astonius
Well-Known Member
True. We all know no one in the northern states has ever proposed something dumb.It isn’t one rep. It isn’t one backwards law. It isn’t one idiot.
Sponsored
Announcing our new "CLUBS" section where you can join or create a Rivian club or group! You can use this new feature to conveniently plan and discuss local events, gatherings or other club/group related topics.
So we encourage you to join (or start) special-interest and regional-based Rivian clubs at: https://www.rivianforums.com/forum/group-categories/clubs-groups.1/
True. We all know no one in the northern states has ever proposed something dumb.It isn’t one rep. It isn’t one backwards law. It isn’t one idiot.
Agree on paying one's fair share. But 3 points:I agree with the quote above. I don't know if Texas has chargers that fall in this category, or not. I don't think taxpayers should foot the bill for my electricity, no more than I think I should foot the bill for their gas/oil. I'm sure they all get subsidized in some way.
I'm with you on points 1 and 2, Doug. On point 3, if you're suggesting incentives, where it helps achieve a goal that is good for everyone, such as helping the economy, environment, etc. I agree.Agree on paying one's fair share. But 3 points:
1. Electricity costs a fraction of petroleum-based fuel, so free gas would be much freer than electricity!
2. US government has been subsidizing fossil fuel industry for decades
3. To encourage people to do the right thing for the environment, governments need to make doing the right thing economically attractive.
If we're giving away some free electricity, there are plenty of people that would truly benefit from it more than someone who can afford a $55k car, but I'm generally not a fan of government handouts as a whole. Now if we're talking about private businesses paying for the electricity to entice customers, that's a different animal.I don't think ICE owners would complain about incentives to purchase an EV, as they would have the same opportunity. However, giving away something free, to a certain group of people who have the means to pay, is different, IMO.
Part of the bill requires private businesses to disclose how much the free charging costs customers. Essentially, if a restaurant had free EV chargers, they'd have to add a line to every receipt indicating how much you were paying to subsidize the free EV charging. Is it sounds like a nightmare to calculate that, you would be correct. In short, the bill is entirely performative nonsense to rile up the same people who are already riled up and like to do things like coal roll you and intentionally ICE your EV chargers.Now if we're talking about private businesses paying for the electricity to entice customers, that's a different animal.
It's not a question of affordability, it's a question of incentivizing a change in behavior....I don't agree with a government furnishing free electricity, though. I see "free electricity" as helping those that can easily afford it..
Portland almost had a free beer fountain for a while... (The second part of the article mentioning an attempt to actually do it in 2009 was an April Fool's Joke, but the first part about the 1887 offer was real.)I'm sick and tired of subsidizing teetotalers. Everywhere I go there's taxpayer funded FREE water flowing in the fountains. Where's my free whiskey fountain???
That's one way to view it.It's not a question of affordability, it's a question of incentivizing a change in behavior.
I agree.If we're giving away some free electricity, there are plenty of people that would truly benefit from it more than someone who can afford a $55k car......
Probably not the change in behavior you were looking for...It's not a question of affordability, it's a question of incentivizing a change in behavior.
Well, I dunno - does Ford now *being able* to charge more for their product incentivize them to make and sell more of them?Probably not the change in behavior you were looking for...
Ford raised the base price of its F-150 Lightning electric pickup truck Aug. 9 following the passing of a bill by Senate Democrats that included a $7,500 federal electric vehicle tax credit.
The base model of the 2023 F-150 Lightning pickup will now cost $47,000, up from it’s original price of $40,000, according to CNN. More expensive models, such as the XLT High/Extended Range and the Lariat Extended Range have increased in price by $8,500, while other F-150 Lightning designs vary between $6,000 to $7,000 in price increases, according to the Detroit Free Press.
Is your implication here Ford needs government subsidies to produce electric vehicles?Well, I dunno - does Ford now *being able* to charge more for their product incentivize them to make and sell more of them?
They don't need it, but certainly they're inclined to make more if they make more money on them.Is your implication here Ford needs government subsidies to produce electric vehicles?