President Biden test drives Ford’s new electric F-150 on a track pic.twitter.com/ICAlHtpLrW
— Mario Parker (@MarioDParker) May 18, 2021
WATCH: President Biden test drives the new electric Ford F-150 Lightning at the Ford Dearborn Development Center in Michigan. pic.twitter.com/yPO3t6lE10
— The Hill (@thehill) May 18, 2021
“The future of the auto industry is electric. There’s no turning back,” President Biden says at Ford’s Rouge Electric Vehicle Center in Dearborn, Michigan, declaring that the U.S. is in a race against China to lead the global market for electric vehicles https://t.co/NZCL9Ok6Vq pic.twitter.com/XSlU9cl0wi
— Bloomberg Quicktake (@Quicktake) May 18, 2021
This has nothing to do with working class union jobs.
If we really cared about those jobs, we wouldn’t be closing factories here and shipping jobs to Mexico. This is entirely about pushing the climate change agenda of affluent, college-educated, upper middle class progressives by subsidizing electric vehicles in order to curb carbon emissions.
The forced shift to electric vehicles is one piece of the larger progressive agenda which includes “tackling our meat obsession” by replacing industrial animal agriculture with lab grown meat and getting rid of fossil fuels and nuclear power in order to power the electric grid with renewables. It is wealthy and highly educated people who are obsessed with this stuff, not working class voters.
“Dearborn — President Joe Biden pitched his $174 billion electric vehicle plan Tuesday at the Ford Motor Co. Rouge Electric Vehicle Center, touring the plant and taking a test-track spin in the company’s electric version of the best-selling F-150 pickup truck ahead of its reveal Wednesday evening.
After his time behind the wheel of the F-150 Lightning, the president was asked how it was to drive the battery-electric pickup. “It feels great,” Biden said.
“I’ll tell you what, these electric vehicles, now I don’t know if anyone has a stop watch but these vehicles can go from 0 to 60 in … 4.4 seconds,” the president said. …
The goal is to spark a takeoff of the American electric vehicle market, which now accounts for less than 2% of new car sales, with the eventual aim of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to help reach a goal of cutting emissions in half by 2030 and net-zero economy-wide by 2050. …”
If electric vehicles are already on the market, why do we need the government to subsidize them and promote them? Why can’t Joe Six Pack be trusted to buy an electric F-150 Lightning pickup? Why can’t Joe Six Pack be trusted to buy a Beyond Burger or an Impossible Burger?
The reality of the situation for working class voters many of whom voted for Joe Biden who can’t afford electric vehicles and who probably aren’t interested in buying one either is the soaring cost of used vehicles which they actually do buy and a 7-year-high in gas prices and higher prices for beef and pork and higher prices for consumer goods in general. These are more immediate and pressing concerns for the vast majority of Trump and Biden voters than putting around in an electric vehicle.
How much of the presidential motorcade is electric vehicles ?
Your vehicle is dead, out in the sticks, how far do you walk to get a bucket of electrons ?
Just find a currant bush and pick some.
The world is awash in natural gas(methane).
Is there any serious talk on gas to liquids?
Solar panels degrade and die over a 25 year span.
Fast breeder/burner reactors could give us energy for 1000s of years.
With the US racial cesspool, we will never ascend to the technical levels of NS Germany.
I know that the current level of technology can not be maintained.
Tyrone working on the CAN bus system on your car.
Who is going to do the work and who is going to become the slaves once oil is outlawed?
1 barrel of oil equates to 25,000 hours of human labour (12.5 years at 40 hours per week).
Who is going to do the work of all them diesel engines, mules?? White ones?
What do you mean I don’t have any carbon credits left in my account?
https://www.kbb.com/car-advice/how-long-does-take-charge-electric-car/
There’s a bigger “carbon” footprint running and mining for lithium that these car batteries run on. The cure is always worse than the problem.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/ev-electric-vehicle-carbon-footprint-1.5394126
There is always going to be some damage whatever we do. Digging for lithium will be bad. There is no perfect solution. But it’s a case of which is worse? Is millions of billions of cars emitting CO2 worse (than what plants can even taken in, etc)? Or electricity worse (which can stem form different things). I say the former. But interesting article. Thanks for sharing it. I’ll look into this more. Sitting idlily by and doing nothing is not a choice. We don’t use coal anymore as a traditional resource than electricity. Coal used to dominate everywhere previously. As technology improves, new forms of energy get implemented.
“We don’t use coal anymore”
No, but china does.
China is building a giant coal powered plant , every week.
China is emitting more co2 than the rest of the world is stopping.
Electric cars are for people with more money than brains.
LMAO.
Minorly based (kinda). Doesn’t go far enough.
It always take the State to push things. Most capitalists don’t take huge risks (for huge money loss).
But as far as Ford in Mexico… that should be called out. Big industrial plants to start building electric cars should be implemented. A program to help exchange cars would be implemented. Capitalists cannot be trusted to have jobs in the country and State run factories would be implemented. Instead of trying to vie for these companies to come back, we should be looking for new opportunities and using what is a loss and turning it into an advantage.
To reach working class people (who don’t give a fuck about climate change admittedly), pointing to the long term savings of gas to electric, and other maintenance car problems that are associated with traditional gasoline cars vs electric (i.e. oil change, timing belt [I had to get this replaced and all of this is expensive], smog checks, etc) would be gone. There’s more moving parts in a gasoline car vs electric (and more things that can go wrong). The most expensive thing would be the battery replacement but that’s fairly easy in terms of labor. The costs would be astronomical in terms of yearly savings. The discussions should largely be about costs and savings- especially month to month. Also, the ability to charge your car at home vs going to a traditional gas station again saves more money (and time).
The issue is initial buying of the car which a State car program would deal with. The other big hurdle is development the infrastructure nationally by replacing gas stations vs electric stations across the country (which again can be forged ahead by the State [creating more jobs]). A big undertaking but a better one. (even going nuclear for power plants for fossil fuels).
There is also Hydrogen cars which is another solution (but run the same infrastructure problem, etc).
There’s the other hydrogen, ammonia.
A reporter asked Sleepy Joe if she could ask a question about Israel and he replied – “No, you can’t- not unless you get in front of the car as I step on it.”
“It is wealthy and highly educated people”
Educated beyond their intelligence and basic common sense.
The Biden Administration with its corruption and incompetence underscores what a disaster an administration infested with ideologues with stupid yet ambitious agendas can be for a country.
I don’t care for the reflexive kneejerk Repugnant reaction to the mere suggestion of any environmentalism that is advanced by Democrats. Funny how they can find ways to compromise on tax cuts, more monetary and military support to Israel, and all kinds of crap to decimate the productive White classes, but the environment is the hill they choose to fight on. Oh, well, Sam Francis didn’t christen the GOP as the Stupid Party for nothing.
Instead of closing industries and forcing people without the wherewithal to buy the new technology long before there is any infrastructure in place to support it, why isn’t any one pushing for conservation?
There is a large percentage of work that is done in an office with a computer, a fax/printer, and a phone. Why not reduce our emissions by enacting legislation to “nudge” companies into shifting to remote workers and more telecommuting?
The one thing that came out of the Covid Crisis was that large companies who could quickly transition to remote work found that their remote workers/telecommuters were more productive than those who battled traffic. The potential savings they could yield from not heating/cooling, paying the electric bills on huge units they rented was even greater.
Last, with much fewer commuters, there was much less fuel emissions, less traffic delays and accidents. Roadway construction was easier and less hazardous. Trucks delivering goods were not impeded or slowed down by rush-hour traffic.
Today’s current technology could enable any office worker to work at home and even meet with coworkers through Google Meeting and ZOOM video meetings.
A retired school bus driver told me how much fuel was wasted by not properly pre-planning suburban housing divisions. The kids would have to be bused even to local schools, because the developers preferred to use every spare lot to cram in another house rather than making sure the schools were easily accessed on foot on all sides.
Working with what we have in a conservative, sensible fashion and then providing home owners with affordable, energy savings products that they could then take off their income taxes and other compromises that does NOT throw out the proverbial baby with the bathwater is never an option that is up for discussion with either side.
Let’s face it, no matter what color tie they “wear,” both sides suck raw sewage.