View Single Post
Old 09-26-2020, 12:10 PM   #114
FlyingScot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Tuftonboro and Sudbury, MA
Posts: 2,208
Thanks: 1,108
Thanked 934 Times in 576 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XCR-700 View Post
I completely agree as a positive incentive the gift of money (especially substantial amounts of money) will change peoples behavior.

But I also completely disagree that so long as the penalties are in the realm of affordable, that they will have ANY impact.

A $1200 gas guzzler tax is not going to cause a potential buyer of a $70,000 Corvette from buying their dream car and spending that money AND get the incentive to buy a Tesla 4 door EV. Its just not happening.

Nor would a $50 fertilizer use fine stop a home owner from getting the lawn they desire.

And again, for the record, I fully support EV's as a very modest gateway technology, but they have a long way to go to be clean.

And to bring this back to your point, there is very significant difference between a reasonable use fine and incentive reward program and the bazaar and inappropriate government intervention in the automotive sales/use taxation and incentive programs: Why should the government significantly tax me for something like this and egregiously reward you. Thats NOT the job of government. Its WRONG to tax me on this and gift you with my money, especially when your EV has a laundry list of cradle to grave environmental and other problems.

I guess that this is an example of a more classic view of the role of Government, as opposed to the dysfunctional government we have currently devolved into.

So in the end, dont be surprised that someone who is not personally shopping for an EV is further alienated about EV's to know that the EV buyers who brag about the incentives were gifted that money from those who were not dissuaded from buying what they wanted and suffered the gas guzzler tax. Well thats one cur buyers perspective.

And sorry the EV/gas guzzler subject keeps popping up in this thread about Winnipesaukee water quality,but it does have some bearing, if only in the larger whole world perspective.

I agree that small penalties/rewards are silly.

On fertilizer, just for example, I think people directly on the lake should not be allowed to use fertilizer that contains phosphorous. It's basically pouring a known pollutant directly into the water.

On EVs, I think the USA made a smart investment in a critical technology for the future, and now an American company is kicking the butts of our frenemies overseas. It's done this many times in the past. Some of the bets don't pay off (I'm sure we could find hundreds that fail), but some of them turn out to be the internet, GPS, cancer cures, etc.
FlyingScot is offline   Reply With Quote