[OkieSnuffBox]

Originally Posted by Murf the Surf

And I say if it makes sense for you then great. But it making sense for you shouldn't be the grounds for the government forcing EV's on everyone else, many of whom it might not make sense for.

I think this and the other common sense arguments surrounding increased capacity and grid upgrades that constantly get posted here are what the underlying theme among a great many posters on this thread is.

This is my issue with them, the US is now like $33 trillion in debt and we are subsidizing cars for people?

But I have a lot of issues with what we subsidize. I don't have kids, why should I help pay for yours?

[RM7]

Originally Posted by OkieSnuffBox

This is my issue with them, the US is now like $33 trillion in debt and we are subsidizing cars for people?

But I have a lot of issues with what we subsidize. I don't have kids, why should I help pay for yours?

I assume you pay out of pocket for medical expenses and procedures?

[Murf the Surf]

Originally Posted by RM7

I assume you pay out of pocket for medical expenses and procedures?

I don't think comparing an EV to repairing a broken bone or any other medical treatment is the same. Nobody needs an EV but everyone should have access to healthcare if they need it.

[freakystyly]

It has likely changed over the years up here, but it always left a bad taste when Teslas were introduced, getting a rebate on ~$100k purchase price vehicles. Avg. EV prices have become better over the years but the feeling is still there. (and the rebates have shrunk)

[XutvJet]

Originally Posted by gatorfast

Most people don’t want to own any car outside the warranty period, BEV or otherwise. Don’t think that is a big concern for most.

Not true. You just tend to hang out with more wealthy people that own cars under warranty. A vast majority of car owners in the US cannot afford new cars or cars with a warranty. God help someone with an EV that needs an out of warranty battery or motor replacement. For most, the EV will be mechanically totaled at that point.

[KRS_SN]

Somewhat relevant to the topic...
https://youtube.com/watch?v=UcNl23qh...SIkaIECMiOmarE

[zx10guy]

Originally Posted by XutvJet

Not true. You just tend to hang out with more wealthy people that own cars under warranty. A vast majority of car owners in the US cannot afford new cars or cars with a warranty. God help someone with an EV that needs an out of warranty battery or motor replacement. For most, the EV will be mechanically totaled at that point.

Just because someone buys a new car or a car with a warranty doesn't mean they're wealthy. Leases, being able to roll over negative equity into the next car loan, sub prime auto loans, and loan terms that now go out to 7 years have made new cars accessible to many people; even those that have no business buying a new car.

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by XutvJet

Not true. You just tend to hang out with more wealthy people that own cars under warranty. A vast majority of car owners in the US cannot afford new cars or cars with a warranty. God help someone with an EV that needs an out of warranty battery or motor replacement. For most, the EV will be mechanically totaled at that point.

Vast majority???? I think you should look those two words up in a dictionary. Once you fully understand the definition of each of those two words, especially put together the way you did in your sentence, then reread your sentence. Get back to me after that.

[OkieSnuffBox]

Originally Posted by RM7

I assume you pay out of pocket for medical expenses and procedures?

I'm not sure how you're comparing my company paying for my health insurance as part of my compensation package to tax payers subsidizing cars for people.

I'm not trying to be a dick, but how did you come to this conclusion that the two were equivalent?

[RM7]

Originally Posted by OkieSnuffBox

I'm not sure how you're comparing my company paying for my health insurance as part of my compensation package to tax payers subsidizing cars for people.

I'm not trying to be a dick, but how did you come to this conclusion that the two were equivalent?

Because you are a member of this society and you have a responsibility as a member. If you want to only pay for your own stuff, you need to buy your own island and pave your own roads, set up your own health care, build your EMS services, utilities, etc. There are lots of other social responsibilities. I just used that example to show that the people who are all about "I only wanna pay for my own stuff" are more than happy to spread that around when it directly benefits them, such as with health care, insurance, etc. In other words, you are ok with subsidizing stuff. No, society can't operate al la carte. But one day, we'll finally get those poor people to pay their fair share, right?

[OkieSnuffBox]

Originally Posted by zx10guy

Just because someone buys a new car or a car with a warranty doesn't mean they're wealthy. Leases, being able to roll over negative equity into the next car loan, sub prime auto loans, and loan terms that now go out to 7 years have made new cars accessible to many people; even those that have no business buying a new car.

I think you don't understand the general public.

I've pointed this out before, many here have a skewed impression of how others live. I don't make that much but just my income income is $20k more than then national household income. That doesn't include my fiance's income.

And many of you make a significant sum more than that. Many of you guys have multiple times of money in cars as I have in my house.

[OkieSnuffBox]

I don't say that trying to sound jealous, I just know a bunch of you made different choices, and that has enriched you more than me.

[zx10guy]

Originally Posted by OkieSnuffBox

I think you don't understand the general public.

I've pointed this out before, many here have a skewed impression of how others live. I don't make that much but just my income income is $20k more than then national household income. That doesn't include my fiance's income.

And many of you make a significant sum more than that. Many of you guys have multiple times of money in cars as I have in my house.

I do understand the general public. The keeping up with the Jones' meme used to describe a broad segment of the US population wasn't by accident.

So I don't understand your reply and why my post was quoted. As I said, pretty much anyone can buy a new car or a newer car with a warranty due to all the different creative financing options out there. Whether it's financially prudent for one to buy a product that takes an immediate depreciation hit is another. Or trading off the financial hit to gain a better sense of security against mechanical breakdown. That's up to the person as we're all adults and we're all free to do whatever.

I myself didn't buy a "nice" car till much later in my career/life. I've always drove econoboxes even though I could afford a car many times more than what I've been purchasing. I also end to buy new but I hold on to my vehicles for a long time so any depreciation discussion is moot.

[dreamingat30fps]

Originally Posted by RM7

Because you are a member of this society and you have a responsibility as a member. If you want to only pay for your own stuff, you need to buy your own island and pave your own roads, set up your own health care, build your EMS services, utilities, etc. There are lots of other social responsibilities. I just used that example to show that the people who are all about "I only wanna pay for my own stuff" are more than happy to spread that around when it directly benefits them, such as with health care, insurance, etc. In other words, you are ok with subsidizing stuff. No, society can't operate al la carte. But one day, we'll finally get those poor people to pay their fair share, right?

Just because I don't want to pay for someone's $80k EV doesn't mean I don't want to pay for the roads to be paved.

[Murf the Surf]

Originally Posted by dreamingat30fps

Just because I don't want to pay for someone's $80k EV doesn't mean I don't want to pay for the roads to be paved.

This, I'm ok with paying taxes to cover the cost of healthcare, public safety, infrastructure, public transportation and education. But why should I subsidize someone else's personal transportation.

[freakystyly]

Originally Posted by Murf the Surf

This, I'm ok with paying taxes to cover the cost of healthcare, public safety, infrastructure, public transportation and education. But why should I subsidize someone else's personal transportation.

Can't mention infrastructure since they don't pay road taxes (yet). In spite of generally being larger and heavier.

[M5Rick]

The ex P M here that told us he's stopping fuel car sales in 2030 instead of 2040 is himself being investigated for lying to his parliamentary house party followers then.

[M3WC]

Ford will split out the EV business officially Q1 this quarter, named Ford Model E. Today they gave everyone a glimpse into their EV financials since 2021.


Ford expects to lose $3 billion on their EV division in 2023.

They lost $2.1 billion in 2022 and $900 million in 2021.

Goal is to be in green by 2026.



https://www.thedetroitbureau.com/202...ness-for-2023/

[RM7]

Originally Posted by Murf the Surf

This, I'm ok with paying taxes to cover the cost of healthcare, public safety, infrastructure, public transportation and education. But why should I subsidize someone else's personal transportation.

But you already do, with the subsidizing of the oil industry. How comfortable would you be with $6/gal gas or more?

[M5Rick]

Do you have a system in the US where taxpayers pay for registered disabled peoples new cars?

[chad86tsi]

Originally Posted by RM7

But you already do, with the subsidizing of the oil industry. How comfortable would you be with $6/gal gas or more?

If we are going down that road, power that is fed into ev’s is also subsidized, some very substantially. Far more than gasoline.

Subsidizing the cars on top of that is like an added insult. Subsidizing a product that consumes highly subsidized energy.

[chad86tsi]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Humorous is "subsidies" are just the Government not taxing the living shit out of you (or a corporation/industry) like they really want to do. It's all just either...

In many cases, it's just taking money out on one persons pocket, and putting into another's pocket. Depending on the year, some 50% of all citizens pay zero federal tax, yet we all get to use federal subsidized resources/benefits. There are people that literally don't pay their share.

I'm Ok with indigent people not paying, but 50% are not indigent. All that federal money comes from somewhere, and it seems it's not all of us.