An energy report released last October by the Texas Public Policy Foundation concluded that EVs would cost tens of thousands of dollars more if not for generous taxpayer-funded incentives: the average model year 2021 EV would cost approximately $48,698 more to own over a 10-year period without the staggering $22 billion in taxpayer-funded handouts that the government provides to electric car manufacturers and owners.

So Brewha as you’ve mentioned many times you’re against corporate welfare so I’m assuming you’ll write a check to the Treasury to reimburse them for your portion of Tesla’s welfare check they received for your car?

Abrignac wrote:

^^^THAT...THAT, is what I'm opposed to. Also, remember (because a lot in here have!) we already bailed out the US Auto manufacturing sector once. These companies cannot and will not do the bidding of the US government and not make a profit or another round of taxpayer money. Take your pick. So far, it looks like the Biden Administration is picking winners and losers...just like the Obama administration. Solyndra...hello!!!!

DrMaddVibe wrote:

So, you'll be please to know that starting this year in Texas, EV's are tagged with a $200 registration renewal to offset that fact that they don't pay road taxes when they buy gas.

I have not heard of Tesla receiving "billions in taxpayer funded handouts".
Nor have I received credits or payments for buying an EV - the opposite in fact - a special EV tax from Texas!

The "foundation" you site claims to be a non-partisan, non-profit. Not having seen their "report" I have no reason to believe their summary is credible. They look like a right wing think tank. You should be more discerning.

Brewha wrote:

It’s the message that’s important, not the messenger. It’s well known that EV’s are heavily subsidized.

A list of some of those subsidies can be found here. Whether the site posting the list is right-wing, left-wing or non-partisan is irrelevant if the data cited is factually correct. However, to brush something to the side simply because of the source reporting it doesn’t necessarily align with one’s views demonstrates that the person ignoring the data is simply unwilling to be objective.

https://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/regulation/an-overview-of-federal-government-support-for-electric-vehicles/ 

Abrignac wrote:

In The Washington state:

This week, Gov. Jay Inslee announced $45 million in subsidies through a Department of Commerce grant program for families deemed “low-income” to purchase an EV.

“Washingtonians really get it when it comes to electric vehicles,” Inslee said at a Wednesday news conference in Tukwila.

Abrignac wrote:

Then there’s this:

Making EVs More Affordable at the Dealer: On average, EVs are now 20 percent cheaper than they were one year ago. As of January 1st, Americans can get up to $7,500 off the sticker price of many of the new electric vehicles eligible for the Inflation Reduction Act’s 30D New Clean Vehicle Tax Credit, and up to $4,000 off the price of a used EV for vehicles eligible for the 25E Used Clean Vehicle Credit. Already, over 9,500 dealers across the country have registered with IRS Energy Credits Online, most of which also registered to provide this tax credit at the point of sale.

Abrignac wrote:

No, no - this is good.

The Author is a political journalist. Despite his flavoring the article with opinions and conclusions the base facts are correct. the conclusions - well, no so much.

Yes, the government is funding the build out of charging stations. It would be easy to miss the fact that today most all charging stations are privately funded.

And loaning money for battery development is great - I hope they do it!

It's too bad these are chicken feed amounts compared to the trillions each year in oil and gas subsidies. But hey - it's a start.





Bottom line here is that some people what to move us to cleaner energy - other cannot imagine why and claim it all to be a money grab. Like how Covid was fake, and how man never really went to the moon.

Brewha wrote:

So, I tax credit only barely qualifies as a subsidy - but it does. Remember this is money off of your income tax. So you pay less - no one gives you anything.

I just wish I had gotten it.

Brewha wrote:

The government shouldn’t have bailed them out. Nor should the government have bailed out the banks. For far too long corporate America has operated under the assumption that some companies too large to fail and so vital to national security that they are immune to the normal consequences of being fiscally irresponsible. For far too long they have followed the Henry Ford theorem of you-can-have-them-any-color-you-want-as-long-as-its-black.

But, what really bothers me the most is that the current viability of the EV market is subject to the whims of our largest geo-political enemy. Depending on the source Chinese owned companies control anywhere between 50 & 98.2% of the raw materials to manufacture the batteries used to power EV’s. What happens in say 30 years if 80% of new cars sales are EV’e that use batteries manufactured from Chinese controlled materials and China decides to close the supply channel? That would shut down car sales which would ripple all the way up the supply chain then outward to via a reverse ripple effect.

Abrignac wrote:

It's too bad these are chicken feed amounts compared to the trillions each year in oil and gas subsidies. But hey - it's a start.

Brewha wrote:

I have absolutely no problem with the development of cleaner energy. On the other hand, I’m opposed to risking our economic future by investing in technology that relies on raw materials controlled by our biggest and strongest political opponent for a critical component.

Abrignac wrote:

What turnip truck did you fall off and land on your head? Obviously you failed Accounting 101. For every credit there is a corresponding debit. Expenditures don’t change simply because someone is charged less. It just means less revenue is generated so a deficit is created. To offset that deficit additional revenue must be collected somewhere else or that deficit must be carried as a debt.

Abrignac wrote:

The 2024 Federal budget is $6.5 trillion. How many of those trillions go to oil and gas subsidies?

HockeyDad wrote:

Even worse...with all of this "technology" tooling down the US road system...what are they harvesting? The ability to killswitch remotely is already there. Drive with a cellphone that just so happens to be linked to the car...yeah...sorry about your data! Then there's the whole auto-driver function that could be turned on from afar...they're already doing it now, so let's give a trustworthy adversary those tools! No, it's insidious and people really need to wake up because this...is what Rush warned us about. Yeah, the Canadian band Rush.

DrMaddVibe wrote:

So, I tax credit only barely qualifies as a subsidy - but it does. Remember this is money off of your income tax. So you pay less - no one gives you anything.

I just wish I had gotten it.

Brewha wrote:

If we follow your clever little plan of not embracing EVs then China - who is already far ahead of us - WILL own the market in years to come. That is the risk to our economy.

The risk you see because of materials is fallacious.

Brewha wrote:

don't you know sarcasm when you read it?

Brewha wrote: