize that if we go to electric cars there will be no gas tax money coming in. Certainly much less. Kill gas tax and go to tolls   but having both is not right. People with electric cars and high MPG cars are not paying their fair share of the burden. Maybe tax them? The government gives them a tax credit to buy them then wonders what happened to all the revenue?
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: Mustang on January 06, 2019, 10:02:50 AM
Their electric vehicles do more harm to the environment then good.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: edgephoto on January 06, 2019, 10:09:33 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Their electric vehicles do more harm to the environment then good.

This can be argued but the reality is they cause different issues for sure. Our electric grid is already a mess and then you want to convert the existing 263 million vehicles to electric? How are we going to do this with the current grid?

We need to build nuclear plants and upgrade our grid.

Electric vehicles have their place. It is another form of drivetrain like gas and diesel. I am in the industry and can tell you some of the stuff coming down the pipeline is pretty cool. Not some over priced statement car like a Tesla but a normal priced vehicle. There is potential. They are not for everybody. Until there is a way to "refuel" them with the ease similar to gas/diesel and the amount of "fuel" stations is similar to gas/diesel they will only work in more metro areas or for vehicles that never venture far from home base.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: sbhaven on January 06, 2019, 11:50:03 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
In the end our electricity costs are not that bad compared to other parts of the country.
While that may be the case, costs went up Jan 1...

https://wtic.radio.com/articles/news/eversource-ui-power-generation-rates-increase-2019 (https://wtic.radio.com/articles/news/eversource-ui-power-generation-rates-increase-2019)

The Eversource standard offer rate is increasing almost 19 percent from 8.53 cents to 10.14 cents per kilowatt hour. The United Illuminating standard offer rate is increasing almost 24 percent from 9.05 cents to 11.23 cents per kilowatt hour. These rates apply to residential consumers who to not select a third-party supplier for their electricity.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: JBear on January 06, 2019, 12:16:20 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
In the end our electricity costs are not that bad compared to other parts of the country.
What parts of the country are those? I don't know anyone anywhere in the US who pays anywhere near what I do. If by "other parts" you mean the 5% or so of the US that has it worse than CT, it isn't much of an argument. 
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: Mustang on January 06, 2019, 12:30:52 PM
Electric vehicles r not the way to go, like you mentioned with the grid, mining, and what nots. The gas tax would just be replaced with a higher electric tax and have certified stations where you need to refuel. You wont be granted to "refuel " at your house and it will be illegal because the state will push that's its dangerous. The state wont let you get away with not having some type of fuel tax for your vehicle, getting their hands in your pocket. Those government tax breaks are going away for the electric vehicles. imo this is just government trying to sell you something that's not good. Even repair costs are outrageous and from what other mechanics r telling me they must be trained / certified to work on them.

Heck, lets not forget battery disposal costs and who here works in construction? We use battery powered tool a lot and they break, battery goes bad, and when low on power they just "crawl" or just completely shut down. Takes 30 minutes to n hour to recharge, will these vehicles take less then filling up your tank? Forget about going up step hills with low battery levels. Now make these priced for everyone to purchase n put these to everyday use on the roads and see what will happen.

If these were so great states and towns (the biggest emission producers) would of had fleets of these for their DoT, busses, taxis, town official vehicles, police vehicles, fire and EMS vehicles yet they don't. 
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: BerettaBoy213 on January 06, 2019, 02:07:55 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Electric vehicles have their place. It is another form of drivetrain like gas and diesel. I am in the industry and can tell you some of the stuff coming down the pipeline is pretty cool. Not some over priced statement car like a Tesla but a normal priced vehicle. There is potential. They are not for everybody. Until there is a way to "refuel" them with the ease similar to gas/diesel and the amount of "fuel" stations is similar to gas/diesel they will only work in more metro areas or for vehicles that never venture far from home base.

one idea I've had, and the internet is free to steal it, is to have banks of swappable batteries which are pre-charged under the hood whcih you'd exchange from racks at gas stations. The batteries would discharge sequentially (so some would always be charged unless you ran your car completely to empty) and to "fill up" you'd pull out the indicated "emtpies" and swap them for new batteries, paying per-unit. one of the problems with rechargables, besides the long charge time, is their lower energy density compared to fossil fuels, but some non-rechargables (I've heard silver-oxide) have comparable energy densities to FFs. this results in weight/bulk issues which except for lithium (scarce with charging/heating problems) and mega-capacitors (low charge life, heat issues and potential for heavy shocks if not handled/discharged improperly when working on them). so the drained batteries you left at the "battery exchange station" which could replace each fill-pump at a gas station as market forces dictated would go to a "rebuilding factory" next to an electrical generating plant (eliminating the costs of upgrading the grid) which would destroy and then rebuild the batteries as new and charged (in a energy-inputted process) for return to a "swap rack," transported on (eventually) electric big-rigs similar to how gas is transported "the last mile" on fuel trucks today. the batteries should be light enough, 10-15lbs, for most anyone to lift out of the hood of their car and on to the rack and vice versa. you might have 10-20 batteries in a passanger vehicle and many more for large trucks and buses. smaller battieres would be available for motorcycles, lawn mowers and leaf blowers.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: imahangtia on January 06, 2019, 02:44:01 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
one idea I've had, and the internet is free to steal it, is to have banks of swappable batteries which are pre-charged ......


Someone beat ya to it. 


(https://images.uline.com/is/image//content/dam/images/HD/HD3500/HD_3320.jpg?$MediumRHD$&iccEmbed=1&icc=AdobeRGB)
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: edgephoto on January 06, 2019, 03:00:30 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Electric vehicles r not the way to go, like you mentioned with the grid, mining, and what nots. The gas tax would just be replaced with a higher electric tax and have certified stations where you need to refuel. You wont be granted to "refuel " at your house and it will be illegal because the state will push that's its dangerous. The state wont let you get away with not having some type of fuel tax for your vehicle, getting their hands in your pocket. Those government tax breaks are going away for the electric vehicles. imo this is just government trying to sell you something that's not good. Even repair costs are outrageous and from what other mechanics r telling me they must be trained / certified to work on them.

Heck, lets not forget battery disposal costs and who here works in construction? We use battery powered tool a lot and they break, battery goes bad, and when low on power they just "crawl" or just completely shut down. Takes 30 minutes to n hour to recharge, will these vehicles take less then filling up your tank? Forget about going up step hills with low battery levels. Now make these priced for everyone to purchase n put these to everyday use on the roads and see what will happen.

If these were so great states and towns (the biggest emission producers) would of had fleets of these for their DoT, busses, taxis, town official vehicles, police vehicles, fire and EMS vehicles yet they don't.

Repair costs are "outrageous" because the parts are expensive at the moment. Mechanics need to be technicians and trained. I can tell you with 30+ years of experience most automotive techs struggle with electrical. No make the entire car electric and have high and low voltage systems you will find a lot of our current technicians will not make the cut. In all reality the guys are too stupid to be working on modern stuff. Until there is a licensing requirement for auto technicians like there is for other trades it will not change. I can speak to this with authority.

Electric vehicles by design are actually less complicated from a mechanical side. The electronics are where the complication comes in. Software will be were things get "fixed" in the future. Electric vehicles have 10% of the parts of an internal combustion vehicle.

Just like any new technology it is expensive at first. Costs come down after a while. Remember how expensive flat screen TVs were just 10 years ago?

There will be a place for electric. Working on them or refueling them is no more dangerous than playing around with gasoline. The charging infrastructure will need to be as extensive as gasoline/diesel for it to be a replacement for internal combustion engines.

I would expect to see going forward that you will have to submit your car to a plug in once a year to download how many kwn you used and then pay a tax based on that number. It will be in lieu of an emissions test.

Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: Mustang on January 06, 2019, 07:00:33 PM
You keep painting these environment killers like rainbows. From what mechanics tell me these are trouble and software to "fix" the vehicles issues? Look how many people use software to fix their computers and then have more  trouble. Now one would need to worry bout hacks, speed control, viruses, stopping, air bags deploying etc. And these home computers are not on the road getting extreme use dirt rain mud hot cold ice wind etc. etc. Ya keeps getting worse.

If you believe the state / government / vehicle makers will allow you to plug in at your house for update / emission / company of vehicle updates.....Highly doubt it. They want control and to do it at their place / facility, just like recharging will be.

Like I said before if it was all rainbows and unicorns the state, cities, towns, and government would of switched their entire fleets plus town and state vehicles for politicians (or other employees who gets state or town vehicles) to electric.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: Steevo on January 06, 2019, 07:04:57 PM
Government doesn't upgrade to better stuff to save money. I have seen where states and cities leave cars for 20 years, lining their pockets and dealer friends pockets.  It's always on the news
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: WoodBurner on January 06, 2019, 07:13:27 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You keep painting these environment killers like rainbows. From what mechanics tell me these are trouble and software to "fix" the vehicles issues? Look how many people use software to fix their computers and then have more  trouble. Now one would need to worry bout hacks, speed control, viruses, stopping, air bags deploying etc. And these home computers are not on the road getting extreme use dirt rain mud hot cold ice wind etc. etc. Ya keeps getting worse.

If you believe the state / government / vehicle makers will allow you to plug in at your house for update / emission / company of vehicle updates.....Highly doubt it. They want control and to do it at their place / facility, just like recharging will be.

Like I said before if it was all rainbows and unicorns the state, cities, towns, and government would of switched their entire fleets plus town and state vehicles for politicians (or other employees who gets state or town vehicles) to electric.

Computers in cars have been hacked well over a year maybe 2+ years ago. It was done to see if they could and they were able to control the steering, brakes and wipers IIRC, probably could stop the engine. Cars today are rolling computers, we don't have to have electric cars for them to be more computer than car. Tesla sends out updates to their cars' software wirelessly. I see the crap job MS et al do on updates and how they eff up computers, how poorly tested these updates are, I sure don't want them updating shit in cars!
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: edgephoto on January 06, 2019, 09:17:20 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You keep painting these environment killers like rainbows. From what mechanics tell me these are trouble and software to "fix" the vehicles issues? Look how many people use software to fix their computers and then have more  trouble. Now one would need to worry bout hacks, speed control, viruses, stopping, air bags deploying etc. And these home computers are not on the road getting extreme use dirt rain mud hot cold ice wind etc. etc. Ya keeps getting worse.

If you believe the state / government / vehicle makers will allow you to plug in at your house for update / emission / company of vehicle updates.....Highly doubt it. They want control and to do it at their place / facility, just like recharging will be.

Like I said before if it was all rainbows and unicorns the state, cities, towns, and government would of switched their entire fleets plus town and state vehicles for politicians (or other employees who gets state or town vehicles) to electric.

Not sure how they are environment killers any more than current vehicles are? They do it in different ways. I am just stating the facts. You can have your opinion and listen to whomever is giving you their opinion. I am stating facts. The facts are electric cars are coming, like it or not. I have been in the automotive business for 34 years this year. I am privy to what is in the pipeline.

I see the skill set of most technicians is not keeping pace with the changes in the technology of the automobile. We are at a critical point now. There are not enough bodies to fill vacancies in the workshops. let alone skilled techs that can actually fix this stuff. Most are wanting to be "mechanics" and do engines, clutches, brakes timing belts, etc. Those jobs are all going away and you now need to be able to understand basic electrical theory, some basic digital electronics and work a computer. Most techs are none of these and those are the ones I hear complaining about "how these things are pieces of shit, can't be fixed, etc."

I am not in love with having all these electronic systems in the cars but it is not going away. Internal combustion will be gone within 25 years replaced by battery electric and fuel cell vehicles. Hybrids are a stop gap and are being used mainly to prove technology and get data for long term battery usage.

The BEVs are not ready to replace internal combustion just yet. It is getting there but there are some hurdles that need to be overcome before they can really replace a gas or diesel vehicle.

There will be a time when human driving will be a thing of the past. I am guessing within 50 years. Steering wheels and controls will all be eliminated from the cabin. Scary shit. I love driving.

I do believe the government will "allow" you to charge at home. Like I said I forsee them requiring a yearly inspection where the amount of electricity used is transmitted to the state and you pay a tax on that amount. Not far fetched, that data is already in the control units and the manufacturer can access it. We use it for determining battery life and health.

I am sure when the automobile was coming into play the stable owners were thinking "who would want to drive some mechanical piece of shit that runs on a dangerous chemical when you can ride a nice horse". "You just give it some hay and water and it is ready to go." "Those horseless carriages use gasoline. That stuff is a bomb waiting to explode. " . "I will never get one of those hunks of junk".

Farriers figured they would always have work. How many of them are left? Old school mechanics will be out of work if they don't adapt.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: WoodBurner on January 07, 2019, 09:04:45 AM
You can not stop whatever you want to call it whether it's technology, change or progress. We tend to think our time is static and we've done all there is to do and this is it ie the status quo. Change is always happening and at an ever increasing pace. I thought smart phones were a joke when you have a computer, see how brilliant that was!

Charging for electrical charging of a car battery would subject you to paying also on all your other electric usage, I doubt they'll single out car battery charging.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: edgephoto on January 07, 2019, 09:39:51 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You can not stop whatever you want to call it whether it's technology, change or progress. We tend to think our time is static and we've done all there is to do and this is it ie the status quo. Change is always happening and at an ever increasing pace. I thought smart phones were a joke when you have a computer, see how brilliant that was!

Charging for electrical charging of a car battery would subject you to paying also on all your other electric usage, I doubt they'll single out car battery charging.

I can't say I disagree that some "progress" is not wonderful. However things change. Either get with it or fall behind.

If it was up to me I would roll technology back to about 1980.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: imahangtia on January 07, 2019, 09:57:15 AM
As long as it is not forced upon people I am interested in electric cars. (Have never driven or seen one up close).

Here is some stuff to suck you down the rabbit hole.  (Don't blame me if you spend a day watching youtube videos)



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnXtAK3dYoE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnXtAK3dYoE)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bhmd4mF71k (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bhmd4mF71k)



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qo4byxhI6kY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qo4byxhI6kY)



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfIjMxyg00o (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfIjMxyg00o)



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSLTNjGI8hw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSLTNjGI8hw)

Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: Supes3 on January 07, 2019, 10:37:30 AM
Welp, might as well ... usually head down the rabbit hole of gun vids on Youtube most days.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: Bottom Rung on January 07, 2019, 11:48:55 AM
Rewind back to the high cost of power in this state:

CT’s deregulated energy market is certainly a massive problem.  It has not played out the way it was sold to CT residents.  It worked out financially for a select few.  That is for sure.  To be clear, Eversource/CL&P embarked on the path to rape the ratepayer years ago.  CL&P was itching to be “deregulated” so they could dump the financial liability of Millstone and the environmental liability of their fossil plants.  Deregulation was not the demise of a solid utility at all. CL&P mismanaged itself into a corner by taking care of retirees and shareholders instead of ratepayers.  CL&P’s plants were aging, Millstone was not paying off terribly fast, and shareholders wanted money.  So deregulation was the saving grace of poorly run business disguised as a utility.

Utilities should have a monopoly as Edgephoto noted. The electric grid is as important as the military and it should not ride the whims of greedy “investors”.  Years ago CL&P had acres of spare parts to deal with storm damage. Now they don’t. Why? Because CT taxes what you have on hand and the bean counters decide it’s better to run with less overhead.  Power plants are taxed on the spare parts and fuels they have on hand as well.  They, too, have adopted the less overhead concept. So yeah, CT’s taxes carry over to screwing you and I once again.  Sorry for the tax rabbit trail, but a CL&P/HELCO was initially structured to ensure the grid was reliable.  Parts and equipment were replaced as needed and at times before they broke or blew up.  Revenues were setup on the basis of cost plus 10%.  Of course, once they became publicly traded the utility had start earning a profit for investors. It was an asinine plan that never should have been allowed.  Fast forward to where we are today and we have expensive power, old infrastructure, and untold unreliability.  Well that’s my piece on CT’s electricity problem from nearly 15 years of working in that field.  There are quite a few more issues at play that I did not touch on due to time constraints. 

As Edgephoto pointed out, electric cars are here and improving.  That being said, they’re currently a terrible replacement for anything but city commutes.  Of course the state will tax the snot out of them when they see widespread adoption. Furthermore, the drive by wire stuff they’re pushing is going to be a hard sell and is currently extremely unreliable.  Personally, I hate the idea.  Being linked to a charger is worse than being linked to a gas station.  Again, just my opinion. 

As for our situation, it’s bad and only going to get worse.  We are exactly where Sbhaven pointed out earlier.  We are dealing with the death of a democracy.  We long departed the republican format and have wholeheartedly pursued voting ourselves benefits and freebies. 

On that note, vote, be vocal, get involved politically as much as you can stomach, shoot often, buy more guns and ammo, and worst case scenario watch more gun videos like Supes.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: WoodBurner on January 07, 2019, 08:24:38 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I can't say I disagree that some "progress" is not wonderful. However things change. Either get with it or fall behind.

If it was up to me I would roll technology back to about 1980.

Don't misunderstand what I meant. I don't like change and as far as electric cars go while there are some pros I think it is a stupid idea but then look at my thoughts on smart phones!

You can't go anywhere cuz they need to be recharged and there is no infrastructure in place and how long will a recharge take vs filling your gas tank? Electric cars are very fast, full torque the moment you punch the pedal to the medal. No tuneups or oil changes but those batteries will cost a fortune. Emergency workers have to be careful due to high voltage, how's that going to work out in a wreck when time is of the essence? Fuel injection and electronic ignition are so much better and more reliable that carbs, points, condenser and rotor, some progress is good.

All I was aying is you can't stop change or progress even if you think the change is not for the better. Companies will always gravitate to new technology for fear of being left behind or cuz they think consumers will want it.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: edgephoto on January 07, 2019, 09:47:46 PM
Electric cars are coming. Regulations are forcing the adoption of them. CAFE requirements, emission standards and carbon emission standards around the world are forcing the end of internal combustion.

If I could show you what is in the pipeline you would see that we are making major strides toward them fitting the needs of more people. They still have a long way to go with a charging network. They have worked out some of the challenges of recharging. Future batteries will be able to recharge to 80% in 15 minutes. So if you have a 250 mile range you can get another 200 miles in 15 minutes. Not as good as gas or diesel but it is getting there. That will give you 3+ hours of driving. By then you will need to stop to take a leak or grab a bite to eat.

First responders need to be trained in the safe handling of these system in the event of accidents. Manufacturers have been doing this already with hybrids. Dealing with the high voltage systems is no more dangerous than a tank full of gasoline. If one of the batteries catches fire you will let it burn out. You can't extinguish it. Firefighters will work to keep the surrounding area from going up in flames vs. putting out the battery fire. However this is as rare as a gasoline explosion in a collision. Just a different kind of danger.

"Drive by wire" was mentioned. We have had drive by wire for 20 years now. Not too many, if any at all, still use a mechanical connection to the throttle. If you mean self driving then I am not a huge fan of that but again, it is coming like it or not. I think it will have it's place. Imagine if I84 was self-drive only. The traffic jams could be minimized because some frack nut is not weaving in and out or trying to cut into a lane at the last second causing a brake stab that cascades back for miles. Old people could live on their own longer if there was a way for them to get to the store, pharmacy or doctor. In rural areas taxis are out of the question. The down side is auto repair costs will continue to escalate.

Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: M1A_All_Day on January 07, 2019, 10:22:34 PM
Electric cars are definitely coming. China and India are just now entering a time where an average person can own a car, and they will be electric. North America may be a bit more stubborn to adopt, but Asia is already all over it and GM wants a piece. And agree totally that the only barriers are battery efficiency and performance. Year over year, battery technology improves greatly.

Tesla is going to make it happen here. GM dropped the Volt. I’ll buy a Tesla just because Elon Musk is a contrarian who deserves to beat GM.

Now about personal-sized railguns...
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: edgephoto on January 07, 2019, 10:24:14 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Electric cars are definitely coming. China and India are just now entering a time where an average person can own a car, and they will be electric. North America may be a bit more stubborn to adopt, but Asia is already all over it and GM wants a piece. And agree totally that the only barriers are battery efficiency and performance. Year over year, battery technology improves greatly.

Tesla is going to make it happen here. GM dropped the Volt. I’ll buy a Tesla just because Elon Musk is a contrarian who deserves to beat GM.

Now about personal-sized railguns...

I think Elon Musk is a total POS. I think Tesla will not survive the coming electric car frenzy. Most likely a real car company will buy them for the infrastructure.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: Mustang on January 08, 2019, 05:12:32 AM
I heard this 20 plus years ago. Where are the hippies crying bout strip mining now? These cars r know to speed on their own, cars that auto pilot crashes, wireless which mean no need to plug in to send virus, batteries quarter to half the size of the car itself, expensive cost of repair, expensive to replace the battery, tax breaks going away, poor battery life, battery disposal, etc. Wait till someone dies is a battery fire from getting hit from behind or the side. Thought Ford Pintos and your 1970's to 80's Chevy trucks were bad, just wait. And if one believes the government will not control your speed, shut done your vehicle, or allow you to do your own "inspection" at your house, recharge at your own house or auto makers sending you updates while you recharge at your house, shut down your vehicle, and easy just swap a battery and go is out of this world. Shoot, I'm not sold on electric steering, screw that. What's next electronic braking, which I'm to guess some cars already have. I posted good reasons in my posts why battery cars are not the way to go and I stand by them. Say what you will of these things you wont have me trusting my life with them. You guys can believe in these on how simple, easy, convenient, and not look at what was said but batteries, computers, viruses, and infrastructure is up to you. People here even mentioned infrastructure yet I just hear people here saying "electric cars the way of the future". Heck they fought for years to stop the Oxford power plant. Why? because they did not want the ugly thing in THEIR back yard. They wanted it in someone else's back yard. Build more power houses in Connecticut? Sure go right a head (more money for me) still need to up date everything else though. Millstone an its plants? They need to build a new one someplace else.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: WoodBurner on January 08, 2019, 09:14:34 AM
I think in an urban environment electric cars are good as you probably never drive more than 10 or 15 miles but for the average person especially in rural areas they are not ready for prime time. Look at all the changes and advancements that occurred in cars from the late 1890's through the 20's and 30's. More innovation in the 50's and 60's. Look how much more reliable cars are now with electronic ignition, if you got 100k on an engine in the 60's and 70's that was bragging rights but today engines go 200k even 400k as routine. Hydraulic brakes vs mechanical then disk vs drum, better yet. I could go on but the point is advancements continue as time goes by and I have no doubt electric and self driving cars are going to be common in the future, probably not my future but in a couple of decades. You can not stop change. Some changes have been good and some fell by the wayside.   
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: imahangtia on January 08, 2019, 10:50:37 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
.....Some changes have been good and some fell by the wayside.   


Some things are fvckin' awesome and should be brought back!


(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/4d/30/6f/4d306feb633951ceea7a5b7291f192ec.jpg)
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: edgephoto on January 08, 2019, 10:56:16 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I think in an urban environment electric cars are good as you probably never drive more than 10 or 15 miles but for the average person especially in rural areas they are not ready for prime time. Look at all the changes and advancements that occurred in cars from the late 1890's through the 20's and 30's. More innovation in the 50's and 60's. Look how much more reliable cars are now with electronic ignition, if you got 100k on an engine in the 60's and 70's that was bragging rights but today engines go 200k even 400k as routine. Hydraulic brakes vs mechanical then disk vs drum, better yet. I could go on but the point is advancements continue as time goes by and I have no doubt electric and self driving cars are going to be common in the future, probably not my future but in a couple of decades. You can not stop change. Some changes have been good and some fell by the wayside.   

Some changes have been for the better some I am not so sure about. One thing for sure is today's cars are much more reliable. The worst car today is better than the best car was 30 years ago. Cars are safer too. People survive accidents that used to kill them years ago. The down side is the cost of repairs. The vehicle absorbs the impact and all the pyrotechnic safety devices deploy so a lot more body work and parts are needed.

FYI, electric steering is not steer by wire. The power assist is provided by an electric motor vs. hydraulics. Either works fine. Not sure I would want no mechanical connection to the steering gear. However airplanes are all fly by wire now and the systems work well.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: imahangtia on January 08, 2019, 11:08:38 AM
I prefer 2,000lb cars with 200hp to 4,000lb cars with 600hp loaded with airbags, electronics, and other crap.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: JBear on January 09, 2019, 06:00:16 AM
The company I work for bought five brand new 2018 Chevy 3500 Duramaxes last year. One of them has 950 miles on it now, check engine light is on. Another can't drive more than 50mi without going into regen. One of them literally has spent more time at the dealer than it has in our fleet. And to think, we switched to Chevy because we were having too many problems with our new Fords...
My favorite picture that I took last year was of my 20 year old Dodge that isn't broken towing my three year old Chevy to the dealership because it's so fragged up our mechanics can't figure it out. Interestingly, they had it a week and couldn't fix anything. Told me to take pictures of the 4wd error message next time it comes up in the display. Technology may be great, some things may be improvements, but it isn't that great and it's getting harder to find even brand certified technicians that know how to work on the internal combustion vehicles we're still making, never mind the electric cars of tomorrow.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: MrNuke on January 09, 2019, 08:58:01 AM
I'm going through a manufacturer buyback/lemon law with Jaguar/Land Rover right now because a brand new car has been in service since the 5th day of owning it. Infotainment problems, engine problems, etc.. etc...

Too much advanced crap that is released way too early and making us, the consumer be the beta tester.  :eyejack:
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: M1A_All_Day on January 09, 2019, 11:14:20 AM
I daily-drive a GM 2500HD and insisted on the WT (base) trim at the dealer. I have power windows and AC, that’s about it. Manual-actuated transfer case. The last LS cast iron block still made, I think (L96). I have a growing collection of 97-01 Jeep Cherokees that I plan on always having at least one in restored condition as the daily driver through when I can’t drive anymore. If I had to get a car, I would absolutely get a Tesla. I’d like to not ever need to have a car, though.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: edgephoto on January 09, 2019, 06:05:24 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The company I work for bought five brand new 2018 Chevy 3500 Duramaxes last year. One of them has 950 miles on it now, check engine light is on. Another can't drive more than 50mi without going into regen. One of them literally has spent more time at the dealer than it has in our fleet. And to think, we switched to Chevy because we were having too many problems with our new Fords...
My favorite picture that I took last year was of my 20 year old Dodge that isn't broken towing my three year old Chevy to the dealership because it's so fragged up our mechanics can't figure it out. Interestingly, they had it a week and couldn't fix anything. Told me to take pictures of the 4wd error message next time it comes up in the display. Technology may be great, some things may be improvements, but it isn't that great and it's getting harder to find even brand certified technicians that know how to work on the internal combustion vehicles we're still making, never mind the electric cars of tomorrow.

The industry is already short thousands of technicians. To find ones that actually have a brain and critical thinking skills that want to work on cars/trucks is near impossible. Cars have gotten much more complicated the last 10 years. We have lost many skilled technicians in the last 10 years and the ones coming in are not capable. It will only get worse.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: shermer-high on January 09, 2019, 06:40:59 PM
Not to mention what a PIA it is to work on cars these days everything is so tight to get to and a lot of trucks need the cab lifted to work on the engines. I'm glad I went the body side then left that for the upholstery part.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: WoodBurner on January 09, 2019, 08:48:05 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I'm going through a manufacturer buyback/lemon law with Jaguar/Land Rover right now because a brand new car has been in service since the 5th day of owning it. Infotainment problems, engine problems, etc.. etc...

Too much advanced crap that is released way too early and making us, the consumer be the beta tester.  :eyejack:

I am not surprised but to be honest those vehicles have always been finicky and temperamental (Jags) and Range Rovers from the early days to present are noted for poor design/reliability. Now the "Series" Land Rovers were totally different machines, reliable, rugged, down right primitive, simple machines, they were much more of a farm tractor than an on the road car.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: BigBluefish on January 14, 2019, 01:54:59 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The Gold Coast now runs pretty much the entire length of Long Island Sound. I am a Guilford taxpayer and while the town has always been "fancy", the waterfront has exploded in value in the last 20 years. Anything south of RT1 is in a different league. And yes, there is tremendous tax burden there- which they don't seem to have a problem with compared to the NYC metro. People will never leave there short of a tsunami hitting the reset button. New people move in all time- Madison, too.

But you can't subsidize the MASSIVE social service infrastructure of ex-industrial cities like Waterbury, Bridgeport, Hartford, Meriden, etc on pretty much nothing but the wealthy's state income tax liability, corporate tax, and sales tax. Soon most CT residents will be below the taxable income threshold for ANY tax liability (state or Federal). It's turning into a state of 1% executives and 99% minimum wage workers.

The cliche of the middle class leaving is totally true.

Pretty much hits the nail on the head. Smack dab in the middle class here, and soon as my son is out of high school (3.5 years) we are gone. Why stay and pay West Hartford taxes when I've got no kids in school, my income tax is going to go up, the State will try to take my property, and retirement here ten or 15 years from know will be completely unaffordable?

Family used to own waterfront summer property down in Fairfield until the mid '80s, when for a variety of reasons, we all got out of it - it wasn't really a money issue.  It's a whole different world down there now; and today is most certainly would be a money issue. The voters in Hartford, Bridgeport and New Haven will decide the State's fate, and the residents of the CT coast will pay for it.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: CCIE on January 14, 2019, 09:11:29 PM
I don’t know how this thread became a commentary on electric cars, but there seem to be a lot of misconceptions about them. I own a Gen1 Chevy Volt and a Tesla Model 3. Had a Chevy Spark EV for a little while too, mostly because it was virtually free after tax credits and had 400ft/lbs of torque.

The Volt is a PHEV (has an engine for backup) and is the best engineered car I’ve ever owned (always been a GM guy). It has 110,000 miles and hasn’t had an issue since new. Battery range is the same as when new. EV batteries don’t rapidly degrade like power tool batteries because they have thermal management systems and are never allowed to become under/overcharged.

The Tesla was expensive, though after state/federal credits it cost me less than $40k. People spend more than that on pickups these days. It’s an amazing car, especially since the regular software updates keep improving it. It easily goes 300 miles, and Tesla’s supercharger network lets me recharge in 30 minutes while I get a meal. At home I plug it in each night and let it charge overnight with off-peak electric rates. I never give the charge level a second thought. The instant torque and acceleration are also truly amazing.

I still own a gas SUV, but avoid driving it. Having to deal with an automatic transmission and regular refueling has become annoying.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: mu2bdriver on June 10, 2019, 08:42:46 PM
Adios UTC.  I knew you'd be leaving but didn't think it would be via merger with Ratheon.  I remember hearing Lamont received a phone call from Hayes unannounced and talked about their future in the State and Lamont allegedly told him the typical nonsense about how great CT is and will be.

We should keep a running tally of businesses leaving CT in recent memory:
GE - Boston
Mass Mutual - closing Enfield
UTC - Braintree/Boston
Stag/PTR/Remington/Marlin - elsewhere

CT's biggest industries will be the ones paying the least/no taxes.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: BerettaBoy213 on June 10, 2019, 08:51:22 PM
UTC = sikorski? they're actually moving out of state or just HQ? or is UTC somebody else?
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: edgephoto on June 10, 2019, 09:01:44 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
UTC = sikorski? they're actually moving out of state or just HQ? or is UTC somebody else?

Sikorsky is owned by Boeing now.

Carrier and Otis Elevator are going to be spun off prior to Raytheon merger. I would look for them to relocate south. First off the South is exploding so they will want to be nearer their customer base and second is this state is too expensive.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: WoodBurner on June 10, 2019, 09:02:12 PM
UTC corporate headquarters is moving. Of course in 5 years or so it'll all move as the demonrats tell us what a great job they are doing.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: K. Soze on June 10, 2019, 09:02:45 PM
Sikorsky is owned by Lockheed Martin.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: edgephoto on June 10, 2019, 09:10:38 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Sikorsky is owned by Lockheed Martin.

My bad....
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: Steevo on June 10, 2019, 10:36:57 PM
utc keeps walking and talking in circles.

--a year or 2 ago, carrier worked a deal and broke a contract for their headquarters lease in farmington and moved down south which cost them a lot of $$ to break the 20+ year lease. Then utc derps again, and moved otis into the building.

-- then Utc is splitting from carrier and otis

-- now merging with raytheon and moving to boston.

** I can only hope that with this merger they keep carrier and otis and dont split from them. I know Ct/MA offices of carrier are crazy busy with shit ton of work for easily the next few years. funny that a lot of these companies that threaten to leave CT , move a few jobs out, but end up spending more and more on upgrades, new buildings that need controls and units ect.... 

utrc just built 2 or 3 new building in east hartford for huge contract for engines.

Oh and frack that little half-tardling Lamont
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: Mustang on June 11, 2019, 06:05:32 AM
I don't even see Sikorsky staying for the time they said they would with the small deal they made with mao-loy. They were going to move n I'm sure its still being tossed round with by them.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: ctyankee on June 11, 2019, 07:22:31 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Adios UTC.  I knew you'd be leaving but didn't think it would be via merger with Ratheon.  I remember hearing Lamont received a phone call from Hayes unannounced and talked about their future in the State and Lamont allegedly told him the typical nonsense about how great CT is and will be.

We should keep a running tally of businesses leaving CT in recent memory:
GE - Boston
Mass Mutual - closing Enfield
UTC - Braintree/Boston
Stag/PTR/Remington/Marlin - elsewhere

CT's biggest industries will be the ones paying the least/no taxes.
Hubbell, IT equipment manufacturing: (54 jobs) Bethel CT -> Alabama

Forum Plastics, plastics manufacturing, (150 jobs) Waterbury CT -> out of state, looking for offers

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: CTSixshot on June 11, 2019, 07:47:45 AM
Lockheed Martin, I believe (as mentioned above), but you are correct, no longer owned by UTX (NYSE).

Where did all those posts come from?

Probably already mentioned, but i see this on Yahoo:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/united-technologies-departure-another-blow-193919295.html
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: mu2bdriver on June 11, 2019, 07:59:56 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
** I can only hope that with this merger they keep carrier and otis and dont split from them. I know Ct/MA offices of carrier are crazy busy with shit ton of work for easily the next few years. funny that a lot of these companies that threaten to leave CT , move a few jobs out, but end up spending more and more on upgrades, new buildings that need controls and units ect.... 

I think the breakup is pretty much set to happen. UTC really wants to go with the aerospace and defense core business with the Rockwell Collins deal earlier this year and after pulling out of the failed Honeywell merger of last year.  Raytheon/UTC will be a hell of a powerhouse as a combined entity. Carrier/Otis have no future in that portfolio. Otis isn’t very profitable at all but Carrier should get them a chunk of revenue from the sale.  I just don’t get why they sold Sikorsky off a few years ago.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: M1A_All_Day on June 11, 2019, 10:11:29 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I don't even see Sikorsky staying for the time they said they would with the small deal they made with mao-loy. They were going to move n I'm sure its still being tossed round with by them.

My late father in law worked for Sikorsky his entire adult life. Relocated from Guilford to just outside Patuxent Naval Air Base in Maryland at Sikorsky offices there. Totally different when you can have your corporate offices, sales, and testing on a big military base. I have no idea why their corp HQ is still in CT.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: M1A_All_Day on June 11, 2019, 10:58:48 AM
P&W in East Hartford and Middletown are there because the skilled labor is there (and the plants/properties are very paid-for). Once the skilled labor pool dries-up and/or it’s deemed too expensive to sustain, they’re gone. The brownfield sites of tomorrow. It’s not just about engineers and machinists- it’s about metallurgists and project managers too. These are global jobs, they can be anywhere.

Lamont’s continuance of the Malloy playbook ensures the further erosion of the aerospace military manufacturing base in CT. And it’s not just P&W- think of all the job shops and QC shops. Sterling, Jarvis, etc.

...and let’s not forget BRAC almost closed Groton in 2005. EB goes away then with thousands of other on-base civi jobs. It’s just a matter of time.
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: CTSixshot on June 11, 2019, 11:14:58 AM
So, more tattoo parlors, nail clinics and Western Unions/check cashing outlets?
Title: Re: Lamont's policy groups recommend big changes for first 100 days
Post by: edgephoto on June 11, 2019, 07:43:37 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So, more tattoo parlors, nail clinics and Western Unions/check cashing outlets?

Yes those will take up the slack. Don't forget casinos and minor league ball parks.