Quote:
Originally Posted by #-3
Oh no, it's a very real $5000.
You see, what we have is this model of collective decision making, where we agree that it would be good if we pick winners and losers to ensure that up and coming industries with roughly 1/3 of of the externalized societal cost have the opportunity to thrive against entrenched legacy industries that have offloaded a bunch of hidden costs on society, so that eventually the lower impact industry can grow and compete head to head. (we call it government, and sometimes it is there job to pick winners and losers).
|
That's all fine, I just don't feel that if you are directly comprising the cost of 2 things, you should interlude taxpayer funded rebates to make the numbers match. If you want to make the statement "EV's have reached cost parity with ICE vehicles"I feel like that should be free of rebates.
I also don't really agree with rebates as structured. The only people who can afford an EV are the well off, so people who can't afford them have their tax dollars handed to people wealthier than them. I'd like to see rebates go away for anything over $30k.
If the goal is to reduce emissions as much as possible while adopting a limited amount of EV's, it makes far more sense to target the largest users, not the ones who drive a short distance every day. But that would mean giving money to businesses who put on lots of miles, and transit.