Sinema stands with her fellow Democrats on social spending and climate bill. It’s a done deal.

[nevergaveitathought]

Originally Posted by WTF

You haven't followed GM and the price points of their Bolt and incoming mid size sun's.

Research before you parrot nonsense fed to you by right wing propaganda sources.

well up to your concocted nonsense already this morning?

[WTF]

Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

well up to your concocted nonsense already this morning?

Do you think a price point of 26k and a credit of 7,500 for a total cost under 20k is expensive? Targeted for the wealthy?

What you and Tiny seem oblivious to is say the cost of home computers or flat screen tv's....at one time, only the wealthy could afford them. Is that still the case? Jesus, you two should see how much your having to twist in knots ...
This from my prior post..

And they could soon get even cheaper. A proposed extension of federal EV tax credits is making its way through Congress in the so-called Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. The bill, if passed, could cut the effective base price for a five-passenger Bolt to less than $20,000 through a new $7,500 tax credit, available at the time of purchase.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by WTF

Do you think a price point of 26k and a credit of 7,500 for a total cost under 20k is expensive? Targeted for the wealthy?

What you and Tiny seem oblivious to is say the cost of home computers or flat screen tv's....at one time, only the wealthy could afford them. Is that still the case? Jesus, you two should see how much your having to twist in knots ...
This from my prior post..

And they could soon get even cheaper. A proposed extension of federal EV tax credits is making its way through Congress in the so-called Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. The bill, if passed, could cut the effective base price for a five-passenger Bolt to less than $20,000 through a new $7,500 tax credit, available at the time of purchase.

Will a buyer who makes less than the median income in the USA be able to use all of the $7500 tax credit for this $27,500 EV? And how’s it equipped compared to similarly priced ICV’s?

And yes WTF, I must agree with you, if our federal government devotes enough subsidies and tax credits to EV’s, then they will be cost competitive with ICV’s. However please note that it may require hundreds of billions of dollars in subsidies and tax incentives to do that. Spending $35 million on poor children in Florida is a much better idea.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Tiny

Will a buyer who makes less than the median income in the USA be able to use all of the $7500 tax credit for this $27,500 EV? And how’s it equipped compared to similarly priced ICV’s?

And yes WTF, I must agree with you, if our federal government hands out enough subsidies and tax credits to EV’s, then they will be cost competitive with ICV’s. However please note that it may require hundreds of billions of dollars in subsidies and tax incentives to do that. Spending $35 million on poor children in Florida is a much better idea.

nevergaveitathought said wealthy/rich buyer of EV's.

Do you think 27k is for wealthy buyers?

I was providing a counter narrative to his outdated nonsense.

Do you now want to change the narrative to , Are the poor able to afford 27k cars?

Question...Do you think the government investment and tax incentives in regards to the internet in the early days, paid off?

And I agree with you...if our government provides enough subsidies to the poor....they will be poor no more. But a one time 450 dollar payment is akin to giving a man a fish instead of teaching him how to fish. Maybe you now see the futility in DeSantis "offset".

[nevergaveitathought]

i believe my point was the subsidy favors the rich

you always and forever misstate things

thats prima facie evidence of dimocratness

and as someone who knows about being poor

the middle class and upper middle class are rich to poor people

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by WTF

nevergaveitathought said wealthy/rich buyer of EV's.

Do you think 27k is for wealthy buyers?

I was providing a counter narrative to his outdated nonsense.

Do you now want to change the narrative to , Are the poor able to afford 27k cars?

Question...Do you think the government investment and tax incentives in regards to the internet in the early days, paid off?

And I agree with you...if our government provides enough subsidies to the poor....they will be poor no more.

Well then why not give the $35 million to the poorest children in Florida instead of pumping hundreds of billions of subsidies, tax incentives and corporate welfare into EV’s? When all this money in the scheme of things is going to make almost “0” difference in worldwide carbon emissions. I thought you were concerned about the national debt? Maybe not when the pork is coming from the left side of the aisle?

I know you’re mathematically mature enough to realize that “hundreds of billions” is more than 35 million. By a factor of about 10,000.

[nevergaveitathought]

and there is more than just the ev subsidy that favors the rich in the bill

the 87,000 addl iRS agents

a good number of which will target earned income credit "abuse"

[1blackman1]

Originally Posted by Tiny

Take a look at this on inequities in ownership of EV’s based on income and race. The writer says the average income of an owner of an EV in California was $190,000. And only 4% of EV’s in Maryland have black owners, although 30% of the population is black.

Granted, you’re right, there are affordable EV’s although I’d ask if they’re as cheap as similarly equipped ICV’s. And with time more people who aren’t well off will own the vehicles

https://sciencepolicyreview.org/2021...tric-vehicles/

It’s still called choice. You can point to how many people have them. That differs greatly from who can afford them. Which was the gist of the complaint. Subsidy to the rich. Which is a falsehood. If people prefer to choose something else even when they can afford the “subsidized” vehicle that’s a choice.

Any other statements or rationales about subsidizing the wealthy is simple false and just a McConnel RNC FoxNews talking point not actually based in truth.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

i believe my point was the subsidy favors the rich

you always and forever misstate things

thats prima facie evidence of dimocratness

and as someone who knows about being poor

the middle class and upper middle class are rich to poor people

There is a cap of like 70k for eligible cars. Rich folks buy cars more expensive than 70k!

So you now admit it favors the middle class...but you call those rich because they have more money than the poor? Wtf kind of logic is that.

The ev "offset" favors the middle class. Why can't you and Tiny just admit it?

[winn dixie]

Originally Posted by 1blackman1

It’s still called choice. You can point to how many people have them. That differs greatly from who can afford them. Which was the gist of the complaint. Subsidy to the rich. Which is a falsehood. If people prefer to choose something else even when they can afford the “subsidized” vehicle that’s a choice.

Any other statements or rationales about subsidizing the wealthy is simple false and just a McConnel RNC FoxNews talking point not actually based in truth.

Oh yeah? na huh... omg wtf and lolling

[WTF]

Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

and there is more than just the ev subsidy that favors the rich in the bill

the 87,000 addl iRS agents

a good number of which will target earned income credit "abuse"

So you think taxpayers should be able to just lie about their income?

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Tiny

Well then why not give the $35 million to the poorest children in Florida instead of pumping hundreds of billions of subsidies, tax incentives and corporate welfare into EV’s? When all this money in the scheme of things is going to make almost “0” difference in worldwide carbon emissions. I thought you were concerned about the national debt? Maybe not when the pork is coming from the left side of the aisle?

I know you’re mathematically mature enough to realize that “hundreds of billions” is more than 35 million. By a factor of about 10,000.

Now you're starting to get it!

You want 35 million, I want a trillion.

They're both wrong but justifiable in partisan political eyes.

Can I compare our differences to ...Death by a thousand cuts vs Death in one fell swoop.

What is the difference?

[nevergaveitathought]

Originally Posted by WTF

So you think taxpayers should be able to just lie about their income?

well its either targeting the poor or the lower middle class then

whether anything is wrong or not

from the intimidation, you'll have poor people owning up to all kinds of things just to get the the irs off them

and the bill will reduce jobs by almost a million, thats an attack on the poor

it will also affect them healthwise

the dim party elite...leftist college graduates living in new york, washington, san francisco and environs and hollywood, living off trust funds, wall street salaries, internet ripoffs and vc's...the millionaires doing the bidding of the billionaires passing down crumbs to the unions and wannabes, protecting the facists and communists, laughing at the wal mart shoppers and flag saluters, hating free speech and people who speak free and worried about losing power

[Ducbutter]

While the expense of an EV is an issue for many buyers the real focus ought to be on the true efficiency of them to begin with. Volvo put out information concerning the manufacture of one model of vehicle produced on parallel production lines, one EV the other ICE powered. Their figures show that the EV model comes off the production line 70% dirtier than the comparable ICE powered. So the EV must be driven over 68,000 miles to reach "payback", assuming average global energy supply. I can only speculate on what that would be if you used electricity generated by coal, so I won't.
And that says nothing about the ecological costs of mining the materials needed to produce the batteries. Nor what we will do to dispose of or recycle the old batteries. Not to worry though. As with the recycling of electronics for their precious metals, the burden will be placed on the backs of poor brown and black children half a world away.
Yeah, let's all plug in! Fuckers.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by Ducbutter

While the expense of an EV is an issue for many buyers the real focus ought to be on the true efficiency of them to begin with. Volvo put out information concerning the manufacture of one model of vehicle produced on parallel production lines, one EV the other ICE powered. Their figures show that the EV model comes off the production line 70% dirtier than the comparable ICE powered. So the EV must be driven over 68,000 miles to reach "payback", assuming average global energy supply. I can only speculate on what that would be if you used electricity generated by coal, so I won't.
And that says nothing about the ecological costs of mining the materials needed to produce the batteries. Nor what we will do to dispose of or recycle the old batteries. Not to worry though. As with the recycling of electronics for their precious metals, the burden will be placed on the backs of poor brown and black children half a world away.

Great post Ducbutter. I quoted the Volvo number in this thread, but like the laboratory origin theory of COVID haven’t researched the issue as closely as you have. I’ll point out that the Volvo study didn’t take into account you might need new batteries, which I think have a 5 to 8 year warranty and a longer expected life.

And I believe the 68,000 mile crossover point is based on carbon emissions. Lithium and nickel mining, which occurs as you say half a world away, is much more destructive to the environment than oil production.