Forget the rebates... IL first state to levy annual "tax" on EVs... - Page 3 - Jaguar I-Pace EV400 Forum
 26Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #21 of 62 (permalink) Old 05-12-2019, 09:22 PM
Senior Member
 
Mister Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Illinois
Posts: 462
Quote:
Originally Posted by McRat View Post
Dead cows
Aren't much fun
When you call them
They don't
Come/
My steak for dinner was very tasty. I didn't call it but it was there on the plate anyway. Yummy!

How do you call a cow anyway? I've heard people call pigs, but not cows.
Mister Dave is offline  
post #22 of 62 (permalink) Old 05-12-2019, 09:51 PM
Senior Member
 
Mister Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Illinois
Posts: 462
Oh my bad. I took cow farts for granted because AOC said so.

Quote:
A common misconception is that the cow’s rear end emits methane, however the vast majority is released orally. Researched carried out by Grainger et al. in 2007 found that 92-98 % was emitted orally (I won’t go into detail about how they found that out!).
Also:

Quote:
A dairy cow emits over twice the amount of methane than a beef cow and is by far the highest contributor of all the animals studied. There are also more dairy cows in the UK than beef cattle (1.81 million compared to 1.66 million).
Your glass of milk is worse then my steak.

You might not have heard:

Quote:
Methane is a natural gas in the Earth, and the amount that comes from cattle is actually more insignificant than that naturally produced from such sources as volcanoes, the oceanic floor, swamps, etc.
We must ban volcanoes, the ocean floor and swamps immediately.

And finally.....

Quote:
Cows that stand in the shade do not produce chocolate milk

Last edited by Mister Dave; 05-12-2019 at 10:01 PM.
Mister Dave is offline  
post #23 of 62 (permalink) Old 05-12-2019, 11:45 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Castro Valley, CA
Posts: 538
Well, this turned into a **** show.

I never said it was a democrat or republican thing. If you saw that, well, that's on your paranoid, delusional view of the world. Illinois is a blue state and the a-hole proposing the 1000 ev tax is a dem. In general, politicians do not only ignore the will of the populace, they make bad decisions too. Often the populace wants stupid, destructive, selfish things. That's when politicians should be leaders, not populists. Left and right, we have plenty of populists. I find it ironic when people complain about left wing populists while supporting right wing populists, and vice versa.

I imagine most people here are not pure greenies. The ipace isn't exactly the most efficient EV. If I wanted efficiency, I'd have a Prius for long driving days and a Fiat 500 for short driving days. We're all luxury car buyers here. My wife and I have four cars, only one of which is an EV, though we've had two small EVs leased before. One of the vehicles is a Ram 1500 with a Hemi. Thing weighs well over 5000lbs and gets 15mpg driven normally. I'm just driving it less now. Might sell it. Super comfy, though. Also super useful. Currently there's 600lbs of concrete bags in the back.

The science on global warming is clear and massively supported by scientists in the field. Some scientists from outside the field and, for some reason, many engineers feel otherwise. I don't get my science from engineers, though. I get my engineering from them, but I get my climate science from climate scientists. Among them, the agreement and science are absolutely crystal clear.

Total subsidies for the oil industry are massively greater than those for the alternative energy and EV industry. It's stupid, destructive policy that will cost us immensely in the long run.

The wealthy get subsidized at an embarrassing rate. For last tax year, I get a 7500 refund on the ipace, another 30% back on my home battery backup system, a write-off on home interest, massive business write-offs, deferred taxes on a significant chunk of income thanks to 403b, 457, and 401k, and probably more things I can't think of at the moment. Not to mention the massive tax cut that I got last year. If you don't like communism, how can you like subsidies for the rich and corporations? Isn't that communism too? Not that either of these things are communism, but I'm not even going to try to find a definition.

As for cap and trade, that's not my baby. It seems like it's gotten some mixed results. Lower carbon overall, but higher local pollution in vulnerable, poor areas.

Quote:
Originally Posted by McRat View Post
Dead cows
Aren't much fun
When you call them
They don't
Come/
This conversation is rotting in the hall.

Quote:
Originally Posted by McRat View Post
Don't be fooled. If that cow ever escaped, it would eat you alive in a heartbeat. Kill or be killed.
Human leather was used for lampshades by Socialists once upon a time.
I imagine they will do it again; history doesn't repeat, but it often does rhyme.
Cows with guns.

The Nazis were not socialist by any meaningful definition of the word.
jsimon7777 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #24 of 62 (permalink) Old 05-13-2019, 12:28 AM
Senior Member
 
Mister Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Illinois
Posts: 462
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsimon7777 View Post
If you don't like communism, how can you like subsidies for the rich and corporations? Isn't that communism too? Not that either of these things are communism, but I'm not even going to try to find a definition.
They are or they aren't - I'm confused by this statement.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsimon7777 View Post
The Nazis were not socialist by any meaningful definition of the word.
Quote:
Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterized by social ownership of the means of production and workers' self-management, as well as the political theories and movements associated with them. Social ownership can be public, collective or cooperative ownership, or citizen ownership of equity. There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them, with social ownership being the common element shared by its various forms.
Quote:
National Socialism is a form of state capitalism in which private owners reap all the profits, but the state directs them in what they want produced, so it is not really free-market capitalism either. Krupp, IG Farben, Leica and Siemens were among Nazi beneficiaries,.....
Curious: where did Nazis enter the discussion?

They were to some degree socialist in that they controlled the means of production even if they didn't take ownership of it.

Quote:
.... In a real socialist country they would have been nationalized and the profits would have been taken and distributed back to the workers in the form of benefits and entitlements
The remainder of that quote is humorous. In theory it might be true.

And now that Nazis have been brought up, Godwin's law must be invoked.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsimon7777 View Post
I get my climate science from climate scientists. Among them, the agreement and science are absolutely crystal clear.
I try to introduce people to the concept of reverse scientocracy, but they resist. It kind of matters. It's what we have today.

As for anything science being crystal clear, you destroy the entire premise of science when you declare such. Science by it's own nature is never settled.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsimon7777 View Post
Total subsidies for the oil industry are massively greater than.....
..... greater than a lot of things. I've read this for years. Not once has anyone stumbled upon why while lamenting this. There are actually non-evil reasons why. But I suppose that when everything is crystal clear, so must be the evil oil subsidy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dantrium View Post
Kids, if you are ever confused about why intelligent conversations are so difficult to have,......
Hello again.
Mister Dave is offline  
post #25 of 62 (permalink) Old 05-13-2019, 12:50 AM
Senior Member
 
Mister Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Illinois
Posts: 462
Getting back to the topic, this is refreshingly the correct outlook on the subject:

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcomeau View Post
It seems that this particular tax is particularly excessive (compared to the additional fuel tax for ICW cars).

Having said that, it is inevitable that the same taxes on conventional cars designed to fund the maintenance of the roads we all drive on will have to find their way to electric cars. While electricity is cheaper than gas, the cost of paving the road is the same regardless of the type of engine is in the car driving on it, so the tax to total cost ratio will be worse for EVs for the overall contribution of EVs to the road maintenance to be the same per car.

Given the social benefits of driving EVs, hopefully these taxes will be waived for a while to help motivate the transition, but at tome point, all cars will have to pay their share of the road infrastructure costs.
One might feel that this PROPOSAL is excessive. Maybe it really isn't, particularly in light of the proposed gas tax hike. Or... both are excessive. I live in this state and I'm quite familiar with the idiocy that goes on in Springfield. This is probably just an idiot looking for attention.

They also want to implement a "Fair Tax" which will turn out to be anything but fair.
.............................

As for promoting EVs, here's a good way to present yourself on the subject:

Quote:
Originally Posted by McRat
I like electromotive drive for a daily driver because its a superior driving experience. Better transmission, better motor, more convenient.
Notice the absence of politics, or any other kind of divisive speech here.
Mister Dave is offline  
post #26 of 62 (permalink) Old 05-13-2019, 02:00 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Castro Valley, CA
Posts: 538
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister Dave View Post
They are or they aren't - I'm confused by this statement. Curious: where did Nazis enter the discussion? They were to some degree socialist in that they controlled the means of production even if they didn't take ownership of it. The remainder of that quote is humorous. In theory it might be true. And now that Nazis have been brought up, Godwin's law must be invoked. I try to introduce people to the concept of reverse scientocracy, but they resist. It kind of matters. It's what we have today. As for anything science being crystal clear, you destroy the entire premise of science when you declare such. Science by it's own nature is never settled. ..... greater than a lot of things. I've read this for years. Not once has anyone stumbled upon why while lamenting this. There are actually non-evil reasons why. But I suppose that when everything is crystal clear, so must be the evil oil subsidy. Hello again.
I think I've addressed everything you wrote:

My point is that you used the word communism is a way that matches no meaningful use of the word. Then I pointed out all sorts of things in America that are similar to the policy you criticized but that benefit the rich only as opposed to the not so rich only. Then I threw my hands in the air over the thought of trying to come up with an agreed upon concept of communism.

Nazis entered the discussion when McRat mentioned Socialists using human leather to make lampshades. It was quoted immediately above where I used the word Nazis.
Nazism is a rejection of socialism. Nazism is the philosophy of a racial hierarchy and is highly capitalistic. Socialism is about class and ensuring that the means of production benefit the working man. There's a reason Germany was at war with the Soviets, and it wasn't because the Soviets were philosophically in line with Nazism.

I don't know what it means to invoke Godwin's Law. Is he going to appear for us and shame the argument? Anyway, talk to McRat.

There is such thing as scientific consensus, and there is such a thing as the evidence and proper analysis thereof. There has been a lot of scientific consensus and a lot of evidence with proper analysis backing it up. Until somebody can present even a shred of evidence that would make me doubt the reality of global warming, I see no reason to doubt it. The primary arguments against global warming that I've heard are "It's cold outside" and "The climate models don't all exactly agree so they must all be false". I've read many more, and they all fall apart under scrutiny. My favorite was "I did an experiment on my kitchen table and proved CO2 doesn't cause global warming." Well, that and some guy saying that the Chinese made it up to make money somehow.

And if the evidence and consensus point in the direction of global warming ever so strongly then something should be done. And if something should be done, the government should be part of making it happen, because the government is the best tool around for making something important and big happen. If there's some other effective way, I'm all ears. And if the government should be part of making it happen, it's not the same as socialism or communism, not that that especially matters but it apparently does to some. And since cars are a huge contributor to global warming, and since, over their lifetime, EVs use less fossil fuels than ICE cars, then policies that move people into EVs are good, and policies that move people out of EVs are bad. And therefore a $1000 registration fee on EVs is just bad policy. And therefore subsidizing fossil fuel production is bad policy.

And we do live in a reverse scientocracy. A lot more science in the government would be a good thing. It's been only slightly above zero my whole life but has dropped precipitously below zero in the past two years. Saying things are crystal clear isn't anti-science. That's some strange form of scientific puritancy. Don't mistake certainty and clarity for the inability to change one's mind in the face of evidence.
jsimon7777 is online now  
post #27 of 62 (permalink) Old 05-13-2019, 10:33 AM
Senior Member
 
McRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Norco, California, USA
Posts: 1,228
"Nazism is a rejection of socialism" - Work for Everyone, Free Medical, Free Vacations, Living Minimum Wage, "The State over the Individual", TV and media owned by the state (first country with TV), the Government owned many factories, it was the National Socialist Worker's Party. NSDAP was a populist movement, not the armed overthrow of a government. However, like most attempts at socialism, the rich figured out a way to get richer. Greed always trumps altruism.

Trivia - Siemens (and many others) are directly responsible for the murder of thousands of innocent slave workers. They built factories by hiring slaves from the government around the concentration camps, and when a worker was not performing up to schedule, they told the SS handlers (the slaves were owned by The State) to 'replace' that worker, who was killed the next morning. Siemens officials were aware of this. Siemens (and many others) never appeared before a Russian or Allied court for their criminal acts. The rich override both capitalists and socialists.

There are still deep-dark-secrets about the whole 1933-1965 period that remain documented but hidden. And many Urban Legends surrounding it. NSDAP was an enemy of communism, that is true, but they themselves were socialist before the war. Most countries involved became socialist during the war.

Putting a draconian tax on anything is socialist and usually a form of social engineering. States are not taxing EV road taxes, they taxing them with property taxes. If it stays in your garage most the time, you are taxed for ownership.

Jaguar i-Pace FE Photon Red 20" wheels, "Leaper"
Two Chevrolet Volts in service
24.2 kW x 480v 3ph solar array self-installed.
McRat is online now  
post #28 of 62 (permalink) Old 05-13-2019, 11:17 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsimon7777 View Post

The wealthy get subsidized at an embarrassing rate. For last tax year, I get a 7500 refund on the ipace, another 30% back on my home battery backup system, a write-off on home interest, massive business write-offs, deferred taxes on a significant chunk of income thanks to 403b, 457, and 401k, and probably more things I can't think of at the moment. Not to mention the massive tax cut that I got last year. If you don't like communism, how can you like subsidies for the rich.
You do know that if you are truly opposed to tax cuts, subsidies, etc. you can vote with your wallet and not take them, right?

Nothing is more baffling to me than hearing folks like Warren Buffet bemoaning his tax rate, yet no one is forcing him to take a single deduction or credit.

Write a check to the treasury to pay back every single ‘embarrassing’ subsidy/credit and then get back to me...
Dantrium is online now  
post #29 of 62 (permalink) Old 05-13-2019, 11:52 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 565
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dantrium View Post
You do know that if you are truly opposed to tax cuts, subsidies, etc. you can vote with your wallet and not take them, right?

Nothing is more baffling to me than hearing folks like Warren Buffet bemoaning his tax rate, yet no one is forcing him to take a single deduction or credit.

Write a check to the treasury to pay back every single ‘embarrassing’ subsidy/credit and then get back to me...
I am sorry but this argument is a red herring. To say that tax policy is wrong is a valid argument, and to say "hey just you as a single person don't take it" has nothing to do with the original argument, rather its simply a bad argument to invalidate rather than discuss the merits or weaknesses of the position. Which is exactly what we have devolved to in this country.

Let's talk about the actual argument rather than throw up a smoke screen. What is is about Warren Buffets detailed criticism that you find incorrect? If he as an individual refuses to use them it doesn't address the economic and social points he is making.

The basic position that "all taxes bad, I keep my money" is not a economic nor political argument in my opinion.
sciencegeek likes this.
epirali is online now  
post #30 of 62 (permalink) Old 05-13-2019, 12:18 PM
Senior Member
 
Mister Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Illinois
Posts: 462
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsimon7777 View Post
My point is that you used the word communism is a way that matches no meaningful use of the word. Then I pointed out all sorts of things in America that are similar to the policy you criticized but that benefit the rich only as opposed to the not so rich only. Then I threw my hands in the air over the thought of trying to come up with an agreed upon concept of communism.
I'll take "you" as a collective "you" there, or maybe you're confusing me with someone else's comment. I don't think I want to do the logical gymnastics to figure this one out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsimon7777 View Post
There is such thing as scientific consensus, and there is such a thing as the evidence and proper analysis thereof. There has been a lot of scientific consensus and a lot of evidence with proper analysis backing it up. Until somebody can present even a shred of evidence that would make me doubt the reality of global warming, I see no reason to doubt it. The primary arguments against global warming that I've heard are "It's cold outside" and "The climate models don't all exactly agree so they must all be false". I've read many more, and they all fall apart under scrutiny.
Sorry, I'm not foolish enough to actually take on the pushing a rope uphill task of convincing you or anyone else that what's "crystal clear" to them might not be in reality.

I've read some things that suggest that not all of what I'm being bombarded with is true. But you'll have to do your own homework in discovering that. It's not my job to educate you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsimon7777 View Post
And if the evidence and consensus point in the direction of global warming ever so strongly then something should be done. And if something should be done, the government should be part of making it happen, because the government is the best tool around for making something important and big happen. If there's some other effective way, I'm all ears. And if the government should be part of making it happen, it's not the same as socialism or communism, not that that especially matters but it apparently does to some. And since cars are a huge contributor to global warming, and since, over their lifetime, EVs use less fossil fuels than ICE cars, then policies that move people into EVs are good, and policies that move people out of EVs are bad. And therefore a $1000 registration fee on EVs is just bad policy. And therefore subsidizing fossil fuel production is bad policy.
Logical dominos. I'm getting some clues on how things become crystal clear.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsimon7777 View Post
And we do live in a reverse scientocracy. A lot more science in the government would be a good thing. It's been only slightly above zero my whole life but has dropped precipitously below zero in the past two years.
I'm not sure you understood what I meant. That's okay. I appreciate the effort at least. Let's see if I can make my meaning crystal clear.

Scientocracy is the practice of basing public policies on science. What we have now is the practice of basing science on public policies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsimon7777 View Post
Saying things are crystal clear isn't anti-science. That's some strange form of scientific puritancy. Don't mistake certainty and clarity for the inability to change one's mind in the face of evidence.
There's some irony in the conflicting logic there. I'm not sure who will spot it.

Meanwhile, I'll stand by my earlier remarks in this regard.
Mister Dave is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome