Most active commenters
  • cogman10(3)

←back to thread

A $20k American-made electric pickup with no paint, no stereo, no screen

(www.theverge.com)
1336 points kwindla | 13 comments | 25 Apr 25 15:01 UTC | HN request time: 0.025s | source | bottom
Show context
aidenn0 ◴[25 Apr 25 16:56 UTC] No.43795946[source]▶
For anyone curious, if you made a similarly sized gas-powered pickup with an i4 engine, it would be penalized more than a full-sized pickup for being too fuel inefficient, despite likely getting much better mileage than an F-150 because, since 2011, bigger cars are held to a lesser standard by CAFE[1].

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_average_fuel_economy...

replies(9): >>43796306 #>>43796377 #>>43796399 #>>43797478 #>>43798561 #>>43798794 #>>43798925 #>>43799250 #>>43800495 #
MostlyStable ◴[25 Apr 25 17:26 UTC] No.43796306[source]▶
Example #5621 that a simple carbon tax would be miles better than the complex morass of regulations we currently have.
replies(10): >>43796437 #>>43796498 #>>43797259 #>>43797297 #>>43797777 #>>43798133 #>>43798144 #>>43798632 #>>43799271 #>>43799782 #
aidenn0 ◴[25 Apr 25 17:37 UTC] No.43796437[source]▶
That's overly reductive.

1. Poorer people tend to drive older vehicles, so if you solely encourage higher fuel economies by taxing carbon emissions, then the tax is (at least short-term) regressive.

2. You can work around #1 by applying incentives for manufacturers to make more efficient cars should lead any carbon tax

3. If you just reward companies based on fleet-average fuel economy without regard to vehicle size, then it would be rather bad for US car companies (who employ unionized workers) that historically make larger cars than Asian and European companies.

4. So the first thing done was to have a separate standard for passenger vehicles and light-trucks, but this resulted in minivans and SUVs being made in such a way as to get the light-truck rating

5. We then ended up with the size-based calculation we have today, but the formula is (IMO) overly punitive on small vehicles. Given that the formula was forward looking, it was almost certain to be wrong in one direction or the other, but it hasn't been updated.

replies(11): >>43796458 #>>43796539 #>>43796560 #>>43796625 #>>43797425 #>>43797538 #>>43798466 #>>43798489 #>>43798858 #>>43800531 #>>43800991 #
bflesch ◴[25 Apr 25 17:40 UTC] No.43796458{3}[source]▶
Meanwhile jet fuel for private jets is (and remains) not taxed at all, even in the EU.
replies(5): >>43796774 #>>43796932 #>>43797503 #>>43797554 #>>43799073 #
1. cogman10 ◴[25 Apr 25 18:07 UTC] No.43796774{4}[source]▶
Which is bonkers. If ever there was a thing that should be taxed it's jet fuel for private jets. 300% tax on private jet fuel would be reasonable.

The emissions just to shuttle rich people from one side of the country to the next (For some, multiple times per day) is insane. You should need to be a billionaire just to afford flying private jets and it should still eat a significant portion of your income if that's what you choose to do.

And for what? Like, we live in the modern era, why does anyone need to travel from NY to Florida to Texas to California in a day?

replies(1): >>43797165 #
2. Gibbon1 ◴[25 Apr 25 18:42 UTC] No.43797165[source]▶
I have a suspicion the reason why super wealthy people like say Musk but he isn't the only one hate subways and high speed rail is because they fly everywhere. You might like if you could get on the subway in Glen Park and be at lands end in half an hour. You might like getting on a high speed rail and being in LA in 4 hours.

These guy will never ride a subway or take a train anywhere.

replies(3): >>43797540 #>>43798288 #>>43800552 #
3. gonzoflip ◴[25 Apr 25 19:15 UTC] No.43797540[source]▶
I'm no Musk fanboy, but it is funny you mention him not liking subways or high speed rail because didn't he try to build a subterranean high speed rail?
replies(2): >>43797654 #>>43798896 #
4. AlexandrB ◴[25 Apr 25 19:26 UTC] No.43797654{3}[source]▶
The hyperloop was a shit idea from day one and thus far no one has been able to make it work. It's also entirely possible that Elon Musk floated this as a distraction to stop the development of "regular" high speed rain in California[1].

The Las Vegas "loop"[2], on the other hand, is basically a parody of a subway - with a fraction of the capacity.

> In July 2021, the peak passenger flow was recorded at 1,355 passengers per hour.

As a comparison Toronto's subway can handle 28,000 passengers per hour[3] per direction or more.

[1] https://www.jalopnik.com/did-musk-propose-hyperloop-to-stop-...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Las_Vegas_Convention_Center_Lo...

[3] https://dailyhive.com/toronto/ttc-toronto-subway-station-rid...

replies(2): >>43797997 #>>43798001 #
5. gonzoflip ◴[25 Apr 25 20:04 UTC] No.43797997{4}[source]▶
Did I say it was a good idea? I was merely pointing out that there's evidence that he is not the best example for people that hate high-speed rails and subways.

>Stop the development of high speed rail in California

I thought that got funded, what happened?

replies(1): >>43800041 #
6. Gibbon1 ◴[25 Apr 25 20:05 UTC] No.43798001{4}[source]▶
You'll note to two things that ties the hyper loop and the Las Vegas Loop together is private cars.

Don't discount that these guys find ordinary people to be scary and disgusting.

7. lenkite ◴[25 Apr 25 20:38 UTC] No.43798288[source]▶
Many politicians campaigning for green energy (aka AOC) also fly on private jets everywhere so that they can fight the oligarchy - this behavior isn't restricted to wealthy businessmen alone.
replies(2): >>43798389 #>>43799352 #
8. cogman10 ◴[25 Apr 25 20:50 UTC] No.43798389{3}[source]▶
Depressingly, I think that's why a law to stop this behavior won't pass in the US. Wealthy and powerful people love their private flights.

Doesn't mean that anyone engaging in this behavior should get a pass nor that we shouldn't keep advocating for such a tax.

9. rasz ◴[25 Apr 25 21:54 UTC] No.43798896{3}[source]▶
>didn't he try to build a subterranean high speed rail?

_for cars_

10. drilbo ◴[25 Apr 25 23:13 UTC] No.43799352{3}[source]▶
Maybe you shouldn't base your assumptions of the world on politically charged clickbait headlines... Did her and Bernie use a private jet? Quite possibly. Does that mean they fly "everywhere" on private jets? Certifiably false.
11. ◴[26 Apr 25 01:12 UTC] No.43800041{5}[source]▶
12. renewiltord ◴[26 Apr 25 03:06 UTC] No.43800552[source]▶
LOL on an e-bike I can beat BART to SFO from Glen Park unless you time both to start at just the moment BART arrives instead of at a random moment. If you want a Glen Park to Lands End to take under 30 minutes, the cost would rival the Iraq War.
replies(1): >>43802399 #
13. cogman10 ◴[26 Apr 25 10:32 UTC] No.43802399{3}[source]▶
Looks like the trains are running every 30 minutes.

A super easy solution that doesn't cost the iraq war is adding new trains and running them every 15 minutes.

You'd have to deal with lower occupancy trains as a result, which means it's not as cost efficient.