You ought to post this as a seperate thread so people see it, this is outrageous but it is so illustrative of the arrogant attitude of these looters.

Now poor Gov. Brown has had enough of those ungrateful "freeloaders" who will have to pay their hiked up taxes regardless~
http://www.mrctv.org/blog/gov-brown-c...

Well, I would bet she was sorely disappointed on her 16th. Was her last name Chrisley?

Don't know, but I remember another person I worked with in SoCal who was informed (or should I say, read the riot act) by his almost 16 year old daughter that she would only be seen in and therefore would only accept a NEW Porsche, Mercedes or BMW for her birthday.

Your argument is the same one a lot of people have made, and falls on deaf ears, just as we see with the Media attacks on Trump, Obama did a huge pile of bad things, yet none was ever reported, if Trump farts, it is front page news and he is single fartedly killing us all and should be impeached. Same issue with electric cars, where there may be some advantages, but no where near as much as they like to say, because it does not fit their agenda.

Uh, my point was Kalifornia mixes any situation with saving everything in the known universe, except people. I also suspect they are not above stealing 20 years worth of road taxes (and they as much as admit that), and then hammering everyone with a huge "makeup" tax, and just say "oops". All the while blowing money on everything but what they are legally and morally required to do because democrats have no moral sense of right and wrong that matches our norm, they believe you can do anything, if it is "for a good cause".

Who uses whale oil in cars?

" We still generate almost half of our electricity from coal,"
I buy all mine from renewable sources. One counter-arguments to that is they could not handle peak demand if everyone used only renewable. Also the renewable energy my money buys is produced in sunny and windy areas and consumed by people nearby, not by me. It would be more expensive to get renewable energy from the source to my house.

All that is true, but as nonrenewable mature, costs will come down and those problems will be solved. Trying not to have any negative impact on anyone in the world is an impossible goal. The point is to try to pay your way and make people whole for the damage you do, not to be morally pure like those people you describe arguing who's "greener". I definitely know what you're talking about with people irrationally showing off how "greener" they are than others.

No, we need more information. What was the car? The Jilt LE?

Well stated, KS! And if the EPA would get out of the way the coal, diesel, heavy oil, and gas plants could become at least 20% more efficient for very little capital cost. (Same process is also viable for diesel truck engines.)

Then there is "the rest of the story:" Even "pure electric" vehicles have a "carbon footprint." Just remember, whenever you plug your electric vehicle into an outlet to charge those batteries, where does the electricity come from? "The Grid" of course! We still generate almost half of our electricity from coal, and another 20% from gas-turbine power plants. That adds up to about 70% from fossil fuel. The remainder (30%) is roughly 20% nuclear, 6% hydro (dams, mostly in the Pacific Northwest and the Columbia River), and 4% "other" (which means wind, solar, geothermal, and a small amount of oil-fired plants). So, it TAKES CO2 generation to PRODUCE the electricity that charges up your batteries for your "ALL GREEN" cars. Brilliant! Now, if we had an electrical grid that was 100% powered by nuclear, that would be a different matter. Also, there are transmission and other efficiency factors that translate into an electric vehicle's use of that fossil fuel being less efficient than if it were burned directly in the vehicle. For example, in a coal plant, for every 100 MW-hr of combustion energy released, only 40-45 MW-hr of electricity is fed into the grid. All real energy production methods have associated thermodynamic efficiencies. So, given that an "all electric" vehicle gets its energy from the grid, what "mpg equivalent" is the "break-even" point where its "carbon footprint" is equivalent to an internal combustion engine? I've seen a couple analyses that put that break-even point at about 35-40 mpg. So, if you own a Tesla or a Chevy Volt, don't ever tell someone with a car that gets 45 mpg about how "green" you are, because that other guy is "greener" than you are!

Well, it also is "force them out of the gas cars into electrics" and save the whales. And Trees. And Fish. A blue belly mini finger trout. And whatever else you want. Who is to say their theft of all the last 20years of taxes was not specifically to create this situation?

Thanks, that makes o lot of sense. I wonder what
more electrics on the road will do for the ozone level?

I recall going to local sports games as a child visiting in NC. Dixie was always played and revered at least as much as the US anthem. Everyone stood and most sang along. Haven't heard it in 40 years or more.

Those electric vehicle stats in CA include hybrids which made up about half the CA electric vehicle sales in 2016. That puts pure electrics at only 1.5% of the total. The best selling electric in CA in 2016? Tesla model S. 43% of all Tesla S sold in the US in 2016 were in CA.

Old saying: If you are faced with a situation you cannot understand, look for the financial interest.
For politicians just broaden "financial" to include power and you will find your explanation.
In 2016 electrics were only 3% of the total new vehicle sales in CA, the highest percentage ever. Would a politician rather control 3% or 97%? BTW the rest of the US the percentage sales of new electric vehicles is 0.3% of total new vehicle sales.

Shhh..don't let the uneducated masses hear that one..it would happen for sure.,...

Heinlein saw this coming 20 years or so ago in "Friday". The Republic of California had a money unit called an "Ursis" or something, had elections every other week, and a head of state called the "Chief" who wore an Indian headdress. I guess he is right up there with Ayn Rand as a prophet...

True story: Years ago at work in California a young woman was crying because a guy had jilted her. An older woman among a small group tried to console her, and offered to introduce her to a more upstanding fellow when she felt ready to date again. The young woman considered this a minute as she wiped her tears, then asked: "What kind of car does he drive?" And that is about all one needs know about California.

Idaho is still fairly rational...........some moves have been attempted, but were thwarted..........however, the attempts to "convert" continue by "infiltraitors" (spelling intentional)........... BT

Altruism is the ethics of living for others as the standard of morality, not voluntary acts of kindness or occasional charity. The collectivist demands for global statism is based on the ethics of sacrifice of the individual. "Globalism" is also often used to mean simply free trade without national protectionism.

Altruism as voluntary acts of kindness or charity seem ok to me. Globalism isn't that. It's compulsory. Therein is the rub. People should be able to help others. Globalism forces sacrifice on people - it moves into an area that isn't completely screwed up and destroys.

We will just have to tear up the Constitution and Declaration because a good number of the original signers were in fact slave owners.

Some folks wanted to remove Andrew Jackson's statue from Jackson Square until they were gently reminded that he defended New Orleans against the British in 1812 and had nothing to do with the CSA. (Of the Cherokees would have approved.)

Secession would kill off a large minority of the population in rural areas that don't follow the left.