14 ms·
"Trump's proposed to wipe out the EV tax credit (please don't, I want my tax credit!) in the US. It'd reclaim less than a billion dollars but substantially dete
by melling 10y ago
"Trump's proposed to wipe out the EV tax credit (please don't, I want my tax credit!) in the US. It'd reclaim less than a billion dollars but substantially deter the uptake of EV cars"
Hmmm. I guess you don't understand that many Republicans don't like the idea of government subsidies. If it comes down to subsidies, we aren't going to solve the problem, according to this economist:
https://youtu.be/pQSGuC9GF70 https://youtu.be/pQSGuC9GF70
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- treehau5 10y agoThen get rid of the oil and gas subsides first. Then cut the small fries.
- KirinDave 10y agoYes. Also: legacy subsidies for non-edible farming. Ethanol is a waste of time at scale.
- bjelkeman-again 10y agoThey like subsidies alright. Just subsidies that fit their doctrine. > the IMF says America is the world’s second biggest culprit, spending $669 billion this year—but mostly by “post-tax” systems which fail to factor the costs of environmental damage into prices. http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2015/07/economist-explains-19 http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2015/07/ec...
- mikeash 10y agoI really wish people would understand that allowing companies to pollute without compensating the people they poison is just as much of a subsidy as dropping a fat deposit into their bank account every month. That recent rule change where coal mining companies are once again allowed to dump their waste into streams? That was Republicans passing a subsidy for coal mining. Every time Republicans block or roll back environmental regulations, that's subsidizing polluting industries.
- KirinDave 10y agoRepublicans have no problem subsidizing industries that they like. What they dislike is competition. Weirdly, the Democrats morphed into a weirdly lightweight party on regulation of markets and the Republicans continue to grow towards something that incrementally becomes a planned economy. And let's just reiterate: less than a decade of subsidizing renewables kicked it over an economic hump and we've accelerated it to the point where it's actually radically changing first world economies. So anyone saying that subsidies "don't solve problems" is clearly using a different definition of "solve", "problem", and maybe even "doesn't."
- omginternets 10y ago>Republicans continue to grow towards something that incrementally becomes a planned economy. This is worth repeating twice, in case people missed it. The irony would be funny if it weren't so damn catastrophic.
- eli_gottlieb 10y agoThere is no irony. They just wanted the centrally-planned oligarchy to be privately owned.
- omginternets 10y agoMaybe I was unclear: the irony is in the fact that the Republican party loves to appeal to the communist boogyman, all the while vying for a planned economy (albeit at the hands of private actors). This is ironic because much of their apparent hatred for socialism/communism stems from the idea that these lead to planned (i.e. non-free) economies.
- bobwaycott 10y agoRepublicans love subsidies as much as the next party.
- api 10y agoThey love subsidies, but to different industries run by different people and concentrated in different regions of the country. It's pork politics.