Government Meddling - How You Can Tell It’s a Fraud as Well As a Con . . .

Posted by freedomforall 1 month ago to Government
8 comments | Share | Flag

"It is easy to prove that the whole electric car thing is a gigantic fraud – as well as a con.

The fraud is the assertion that electric cars are the best – the only – way to reduce the putative danger of carbon dioxide being “emitted” by vehicles.

Actually, the best and only realistic (bear with) way to reduce these “emissions” (leaving aside for the moment the assumption that they are in fact dangerous) would be to halve the gas burned by non-electric cars. This is something that is not only very feasible it is also something very affordable – which electric cars are not.

And because they are not affordable (and leaving aside the question of the enormous volume of “emissions” generated by the mostly natural gas/coal and oil-fired utility plants that generate the excessive quantity of electricity they burn) most people aren’t able to buy them, which renders them pie-in-the-sky solutions to this putative problem.

Unless, of course, the real-but-dare-not-say-it-yet solution is to “reduce emissions” by reducing driving to what it was before Henry Ford created the Model T – i.e., a luxury indulgence available only to the very affluent.

But if they are serious – and not serious about making the privately owned car a thing of the past for most people – then there is a much better way to “reduce emissions” of carbon dioxide.

It is to remove government-imposed obstacles that prevent the building – and selling – of gas-engined cars that burn half or less the gas of current government-mandated “economy” cars – and cost half or less what current, government-mandated “economy” cars cost.

Then more people could afford to drive them – and the more who drive them, the less gas emitted.

Environmental win – without anyone losing.

This is not only possible, it is actual. Such cars exist – are sold – in other countries and could be sold here, were it not for the government.

What could be achieved today, 30-plus years after the ’90 CRX HF averaged better than 40 MPG – with 30-plus years of technology advances? Well, the answer to that is also knowable because cars like the ’90 CRX HF are being built and sold today.

Just not here in the United States.

In India, one can buy a compact-sized five-door hatchback like the Suzuki Alto that averages – deep breath now – in excess of 60 MPG. This is 20 MPG better than any hybrid you can buy here achieves. And the Alto costs about 4 Lakh – equivalent in American money to less than $10,000.

It achieves this spectacular economy – and affordability – without hybrid technology or micro-turbos. Instead of those expensive things, it achieves economy with a 1,000 cc three cylinder engine that’s powerful enough to propel the car to 60 MPH in about 13 seconds – sufficient for A to B everyday driving – and to a top speed of just under 100 MPH – enough oomph to maintain 75 MPH on the highway.

It can do all that because it only weighs about 1,600 pounds.

With AC. Because it does not come with the “safety” equipment mandated by the government here. Which is also why it costs less than $10,000 to buy, brand new – there.

Which is less than one-third the cost of the least expensive new electric cars, the Nissan Leaf and the Chevy Bolt.

Which don’t do much to “reduce greenhouse gasses” when very few people can afford to buy them in the first place.

As far as the con, that ought to be obvious. Billionaires like Elon Musk – and billion-dollar corporations – are using the government to rent-seek themselves more billions by forcing the average person, who cannot afford to buy an electric car, to subsidize high-performance electric cars for the affluent few.

These EVs are designed for speed and style – not economy. They have batteries twice as large as necessary and so hog twice as much energy as is necessary to get around economically, piously – hands held prayerfully in devotion to Gai and Greta.

And laughing all the while at the dupes made to pay for it all."

Add Comment


All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by $ Markus_Katabri 1 month ago
    I’ve been saying this for years. I remember when my dad’s 1979 Pontiac Sunbird got 40mpg. No BS. It did. Emissions is simple. Less fuel burned = Less Emissions. This hasn’t been about Emissions since at least the mid 90s.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by mccannon01 1 month ago
    Nice find. Thanks for posting.

    At this point, would Americans buy a car minus the safety features? Would insurance companies insure them? Hmmmm, to answer my own questions, motorcycles don't have all those crash safety and EPA standards and are still on the road.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by VetteGuy 1 month ago
    People in the US won't buy 'em. Next time you are at the grocery store, count SUVs vs subcompacts. There are several reasons. One is that it's a 'fad' although a long-lasting one. The 'bigger is better' mentality. There are practical reasons as well. Ever tried to fit a mandated child car seat into a compact car? I have (Miata), and it is difficult to impossible. It is implicitly assumed that if you have children, you haul them around in a minivan or SUV. Similar with strollers. Sure they fold, but even folded, it won't fit in anything remotely small. Third is the 'safety' issue. In a crash, bigger is definitely better. And since everyone else out there is driving around in these monstrosities, you better be in one as well, out of self-defense.

    Please note that I don't AGREE with these sentiments, nor defend them. I own a Miata, an RX8 (small sport sedan), and a Corvette. Full disclosure, I also own a pickup (which I consider a necessary evil for accommodating my hobbies). I am on constant guard for distracted (and just bad) drivers, out of a sense of self-preservation. When you drive a small car, you get really good at avoiding accidents. Or you don't last long.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 1 month ago
      I agree completely, VetteGuy. The SUV craze has long baffled me from a buyers viewpoint. I understand why the manufacturers created the irrational demand - survival reaction to government edicts. Auto consumers are easily herded by advertising, imo.

      Is one of your 3 sports cars your favorite, or do you enjoy them all for different reasons?
      (I drive a '99 10AE Miata. It's my 5th Miata since '89. Not willing to pay for a newer one or for the insurance. I still like the style of the first gen best.)
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by VetteGuy 1 month ago
        The Vette is definitely my favorite. It's a 2012 'Centennial Edition' and we take it to Cruise Nites whenever possible (not much lately) and on a road trip down parts of Route 66. The RX8 is my grocery-getter / everyday car. The Miata is primarily my wife's car and has an auto. It is a retractable hard-top, and is just a fun little car.

        Style-wise, I agree with you - the first gen Miatas just look 'right'! In general, I am a fan of small, light cars that handle well in the right hands. I previously have owned a MR2 and a Porsche 914.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 1 month ago
          Your Vette sounds like a great sports car. I take it you haven't had any issues withe th RX8's engine. iirc, they were somewhat problematic.
          I had '74 Jensen Healy, '74 Capri, '79 RX7 (upgraded to a 'racing' engine in '85), all miata's since '89. Loved driving a friend's 914 and S2000, too.
          The Miata's hidden headlights were supposedly cut because they didn't pass federal pedestrian safety laws. Seems like all SUV's in the world would be more dangerous to pedestrians than a Miata with hidden headlights. Were the pedestrians frightened to death when they popped open?
          I like the idea of a retractable hard top, but the Miata NC and ND models sacrifice too much space behind the seats to be practical for me. The lower driving position is less ideal for me, too.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by VetteGuy 1 month ago
            I hear lots of bad stories about RX8s, but mine has been pretty reliable, and no excess oil use. Biggest issues have been AC compressor and a diff front seal. I had to replace the clutch at 80K miles, due to a throwout bearing, but the clutch disk was not worn out.
            With a 9000 rpm redline, when wound out, it sounds more like a sport bike than a car!
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by 1 month ago
              I wanted another rotary (loved my RX7), but the RX8 history nudged me to the 10AE Miata. I'm glad yours has been good to you.
              I just had to replace the clutch (yes, throwout bearing) on my Miata (at about 76,000.) It's 22 years old this year and things eventually wear out. I got it in '14 when I returned from living in NZ. It had about 43k then and needed a new top. I think it spent most of its life in the (60 yr old) owner's garage in LA, CA. I have also had to replace brakes, re-thread one plug, new radiator, and valve cover gasket. Running nicely. Weather was good for top-down driving last week, too.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  


  • Comment hidden. Undo