Posted on 02/27/2023 5:32:09 AM PST by MtnClimber
But the reason is always the same....follow the money...
First they came for the cars.
Now that apparently they are going to succeed in getting ICE vehicles off the road, they are moving on to what you eat.
I mark the transition back when someone decided that all toilets had to have reduced water usage, which I called at the time the 55 MPH toilet, since they came out about the same time. The Federal rule is 1.6 gallons per flush and older models would use up to 3.5 gallons.
This edict passed through with a minimum of resistance and it paved the way for all the other mandates and rules without citizen input.
The next rule will be rationing of gas and electricity.
What is behind the push? My guess is that ev manufacturers made lucrative deals with the govenrment, and co tribute heavily to the gov, and wanted the gov to mandate electric only so that they could profit big time just like Pfizer, Moderna, etc did
The push has absolutely nothing to do with the environment, or the climate, that is for sure- so the only other possible answer for the asinine push is $$
FACT: Artic ice borings going back over a hundred thousand years show climate change is constant!... Temps up, down...up, down...up, down...forever on earth....
AND WHERE WERE THE CARS????
Until the ICE cars are off the road. Then they will discuss it, to get the EVs off the road, and say "goodbye" to all forms of personal transportation, except for bicycles.
Exactly.
Leftists always wanted to push the population to the cities. hey have never approved of the suburban way of life and the freedoms associated with that. They have always believed city life was utopia. Unfortunately the reality of their experiment has become obvious as Dems managed most cities. They are rife with crime, they are dirty, they have the worst schools and the highest taxes. They are easier to watch and surveil the residents, they like that.
I just watched a YouTube video over the weekend about the largest cruise ship in the world operated by Norwegian Cruise Lines.
It had multiple 16 cylinder diesel engines made in Italy.
Those engines then powered electric motors to actually drive the propellers. It was an interesting video to watch on how the ships actually run and how many people it takes.
The problem with EV’s are limited range, weight and the fact that they are NOT actually green. Only ignorant people think they are green because they have no idea where their electricity comes from.
FYI, I have a customer in Idaho Falls, ID that has a Tesla Model S Plaid. He took me for a ride in it. It is faster than a Porsche 911 Turbo. His electricity in Idaho comes mostly from hydroelectric and is cheap in comparison to most other places in our country. So, in his particular situation he MIGHT be GREEN. He still has an full size Dodge 4WD pickup to drive in the winter.
True that. But IMHO that's not related to an EV vs ICE argument, but a make-stuff-here argument. In other words, we could mine cobalt in Minnesota. The same could be said of anything else we buy. We'd probably be alarmed of how much stuff we buy is made with child labor or slave labor. A problem that could be easily remedied if the government would get out of the way and allowed stuff to be made here. That includes batteries for any product (including EV's, but that too should be a free market thing).
We shouldn't fall for the trap of having to pick a side based on an argument as the Dims create it. In other words, they create the EV vs ICE argument by trying to force EV's onto us. Instead of being pro ICE or anti-EV we should always be pro freedom and let people decide what they want to drive, and let the businesses produce what the people want.
That’s easy. It’s to control the mobility of the serfs. The owner-driven gasoline-powered vehicle gives people the ability to escape the blessings of their local government. The short range of EVs and their dependency on the government-managed power grid means the serfs will have to stay where they are, so that they can be properly managed.
It’s for their own good, you know.
The same thing that was behind the push to get rid of trolly cars and move to buses and automobiles in the 1950s - profit and the government advocating for certain politically-connected industries.
They are still inefficient because of the dead weight of the battery and long charging times. There is no practical reason for a vehicle. Only highly specialized applications.
The long-term objective is to force the proles to live in densely packed urban areas, to push them onto mass transit to get around within their assigned area, and to force them to use government-run mass transit* if they want to leave their assigned area. Show us your travel papers, comrade!
(*Between the DHS, the TSA, and vaccine mandates, yeah, all mass transit is effectively government-run now.)
The end result, obviously, is to free up large tracts of formerly exurban and rural land to become estates and villas to be handed out as rewards to loyal Party members.
I 100% agree. Which is why my wife and I have both an EV car and an ICE pickup.
Wait. How does that give us more freedom of movement? Well, for starters, being married we need 2 cars anyway. Thus instead of seeing it as a mutual exclusive decision (either EV or ICE) I saw it as mutual inclusive (we could get one of each) and have the best of both worlds. Since it was time replace her car we replaced it with an EV car. In the future when gasoline will be hard to come buy again (like it was not too long ago) and/or too expensive to use a lot (IMHO it still is), we can do most of our driving in the EV. Likewise if the Dims make power hard to come by or too expensive, we can do most of our driving in the ICE car.
Thus, we have a diversification on our energy dependencies, at least as far as transportation goes. Thus, the Dims have to restrict both sources of energy to effectively limit our movement.
Last but not least is our large solar array and home battery storage making our all-electric home almost energy independent (buying 20% of my power from the grid, the rest is free from solar, including charging the EV). The end result is my wife and I drive a lot more local driving than we used to because the miles are literally 80% free.
It’s already happening. I just heard from an old friend whose son lives in Portland. He told me of how his son was really smug about buying a Tesla — until he discovered that *charging* the blasted thing puts him way over his quota for electricity usage, and he has to pay a premium rate for all those excess kilowatts he’s consuming.
Whatever is behind it, it’s real bad
Not true. EV's are very useful in many common applications. My wife and I enjoy both our EV car and our ICE pickup. We do most of our driving in the EV (obviously not in a "highly specialized" manner). But to your point, there are times the ICE pickup is better. For example, the ICE pickup is better for pickup chores that EV trucks can't do, driving on long trips through charging deserts, or driving on a trip without my wife who wants to stop every 200 miles and walk around for 10 or 15 minutes anyway (making an EV conducive for trips with her, but the ICE pickup conducive to me stopping every 300 or 400 miles for only 5 minutes).
What you and I agree on is that EV's shouldn't be forced onto people. Don't fall for the trap of arguing based on how the Dims frame the argument (i.e. the argument is either all EV's or all ICE cars, everybody pick a side). As conservatives our argument should always be for the government to get out of the way and let each person decide what he wants in a free market.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.