You are right but I can't in good conscience like the post because it is sad.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
President Trump Gives Kudos To Tesla's Elon Musk At Recent Event
- Thread starter TMC Staff
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Elon Musk SpaceX Tesla Inc.
Leeclanual
Member
Leeclanual
Member
We officially have a blizzard... lots of snowflakes flying around.
It really doesn't matter which side of the fence you're on: Tesla is good for America. Period. Creating jobs in America, saving the environment while building kickass cars.
If we play our cards right, get some quality control issues dealt with (paint, panel gap) there's no reason why we couldn't take the crown from the germans/europeans in car manufacturing.
And overall I think it's a very powerfull message that Tesla is showing the world: Sustainable energy does NOT have to mean sacrifice, inconvenience and decline.
If we play our cards right, get some quality control issues dealt with (paint, panel gap) there's no reason why we couldn't take the crown from the germans/europeans in car manufacturing.
And overall I think it's a very powerfull message that Tesla is showing the world: Sustainable energy does NOT have to mean sacrifice, inconvenience and decline.
I don't really understand the position many conservatives have taken towards global warming. Just from a risk point of view, I imagine most conservatives (even if they love Tesla and are firm believers) would never bet everything on it - surely their entire life savings, kids' college funds, and their retirements funds are not all 100% Tesla? I suspect instead most hedge their bets just in case they are wrong about Tesla or if the unthinkable happens and Elon is run over by a cybertruck. But getting to my point, ignoring the implications of global warming is a giant risk. We have a massive number of analysts (ie. scientists) that have done the research and made predictions of the direction and impact global warming will have, and yeah, certainly they could be wrong. But the risk-reward calculation that these conservatives are making baffles me.
If they are right that humans have nothing to do with global warming and yet we proceed down the path of renewable energy and CO2 reduction, we really have just spent the money and effort early (I don't see it as wasted because surely alternative energy has to happen eventually - fossil fuels are not infinite???). But if they are wrong and the scientists are right about the climate direction, and yet we still do nothing to change the current trajectory, the cost and impact to our entire society is huge and lasting. I don't understand how investors (ie. voters) and their leaders are comfortable betting the lives of future generations given the vast amount of evidence contrary to their opinions. The comment about scientific consensus alternating between warming and cooling every couple of decades is simply not based in reality, but just like the stock market where you might be able to cherry pick a few datapoints to support any position, if you are in this for the long run, the whole picture needs to be evaluated and the risks mitigated. Looking at it this way, it is more like insurance - maybe you don't need it, but the cost if you don't have it could be catastrophic. And even better than insurance, you also get some side benefits from reduced pollution, less reliance on unstable parts of the world, and maybe even a better experience while driving to work.
Last edited:
Well this thread went exactly the way anyone would have predicted.
The left miss characterizes the right.
It is not a disregard for the planet but rather a disregard for the scare tactics and hypocrisy.
The left has been telling us 10 more years for 30 years and algore(deliberate) literally invented flying private planes to climate change conferences.
I bought an aluminum roof, air source heat pumps and a Tesla in the last few years as my major green purchases. The heat pumps I am basically at the cold limit of being able to get by on.
A raging leftist friend who is all in for Bernie and makes the same money I do drives a F150 and keeps trying to find a way to get taxpayers to buy him a car. He was looking at hydrogen till he realized Cali was the nearest fill station, we are in WI.
You want to change people's minds do send Greta by boat so her crew has to take a plane back home, and don't take fake pictures of her sitting on the floor with garbage when she has a first class seat. Have her lead groups of kids picking up trash and teaching them to use vinegar as a weed killing in the garden. Lead my example not hypocrisy
It is not a disregard for the planet but rather a disregard for the scare tactics and hypocrisy.
The left has been telling us 10 more years for 30 years and algore(deliberate) literally invented flying private planes to climate change conferences.
I bought an aluminum roof, air source heat pumps and a Tesla in the last few years as my major green purchases. The heat pumps I am basically at the cold limit of being able to get by on.
A raging leftist friend who is all in for Bernie and makes the same money I do drives a F150 and keeps trying to find a way to get taxpayers to buy him a car. He was looking at hydrogen till he realized Cali was the nearest fill station, we are in WI.
You want to change people's minds do send Greta by boat so her crew has to take a plane back home, and don't take fake pictures of her sitting on the floor with garbage when she has a first class seat. Have her lead groups of kids picking up trash and teaching them to use vinegar as a weed killing in the garden. Lead my example not hypocrisy
lowtek
Active Member
Perhaps your talking to the wrong conservatives ... or is this the typical leftist ignorant presumption that conservatives blindly follow their representatives and Hollywood twitter accounts like you guys?
larmor
Active Member
The orange one also mentioned that Elon owes him-- why because spacex works with NASA. There is that pesky expectation.
Also, mentioned elon and spacex but nothing about EV cars, presumably d/t base centered on traditional ICE auto manufacturers.
Also, mentioned elon and spacex but nothing about EV cars, presumably d/t base centered on traditional ICE auto manufacturers.
The DNC gave up on EVs already. It's too hard to fight their moral high ground and piety. Plus they block everything. Not to mention supporting EVs mostly supports American companies, Tesla and GM. American companies are not worthy of EV funding.
In California they are pushing H2 cars which run on petrofuel and are dirtier than Prius Hybrids.
Last edited:
lowtek
Active Member
Perfect! Continue that trend of disrespect towards your president .. way to keep the lines clearly divided son! What page of the left-tard rulebook is this from?
larmor
Active Member
True, no one on the DNC is supporting EVs except California, which dealt with smog. And California is so close to America.
In California, they capped our lifetime EV rebates to 2, reduced the HOV sticker life, created an EV specific tax, put income limits on assistance, and removed support for EVSE installs.
Been in CA in EVs since 2012 and watched the gov't activities. The 2016 election made it fair game to attenuate EV support. Now they blame CA decisions on the POTUS.
Note that CA is the Big Dog in DC. Whatever they want they get. Why do you think most of the impeachment efforts comes CA? We have fought all decisions by the POTUS, whether they benefit our state or not.
I think you might be misinformed on California's EV support.
- The CVRP continues to exist. California is one of only 8 states that have an EV rebate program in place. It is currently funded with over $40MM. Incentives are intended to incentivize people to make a change. If someone is already buying their third EV, I think the incentive has worked. As a point of note - I only applied for one rebate, with my Model S. I didn't apply with my Model X, because I don't believe that I should be incentivized to buy something I'd have already bought. And given that it's a finite coffer, I would rather see that money actually incentivize another person to move to an EV.
- Your "income limits on assistance" is answered by the above. If you've got the income limits they've set out ($150k for single, $300k for joint), that incentive is quite unlikely to matter much in your decision process. However, that rebate matters a lot to people in income brackets well below that number. It's simple economics.
- Your "EV specific tax" is a very small registration fee (one-time $100, followed by a reduced number down to $25 based on the price of the vehicle) that is intended to cover a small portion of the lost revenue from gas taxes. We use the roads, we need to pay. Until there's a per mile based program implemented like the California Road Charge Program (which I piloted), it's a minor way to pay for our share. And it's significantly lower than an ICE.
- HOV sticker life - two things. First, California has a lot of EV penetration. HOV lanes are intended to increase throughput of people over a space of roadway. We cannot continue to give EVs a free ride in the HOV lane at the cost of moving people. Yet EVs still get this benefit for a period of time, so it's still an incentive.
Huh. I guessed I missed California lobbying for extension of Fed EV credit for Tesla.
All California gov't EV incentives have been attenuated in one way or another.
I've bought 5 EVs for our family of 5 drivers. We are past our incentives. Obviously I don't make $150k, yet pay for 3 college tuitions with no gov't assist. That's not as easy as it looks.
All California gov't EV incentives have been attenuated in one way or another.
I've bought 5 EVs for our family of 5 drivers. We are past our incentives. Obviously I don't make $150k, yet pay for 3 college tuitions with no gov't assist. That's not as easy as it looks.
Be careful moving the goalposts here. I answered your claims above. If you disagree, you can address those, or can concur. Happy to move on afterwards.
Exactly. Even Reagan who did not believe there was a problem with the ozone layer and CFC's was smart enough to acknowledge it was cheap insurance to ban them just in case.
A lot of good things still happen if you act as if the scientist are right about climate change - and they are wrong. If you act as if they are wrong and they end up being right the consequence is catastrophic.
Similar threads
