502
15 billion to private companies to retool and whatever. But then they sell us what they make. None of that goes back to the tax payers.
If you work for someone else in this country you are a joke it seems.
While I agree with your sentiment, ~2/3rds of it according to the article isn't being given to them but being available in loans. So the article should say $5.5 given away, and $10 billion made avaliable to pay back.
load more comments
(7 replies)
Stopping climate change benefits everyone, including the taxpayers.
This isn't going to put a dent in climate change. It just isn't. Wake me up when we change our stance on Nuclear since that is the only thing that will bolster renewable energy, which is a stop gap.
Furthermore, if the US government actually cared about fighting climate change they would invest in public transportation across the country, making those EV, since they A. Go shorter distances and B. Can carry more people, and they would also tax the shit out of the fossil fuel industry and manufacturing sector for their wonton pollution. It's called internalizing the externalities and it needed to happen 10 years ago. We're so fucked.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Stopping climate change by...
Removing fossil fuels from the grid? Reducing methane leakage in natural gas transmission? Developing domestic nuclear energy?
Maybe reducing car-dependency to make more efficient use of land and reduce the excessive amounts of taxpayer money being dumped to subsidize suburban development? Reducing inefficient flights between close cities (LAX-SFO, BOS-JFK-DCA)? Building more efficient buildings?
How about taking advantage of the already insanely efficient supply chains in China that allow for the development of sub-10k EVs? Helping those companies launch in the US and bring their expertise with them to accelerate the EV transition like China has?
Nah, let's just give some more money to a few big EV manufacturers, I'm sure that'll fix everything.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
We pay at least twice. Isn't that how it's supposed to be?
(/S)
load more comments
(33 replies)
We will always give money to our industries to make up for the lack of long term planning in our system. I certainly do not understand what concept of fucking justice that is related to.
I certainly do not understand what concept of fucking justice that is related to.
This concept of justice:
higher scores will be given to projects that are likely to retain collective bargaining agreements and/or those that have an existing high-quality, high-wage hourly production workforce, such as applicants that currently pay top quartile wages in their industry.
And that's good. But what would be better for the planet would be building up a public transportation system so robust that cars are unnecessary outside of rural areas.
I was just listening to a Parenti lecture where he talked about an interaction he had with someone who had been in high up in East Germany. He basically asked, “why did you put out those crappy little two cylinder engine cars?” And the ex-officials response was essentially, “we didn’t want to put them into cars at all, we thought if we provided an adequate public transportation system, that people would be satisfied, but they weren’t so we had to do what we could.”
I agree with you fully, that public transport would be the ideal solution, far and away above electric vehicles, which just providing one for every household in the US would require such s massive amount of material extraction that it by itself will cause significant climate outcomes, but, we must find a way around the impulse for private personal transportation that exists within people, and I don’t know how to do so. Moving without the mass of people could lead to rejection and reactionary movements. Moving with the mass will lead to climate destruction. How do we work with the masses to come to a compromise that allows the support of the masses, while reducing the number of private vehicles to nearly zero?
Maybe as a miniscule offset to the ungodly sums still being spent to prop up the fossil fuel industry.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I was hoping for a cash for clunkers 2.0
First the charging infrastructure needs to be better
It’s well on its way. And most people charge at home day to day.
That’s a great way to do it, but that solution excludes a lot of people renting or in condo HOAs that don’t have easy access to overnight charge points in their complex’s or city’s lots. Hopefully those missing pieces are addressed soon so EVs feel like an option to everyone driving an ICE car, not just homeowners with garages.
They should start fining VW for their failure to maintain Electrify America.
That would be amazing
Cash for Clunkers impacted the used car market for well over a decade.
Wasn't that part of the expectation?
"Strong and just"? You're not going to win over fascists by using their keywords. Maybe tone it down a little for those of us who still recall "Operation Shock and Awe" and the "War on drugs" and "The PATRIOT Act" and all the associated "collateral damage".
It just makes me think there's something hidden in there of which we should all be very suspicious, even if there might not be.
Note: I welcome less environmental damage and reskilling workers into sustainable energy industries and products. I hope this bill isn't the result of industry lobbying by EV manufacturers, but I note the lack of environmental goals contrasts with the large amounts of money being put into industry grants and loans.
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2023
502 points (97.2% liked)
News
21734 readers
3610 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS