- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Tax credits for electric cars are a classic income transfer to the rich - WSJ
Posted on 1/2/19 at 5:08 pm to Lima Whiskey
Posted on 1/2/19 at 5:08 pm to Lima Whiskey
quote:
Battery technology has stagnated.
Battery energy density is being improved at a rate of 5-10% per year, and costs are coming down at a similar rate. That basically means that the environmental impact of producing a battery pack for an EV with a given range is reducing at a similar rate.
quote:And we've been dealing with the same basic ICE design for a century. Even with all the billions of dollars that are spent on gasoline powered vehicles, nobody has developed something substantially better. EVs are substantially better. Fossil fuel powered transportation tech has stagnated.
We’re still dealing with the same basic technology that we developed in the 70s.
Do you know what drives tech advancement? Money. And the more EVs we get on the road, the more money there is to be made on battery tech. There is more advancement to be made with current tech, but there are many other energy storage techs in development. If we, as a country, don't encourage this development, somebody else will. Don't you want to be a leader?
quote:So? This happens with all vehicles. What's your point? In the case of EVs, dealers/manufacturers typically change out battery packs and put them on the used-car market. I really don't see your angle here.
I need to be more precise in my language. As the vehicles become less and less valuable, owners will get rid of their vehicles, rather than buy a new battery.
quote:Where are you pulling this shite from? Do you realize how many fewer moving parts EVs have compared to ICEs? Have you ever added up the maintenance costs of a vehicle? It's a lot. So with an EV, not only do you save a few cents for every single mile you drive in fuel costs (or more if you have home solar), but you save on every oil change you don't need (and the time spent getting them). ICEs have dozens or hundreds of moving parts, all of which can wear out, while electric motors have... one. Aside from the parts all cars have in common, the maintenance costs of an EV vs gas are heavily in favor of the EV, and it's not even close. Add the fuel savings on top, and a battery replacement 8 or 10 years down the road is easily paid for.
Because of the expense of replacing the battery, vehicles will depreciate more quickly, and have shorter lifetimes.
0
Posted on 1/2/19 at 5:41 pm to CleverUserName
quote:I can't imagine what it's like to live in your world. To be so engaged with what the TV man says that you feel like they're talking directly to you. To feel as if you're being talked down to, or your intelligence is being called into question, or that something is being shoved down your throat, just by turning on the TV. Must be terrible.quote:It’s called turning the tv on.
Where do you live and who do you hang out with where people are shoving shite down your throat?
quote:Is this the TV man saying all this to you, or people you know in real life? Or maybe people in your head? Can you even tell the difference?
You know who spouts off about EV pollution vs other? People that encounter smug leftists droning on and on and on about how my G37 is killing the planet and their EV is powered by a magic cord and Elon musk made it out of ocean trash and recycled oil drums.
quote:There are better ways to produce power, but I never said coal was terrible.
But coal is terrible remember.
quote:Sure, why not?
So should there be a penaly on the same pollution from nickel and lithium mines? Like cap and trade?
quote:
I know coal plants emit SO2. How? Pretty much every environmentalist in front of a microphone. However, the same said environmentalist praises EVs. And the mines emit tons of it too.
You know what they call demonizing one product and glossing over another when they do the same thing? Propaganda.
Man, you've got issues. There are tons of reasons to switch to EVs, not the least of which is energy independence. Not only as a nation, but as an individual. How great would it be if you could produce your own fuel at home? You can do that with an EV. This is something that someone with a conservative mindset should love! But you don't, because why? Propaganda. You think you're immune to it? You don't think you're targeted by propaganda?
quote:It's not possible, it's propaganda. That "study" you refer to is trash. It uses 109k miles as the Prius' useful life, and 379k for the Hummer. False. It puts all of Toyota's R&D costs into the relatively small number of Prius' produced, which is nonsensical given that the R&D is useful for many other vehicles. It ignores that the Hummer has twice as much nickel in its frame as the Prius.
And the most popular hybrid? The Prius? It’s a while. Central Connecticut University did a study that a new Toyota Prius has more overall negative impact on the environment than an H2Hummer from production to scrap.
How is that possible?
It's straight up propaganda trash, and you fell for it because you want to.
quote:
If you ever refer to buying a new car an “investment” in any form.. then you know Jack about investing.
Way to completely miss the point, while being wrong anyway. It doesn't matter if we're talking about a car or not, spending more up front for a payout later is an investment.
I think at this point it's best if we stop conversing. Considering you seemingly lack the capacity to understand what "investment" means in terms of fuel input costs and TCO, there is little chance you will grasp what it means in the context of subsidies and tech development.
Posted on 1/2/19 at 5:55 pm to goofball
quote:
studies show that total CO2 emissions from EV cars can even exceed those of conventional gas vehicles—depending on what fuel is producing the electricity to charge the batteries (coal) and how long a car battery charge lasts.
Textbook guide on how to make a statement sound scary without evidence. It could be worded like below and sound entirely different.
"studies show that total CO2 emissions from EV cars can be less than those of conventional gas vehicles—depending on what fuel is producing the electricity to charge the batteries (coal) and how long a car battery charge lasts"
This post was edited on 1/2/19 at 5:59 pm
Posted on 1/2/19 at 5:59 pm to bmy
quote:Welcome to the world of AGW """science"""
Textbook guide on how to make a statement sound scary without evidence
Posted on 1/2/19 at 6:03 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:AGW "science" is a lot more sound than the anti-EV "science".
Welcome to the world of AGW """science"""
Posted on 1/2/19 at 6:04 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Welcome to the world of AGW """science"""
Welcome to the world of """journalism""" where it's the industry standard to ignore confidence intervals and margins of error to generate those clicks
Posted on 1/2/19 at 6:07 pm to goofball
EV’s are coming baws. 10 years EV’s will be outselling internal combustion engines without subsidies.
Posted on 1/2/19 at 6:08 pm to highcotton2
quote:
quote:
Don’t frick with my Farm Tax Credit though because I love my Range Rover and Porsche Cayenne deductions!!!!!
You know that is not a specific tax credit for just farms right? Anybody that owns a business of any kind qualifies for the section 179 deduction of up to $1,000,000 in a single year for equipment.
And if it makes you feel better I doubt a Porsche Cayenne would qualify because it probably doesn’t weigh at least 6000 lb. could be wrong though.
Yes I know it isn't just limited to farms.
BUT The Porsche Cayenne is 6195 pounds!
Posted on 1/2/19 at 6:10 pm to bmy
Hahahaha
Welcome to the world of “journalism” where the curiosity required to “follow the money” evaporates when doing so would threaten the narrative.
“Confidence intervals” on shite predicted 100 years into the future
Hahaha
How stupid do you have to be to fall for that?
Welcome to the world of “journalism” where the curiosity required to “follow the money” evaporates when doing so would threaten the narrative.
“Confidence intervals” on shite predicted 100 years into the future
Hahaha
How stupid do you have to be to fall for that?
Posted on 1/2/19 at 6:23 pm to goofball
Find this on YouTube and then give an opinion.
Tony Seba: Clean Disruption - Energy & Transportation (youtube title)
Tony Seba: Clean Disruption - Energy & Transportation (youtube title)
Posted on 1/2/19 at 6:32 pm to Korkstand
quote:Sadly it isn't. You don't know how badly that pains me to say. But AGW ""science"" is, as often as not, pure crap.
AGW "science" is a lot more sound than the anti-EV "science".
This post was edited on 1/2/19 at 6:34 pm
Posted on 1/2/19 at 6:58 pm to goofball
That article is bad accounting.
The rich pay most of the taxes period.
The upper 10% pay close to 80% of all income taxes.
If the upper 10% pays less it means they just pay less, it doesn't mean that the other 90% pay more.
So it is not an income transfer.
The rich pay most of the taxes period.
The upper 10% pay close to 80% of all income taxes.
If the upper 10% pays less it means they just pay less, it doesn't mean that the other 90% pay more.
So it is not an income transfer.
Posted on 1/2/19 at 8:14 pm to gthog61
quote:
“Confidence intervals” on shite predicted 100 years into the future
It's called math
Posted on 1/2/19 at 10:53 pm to Korkstand
quote:
There are tons of reasons to switch to EVs, not the least of which is energy independence. Not only as a nation, but as an individual. How great would it be if you could produce your own fuel at home? You can do that with an EV. This is something that someone with a conservative mindset should love! But you don't, because why? Propaganda.
This.
I charge my Tesla at home and because I have PV and a solar water system my bill is $25 a month (which is the minimum customer charge). The car has 300 mile range so enough with that being an issue.
I bought the house with PV and SWH on it so no subsidies for that but I will get a $7,500 fed tax credit for 2018 from the Tesla. Do people think solar/EV is the only thing that has received or gets subsidies?? Anyway, I'm totally independent of O&G and 90% from the utility and I would think any red-blooded American would appreciate that.
This post was edited on 1/2/19 at 10:57 pm
Posted on 1/3/19 at 5:10 am to goofball
Multiple observations:
If it's a classic income transfer to the rich, then the GOP and POTUS should love it. It's what they do.
Tax credits and incentives are used to aid attract big business with giveaways.
America has done precious little to advance green energy industries. Maybe we should subsidizing companies with new and innovative technology and incentivize the consumer to purchase them.
BTW, I'm pretty Obama's auto bailout saved more jobs than Trump has come close to "saving".
If it's a classic income transfer to the rich, then the GOP and POTUS should love it. It's what they do.
Tax credits and incentives are used to aid attract big business with giveaways.
America has done precious little to advance green energy industries. Maybe we should subsidizing companies with new and innovative technology and incentivize the consumer to purchase them.
BTW, I'm pretty Obama's auto bailout saved more jobs than Trump has come close to "saving".
Posted on 1/3/19 at 5:26 am to JohnnyU
quote:Did Trump ever visit the troops?
JohnnyU
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News