WSJ Live w/ Elon: Cybertruck will our best product ever; U.S. EV subsidies should be canned; & more....

[ÆCIII]

Elon's words in his WSJ interview were 100% spot on containing more wisdom than anything we've heard from the current through at least the past seven U.S. administrations combined.

The PHEV provisions are only a means for legacy and GM to utilize their wasted ICE powertrain and ICE automotive systems they've wastefully continued - in order to put them in an eligible car - effectively providing a way for ICE cars to 'ride' on or leverage a tax credit with just making any model a PHEV by including a 'token' sized electric motor and battery, to help them push their outdated ICE crap out the door.

This shows how truly desperate and insecure GM and legacy union auto is, because it's no secret they had operatives giving input for the language and wording of the bill.

So the EV rubber has started meeting more road, and we are finding out who truly cares about the environment, versus who are just virtue signaling and riding on identity politics sound bytes. Tesla's mission isn't political - it's for Everybody.

But when Elon gives some hard truth that a certain political party doesn't like, they have to act all butt-hurt and activate their narcissist and denial posturing. But they've so worn out any credibility that it's like the boy who cried wolf screaming with tape over his mouth - most smart people aren't trying to hear them anymore.

Trying to say that 'wasteful' or 'useless' government spending is a myth, is in the same level of delusion as saying all ICE cars are totally clean for the environment.

 

[Crissa]

there were 2 recessions after WW2 before Korea began.

Yeah, they didn't have much in the way of unemployment, so I wasn't counting them. It wasn't entirely fair. Also, I count the beginning of the Korean War as the Jiju Uprising, but that's not entirely fair to the US spending on the war.

If most everyone took a vacation at the same time, that's technically a recession even though no one would be harmed.

-Crissa

 

[Ogre]

Elon's words in his WSJ interview were 100% spot on containing more wisdom that anything we've heard from the current through at least the past seven U.S. administrations combined.

The PHEV provisions are only a means for legacy and GM to utilize their wasted ICE powertrain and ICE automotive systems they've wastefully continued - in order to put them in an eligible car - effectively provide a way for ICE cars to 'ride' on or leverage a tax credit with just making any model a PHEV or hybrid by including a 'token' sized electric motor and battery to help them push their outdated ICE crap out the door.

This shows how truly desperate and insecure GM and legacy union auto is, because it's no secret they had operatives giving input for the language and wording of the bill.

So the EV rubber has started meeting more road, and we are finding out who truly cares about the environment, versus who are just virtue signaling and riding on identity politics sound bytes. Tesla's mission isn't political - it's for Everybody.

But when Elon gives some hard truth that a certain political party doesn't like, they have to act all butt-hurt and activate their narcissist and denial posturing. But they've so worn out any credibility that it's like the boy who cried wolf screaming with tape over their mouth - most smart people aren't trying to hear them anymore.

Trying to say that 'wasteful' or 'useless' government spending is a myth, is in the same level of delusion as saying all ICE cars are totally clean for the environment.

People hear what they want to hear.

If people listened to Musk, we’d have a carbon tax… something which Republicans would fight tooth and nail. We would end oil subsidies… something both parties would fight because it would mean higher prices at the pump.

You can’t take one piece of what Musk says and hold it up and say “Gee look he’s clearly on my side”, you have to look at the whole picture. As I said. People hear what they want to hear.

 

[Dusty]

And seriously Elon - lose the Kim Jong-il haircut.
Several Billion $ should get you a bit of an upgrade:

Yeah, I mean he can get a flowbee or something.
And, you can't go around building rockets, AI, and robots; all while sharing a haircut with this guy...

You don't ever go "full Doofenshmirtz".

 

[damnitjim]

Can't believe no one asked about that haircut.

Someone on Twitter made fun of it!!!

 

[SHorzy]

Subsidies are needed when there is no demand. This is Not the case. The ICE age is ending all on its own. With lower prices, EV’s will completely take over without incentives.

Here in Canada most incentives are a total PITA and personally I wouldn’t waste my time on them.

 

[Cybertruck Hawaii]

Cybertruck truck doesn’t have to be the best in order for me to own one. I’ll take it just as it is offered to me in 2019 at the debut show.

 

[Cybertruck Hawaii]

IS THE END OF FOSSIL-POWERED VEHICLES FINALLY IN SIGHT?

Posted on December 07, 2021 by Charles Morris

Just four years ago, the end of the Oil Age was considered a crazy dream. Today it is official policy in a growing number of countries, states, cities and corporate boardrooms around the world.

Certainly, there are good reasons to be skeptical that proposed phase-outs and bans will actually take place as scheduled. However, a major conceptual barrier has been crossed—the idea can no longer be dismissed as the ravings of green-eyed lunatics.

In 2017, a bill that would phase out the sale of gas burners starting in 2040 was introduced in the California legislature. Matthew Metz, Co-Executive Director of the advocacy group Coltura, published an op-ed calling for Washington state to follow suit. “Crazy” was one of the kinder words used in the media reaction that followed. Mr. Metz was called loony, “moonbatty” and (of course) a commie. “I’d say the reaction is about 99.9 percent negative,” he told The Seattle Times. “But people will get over it.”

How crazy was the idea? In 2020, California Governor Gavin Newsom issued an executive order requiring all new passenger vehicles sold in the state to be zero-emission by 2035. In March 2021, Washington state raised the stakes, proposing to phase out the stinkers by 2030. Massachusetts and New York have also joined the movement away from oil.

As NPR reports, a lot has changed in four years, and “what was once a fringe idea is now part of a global trend.” Tesla has become the world’s most valuable automaker, and its success has caused a mad scramble by the legacy brands to accelerate their own electrification programs (or at least to try to convince Wall Street that they’re doing so). Some of these have announced their own self-imposed deadlines to end production of fossil-powered cars.

“More and more countries are announcing targets to phase out internal combustion engine vehicles at the national level,” Sandra Wappelhorst of the International Council on Clean Transportation told NPR.

At last count, some 25 countries and several US states have announced plans to end the sale of petroleum-burners. The European Union is considering a zero-emission mandate that could start to bite around 2035. Global capitals including Amsterdam, London and Oslo have proposed bans on gas burners in city centers. Many, many urban transit agencies have set dates to convert their public transit fleets to all-electric. Automakers that have announced plans to wind down production of ICE vehicles include GM, Honda, Mercedes, VW and Volvo.

Readers, we are skeptical. As far as we are aware, not a single one of the “bans” that have been announced is actually settled law. Most are “proposals,” and some are executive orders that could easily be reversed by a future administration. Some headline-grabbing announcements, such as COP26’s non-binding suggestion that all vehicles be zero-emission by 2040, or President Joe Biden’s call for 50% of US sales to be EVs by 2030, amount to little more than statements that “it would be nice if...” The proposals from automakers invariably include weaselly phrases like “if market conditions allow.”

Furthermore, the timelines attached to most of these proposals are so far in the future that no action will be required in the next few years (except for commissioning consultants to prepare lengthy studies and market assessments at taxpayer expense). The policymakers who crafted all these vague proposals will be out of office and on the golf course long before their successors have to figure out how to implement them.

However, that doesn’t mean that all these proposals are meaningless. Some automakers seem to be taking them seriously, and so is the oil industry, judging by the ever-growing flood of anti-EV FUD that’s been taking over our inboxes lately. And a few years from now, we might just be surprised to find that some of these jurisdictions (California and Amsterdam are likely candidates) remain deadly serious about ending fossil-vehicle sales on schedule.

Perceptions matter, and right now public perception is coming around to the idea that the Oil Age is drawing to a close. The demise of gas cars may be pretty far in the future, and it may turn out to be a messy affair, but it’s no longer a crazy idea.

===

Written by: Charles Morris; Source: NPR
https://evannex.com/blogs/news/is-the-end-of-fossil-powered-vehicles-finally-in-sight

Never forget about the nonconformist. They will never want to own a EV for fear of stepping out of their comfort zone.