Nothing that a couple of trillion dollars can’t fix.

Meanwhile, maniacal scientists work to summon into existence the inordinate presence of the Used EV.

With the unholy mix of low maintenance, economical purchase price and a truly un-American operating cost, the peril to the future of all ICE vehicles becomes unspeakable….



Dim Sum anyone?

So if I understand correctly you think that we should chase the Chinese down an industry rabbit hole that every major car manufacturer in the world other than those owned by the Chinese are pulling back?

Maybe they know something the Chinese don’t know?

Ford and GM have to contend with unions, this is why they cannot make a quality EV at a profit. On the other hand Tesla does not have to deal with unions. Teslas' employees do not want a union, there have been numerous votes with the same result, no. I think Tesla is missing an opportunity, make a small well built, bare bones EV through a subsidiary corporation.

I rode my electric vehicle to the mailbox earlier... had a cigar delivery I needed to get in the lock box.

Another Roadblock to the EV Transition: Personal Politics
As automakers look to push their electric vehicles, some consumers are resisting for political reasons


WSJ
On paper, Robert Olson is a prime candidate to buy an electric vehicle.

The retired Arizona engineer loves cars, has owned hybrid vehicles and has the means to pay the premium for an EV. And he owns two gas-powered cars, including a Porsche, that he could use for longer road trips.

But Olson is turned off by electric cars. He thinks their potential to help the climate is overstated, and he resents the Biden administration’s pro-EV policies.

“It is being pushed down our throats,” said Olson, who says he is a Republican.

Automakers are fixated on easing the practical concerns around electric-vehicle ownership, primarily high prices and charging hassles. But in the industry’s quest to persuade more Americans to consider EVs, a swath of the buying public could prove tough to convince: those opposed to EVs for political or ideological reasons.

In a recent Morning Consult poll of about 2,200 American adults conducted for The Wall Street Journal, about four in 10 said they had an unfavorable view of EVs. Of those who are opposed to them, 38% said their political views were a factor. Even more of those with unfavorable views—63%—cited China’s dominance of the EV supply chain as a reason.

As for party affiliation, 31% of people who identified themselves as conservative said they had a favorable view of EVs, compared with 66% of liberals.

Green cars long ago became swept up in the culture wars. In the early 2000s, many conservative commentators maligned Toyota’s Prius hybrid, which became a hit with liberals and Hollywood celebrities.

In 2012, then-Republican presidential hopeful Newt Gingrich criticized General Motors’ Chevrolet Volt plug-in hybrid for not being able to fit a gun rack. During a congressional hearing around that time, then GM CEO Dan Akerson told lawmakers: “We did not engineer the Volt to be a political punching bag.”

In the run-up to the November election, some Republican candidates have criticized Biden for trying to force EV sales. Democrats, meanwhile, have touted the tens of billions of dollars in federal funding for battery factories and other EV projects.

Automakers not only have to win over conservative car buyers. Some of their own dealers have a dim view of battery-powered cars due to ideological reasons. Dealer David Ferraez said he thinks the media and government espouse an inflated view of the risks of carbon emissions to push more EVs into the market.

Nonetheless, Ferraez, who sells GM’s Buick, GMC and Chevrolet brands in New Jersey, has spent more than $300,000 to install electric-car chargers at his stores.

“I do want to sell what the customer wants,” he said.

Giving buyers a choice
At Kia, Center said the brand has emphasized an array of options—straight gas-engine models, hybrids, plug-in hybrids and full electrics—to make clear it isn’t trying to force anyone into an electric vehicle. But Kia is also heavily advertising its EVs.

“We’re talking to the broader part of the market that has an open mind about EVs, rather than trying to convince the part that has their heels dug in,” he said.

John Bozzella, president of the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, which represents most major car companies, said the group has stressed to regulators that consumers should have choices even as emissions rules are tightened.

The group lobbied the Biden administration to include plug-in hybrid models, which travel in electric mode for some distance before a gas engine kicks on, in its calculation of the Environmental Protection Agency’s new emissions standards.

“Political persuasion is a pretty good indicator of a willingness to purchase an EV right now,” Bozzella said. “I don’t think that is a forever situation.”

South Florida car dealer Bill Wallace has noticed that more customers have been expressing a sour view of EVs over the past year.

His company sells several brands that have relatively popular electric models, including Ford, Hyundai, Kia and Cadillac, and EVs account for about 5% of his total sales. But he estimates about one-third of the customers he speaks with about EVs express adamant opposition.

“They are angry,” Wallace said. “They feel like it’s the government trying to control their lives.”

Wallace said he broached the subject during a conversation with GM CEO Mary Barra at a private luncheon in Florida late last year. GM, more than many other car companies, has bet its future on EVs and is marketing them aggressively.

“I said, ‘Mary, you have to understand the red-state mentality. These people want no part of it,’” he said.

When you have an administration propping up an entire sector with tax incentives and rebates to build, oh lets just say "widgets"...it becomes political.

You're not going to change my mind.

One of the things that is quite clear from this thread alone is how little the facts get in the way of people's opinions.
Many here see EVs as a purely political issue, some feel threatened that their "rights" will be damaged by EVs, and others condemn the technology purely based on the hearsay and options of others.

And if you try to assess EVs on a purely technical and dispasionit basis - as I try to - then you are called an idiot. And a liar.

It's not that people don't understand, it is that they don't want to understand.

I would not have guessed it, but EVs are a political football - at least to most people.

Sorry but you don’t seem to understand.

First and foremost is the issue of batteries which are the fuel cells. The raw materials required to manufacture them as well as the actual factories that produce them is largely controlled by our most powerful political enemy, China. To risk the future of our economy on whether or not China will supply batteries to autos sold in the US in the future is poor policy. To avoid that problem battery manufacturing plants need to be built here that can supply our needs. Since manufacturers won’t do that because they are unsure of the future a huge subsidy by our government would be required.

Then there is the problem of charging stations. The Biden administration has pledged to build 800 or more by 2030. Yet, only have been built since the announcement of those plans a couple years ago. This of course also requires a huge subsidy.

At the moment we are seriously over our head in debt as a nation. In fact, interest payments out pace defense spending. Social Security is projected to be cut in the near future because benefits exceed revenue. So for the government to spend trillions of dollars for these subsidies means one thing. Increased national debt leading to even higher interest payments that become a larger percentage of annual spending.

So one has to wonder how we are going to pay for all the subsidies necessary to compete with China in the EV market.

Sometimes EVs are just a little ghey. Need to factor that in also.

So we agree there is a political aspect to EVs. As I suppose there is to Oil and Gas production as well.

But none of those things we a factor in me buying one. But many who should buy one will pass on them because of the political noise.

Agreed that China in the market is a point of concern. So what is the correct political answer?
Encourage and subsidise development, manufacture and adoption?
Sell people on the idea that EVs are bad and hope they just go away?
Do nothing and see if China really does kick our azz?

Here in Texas they imposed a $200 year tax on EVs. I just paid it. So they went with option #2 above.
Texas is an oil and gas state - "and we don't need no Lefty EVs here".
- yippee ki-yay

Is it a good manly color?
It's not like turquoise or anything right?

By what criteria do we determine who is someone that SHOULD buy an EV?

We should add additional subsidies to a Federal Budget that is already $2-3T in the red?

You said people who should buy one. what do you mean by that? Who are these people you refer to and why should they buy one.

For the record I asked you that before you asked what is the correct political answer.

Ok - I see now.
"People who should buy one" summons up images of an oppressive government controlling people lives - my bad.

While vehicle purchase are more emotion than logic, for each person the is a type of vehicle that best suits their needs.
Own a boat? get a truck.
Solo city commuter? Get a Econo-box.
In a band? buy a van. (huh - that rhymes).

I should buy an EV:
Solo commute to the office - less that 100 miles/day - do not like to drive 700 miles without a pizz brake.
Own a home and can charge there - saves megabucks on fuel costs - gas stations stops suck.
Tired of maintenance; oil, radiator, tune up, etc.
Like to go fast. Faster than most - really f*ckin fast.

And in past post I have outlined who should not buy an EV.

I bought mine because I understand the engineering, I don’t miss gas stations and oil changes, the range is fine for my needs, my community is very EV friendly, and it’s just kinda fun to zip around in.

On the other hand I think people should spend their money based on what’s important to them. If they want an EV fine. If they don’t, that’s fine as well.

In addition, considering the fact that our government is spending way more money than it takes in as well as having a huge debt service I don’t think we as a nation should be subsidizing a new industry to the tune of trillions of dollars.

Yes, in California it was only $100. Texas is putting the spurs to Brewha because he wasn’t paying his fair share. The west coast states are looking at a fee per mile system where the government would track your car’s movements.

If I could justify the expense of owning a second vehicle would get a zipper for around town. I’m just a po’ boy.

But, WHY should they buy an EV?

It is a tax on smugness - cause nobody like a smartass - especially if they drive an EV.
(take note HD)

And fwiw, the bill reads:

WINDSHIELD STICKER - $50.75
REG FEE-DPS - $1.00
CNTY ROAD BRIDGE ADD-ON FEE - $10.00
CHILD SAFETY FUND - $1.50
ELECTRICAL VEHICLE FEE - $200.00
INSPECTION FEE-1YR - $7.50
PROCESSING AND HANDLING FEE - $4.75

It is hard to read as the print is so small, but at the bottom it appears to read:
Take that, you tree huggin' Lefty!

I never said nor implied any amount of the 2024 would be used to subsidize the EV industry. I did say Trillions, but I never specified a time period. In an early thread you also stated the EV industry should be subsidized.

But back to the question that you chose not to answer. Why should someone buy an EV?

See #1393

If the political opponents can stomach allowing each other to score a win this might be the best way to break out of a rut we seem to be stuck in. It looks like we are in the cut off your nose to spite your face age of economics here in America.

I just found it an interesting economics topic for both sides of the discussion here?