• GalacticRobot@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 hours ago

    This isn’t exactly correct or truthful. A new EV Bolt is only $4k more than a new Camry, and that difference is quickly made up from the gas saving, especially when gas is $4+ a gallon.

    And when you want to accelerate adoption of something, you incentivize it. The US already spends $40+ billion in direct subsidies for oil (https://www.americanprogress.org/article/5-hidden-ways-the-government-rigs-the-market-in-favor-of-fossil-fuels/) Imagine instead of giving that to oil companies, you used that to accelerate the development of EV’s and their roll out.

    • innermachine@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      A comparison of subsidized oil would better be served by having the government subsidize clean energy production and infrastructure. It’s not like the government is handing out subsidies to buy gas cars 🤷‍♂️

      • GalacticRobot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        The government is doing that already (IRA law, although a lot of that was pulled back by the current administration). And like oil had, you would need continuous investment, which hasn’t happened, so a discounting program to incentivize purchasing seems like the best of both worlds. It seemed pretty effective as well at kicking off early adoption, which was then hampered by inflation, high prices, and government divesting from EV investment.