I think that this is a form of exploitation by car manufacturers to be honest. Consider that ownership can be expensive and so charging subscriptions with walle

I think that this is a form of exploitation by car manufacturers to be honest. Consider that ownership can be expensive and so charging subscriptions with walled gardens and lock-ins makes sense for lower income consumers. You might think this is a good pro-consumer thing to have. I don't believe so. There is no reason for example a manufacturer should be able to cajole another $40/mo. out of me for heating or cooling. Or $20 for their "radio station package", or any other thing they can imagine. Sure, you could argue Tesla's performance upgrade model might not be anti-consumer in the sense that they save money building one engine/one car and the consumer gets in at a level they can afford. But what is stopping them from pushing this further? Engine mileage fees? The point is that often times the average consumer is not considering the choices they make 5, 10, 15 years down the road. That doesn't mean it's okay for this position to be exploited, it means we need to educate people on their rights including the right to ownership and repair and do what we can to stop the exploitation of the cattle class. I have no idea why I can't have an unlocked phone with most carriers, or a gaming system that I can install what I want on, etc. I have no idea why most computers built today use soldered on components so I have to go to the them for repair. At the end of the day I don't like not owning things. When my entire life is determined by a list of dozens or even hundreds of subscriptions I am simply a meat machine that converts calories into corporate profits. Rent for an apartment because all of the houses are bought up is yet another way they keep you on the treadmill. If you own nothing you have no control. If you have no control your position is easily exploited. We need to fight tooth and nail to maintain control and ownership of everything we have.