Sorry an S doesn't meet the definition you made up. A corvette defeats the purpose of a sports car, because I said so. At least the S is faster on the street.

Do you truly not understand the clear difference between being anti-EV and being opposed to the Govt picking winners and losers, while we all get to pay for it?

BoerneGator said:

---

Do you truly not understand the clear difference between being anti-EV and being opposed to the Govt picking winners and losers, while we all get to pay for it?

---

No. they don't.

Solyndra was their winner.

BoerneGator said:

---

Do you truly not understand the clear difference between being anti-EV and being opposed to the Govt picking winners and losers, while we all get to pay for it?

---

Yes. But she didn't make that argument. She didn't say she had no technical issues with EV's but just hates the tax credits. She made an absurd comparison to electric golf carts and other drivel.

aggiehawg said:

---

BoerneGator said:

---

Do you truly not understand the clear difference between being anti-EV and being opposed to the Govt picking winners and losers, while we all get to pay for it?

---

No. they don't.

Solyndra was their winner.

---

The same loan Solyndra defaulted on saved Tesla, which now has a $900,000,000,000 marker cap, I think the loans paid off.

And now the same government is out for blood regarding Tesla because they are non-union and their owner is pro free speech.

Teslag said:

---

BoerneGator said:

---

Do you truly not understand the clear difference between being anti-EV and being opposed to the Govt picking winners and losers, while we all get to pay for it?

---

Yes. But she didn't make that argument. She didn't say she had no technical issues with EV's but just hates the tax credits. She made an absurd comparison to electric golf carts and other drivel.

---

I'm not here to defend the Grand Dame, aggiehawg. She doesn't need it, and she's more than capable anyway.

But she started a discussion four months ago now that has evolved and covered every aspect of the subject. Her original post was rather light-hearted, and focused primarily upon the ever unreliable and changing battery technology. Others have expounded upon that and the environmental and moral issues that plague it (and therefore ALL of us). You're simply being obtuse and snarky, and it's become tiresome.

Americans do not object to variety in the marketplace. We do object to blatant "rigging" and forced choices. Who voted for the elimination of ICEs?

Try to stick to the cogent arguments and resist the temptation for the cheap shots. It's not helping your cause.

Teslag said:

---

And now the same government is out for blood regarding Tesla because they are non-union and their owner is pro free speech.

---

The new EV credits are very pro Tesla. The absolute best (non Tesla or Porsche) EV, the Ioniq 5 is getting basically a $15,000 price swing compared to the Model Y.

GAC06 said:

---

Sorry an S doesn't meet the definition you made up. A corvette defeats the purpose of a sports car, because I said so. At least the S is faster on the street.

---

Ah so triggered bc someone bought a vette. Now I get it.

IslanderAg04 said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

Sorry an S doesn't meet the definition you made up. A corvette defeats the purpose of a sports car, because I said so. At least the S is faster on the street.

---

Ah so triggered bc someone bought a vette. Now I get it.

---

So triggered because the vette is slower than a Plaid for all "practical" purposes.

IslanderAg04 said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

Sorry an S doesn't meet the definition you made up. A corvette defeats the purpose of a sports car, because I said so. At least the S is faster on the street.

---

Ah so triggered bc someone bought a vette. Now I get it.

---

Yeah dude. Very triggered you bought a vette.

BoerneGator said:

---

Teslag said:

---

BoerneGator said:

---

Do you truly not understand the clear difference between being anti-EV and being opposed to the Govt picking winners and losers, while we all get to pay for it?

---

Yes. But she didn't make that argument. She didn't say she had no technical issues with EV's but just hates the tax credits. She made an absurd comparison to electric golf carts and other drivel.

---

I'm not here to defend the Grand Dame, aggiehawg. She doesn't need it, and she's more than capable anyway.

But she started a discussion four months ago now that has evolved and covered every aspect of the subject. Her original post was rather light-hearted, and focused primarily upon the ever unreliable and changing battery technology. Others have expounded upon that and the environmental and moral issues that plague it (and therefore ALL of us). You're simply being obtuse and snarky, and it's become tiresome.

Americans do not object to variety in the marketplace. We do object to blatant "rigging" and forced choices. Who voted for the elimination of ICEs?

Try to stick to the cogent arguments and resist the temptation for the cheap shots. It's not helping your cause.

---

Thanks.

You got it. I was saying that battery tech was not there yet.

I also started a thread about crypto that posters became unhinged over.

Except that for many drivers and owners the battery tech is unquestionably "there":

Teslag said:

---

Except that for many drivers and owners the battery tech is unquestionably "there":

---

I will be long dead when that happens. You promised 15years for battery life right?

Teslag said:

---

Except that for many drivers and owners the battery tech is unquestionably "there":

---

Except, it ignores the various and sundry accumulated "costs" to those of us not using it for one reason or a dozen. That's the part that irks me. People who can afford an $80,000 Tesla don't deserve the huge financial subsidies they've benefited from. You simply ignore the elephant in the room as you thumb your nose at the rest of us. It contributes to the chasm that separates the Left and Right in America.

At the time of Hawg's post Tesla received no federal tax credit. Additionally, many Teslas won't qualify for them when they restart in 2023 as the max price for rebate for sedans will be $55k.

I also don't support any tax credits for EVs. They aren't necessary as illustrated by current demand.

What is your point defending Tesla? They've (and thus you) have already been heavily subsidized, at the expense of the rest of us. Meanwhile, it persists apace for the rest of the industry. Quit alibiing for it. It's pathetic.

BoerneGator said:

---

What is your point defending Tesla? They've (and thus you) have already been heavily subsidized, at the expense of the rest of us. Meanwhile, it persists apace for the rest of the industry. Quit alibiing for it. It's pathetic.

---

What US automaker hasn't been heavily subsidized?

Manhattan said:

---

BoerneGator said:

---

What is your point defending Tesla? They've (and thus you) have already been heavily subsidized, at the expense of the rest of us. Meanwhile, it persists apace for the rest of the industry. Quit alibiing for it. It's pathetic.

---

What US automaker hasn't been heavily subsidized?

---

Well, that's another thread. I was referring to EV subsidies, or broader, Green subsidies in general. Part n parcel to the same can of worms.

BoerneGator said:

---

What is your point defending Tesla? They've (and thus you) have already been heavily subsidized, at the expense of the rest of us. Meanwhile, it persists apace for the rest of the industry. Quit alibiing for it. It's pathetic.

---

I also have a Chevy diesel. They received more in bailouts than Musk could ever dream of and their stockholders were screwed over in a gift to the UAW.

BoerneGator said:

---

Manhattan said:

---

BoerneGator said:

---

What is your point defending Tesla? They've (and thus you) have already been heavily subsidized, at the expense of the rest of us. Meanwhile, it persists apace for the rest of the industry. Quit alibiing for it. It's pathetic.

---

What US automaker hasn't been heavily subsidized?

---

Well, that's another thread. I was referring to EV subsidies, or broader, Green subsidies in general. Part n parcel to the same can of worms.

---

But people haven't being buying Teslas with tax credits for 5 years now. The vehicles stand on their own.

Stockholders were screwed over by GM going bankrupt…

But, but, but…respond to the arguments, or admit you have no defense (that's the logical conclusion). This is child-like.

Your "arguments" are all over the place:

Manhattan said:

---

Stockholders were screwed over by GM going bankrupt…

---

And Obama handing the carcass to the unions.

His gal/tool Mary Barra is all in on EV's still, even if the 'car of the future' is now ancient history. Just another failed huge battery that is now essentially impossible to find/replace in a car ($20K? $35K?)

I wonder if someone could design a long range battery trailer for EV. Basically a light trailer with a big ass EV plug that is a rolling battery with brake lights. Maybe you can charge it separately.

My guess is people who would buy an EV are generally not the same people who could deal with a trailer or would need the extra range provided by one, and I guess it would take that much longer to charge along with the car, and be a pain to park with.

Maybe you do them like U-hauls. One way rentals on the highway between major drop off points. You rent, go long distance, the drop it off at the destination, where it is rented for the return trip by someone else?

MouthBQ98 said:

---

I wonder if someone could design a long range battery trailer for EV. Basically a light trailer with a big ass EV plug that is a rolling battery with brake lights. Maybe you can charge it separately.

My guess is people who would buy an EV are generally not the same people who could deal with a trailer or would need the extra range provided by one, and I guess it would take that much longer to charge along with the car, and be a pain to park with.

Maybe you do them like U-hauls. One way rentals on the highway between major drop off points. You rent, go long distance, the drop it off at the destination, where it is rented for the return trip by someone else?

---

Yeah, people are working on it I think. For highway/long trips it's an interesting idea, or as a 30 mile range extender, yet…it begs the question why it is needed regularly and if we want more people commuting with a trailer in tow daily.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

I wonder if someone could design a long range battery trailer for EV. Basically a light trailer with a big ass EV plug that is a rolling battery with brake lights. Maybe you can charge it separately.

My guess is people who would buy an EV are generally not the same people who could deal with a trailer or would need the extra range provided by one, and I guess it would take that much longer to charge along with the car, and be a pain to park with.

Maybe you do them like U-hauls. One way rentals on the highway between major drop off points. You rent, go long distance, the drop it off at the destination, where it is rented for the return trip by someone else?

---

The thought of the average EV driver pulling a trailer is hilarious. The majority of those people would have no clue where to even start getting it hooked up. Imagine how long those trailer fires would burn for every time one of those betas wrecks one.

Don't get me wrong, I like idea, but the execution of it would be an unmitigated disaster.

Put cameras on them. Upload results to internet channel. Profit.

Reality of EVs for lots of Texas drivers.

Battery powered EV's just don't make a lot of sense for towing and I don't see a technology where it ever makes sense.

The battery pack needn't be on a trailer...why not toss it in the boot?

E-car owners are unhappy about coming tax changes (and privacy)…just another long term reason, re: OP.

Quote:

---

The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, passed with bipartisan support last year, authorized the Department of Transportation to launch new pilot programs to test ways to collect necessary fees. These include a range of high-tech means such as accessing location data from third-party on-vehicle diagnostic devices, smart phone applications, telemetric data collected by automakers, motor vehicle data obtained by car insurance companies, data obtained from fueling stations, and "any other method that the Secretary considers appropriate."

"Location data" that is, information about where people are and where they've been "is highly sensitive," said Lee Tien, legislative director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit that defends civil liberties in cyberspace. It can reveal "what they do, who they're with, where they worship, what medical procedures they're having."

While the infrastructure act authorizes a pilot program to test collecting the personal information needed to charge drivers for their use of roads and highways, it doesn't answer the far thornier questions about how to protect that data. Will only the feds track drivers? Will each state and locality that currently depends on fuel taxes also monitor drivers? If so, will the data be pooled? Will destinations be tracked along with mileage?

---

Quote:

---

At Capitol Hill hearings last year, witnesses assured lawmakers that threats to privacy could be overcome. Peter J. Basso, chair of the Mileage-Based User Fee Alliance said, "The pilots are showing the technical viability of a mileage-based system," and are showing how to address questions of "protection of personal privacy" and "data security."

But privacy experts such as Theodore Claypoole, an Atlanta lawyer who edits the "HeyDataData" blog, cautions that concerns might increase if such tracking becomes universal.

He said a lot of people do understand they are less anonymous on the road than they used to be. Cars these days come default-set to gather and horde data on their drivers. What app doesn't reveal its users' geo-locations? Insurance companies place bugs in some cars to tell what kind of drivers we are. Every day we are stalked by the Billion-Byte Beast, and yet we remain relatively blas about it. But gathering information on our driving for tax purposes is something different, says Claypoole. It's the federal government, not businesses, hoovering up our sensitive information. Do we find this more frightening, or less so?

Similarly, once it used to be difficult to collect comprehensive information about someone's movements. It might take a team of field agents the FBI has traditionally used five cars to tail a single suspect in an automobile. Surveillance used to have what privacy scholars call "high transaction costs." Those costs served as a protection of one's privacy.

---

Does anyone really think the state won't over time become like the VA with confidential health data, or California with gun owner databases, in terms of being more of a data hog than promised and also sloppy at best in security of the data?

Further to the point, a lot of this is of course based on cell phone metrics so…it will impact all of us also, not just EV owners as states are allowed to dig further and further into this for…tax purposes. And make no mistake, a 'road tax' is not a final measure; the lefty goal would eventually be to tax people for sidewalk usage ordering the wrong foods at the grocery store (beef, for instance), etc.

"Any other method that the secretary finds appropriate" is not the kind of language the founders would have used.

The least intrusive would be by mileage at registration. Of course the problem would be people tend to not have cash on hand to pay a whole year of gas/road tax at once. And tampering would be a problem. And there's a sizable portion of the population that just drives around with paper plates. At least they pay gas tax now.

I guess they could just get "progressive" and charge it monthly by value or class or weight of the vehicle.