Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 3:43:22 PM UTC-5, Ed Lee wrote:
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 12:39:44 PM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 1 Nov 2020 12:10:39 -0800 (PST), dagmarg...@yahoo.com
wrote:
On Thursday, October 29, 2020 at 4:53:46 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
Communism is taking private properties for sharing. Free service is socialism at best.
\'Free\' charging is still taking other people\'s property through taxes, to subsidize mostly richer people\'s electric fun cars.
Yes, i am open to charging for charging (for example, 15 cents per kwh). 25 cents for using the bathroom. and 5 cents per minutes when parked at night (when the street lights are on). Or just $1 for entering the rest area.
A pay-to-charge approach that bills for time and kWH would solve your problem of Teslas hogging the stations, and it would result in lots of private people getting interested in building out a charging network.
Hogging charging stations? No problem in Truckee.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/7i8ufcz1mq6fuuo/Tesla_1.jpg?raw=1
That\'s convenient public parking when Safeway is crowded.
If only they allow other EVs to plug into Tesla charger, even for a fee.
Musk has said many, many times that he is happy to open up the charging network to any car makers who are willing to contribute to the investment.
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 12:59:15 PM UTC-8, Ricketty C wrote:
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 3:43:22 PM UTC-5, Ed Lee wrote:
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 12:39:44 PM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 1 Nov 2020 12:10:39 -0800 (PST), dagmarg...@yahoo.com
wrote:
On Thursday, October 29, 2020 at 4:53:46 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
Communism is taking private properties for sharing. Free service is socialism at best.
\'Free\' charging is still taking other people\'s property through taxes, to subsidize mostly richer people\'s electric fun cars.
Yes, i am open to charging for charging (for example, 15 cents per kwh). 25 cents for using the bathroom. and 5 cents per minutes when parked at night (when the street lights are on). Or just $1 for entering the rest area.
A pay-to-charge approach that bills for time and kWH would solve your problem of Teslas hogging the stations, and it would result in lots of private people getting interested in building out a charging network.
Hogging charging stations? No problem in Truckee.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/7i8ufcz1mq6fuuo/Tesla_1.jpg?raw=1
That\'s convenient public parking when Safeway is crowded.
If only they allow other EVs to plug into Tesla charger, even for a fee.
Musk has said many, many times that he is happy to open up the charging network to any car makers who are willing to contribute to the investment.
Why does he need to blackmail car companies? If he put up standard plugs, other EV drivers are certainly willing to pay to use them.
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 4:11:16 PM UTC-5, Ed Lee wrote:
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 12:59:15 PM UTC-8, Ricketty C wrote:
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 3:43:22 PM UTC-5, Ed Lee wrote:
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 12:39:44 PM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 1 Nov 2020 12:10:39 -0800 (PST), dagmarg...@yahoo.com
wrote:
On Thursday, October 29, 2020 at 4:53:46 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
Communism is taking private properties for sharing. Free service is socialism at best.
\'Free\' charging is still taking other people\'s property through taxes, to subsidize mostly richer people\'s electric fun cars.
Yes, i am open to charging for charging (for example, 15 cents per kwh). 25 cents for using the bathroom. and 5 cents per minutes when parked at night (when the street lights are on). Or just $1 for entering the rest area.
A pay-to-charge approach that bills for time and kWH would solve your problem of Teslas hogging the stations, and it would result in lots of private people getting interested in building out a charging network.
Hogging charging stations? No problem in Truckee.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/7i8ufcz1mq6fuuo/Tesla_1.jpg?raw=1
That\'s convenient public parking when Safeway is crowded.
If only they allow other EVs to plug into Tesla charger, even for a fee.
Musk has said many, many times that he is happy to open up the charging network to any car makers who are willing to contribute to the investment.
Why does he need to blackmail car companies? If he put up standard plugs, other EV drivers are certainly willing to pay to use them.
What does blackmail have to do with anything??? No one is blackmailing. Tesla has invested billions of dollars in their charging network. It is a competitive edge. Shouldn\'t other car makers contribute as well?
Well, for what ever reason, I tend to see more Dodge trucks. Me thinks it has something to do with guys wanting \"BIG\"...they also tend to have the worst gas mileage and curiously enough here in the rust belt, much more rot that just about any comparable vehicle and age.On 10/28/2020 5:32 PM, Robert Baer wrote:
bitrex wrote:
On 10/28/2020 3:47 PM, Dean Hoffman wrote:
Tesla\'s AutoPilot is a distant second to GM\'s Super Cruise according to
Consumer Reports.
https://www.insidehook.com/daily_brief/vehicles/consumer-reports-tesla-autopilot-super-cruise
Tesla and GM have somewhat different operating philosophies, Tesla
wants the world to switch to driving luxury electric vehicles
exclusively.
GM wants to sell the world a wide assortment of luxury vehicles of
which electric vehicles are just one type you can buy. They are
car-agnostic, ideally everyone in America will buy a $85,000 truck
from GM, whether it\'s gas or electric or hydrogen or whatever it does
not matter. One of each would be best, actually.
\"Luxury\" schmucks-ery.
WTF is wrong with a \"garden\" variety design for the majority of drivers?
Maybe even a target price below $10,000....
GM trucks are viciously overpriced. might be why most pickups I see
doing actual work are Dodge.
ditto, AFAIK, the profit margins on pickups is huge. Jeep (cherokee, Grand cherokee), about the only thing going for them at the moment is their history, bulletproof transfer case, and their big interior upgrade (faux leather and all). Will see how Fiat will kill that brand. Jeep has taken a page out of the Dodge play book: If you can\'t dazzle them with innovation, throw the biggest engine in them you can find. Just what the public wants, a high CG vehicle that can do 0-60 in 3.5 sec, 6.2L V8, and cost 80K+... senseless....On 10/29/2020 12:07 PM, Dean Hoffman wrote:
On 10/29/20 9:54 AM, bitrex wrote:
On 10/29/2020 6:55 AM, Dean Hoffman wrote:
On 10/28/20 4:32 PM, Robert Baer wrote:
bitrex wrote:
On 10/28/2020 3:47 PM, Dean Hoffman wrote:
Tesla\'s AutoPilot is a distant second to GM\'s Super Cruise
according to
Consumer Reports.
https://www.insidehook.com/daily_brief/vehicles/consumer-reports-tesla-autopilot-super-cruise
Tesla and GM have somewhat different operating philosophies, Tesla
wants the world to switch to driving luxury electric vehicles
exclusively.
GM wants to sell the world a wide assortment of luxury vehicles of
which electric vehicles are just one type you can buy. They are
car-agnostic, ideally everyone in America will buy a $85,000 truck
from GM, whether it\'s gas or electric or hydrogen or whatever it
does not matter. One of each would be best, actually.
\"Luxury\" schmucks-ery.
WTF is wrong with a \"garden\" variety design for the majority of
drivers?
Maybe even a target price below $10,000....
I took a quick look on the Carvana vehicle sales site. The
cheapest I found was a
2021 Chevy Spark LS hatchback, $10287. The cheapest sedan was a
2020 Mitsubishi Mirage G4 ES, $10,474. The cheapest pickup was a
2020 Dodge Ram 1500 Tradesman, $18,017. A 2020 Tesla Model X
Long Range with 11,300 miles is for sale on Auto Trader for $96588.
California\'s ban on selling new internal combustion driven vehicles
starts in 2035. There must be people thinking about the auto parts
store
business. California mechanics might be king in twenty years or so
unless this silly ban is lifted.
Comparing the lowest-price cars you can buy to one of the most
expensive luxury EVs you can buy seems hardly fair. The Mirage is a
really dreadful car.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peZ8AQsZabI
The Spark is somewhat better. They sold an all-electric Spark in the
mid 2010s in several US states including CA as a compliance car it was
much better as an electric runabout with a ~100 mile quick-charge
battery pack, and with a mostly direct transplant of the Chevy Volt
motor into a tiny car it was absurdly powerful for its size. It was an
easy mod. But at the time it couldn\'t be sold at a profit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkT8rZj8YH0
But the MSRP on the lowest trim gas 2021 Spark on Chevy\'s site is
about 14k, don\'t know how anyone\'s selling it at a profit at 10.
I tried to be careful about the pricing but could\'ve messed up.
That car wasn\'t
on Carvana this morning. This one is on Auto Trader.
http://preview.alturl.com/5un4f> $10,895
I didn\'t look at anything except price. I\'ve spent a little time
looking at pickups
the last few days. The manufacturers are sure proud of those things.
Yeah proud of the margins! The low and mid tier US-made trucks and SUVs
like Jeep are pretty bland and low-tech by comparison with other
vehicles at the same price point, but you can charge a premium for \'em
anyway.
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 12:39:44 PM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 1 Nov 2020 12:10:39 -0800 (PST), dagmarg...@yahoo.com
wrote:
On Thursday, October 29, 2020 at 4:53:46 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
Communism is taking private properties for sharing. Free service is socialism at best.
\'Free\' charging is still taking other people\'s property through taxes, to subsidize mostly richer people\'s electric fun cars.
Yes, i am open to charging for charging (for example, 15 cents per kwh). 25 cents for using the bathroom. and 5 cents per minutes when parked at night (when the street lights are on). Or just $1 for entering the rest area.
A pay-to-charge approach that bills for time and kWH would solve your problem of Teslas hogging the stations, and it would result in lots of private people getting interested in building out a charging network.
Hogging charging stations? No problem in Truckee.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/7i8ufcz1mq6fuuo/Tesla_1.jpg?raw=1
That\'s convenient public parking when Safeway is crowded.
If only they allow other EVs to plug into Tesla charger, even for a fee.
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 1:28:19 PM UTC-8, Ricketty C wrote:
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 4:11:16 PM UTC-5, Ed Lee wrote:
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 12:59:15 PM UTC-8, Ricketty C wrote:
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 3:43:22 PM UTC-5, Ed Lee wrote:
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 12:39:44 PM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 1 Nov 2020 12:10:39 -0800 (PST), dagmarg...@yahoo.com
wrote:
On Thursday, October 29, 2020 at 4:53:46 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
Communism is taking private properties for sharing. Free service is socialism at best.
\'Free\' charging is still taking other people\'s property through taxes, to subsidize mostly richer people\'s electric fun cars.
Yes, i am open to charging for charging (for example, 15 cents per kwh). 25 cents for using the bathroom. and 5 cents per minutes when parked at night (when the street lights are on). Or just $1 for entering the rest area.
A pay-to-charge approach that bills for time and kWH would solve your problem of Teslas hogging the stations, and it would result in lots of private people getting interested in building out a charging network.
Hogging charging stations? No problem in Truckee.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/7i8ufcz1mq6fuuo/Tesla_1.jpg?raw=1
That\'s convenient public parking when Safeway is crowded.
If only they allow other EVs to plug into Tesla charger, even for a fee.
Musk has said many, many times that he is happy to open up the charging network to any car makers who are willing to contribute to the investment.
Why does he need to blackmail car companies? If he put up standard plugs, other EV drivers are certainly willing to pay to use them.
What does blackmail have to do with anything??? No one is blackmailing. Tesla has invested billions of dollars in their charging network. It is a competitive edge. Shouldn\'t other car makers contribute as well?
Other charging companies also invested billions, and there are competitive charging stations from EV connect and ChargePoint. Why can\'t Tesla do it without other car companies\' subsides.
But you seem to feel entitled to using that which belongs to others. You like taking control of Tesla\'s charging network, you like taking others\' money so you can charge for free.
No, i am willing to pay to use Tesla\'s charger.
But you will only spend YOUR money on chargers that directly benefit YOU.
How\'s that different from Tesla\'s creation of proprieties charging stations?
On Wednesday, October 28, 2020 at 6:07:06 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 10/28/2020 5:32 PM, Robert Baer wrote:
bitrex wrote:
On 10/28/2020 3:47 PM, Dean Hoffman wrote:
Tesla\'s AutoPilot is a distant second to GM\'s Super Cruise according to
Consumer Reports.
https://www.insidehook.com/daily_brief/vehicles/consumer-reports-tesla-autopilot-super-cruise
Tesla and GM have somewhat different operating philosophies, Tesla
wants the world to switch to driving luxury electric vehicles
exclusively.
GM wants to sell the world a wide assortment of luxury vehicles of
which electric vehicles are just one type you can buy. They are
car-agnostic, ideally everyone in America will buy a $85,000 truck
from GM, whether it\'s gas or electric or hydrogen or whatever it does
not matter. One of each would be best, actually.
\"Luxury\" schmucks-ery.
WTF is wrong with a \"garden\" variety design for the majority of drivers?
Maybe even a target price below $10,000....
GM trucks are viciously overpriced. might be why most pickups I see
doing actual work are Dodge.
Well, for what ever reason, I tend to see more Dodge trucks. Me thinks it has something to do with guys wanting \"BIG\"...they also tend to have the worst gas mileage and curiously enough here in the rust belt, much more rot that just about any comparable vehicle and age.
On 11/1/2020 5:11 PM, Three Jeeps wrote:
On Wednesday, October 28, 2020 at 6:07:06 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 10/28/2020 5:32 PM, Robert Baer wrote:
bitrex wrote:
On 10/28/2020 3:47 PM, Dean Hoffman wrote:
Tesla\'s AutoPilot is a distant second to GM\'s Super Cruise
according to
Consumer Reports.
https://www.insidehook.com/daily_brief/vehicles/consumer-reports-tesla-autopilot-super-cruise
Tesla and GM have somewhat different operating philosophies, Tesla
wants the world to switch to driving luxury electric vehicles
exclusively.
GM wants to sell the world a wide assortment of luxury vehicles of
which electric vehicles are just one type you can buy. They are
car-agnostic, ideally everyone in America will buy a $85,000 truck
from GM, whether it\'s gas or electric or hydrogen or whatever it does
not matter. One of each would be best, actually.
\"Luxury\" schmucks-ery.
WTF is wrong with a \"garden\" variety design for the majority of
drivers?
Maybe even a target price below $10,000....
GM trucks are viciously overpriced. might be why most pickups I see
doing actual work are Dodge.
Well, for what ever reason, I tend to see more Dodge trucks. Me
thinks it has something to do with guys wanting \"BIG\"...they also tend
to have the worst gas mileage and curiously enough here in the rust
belt, much more rot that just about any comparable vehicle and age.
https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a28705453/2020-ram-1500-ecodiesel-pricing-cheapest/#:~:text=on%20this%20page.-,2020%20Ram%201500%20EcoDiesel%20Is%20the%20Cheapest,Duty%20Diesel%20You%20Can%20Buy&text=Ram%20undercuts%20Ford%20and%20Chevy,expensive%20diesel%20half%2Dton%20pickup.
\"Ram undercuts Ford and Chevy by offering its 3.0-liter diesel in every
cab, bed, and drive configuration, including (for the first time) the
Ram Rebel.\"
Not exactly, it\'s not offered on the regular cab 8\' box Ram 1500 Classic
model. But the market for regular cab long-box pickups is probably
small, mostly fleets. Ford, Chevy, Dodge and GMC all offer one, all
priced around 30k no-frills to start.
One thing Dodge also offers that the others don\'t is a wide array of
factory paint jobs, you basically have your choice of red, white, blue,
black, or grey with the others. Dodge will build you a hunter green,
Celtic blue or school bus yellow truck, if you like.
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 4:41:52 PM UTC-5, Ed Lee wrote:
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 1:28:19 PM UTC-8, Ricketty C wrote:
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 4:11:16 PM UTC-5, Ed Lee wrote:
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 12:59:15 PM UTC-8, Ricketty C wrote:
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 3:43:22 PM UTC-5, Ed Lee wrote:
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 12:39:44 PM UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 1 Nov 2020 12:10:39 -0800 (PST), dagmarg...@yahoo.com
wrote:
On Thursday, October 29, 2020 at 4:53:46 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
Communism is taking private properties for sharing. Free service is socialism at best.
\'Free\' charging is still taking other people\'s property through taxes, to subsidize mostly richer people\'s electric fun cars.
Yes, i am open to charging for charging (for example, 15 cents per kwh). 25 cents for using the bathroom. and 5 cents per minutes when parked at night (when the street lights are on). Or just $1 for entering the rest area.
A pay-to-charge approach that bills for time and kWH would solve your problem of Teslas hogging the stations, and it would result in lots of private people getting interested in building out a charging network.
Hogging charging stations? No problem in Truckee.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/7i8ufcz1mq6fuuo/Tesla_1.jpg?raw=1
That\'s convenient public parking when Safeway is crowded.
If only they allow other EVs to plug into Tesla charger, even for a fee.
Musk has said many, many times that he is happy to open up the charging network to any car makers who are willing to contribute to the investment.
Why does he need to blackmail car companies? If he put up standard plugs, other EV drivers are certainly willing to pay to use them.
What does blackmail have to do with anything??? No one is blackmailing. Tesla has invested billions of dollars in their charging network. It is a competitive edge. Shouldn\'t other car makers contribute as well?
Other charging companies also invested billions, and there are competitive charging stations from EV connect and ChargePoint. Why can\'t Tesla do it without other car companies\' subsides.
Look, your arguments ignore pretty much everything about reality. I\'m not going to continue to reply to illogical discussions forever. Tesla IS \"doing it\" without anyone else in the world. They are providing charging for THEIR CUSTOMERS.
But you seem to feel entitled to using that which belongs to others. You like taking control of Tesla\'s charging network, you like taking others\' money so you can charge for free.
No, i am willing to pay to use Tesla\'s charger.
Great. They have a small signup fee. Buy a Tesla and you can charge it at any Supercharger.
But you will only spend YOUR money on chargers that directly benefit YOU.
How\'s that different from Tesla\'s creation of proprieties charging stations?
Exactly!!! How is Tesla any different, i.e. worse than YOU???
All of this comes down to YOU wanting others to do their thing to please you when you do nothing for anyone else.
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 12:10:45 PM UTC-8, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Thursday, October 29, 2020 at 4:53:46 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
Communism is taking private properties for sharing. Free service is socialism at best.
\'Free\' charging is still taking other people\'s property through taxes, to subsidize mostly richer people\'s electric fun cars.
Same for street lights, roads and free rest stops.
Yes, i am open to charging for charging (for example, 15 cents per kwh). 25 cents for using the bathroom. and 5 cents per minutes when parked at night (when the street lights are on). Or just $1 for entering the rest area.
A pay-to-charge approach that bills for time and kWH would solve your problem of Teslas hogging the stations, and it would result in lots of private people getting interested in building out a charging network.
But not enough interest in sites that are not profitable.
That sounds constructive.
It\'s a lot simpler to just use sale taxes to fund these services.
But that\'s robbing the poor to subsidize the rich -- it\'s not just, and it\'s not fair.
The interstate highways, as well as many other things, are free, unjust and unfair.
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 3:21:42 PM UTC-5, Ed Lee wrote:
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 12:10:45 PM UTC-8, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Thursday, October 29, 2020 at 4:53:46 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
Communism is taking private properties for sharing. Free service is socialism at best.
\'Free\' charging is still taking other people\'s property through taxes, to subsidize mostly richer people\'s electric fun cars.
Same for street lights, roads and free rest stops.
Yes, i am open to charging for charging (for example, 15 cents per kwh). 25 cents for using the bathroom. and 5 cents per minutes when parked at night (when the street lights are on). Or just $1 for entering the rest area.
A pay-to-charge approach that bills for time and kWH would solve your problem of Teslas hogging the stations, and it would result in lots of private people getting interested in building out a charging network.
But not enough interest in sites that are not profitable.
If they\'re not profitable, then that means the people who\'d use them don\'t think they\'re worth what they actually cost.
That\'s a valuable feedback mechanism that directs resources toward things people like and need. Tax-funding doesn\'t have that feedback.
That sounds constructive.
It\'s a lot simpler to just use sale taxes to fund these services.
But that\'s robbing the poor to subsidize the rich -- it\'s not just, and it\'s not fair.
The interstate highways, as well as many other things, are free, unjust and unfair.
Not so -- they\'re substantially funded by the users through fuel taxes. The more users, the more funding.
On Sun, 1 Nov 2020 12:10:39 -0800 (PST), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:
On Thursday, October 29, 2020 at 4:53:46 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
Communism is taking private properties for sharing. Free service is socialism at best.
\'Free\' charging is still taking other people\'s property through taxes, to subsidize mostly richer people\'s electric fun cars.
Yes, i am open to charging for charging (for example, 15 cents per kwh). 25 cents for using the bathroom. and 5 cents per minutes when parked at night (when the street lights are on). Or just $1 for entering the rest area.
A pay-to-charge approach that bills for time and kWH would solve your problem of Teslas hogging the stations, and it would result in lots of private people getting interested in building out a charging network.
Hogging charging stations? No problem in Truckee.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/7i8ufcz1mq6fuuo/Tesla_1.jpg?raw=1
That\'s convenient public parking when Safeway is crowded.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
Science teaches us to doubt.
Claude Bernard
On Thursday, October 29, 2020 at 4:53:46 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
Communism is taking private properties for sharing. Free service is socialism at best.
\'Free\' charging is still taking other people\'s property through taxes, to subsidize mostly richer people\'s electric fun cars.
Yes, i am open to charging for charging (for example, 15 cents per kwh). 25 cents for using the bathroom. and 5 cents per minutes when parked at night (when the street lights are on). Or just $1 for entering the rest area.
A pay-to-charge approach that bills for time and kWH would solve your problem of Teslas hogging the stations, and it would result in lots of private people getting interested in building out a charging network.
That sounds constructive.
It\'s a lot simpler to just use sale taxes to fund these services.
But that\'s robbing the poor to subsidize the rich -- it\'s not just, and it\'s not fair.
Cheers,
James Arthur
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 3:46:51 PM UTC-8, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 3:21:42 PM UTC-5, Ed Lee wrote:
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 12:10:45 PM UTC-8, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Thursday, October 29, 2020 at 4:53:46 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
Communism is taking private properties for sharing. Free service is socialism at best.
\'Free\' charging is still taking other people\'s property through taxes, to subsidize mostly richer people\'s electric fun cars.
Same for street lights, roads and free rest stops.
Yes, i am open to charging for charging (for example, 15 cents per kwh). 25 cents for using the bathroom. and 5 cents per minutes when parked at night (when the street lights are on). Or just $1 for entering the rest area.
A pay-to-charge approach that bills for time and kWH would solve your problem of Teslas hogging the stations, and it would result in lots of private people getting interested in building out a charging network.
But not enough interest in sites that are not profitable.
If they\'re not profitable, then that means the people who\'d use them don\'t think they\'re worth what they actually cost.
That\'s a valuable feedback mechanism that directs resources toward things people like and need. Tax-funding doesn\'t have that feedback.
That sounds constructive.
It\'s a lot simpler to just use sale taxes to fund these services.
But that\'s robbing the poor to subsidize the rich -- it\'s not just, and it\'s not fair.
The interstate highways, as well as many other things, are free, unjust and unfair.
Not so -- they\'re substantially funded by the users through fuel taxes. The more users, the more funding.
And we are all paying for the environmental costs of burning fossil fuels.
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 6:54:50 PM UTC-5, Ed Lee wrote:
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 3:46:51 PM UTC-8, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 3:21:42 PM UTC-5, Ed Lee wrote:
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 12:10:45 PM UTC-8, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Thursday, October 29, 2020 at 4:53:46 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
Communism is taking private properties for sharing. Free service is socialism at best.
\'Free\' charging is still taking other people\'s property through taxes, to subsidize mostly richer people\'s electric fun cars.
Same for street lights, roads and free rest stops.
Yes, i am open to charging for charging (for example, 15 cents per kwh). 25 cents for using the bathroom. and 5 cents per minutes when parked at night (when the street lights are on). Or just $1 for entering the rest area.
A pay-to-charge approach that bills for time and kWH would solve your problem of Teslas hogging the stations, and it would result in lots of private people getting interested in building out a charging network.
But not enough interest in sites that are not profitable.
If they\'re not profitable, then that means the people who\'d use them don\'t think they\'re worth what they actually cost.
That\'s a valuable feedback mechanism that directs resources toward things people like and need. Tax-funding doesn\'t have that feedback.
That sounds constructive.
It\'s a lot simpler to just use sale taxes to fund these services.
But that\'s robbing the poor to subsidize the rich -- it\'s not just, and it\'s not fair.
The interstate highways, as well as many other things, are free, unjust and unfair.
Not so -- they\'re substantially funded by the users through fuel taxes. The more users, the more funding.
And we are all paying for the environmental costs of burning fossil fuels.
And gladly, generally.
Do EVs even reduce net, all-cost CO2 emissions? If they did, that would surprise me.
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 6:54:50 PM UTC-5, Ed Lee wrote:
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 3:46:51 PM UTC-8, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 3:21:42 PM UTC-5, Ed Lee wrote:
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 12:10:45 PM UTC-8, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Thursday, October 29, 2020 at 4:53:46 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
Communism is taking private properties for sharing. Free service is socialism at best.
\'Free\' charging is still taking other people\'s property through taxes, to subsidize mostly richer people\'s electric fun cars.
Same for street lights, roads and free rest stops.
Yes, i am open to charging for charging (for example, 15 cents per kwh). 25 cents for using the bathroom. and 5 cents per minutes when parked at night (when the street lights are on). Or just $1 for entering the rest area.
A pay-to-charge approach that bills for time and kWH would solve your problem of Teslas hogging the stations, and it would result in lots of private people getting interested in building out a charging network.
But not enough interest in sites that are not profitable.
If they\'re not profitable, then that means the people who\'d use them don\'t think they\'re worth what they actually cost.
That\'s a valuable feedback mechanism that directs resources toward things people like and need. Tax-funding doesn\'t have that feedback.
That sounds constructive.
It\'s a lot simpler to just use sale taxes to fund these services.
But that\'s robbing the poor to subsidize the rich -- it\'s not just, and it\'s not fair.
The interstate highways, as well as many other things, are free, unjust and unfair.
Not so -- they\'re substantially funded by the users through fuel taxes. The more users, the more funding.
And we are all paying for the environmental costs of burning fossil fuels.
And gladly, generally.
Do EVs even reduce net, all-cost CO2 emissions? If they did, that would surprise me.
Ordinary ICE vehicles could double their fuel economy with radical streamlining and lightweighting. Or just drive less -- that\'s always an option. But folks don\'t seem that interested.
Cheers,
James Arthur
On 11/1/2020 7:07 PM, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:
Ordinary ICE vehicles could double their fuel economy with radical streamlining and lightweighting. Or just drive less -- that\'s always an option. But folks don\'t seem that interested.
They call them motorcycles, they\'re pretty popular.
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 4:07:56 PM UTC-8, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 6:54:50 PM UTC-5, Ed Lee wrote:
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 3:46:51 PM UTC-8, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 3:21:42 PM UTC-5, Ed Lee wrote:
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 12:10:45 PM UTC-8, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Thursday, October 29, 2020 at 4:53:46 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
Communism is taking private properties for sharing. Free service is socialism at best.
\'Free\' charging is still taking other people\'s property through taxes, to subsidize mostly richer people\'s electric fun cars.
Same for street lights, roads and free rest stops.
Yes, i am open to charging for charging (for example, 15 cents per kwh). 25 cents for using the bathroom. and 5 cents per minutes when parked at night (when the street lights are on). Or just $1 for entering the rest area.
A pay-to-charge approach that bills for time and kWH would solve your problem of Teslas hogging the stations, and it would result in lots of private people getting interested in building out a charging network.
But not enough interest in sites that are not profitable.
If they\'re not profitable, then that means the people who\'d use them don\'t think they\'re worth what they actually cost.
That\'s a valuable feedback mechanism that directs resources toward things people like and need. Tax-funding doesn\'t have that feedback.
That sounds constructive.
It\'s a lot simpler to just use sale taxes to fund these services.
But that\'s robbing the poor to subsidize the rich -- it\'s not just, and it\'s not fair.
The interstate highways, as well as many other things, are free, unjust and unfair.
Not so -- they\'re substantially funded by the users through fuel taxes. The more users, the more funding.
And we are all paying for the environmental costs of burning fossil fuels.
And gladly, generally.
Do EVs even reduce net, all-cost CO2 emissions? If they did, that would surprise me.
If the electricity is coming from Solar, then yes.
Ordinary ICE vehicles could double their fuel economy with radical streamlining and lightweighting.
Same for EV, if batteries are smaller. The vehicles will be lighter.
Or just drive less -- that\'s always an option. But folks don\'t seem that interested.
Yes, but ...
On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 7:24:17 PM UTC-5, bitrex wrote:
On 11/1/2020 7:07 PM, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:
Ordinary ICE vehicles could double their fuel economy with radical streamlining and lightweighting. Or just drive less -- that\'s always an option. But folks don\'t seem that interested.
They call them motorcycles, they\'re pretty popular.
https://www.aerocivic.com/