Share This Page

The Fisker deal: Bad karma

The Obama Energy Department's $529 million loan guarantee to the maker of the Fisker Karma electric sports car, which is creating 500 "green" jobs -- in Finland -- is crony capitalism at its worst.

Company founder Henrik Fisker told ABC News the 2009 loan went toward U.S. engineering and design work. But 500 assembly jobs are being outsourced to Finland -- because no U.S. contractor "could actually produce our vehicle."

More than a year behind schedule, Fisker has produced just 40 cars and delivered just two to customers, including -- surprise! -- liberal-Hollywood darling Leonardo DiCaprio.

So who's really benefiting• The usual suspects, of course.

A Fisker-backing venture capital firm's partners include former Vice President Al Gore and major Democrat donor John Doerr, according to The National Center for Public Policy Research.

Fisker -- a textbook example of crony capitalism -- bears all the hallmarks of another publicly funded "green jobs" financial disaster in the making. All involved deny it'll be another Solyndra, but that's what all involved with Solyndra said, too -- until that solar-panel firm's bankruptcy left taxpayers on the hook for a federally guaranteed $535 million loan.

For taxpayers and jobless Americans, the Fisker Karma is bad karma indeed.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.