All electric vehicles...will not work.

19AL63 said:
I want to correct a possible misconception i do not want you to think I am all for gas powered vehicles. I am in favor of hydrogen power. Smaller engines, super power, can be refueled just like gas powered and the best part no pollution. Japan and some others seem to be doing the research and development on this I wish we as a nation were promoting this over electric.
Click to expand...
Toyota is going in that direction.
 
psycho_dad said:
Thank goodness that the coal, oil and gas industry is pure capitalism.

The US government has subsidized coal, oil, and gas for decades, despite the fact that a majority of voters want to end fossil fuel subsidies. Currently, experts estimate that direct subsidies to the fossil fuel industry total around $20 billion every year, $15 billion of that from the federal government.Feb 24, 2021

OOOPS, maybe I'm wrong. Is $20 billion a lot?
Click to expand...
lol, your logic is stunning.
 
bigkat said:
how do YOU know that there will be NO subsidy in 5-7 years?
Click to expand...
Because they won’t need to be because demand is going to continue to grow. Even if there is, it will be immaterial. Trust me. Car companies are not investing billions in all electric strategies because of a business case contingent on subsidies.
 
We subsidize ALOT more than that! The Big Oil lobby has tentacles throughout our government, on both aisles. And make us (taxpayers) eat nearly all of the pollution, health, and environmental costs. Including with our lives.

And that is apart from our foreign policy and military adventures. Oil is and has always been central to it.
 
Hammerdrill said:
What possible reason would they have to make this shift? Businesses do not make major decisions on what to produce for no reason. I'm not talking about the car subsidies, exclusively. Tesla was built by tax payer's dollars. It was crony capitalism pure and simple.
Click to expand...
They are all making this shift because they know it is the future and they don’t want lose an adoption wave to their competitors. That adoption wave and business case is not built on subsidies. The EV market is global and while many governments provide incentives, some like China are already peeling them back.
 
ProV1 said:
They are all making this shift because they know it is the future and they don’t want lose an adoption wave to their competitors. That adoption wave and business case is not built on subsidies. The EV market is global and while many governments provide incentives, some like China are already peeling them back.
Click to expand...
"They know it is the future". Sure, but the point is, why is it the future? because of artificial pressures being applied by governments. I mean entire cities have moved to ban non EVs. For no other reason than they dislike them.
 
Hammerdrill said:
"They know it is the future". Sure, but the point is, why is it the future? because of artificial pressures being applied by governments. I mean entire cities have moved to ban non EVs. For no other reason than they dislike them.
Click to expand...
Total BS. Pressure? What pressure? The only pressure is share price. Nobody is making them go this route. They are spending billions because they see the future and want to get their fair share. Blaming a tax credit is stupid and lazy.
 
ProV1 said:
Total BS. Pressure? What pressure? The only pressure is share price. Nobody is making them go this route. They are spending billions because they see the future and want to get their fair share. Blaming a tax credit is stupid and lazy.
Click to expand...
Tax credit? It is way more than any tax credit, which I stated. Seems you don't read.
 
The only think I worry about with hydrogen is you really have to have bullet proof fuel cells otherwise you could be driving a bomb just waiting to be setoff by accident.
 
Last edited:
ProV1 said:
Because they won’t need to be because demand is going to continue to grow. Even if there is, it will be immaterial. Trust me. Car companies are not investing billions in all electric strategies because of a business case contingent on subsidies.
Click to expand...
LOL!!!! so you are just making chit up.....
 
ProV1 said:
They are all making this shift because they know it is the future and they don’t want lose an adoption wave to their competitors. That adoption wave and business case is not built on subsidies. The EV market is global and while many governments provide incentives, some like China are already peeling them back.
Click to expand...
while this is not about electric cars themselves( besides using them to power those cars), wonder why china is in the process of building over 1,000 coal plants?
 
ProV1 said:
They are tax credits and they phase out.

www.edmunds.com

Electric Vehicle Tax Credits 2023: What You Need to Know | Edmunds

Wondering how federal EV tax credits work in 2023? Check out our full analysis of EV tax credits to see which vehicles qualify and how you can get the electric car tax credit as a buyer. We cover EV tax credits for leasing, too.
www.edmunds.com
Click to expand...
lol. If you think the only money that Tesla got in the form of tax dollars was from the sale of their cars, you are wrong.
 
ProV1 said:
Most people who by EV’s and hybrids are not rich. Most those cars MSRP under 40K.
Click to expand...
"A study by the University of California-Davis showed that in California, people with income over $150,000 per year purchase a third of electric vehicles (EVs) and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs). People with household income of $100,000 to $149,000 account for about 20% and people with household income of $50,000 to $99,999 per year account for about 27% of these vehicles."

Keep in mind too that the average age of new car buyers is 53 years old, and climbing. Average people are not buying these cars, despite them becoming more affordable, they are still more expensive than a non hybrid.
 
Last edited:
Hammerdrill said:
"A study by the University of California-Davis showed that in California, people with income over $150,000 per year purchase a third of electric vehicles (EVs) and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs). People with household income of $100,000 to $149,000 account for about 20% and people with household income of $50,000 to $99,999 per year account for about 27% of these vehicles."

Keep in mind too that the average age of new car buyers is 53 years old, and climbing. Average people are not buying these cars, despite them becoming more affordable, they are still more expensive than a non hybrid, or EV.
Click to expand...
link to the full study: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/0tn4m2tx
 
Tesoro said:
LOL! I can't afford a car under 40K and I have my house paid for and make more than most.
Click to expand...
If you have no mortgage and make a reasonable living, you should be able to afford a 40K car. Regardless, that is far from rich.
 
Hammerdrill said:
lol. If you think the only money that Tesla got in the form of tax dollars was from the sale of their cars, you are wrong.
Click to expand...
I’m not talking about Tesla. I’m taking about most every auto maker in existence. Also, please don’t take to me about subsidies to companies. Oil and Gas has no equal in that department.
 
Hammerdrill said:
"A study by the University of California-Davis showed that in California, people with income over $150,000 per year purchase a third of electric vehicles (EVs) and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs). People with household income of $100,000 to $149,000 account for about 20% and people with household income of $50,000 to $99,999 per year account for about 27% of these vehicles."

Keep in mind too that the average age of new car buyers is 53 years old, and climbing. Average people are not buying these cars, despite them becoming more affordable, they are still more expensive than a non hybrid.
Click to expand...
So most who purchase them earn less than 150K per year? Only 1/3rd over 150K? Exactly. Most who buy them are not rich. Also, what is the date of that study? Also, That is only California? How about the rest of the country.

Thanks for making my point.
 
ProV1 said:
So most who purchase them earn less than 150K per year? Only 1/3rd over 150K? Exactly. Most who buy them are not rich. Also, what is the date of that study? Also, That is only California? How about the rest of the country.

Thanks for making my point.
Click to expand...
The average age alone proves your point wrong. You can choose what income level equals rich, but you can't get around that extremely high age for new car buyers. The average person isn't buying an EV or a hybrid.
 
ProV1 said:
I’m not talking about Tesla. I’m taking about most every auto maker in existence. Also, please don’t take to me about subsidies to companies. Oil and Gas has no equal in that department.
Click to expand...
Coal and gas are used to power our country, hardly the same thing as EVs. Food and power are more important than electric cars, particularity since we already have cars that aren't electric. So sorry, your analogy doesn't really work.
 
Hammerdrill said:
The average age alone proves your point wrong. You can choose what income level equals rich, but you can't get around that extremely high age for new car buyers. The average person isn't buying an EV or a hybrid.
Click to expand...
I never said the average age person. I simply responded to a claim that only rich people buy EV’s and Hybrids. That is blatantly untrue and your ancient study from only one state even proved it.
 
Hammerdrill said:
Coal and gas are used to power our country, hardly the same thing as EVs. Food and power are more important than electric cars, particularity since we already have cars that aren't electric. So sorry, your analogy doesn't really work.
Click to expand...
It’s not an analogy. It’s a direct reference to another industry which has the corner on subsidies. It does not matter how justified you think they are.
 
ProV1 said:
It’s not an analogy. It’s a direct reference to another industry which has the corner on subsidies. It does not matter how justified you think they are.
Click to expand...
of course it matters if they are justified, why wouldn't it? Why not subsidize everything then?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top