You clearly don’t get it because of the privileged position you are in.
I fully get it because I'm only in the privileged position I'm in for reasons I understand. I wasn't always it this position. One of the reasons we bought a Roadster was because the stock market had been very good to my company and I had stock options. We realized that if
we, who understood the importance and had the means at the time, didn't buy one to jump start the path to sustainable transportation, who would?
History has shown that decision to have been spot on.
97% of the country cannot afford a $50K+ EV nor the $20K+ solar system required to charge it, nor the $300K+ property ownehship entry point to facilitate the solar system.
We pretty much agree here. A lot of people can't or shouldn't pay that much for a car or PV.
- New technology don't start out cheap. We've seen that with computers, cellphones, TVs, stereos, phonographs, cars, internet connection, etc. It takes forcing functions to drive the sales volumes to achieve the necessary economies of scale to make them more affordable so the masses can benefit from them.
I think the difference is our approach to dealing with it.
- If folks who can afford a $50K EV + PV don't do so, there never will be a $20K EV (see explanation below).
- As far as the PV goes, the labor is a big part of it's cost and that's tougher to deal with. The only way to make it much cheaper is to pay the labor less which, of course, means more people who can't afford it. One must be smarter here since brute force won't work and, while financially beneficial, the payoff is slow. This is why I point out how, because it provides cheaper electricity, with creative financing, homeowners with long-term views can easily do it. Although it is a lot slower and more complicated, renters can do it as well if they bias their searches for places with PV. Because of the desire by most investors (upon whom they depend) for quick returns on their investments it will take a lot longer for them than homeowners.
I agree somewhat about the 97% (we disagree in that I believe it is more like 75% that can't and 80% of those who can won't because they'd prefer to get the latest bigger-screen TV or a new, expensive luxury ICE every few years) can't afford an ICE car
Owning and driving an ICE vehicle is simply less expensive any way you slice it. And yes; some people HAVE to have gas because of the barriers (plural) to entry.
We agree here too. Just, perhaps not on the number who HAVE to, the ramifications toward the future, and how to break down those barriers or how high they are to how many.
Unfortunately, if you look at the future: owning and driving an ICE vehicle is and will continue to get more expensive. At some point in the not-too-distant future that 75% (or your 97%) will be in very bad shape.
Rather than defeatedly saying nothing will change, as you seem to prefer, I prefer to look for a solution. There are solutions and I'm trying to share them. Perhaps a few more who can, will buy an EV instead of an expensive Lexus, BMW, Audi, or MBZ ICE.
If those who can afford EVs and PV do, prices will decrease, enabling more to be able to afford them, just decreasing prices further. To speed up the process (or maybe even make it happen in time) it will (or did) take compelling cars that will motivate folks that 80% who wouldn't be willing to give up other things in order to do so, to do so. As EV and PV prices decrease, that 75% (or your 97%) will decrease, prices will decrease further, thus enabling even more to afford EVs.
This is a virtuous cycle that certainly beats giving up.
