Joined
·
10,463 Posts
CA as always is heavy handed in the marketplace. Still don't know how the top businesses are drawn to Silicon Valley.
What right does the government have to dictate how something is sold, especially after the fact? There's a case to be made that consumers need to be fully informed, but once you get 2 informed parties (business and consumer) that agree on something, that's between the 2 parties and nobody else.
As if charging infrastructure needs more obstacles to profitability. Nobody is served by someone sticking it out on a DCFC to get the last few percent charge at low rates, so it makes sense to incentivize them to move on. It isn't good for the consumer that is wasting their time, and it isn't good for the DCFC owner who needs to cycle people through as quickly as possible, and it isn't good for those queued up waiting for a charge.
So, what problem does this address? The article seemed to suggest it addresses people who are bad at math and can't be bothered to figure out how their vehicle or charging infrastructure works.
What right does the government have to dictate how something is sold, especially after the fact? There's a case to be made that consumers need to be fully informed, but once you get 2 informed parties (business and consumer) that agree on something, that's between the 2 parties and nobody else.
As if charging infrastructure needs more obstacles to profitability. Nobody is served by someone sticking it out on a DCFC to get the last few percent charge at low rates, so it makes sense to incentivize them to move on. It isn't good for the consumer that is wasting their time, and it isn't good for the DCFC owner who needs to cycle people through as quickly as possible, and it isn't good for those queued up waiting for a charge.
So, what problem does this address? The article seemed to suggest it addresses people who are bad at math and can't be bothered to figure out how their vehicle or charging infrastructure works.