Still want an EV? (NO POLITICS)

[chassis]

Originally Posted by M5Rick

Do you have a system in the US where taxpayers pay for registered disabled peoples new cars?

Not directly, to my knowledge. I have never knowingly paid specifically for a registered or "certified" disabled person's car.

I did a quick search in my state and it doesn't seem like a program as you described exists. The US does not have many programs that are comparable to those in the UK or Europe. That is a thread unto itself...!

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by chassis

Not directly, to my knowledge. I have never knowingly paid specifically for a registered or "certified" disabled person's car.

I did a quick search in my state and it doesn't seem like a program as you described exists. The US does not have many programs that are comparable to those in the UK or Europe. That is a thread unto itself...!

It's taxes which don't figure to a lot of people. Over here disability benefits are vastly increased for those that have a new car or EV free on lease on Motability with insurance and servicing thrown in paid for in full by taxes. Agreed it is a thread unto itself maybe but falls into the category of subsidising which was being discussed earlier.

[M5Rick]

With reference to the war on drivers of older fuel cars from the Mayor of London attributable partly from EV's in the capitol, hard working people who depend on their older cars to make a living being already taxed to the hilt who can't afford new EV's are crying enough and forming protests.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/ca..._home#comments

[OkieSnuffBox]

Originally Posted by RM7

Because you are a member of this society and you have a responsibility as a member. If you want to only pay for your own stuff, you need to buy your own island and pave your own roads, set up your own health care, build your EMS services, utilities, etc. There are lots of other social responsibilities. I just used that example to show that the people who are all about "I only wanna pay for my own stuff" are more than happy to spread that around when it directly benefits them, such as with health care, insurance, etc. In other words, you are ok with subsidizing stuff. No, society can't operate al la carte. But one day, we'll finally get those poor people to pay their fair share, right?

That was a pretty big leap.

People don't need an expensive EV subsidized.

I'm fine with my tax dollars paying for essential services, roads, schools, libraries, health insurance (especially this one because "preventative maintenance" care shown to be far cheaper than waiting for an issue to develop and then treating it which puts an even larger burden on the system as a whole, etc.

I think prisons should actually be reformatory and punitive. We know this is the case when you look at recidivism rates.

[G30M]

To the original question,

Yes! But so far none meet expectations

[OkieSnuffBox]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Humorous is "subsidies" are just the Government not taxing the living shit out of you (or a corporation/industry) like they really want to do. It's all just either...

I don't know if I'm misunderstanding what you're getting at.

But the literal definition of a subsidy is:

"a sum of money granted by the government or a public body to assist an industry or business so that the price of a commodity or service may remain low or competitive."

[Murf the Surf]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Where does the Govenment get its money...?

You beat me to it.

[G35POPPEDMYCHERRY]

Originally Posted by chad86tsi

In many cases, it's just taking money out on one persons pocket, and putting into another's pocket. Depending on the year, some 50% of all citizens pay zero federal tax, yet we all get to use federal subsidized resources/benefits. There are people that literally don't pay their share.

I'm Ok with indigent people not paying, but 50% are not indigent. All that federal money comes from somewhere, and it seems it's not all of us.

[G35POPPEDMYCHERRY]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Where does the Govenment get its money...?

don't waste your breath


people think the government shits gold and doesn't rob us blind

its a moral argument never supported by logic or dollars

[OkieSnuffBox]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Where does the Govenment get its money...?

Yeah, that was my whole point. Because you said subsidies are so the government doesn't tax the living shit out of you.

[OkieSnuffBox]

Originally Posted by G35POPPEDMYCHERRY

don't waste your breath


people think the government shits gold and doesn't rob us blind

its a moral argument never supported by logic or dollars

He's the one who said subsidies are so the government doesn't tax you more.

*facepalm*

[OkieSnuffBox]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

If you look into it, the Govenment subsidies mostly come in the form of tax breaks. Since the Govenment SETS the tax rates on industry, a subsidy is just a lower tax rate. But since the Govenment sets the tax rate, it's just all BS. The Govenment isn't subsidizing anything, it's just taking less of a cut (i.e. it's just all ether - BS).

Humorous.

Whether a specific industry pays less tax than another, or pays the same as the standard gets some of it back, that's still a subsidy. It's 6 of one, half of a dozen of the other.

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by OkieSnuffBox

Whether a specific industry pays less tax than another, or pays the same as the standard gets some of it back, that's still a subsidy. It's 6 of one, half of a dozen of the other.

So like if you owned a grocery store in Brooklyn in 1958 and a mob guy says look we normally collect $500 a month from you but because we’d like you and your Italian we’re only going to collect $300 a month from you from now on in in your eyes, that’s a subsidy?

[OkieSnuffBox]

Originally Posted by Patton250

So like if you owned a grocery store in Brooklyn in 1958 and a mob guy says look we normally collect $500 a month from you but because we’d like you and your Italian we’re only going to collect $300 a month from you from now on in in your eyes, that’s a subsidy?

That doesn't make any sense. That's just theft.

Lets say the standard corporate tax for EVERY business is 20%.

If we take one industry and only charge them 10%, that's effectively helping that industry make their product cheaper. I don't see it as any different as still charging them 20%, then giving them back 10%.

Either way, we've probably derailed this one enough.

[RichF90M5C]

The EU have just announced a u-turn, and that ICE cars WILL continue to be made after 2035, however, will run on synthetic fuels. Expect many more announcements in the coming months/ years, as they realise EV is most definitely not the way forward.

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

But the Govenment is the entity that "sets the standard". Subsidy is just a made up concept. The Govenment is just charging less to let a company conduct business in its industry. If there was no Govenment collecting taxes, there would be no such thing as subsidies. In your example of a 20% standard, if the Govenment decides to raise the standard to 30%, that's the opposite of the concept you believe is a "subsidy". So what do you call a 10% tax increase on an industry? What's the opposite of a subsidy?

My well thought out and written example flew right over his head but I like your explanation also. Welfare is a subsidy. Charging an individual, a company, or a corporation less taxes is NOT a subsidy. He doesn’t seem to be able to understand this. But this is how half our government and all the media has trained the masses over the last 50 years. How else could they say that even know the top 10 percent of income earners pay well over 50% of all taxes they still are not paying their fair share? Absolutely laughable yet people believe it.

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

I liked your Mob themed response to explain it, it was prefectly clear, and was going to go that way too. After reading his reaction to your post I'm glad I didn't go with the Mob protection example. I responded to your post last night but took it down earlier this morning. It was a toung in cheek comment in Mob English about just breaking one's foot vs. breaking his leg. I thought I'd get called racist, so I took it off the thread. Lol.

I'm hoping my last post gets it to sink in. I guess it's just the difference between being educated to learn and regurgitate facts, vs. being educated how to learn to think.

Absolutely. It’s emotion vs. logic and understanding.

[Alfisti]

Synthetic fuels are not gonna work, way, way too expensive.

I keep saying it, the solution where "everyone wins" is they allow PHEV's. This way those who simply cannot use a full blown EV have something to buy and a at the same time the governments can claim they are "all electric". This is what has happened in Canada and I can see it happening elsewhere.

PHEV's will retain a good chunk of the market.

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by Alfisti

Synthetic fuels are not gonna work, way, way too expensive.

I keep saying it, the solution where "everyone wins" is they allow PHEV's. This way those who simply cannot use a full blown EV have something to buy and a at the same time the governments can claim they are "all electric". This is what has happened in Canada and I can see it happening elsewhere.

PHEV's will retain a good chunk of the market.

That definitely can be a great solution until they can create the infrastructure (tens of thousands of more charging stations) to support EV cars and also improve upon technology for these vehicles as far as charging time and distance. I think you have a good idea. Also, just save face on the part of the people that are pushing this so hard, they should probably create more nuclear power plants to produce all this electricity, so we are not just creating carbon emissions somewhere else and try to hide it in EV’s.

[G35POPPEDMYCHERRY]

I heard its gunna rain after 2035

[kyriian]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

My opinion on the ideal solution is a series hybrid EV (SPHEV) like the Chevy Volt, or just a series hybrid. Develop a special tuned ICE for max combustion efficiency and light weight since it is not connected to the drive wheels. Better yet make it diesel so it can run on all different mixes of diesel fuel, from crude to Micky D's fries oil. It would need a small battery for peak energy needs, but you get a much lighter vehicle, efficient burn of carbon fuel with more energy going to the tire contact patch vs. waste heat. And no loss of range in the wintertime along with free cabin heat.

This supports the natural slow growth of the electrical grid, doesn’t upset the petrochemical industry, and keeps jet fuel and heating oil at a reasonable price. But what do I know? I'm not a politician...

You make sense, its why it will never happen

But 2035 though

[fazelove23]

hydrogen powered cars will be the future i'd bet