Infrastructure does need a lot of help and in some ways I do think that EVs are luxury cars. I think that subsidies should be extended to people of certain income levels but not the high income earners. They don't need any more tax relief.he appeal of electric cars and clean energy would still remain, and a graduated tax on cars based on MSRP could still persuade middle-of-the-road buyers to consider potentially cleaner electric cars when they head to dealer lots. But needlessly subsidizing wealthier buyers purchasing environmentally neutral — or marginally helpful — electric cars doesn’t serve a larger goal of cleaner transportation. The United States wouldn’t be the first country to revisit its electric-car incentives.
Add to that the motivations they might have from industries directly impacted by gas prices and any influence we may or may not be aware about.While I see your point, I just think that is politically infeasible. People would freak out if gas prices rose to the levels they should actually be at. Congress would never ever do such a thing.
That's true as well, gas prices are baked into almost everything, so a rise in gas prices would cause a rise in all prices and that only doubles down on what I was saying before.Add to that the motivations they might have from industries directly impacted by gas prices and any influence we may or may not be aware about.
Food is a big one that they try to go after, seen it before when gas prices shot up high.That's true as well, gas prices are baked into almost everything, so a rise in gas prices would cause a rise in all prices and that only doubles down on what I was saying before.
And while transportation you can kind of make the argument that people should adjust to driving less, working and living in the same area, it's hard to argue that people should adjust to way more expensive food. Food seems like more of a necessity and right than cheap gas for cars.Food is a big one that they try to go after, seen it before when gas prices shot up high.
