Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Elon Musk to advise Trump administration

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Pretty sure that his argument is that there are external factors that need to be taken into account... I'm also pretty sure you were aware of that.

That's the beauty of a Carbon Tax. Everyone pays $20, then $40, then $100/ton... let the best technology win.
Can't say that I think any tax is beautiful.
But technology isn't deciding, the government is.
I am asking a simple hypothetical question. If you care for the environment, the correct answer is: If the government says that Option C
is cleaner than option A, then I will support option C going forward.

But the answers I am getting are: Hey that option C is sketchy(even though it is a hypothetical, which is funny to try and nuance like this)

Maybe I should play the ethanol card.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: RichardC
Can't say that I think any tax is beautiful.
But technology isn't deciding, the government is.
I am asking a simple hypothetical question. If you care for the environment, the correct answer is: If the government says that Option C
is cleaner than option A, then I will support option C going forward.

But the answers I am getting are: Hey that option C is sketchy(even though it is a hypothetical, which is funny to try and nuance like this)

Maybe I should play the ethanol card.
What's the point of asking hypotheticals if they have no association to the argument? I mean, other than misdirection.
 
Maybe I should play the ethanol card.

Again... that's the 'benefit' to a Carbon Tax. EVERY source of carbon gets taxed. Good luck getting ethanol to work since most studies show it's neutral at best after you take into account fuel and fertilizer use to grow your crops...

That's WHY libertarians favor a Carbon Tax over a credit for Solar or EVs... the government isn't picking the winner... physics is. If Ethanol wins then is was the best option and more power to it.

If you don't want a Carbon Tax... AND you don't want society picking winners and losers... how to we lower CO2 emissions?
 
A doesn't pollute?? How are they charged? How is the steel produced? How are they shipped? How are the tires made?
You don't believe that it is possible to improve on a Tesla?

This is the problem with ideologues.

Where did I say anything about Tesla? Were talking about hypothetical A & B. But I suppose the fact that I charge my car from my roof doesn't make any difference for you vs. someone who burns fuel.
 
Again... that's the 'benefit' to a Carbon Tax. EVERY source of carbon gets taxed. Good luck getting ethanol to work since most studies show it's neutral at best after you take into account fuel and fertilizer use to grow your crops...

That's WHY libertarians favor a Carbon Tax over a credit for Solar or EVs... the government isn't picking the winner... physics is. If Ethanol wins then is was the best option and more power to it.

If you don't want a Carbon Tax... AND you don't want society picking winners and losers... how to we lower CO2 emissions?

As best I can read @Barklikeadog 's argument(s), carbon emissions from burning gas aren't pollution, and thus regulating them is illegal and should be illegal.

But I'm not sure of that - mostly I'm confused, and unable to figure out what is being argued for. I understand what's being argued against - government needs to stay out of picking winners and losers, and no taxes. I am unable to articulate what b.l.a.d. is for (beyond maybe status quo).
 
Musk seems to get along with Trump. Perhaps he should bring out a special The Donald edition of the first, say 1000 Model 3's. Because of the Donald Duck front looks and of course the President's first name. Have the roof painted in a hay color.

4p9ys8lbhivp_800.jpg