• Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      2 months ago

      If only they actually would die on that hill. They won’t, because they’ve conditioned their base to support them no matter what. Instead, they’ll rot the hill and move on to the next once the one they’re on can’t be salvaged.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Yeah, I don’t get it. I understand wanting to reduce or eliminate subsidies (they’re just a cash handout to dealers and manufacturers imo), but there’s no logical reason to be against EVs.

      Here’s my proposal: allow tax credits for private sales. Perhaps add some requirements to certify that the seller owned the car more than a year or something to qualify to prevent flipping.

      • The Assman@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        2 months ago

        they’re just a cash handout to dealers and manufacturers imo

        The US government subsidized $750B for the oil industry in 2022. The EV tax credit amount to peanuts compared to that. If you want a green energy and green transportation industry in the US, subsidies are absolutely necessary.

      • Etterra@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        2 months ago

        Their oil interest overlords are giving them their marching orders; it has nothing to do with logic (as usual) and everything to do with greed.

      • Treczoks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 months ago

        but there’s no logical reason to be against EVs.

        There is, if you get paid by the Koch mafia.

      • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Here is my reasonable argument against EVs. EVs only really solve the emissions part of the equation. They dont solve the massive amounts of paved surface, private ownership of thousands of pounds of steel and plastic, they still use massive amounts of energy to move that steel and plastic and building cities for cars is largely ineffecient and expensive to maintain.

        We could do a lot more for the environment than EVs. Id rather see their subsidies go to things like electrified transit, cycling infrastructure or walkability improvements.

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        There’s already a solid market for used cars, unless you mean EVs, so no use for an incentive there.

        The point of an incentive is a temporary tool to accelerate the transition to less polluting technology. While EVs are new they naturally are more expensive, there’s temptation to import from cheaper countries, but the incentive makes them less expensive to buy, plus incents growth of local industry. I’d also vote to phase out the incentive after that transition has happened: fossil fuel incentives should have been gone half a century ago.

        If you’re specifically talking the used EV market, the most important factor is time. The more new EVs there are, the better the used EV market will be in a few years. It doesn’t help to try to increase sales of used EVs when there are so few. If you are looking used, please be patient: let’s do what we can to accelerate the growth of new EVs, and one of the benefits will be a strong used market in a gpfew years

      • Resonosity@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Don’t forget that subsidies also swing in the other direction to fossil fuels companies. If we want to eliminate subsidies, then why not for both players so the playing field is even again? Otherwise, giving EVs subsidies might actually level the playing field more than not.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I absolutely agree! I think we should eliminate fossil fuel subsidies, increase taxes on roads so road users (not income taxes) fully fund them, etc.

          But if we’re going to subsidize used cars, it should apply to the private market and not just the dealerships.

      • theyoyomaster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        There is a logical reason to be against forced adoption before the technology matures. For a lot of the country they are not a viable replacement for ICE yet. They’re improving, but not as fast as ICEs are being phased out and that leaves a lot of places where a dwindling used market will be the only option for many people.