Police Hatred Is Causing Democrat Concern Over Elections

By William Teach May 25, 2021 – 10:30 am

Gee, what a shame that Democrats will pay for their whole defund the police/police are horrible rhetoric

Upcoming races show Democrats grappling with police reform messaging

Democrats are grappling with how to message on police reform ahead of a number of high-profile local races and the 2022 midterm elections as shootings rise across the country.

Republicans successfully tied a number of Democrats to the defund the police movement in the 2020 general election, a tactic some centrist Democrats blame for their narrowed House majority.

Now, local and state races in 2021 could preview how the issue will play in 2022. In Philadelphia, for example, the city’s progressive District Attorney Larry Krasner overcame a primary challenge in what his allies saw as a win for the police reform movement. Meanwhile in New York City, Democratic primary candidate Andrew Yang warned earlier this month that defunding the police would be the wrong approach for the city. (snip)

Critics have tied the rise in violence to police funding cuts and other reforms. Advocates of police reform, on the other hand, are quick to point to factors besides police funding, including an unprecedented pandemic, and note that a one-year spike doesn’t necessarily foretell a trend.

Still, the increase could give Republicans an opening to put Democrats on the defensive, tying them once again to progressive calls to reallocate funds away from police departments. The strategy proved to be successful last year in more than half a dozen districts where Republican candidates ousted Democratic incumbents.

In the wake of George Floyd, Democrats have been calling for defunding the police, blaming all police of the actions of a few, for cutting their funding, for getting rid of all sorts of special units, replacing cops with civilians (those civilians would have most of the same powers as police, just without the gun, making them….police), taking away qualified immunity (but the politicians don’t want QI taken away from themselves). They’ve been saying lots of bad things about police. Police have been retiring/resigning in droves. Those left are prioritizing where they patrol and respond. They often refuse to become engaged during crime, wanting to avoid getting stuck in a bad situation.

That all certainly is a big cause in the spike in crime in primarily Democratic party run cities. Hence why many cities are backtracking on their defund messaging and actions, cities like Minneapolis. It’s easy for politicians to attempt to do things, as they are protected by law enforcement. Or hire private security.

Republicans say the strategy of tying Democrats to violence and the defund the police movement likely won’t play as well in large cities, but it could become an issue in some key districts.

“I think our urban areas and our cities, they’ve been mostly captured by the Democrats and particularly by the progressives, that it’s going to take a lot to shake those voters away from that sensibility,” Naughton said.

If Democrats want to keep voting for this, hey, let them suffer the consequences. They should be required to stay in their crime ridden cities. Portland used to be a pretty safe city. Now? It’s actually worse than Chicago.

Democratic Sen. Cory Booker (New Jersey) and Republican Sen. Tim Scott (South Carolina), who are both involved in the negotiations, have expressed hope recently about passing police reform through Congress.

“If you look at the heart and soul of the Democratic Party, the most loyal voting bloc African-American voters, doing something on police reform is not just a hope and wish, it’s a must,” Seawright said. “I don’t care how red or blue any district is or any state is, if you don’t turn out your base and you don’t speak to the bread and butter issues, barbershop and beauty salon issues, then you’re going to have an even deeper problem.”

Scott’s reform made sense, it didn’t demonize the police, and led to law and order. Hence, the Democrats filibustered it.

Read: Police Hatred Is Causing Democrat Concern Over Elections »

Posted in Current Affairs, Democrats, Unhinged Tools | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

EVs Are About Environment Justice For POC Or Something

By William Teach May 25, 2021 – 8:26 am

As Tom Nelson likes to say, “this isn’t about climate, is it?” Also “sounds like BS to me”

Electric cars are about environmental justice for Black and Hispanic Americans

The global auto industry has begun a historic shift from gas- and diesel-fueled cars to electric vehicles. President Joe Biden’s infrastructure plan seeks to speed up this transition by requesting billions of dollars to modernize the electric grid and build 500,000 electric vehicle charging stations.

Evidence shows that many Americans are eager to transition to EVs and participate in a clean energy economy. In a recent nationally representative consumer survey, 71% of drivers surveyed said they were interested in getting an electric car. But 48% said that lack of access to public charging infrastructure was holding them back, and 43% cited vehicle cost as a disincentive.

My research focuses on ways to make cities more sustainable, healthy and equitable places to live. In my view, making EVs and charging infrastructure accessible to all drivers is crucial for achieving clean transportation and energy justice.

People of color bear disproportionate harms from fossil fuels. For example, Black people in the U.S. are more likely than white people to live near oil refineries and petrochemical plants.

People who live in these neighborhoods experience higher levels of exposure to toxic emissions such as benzene, mercury and sulfuric acid than those who don’t live near these industries. They also have higher rates of heart disease, cancer and asthma.

Contamination from these facilities drives down home prices. Reduced property values make it hard for families to build wealth or sell their homes and move away from toxic pollutants.

I mean, Andrea Marpillero-Colomina is trying, she’s really trying. But, hey, if Liberals want to spend money they cannot afford on an EV, feel free. Practice what you preach.

Electric vehicles have the potential to greatly reduce air pollution from transportation. They also are less expensive to own and operate over time.

New EVs are rapidly reaching price parity with gas-powered cars. A Tesla sedan costs less than a comparable gas-powered BMW. Even when an EV’s sticker price is higher, significant savings on fuel and maintenance over time more than make up the difference.

That last link talks about the 15 year lifespan of a Tesla. People don’t keep cars that long. The average is four years. So the comparison actually favors the BMW. And most people are not buying what are called “top-line” cars, they’re buying Honda, Toyota, Kia, Hyundai, etc. And you can’t put a big family in an EV like you can a minivan or mid-sized SUV.

Expanded purchase incentives can help to steadily grow the number of EVs on the road. Currently, there are few subsidies available for buying used EVs, and none for people who lease their cars. Creating new financing programs for low- and moderate-income consumers who want to buy EVs can broaden access to clean cars.

A tax break won’t help when the EVs are outside their budget range to start with.

The electric vehicle transition has great potential to benefit Black and Latino communities, which are disproportionately affected by fossil fuel pollution. Carefully targeted incentives and investments can make clean cars accessible for everyone on the road, mitigate the harms caused by gas-powered vehicles and move the U.S. toward achieving energy and climate justice.

This isn’t about climate change, is it?

Read: EVs Are About Environment Justice For POC Or Something »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Barking Moonbats, Global Warming | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

Democratic Party Run Areas See Spike In Anti-Jew Attacks

By William Teach May 25, 2021 – 8:12 am

The Hill wants to say that the U.S. has seen this spike, and, while technically correct, the vast majority of these attacks have occurred in Democratic Party run cities, just like with the attacks on Asians of late

US sees startling rise in antisemitic attacks

The U.S. is experiencing a rise in violent and disturbing attacks targeting the U.S. Jewish community amid the latest conflict between Israel and the Palestinians.

Reported attacks across the United States have led to a growing alarm and a series of condemnations from President Biden, Vice President Harris, members of Congress and local officials.

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) says reporting of antisemitic incidents has jumped 63 percent since the start of an 11-day war between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip that received heavy media coverage in the United States and around the world.

A number of factors appear to have contributed to the attacks, most notably the new conflict in the Middle East.

Well, certainly the notion that the Democratic Party base has long been pro-Palestine and anti-Israel is a big one, especially when you have lots of elected Representatives, most notably Ilhan Omar, AOC, Rashiada Tlaib, and Ayanna Presley (mentioned late in the article), Blaming Israel and not condemning Hamas in the least. When this anti-Israel sentiment jumps into “Apartheid Israel” and other memes, it starts to become hatred of Jews. College campuses run by Democrats have long been hotbeds of Jew and Israel hatred, and pro-Palestinian terrorist. Let’s see what The Hill comes up with

Oren Segal, vice president of the ADL’s Center on Extremism, said it’s hardly uncommon for a flare-up in tensions between Israel and Palestine to lead to attacks on Jewish people elsewhere.

“That’s sort of the worst part and in some ways the most predictable part — seeing all Jews blamed for the policies of Israel, and that’s antisemitism and a standard practice,” he said.

Who’s blaming Israel? Democrats.

But Segal also said the trend is being exacerbated by social media and disinformation campaigns that gained a foothold amid record-breaking reports of antisemitism during the Trump administration.

And Blame Trump. Sigh. But, I guess he has a point, since Trump and his administration were decidedly pro-Israel. Moving the embassy to Jerusalem. Visiting the Wailing Wall. Not keeping Netanyahu waiting around like Obama did. Which meant the kneejerk reaction from Democrats was to Hate Jews and Israel even more.

Some of the attacks, recorded on cellphone video and documented by Jewish advocacy organizations, include reports of assaults on Jewish diners in Los Angeles last week by a group of men reportedly waving Palestinian flags and cursing Jews. Police on Saturday announced they had arrested one of the primary suspects on a charge of assault with a deadly weapon, and prosecutors are seeking additional charges for hate crimes.

In New York, police are reportedly investigating as a hate crime an assault on a 29-year-old Jewish man who was punched, kicked and pepper-sprayed by assailants reportedly cursing Jews and Israel.

Outside Chicago, police are investigating as a hate crime an attack against the Persian Hebrew Congregation in Skokie, where a window was broken and assailants left a sign reading “Freedom for Palestine” outside.

The ADL has also kept track of antisemitism and support for terror among nationwide protests in support of Palestinians, with demonstrators in multiple cities brandishing signs comparing Israel to Nazi Germany.

Those are all cities run by Republicans, are they not? It wasn’t Republicans running around with the disgusting signs.

The recent attacks on Jews are also being viewed as the most violent expression of a growing solidarity movement for Palestinian national aspirations that are boosted by an increased focus on racial and social justice in the U.S. in general.

So not Republicans going SJW?

On Monday, more than 500 Biden campaign staffers urged the White House to do more to support Palestinian rights and hold the Israeli government accountable.

“We ask that you work to end the underlying conditions of occupation, blockade, and settlement expansion that led to this exceptionally destructive period in a 73-year history of dispossession and ethnic cleansing,” the letter read.

That rhetoric is being viewed as part of the fuel inflaming the most recent spate of attacks on the American Jewish community.

“There is, I think, a view that if you speak of Israel as a racist enterprise, as a state that is enforcing apartheid, if you talk about ethnonationalism, if you talk about ethnic cleansing and genocide, all of these outrageous charges that one hears from voices on the far left, it can, illegitimately, tie into the racial justice movement sensibilities that were so evident, especially in the last year,” said Jason Isaacson, chief policy and political affairs officer with the American Jewish Committee, a global Jewish advocacy organization.

And the pro-terrorist/anti-Jew and Israel rhetoric is coming from China Joe’s White House. We’ve seen all sorts of people using Hamas rhetoric, things like “from the rivers to the sea”, which is a call for the elimination of Israel, wiping it from the map. There’s been long standing hatred of Israel from so many nations in the UN. You have all these nations cozying up to Iran. What do they think is going to happen? BDS is not something coming from Republicans. This is a Democratic Party issue.

Read: Democratic Party Run Areas See Spike In Anti-Jew Attacks »

Posted in Democrats, Israel | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

The Climate Crisis (scam) Needs A New Culture And Politics Or Something

By William Teach May 24, 2021 – 3:00 pm

Once again, I’ll point out that Warmists, and even some Skeptics, used to give me guff back in the early 2000’s when I noted that this whole thing wasn’t about science, but authoritarian politics. More and more Warmists are opening up with their real agenda

The climate crisis requires a new culture and politics, not just new tech

…

resistanceOur society has come to believe that technology is the solution. Electricity from renewable sources, energy-efficient buildings, electric vehicles and hydrogen fuels are among the many innovations that we hope will play a decisive role in reducing emissions. Most of the mainstream climate-change models now assume some degree of “negative emissions” in the future, relying on large-scale carbon capture technology, despite the fact that it is far from ready to be implemented. And if all else fails, the story goes, we can geoengineer the Earth.

But the problem with this narrative is that it focuses on the symptoms, not the causes of environmental decay. Even if the technologies on which we pin our hopes for the future deliver as expected and do not lead to much collateral damage – both of which are huge assumptions – they will not have fixed our mindsets. This is a crisis of culture and politics, not of science and technology. To believe that we can innovate and engineer ourselves out of this mess is to miss the key lesson of the Anthropocene – that dealing with planetary-scale processes calls for humility, not arrogance.

What does this look like in practice? Changing the collective mindset of a civilisation calls for a shift in values. It means educating our children about humility and connectedness, rather than vanity and individuality. It means changing our relationship with consumption, breaking the spell of advertising, manufactured needs and status. It means political organising, generating demand for a politics that sees beyond the nation state, and beyond the lifespan of the currently living generations – Wales has already started, with its Wellbeing of Future Generations Act.

You will be forced to change by your Betters, who will still be able to go on with their lives with little change.

To solve climate change, the innovations we need are financial

….

But there was something else in the EIA report that caught my attention and perhaps deserves a bit more of all of our attention — how much investment in clean energy is needed. Take a look at this graph. The amount of money that was spent on clean energy in the last four years will need to be quadrupled in 2030 and again in 2050.

That’s no small feat. Especially when the investment world has been timid at best on clean energy over the last decade, although thankfully that’s starting to change.

This is going to mean a lot of taxation.

Read: The Climate Crisis (scam) Needs A New Culture And Politics Or Something »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach May 24, 2021 – 1:00 pm

(I’m guessing Imgr didn’t work this time. Replaced with Photobucket)

…is a raised living space for when the oceans flood the world from carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Real Climate Science, with a post on US winter temps tracking the AMO.

Photobucket was down on me this AM.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | Comments Off on If All You See… | Trackback URL

Denver Progressives Were Happy To Support The Homeless Till The Camps Interfered With Their Lives

By William Teach May 24, 2021 – 10:30 am

Progressives love all sorts of social justice initiatives. They love wind turbines and solar panels, as long as they are far away. They love the defund the police movement, as long as they have police protection in their own neighborhoods. They love helping the homeless, as long as they are far away

Homeless camp in church parking lot? Denver neighbors say, ‘No way’

A plan to help homeless people during the pandemic by letting them set up camp in a church parking lot has forced residents in an affluent neighborhood to question their progressive values and commitment to helping ease social ills.

Advocates said unsheltered people were being left behind in Covid-19 mitigation efforts, so they devised a plan to provide safe outdoor spaces where homeless people could access meals, medical care and other services.

But when Pastor Nathan Adams of Park Hill United Methodist Church announced on Easter Sunday that it would put faith into action and create a camp on site for about 40 unsheltered people for six months, many residents in the community were unsettled.

“When I bought in Park Hill, it wasn’t because there was a homeless encampment one block from my front door,” said Jon Kinning, who lives a block away from the church. “If I wanted to live in downtown Denver and near homelessness in my face every day, having people sleep on my patio or go to the bathroom on my garage, I would live downtown.”

About 4 1/2 miles from downtown, Park Hill is full of flowering trees, stately brick homes and cozy bungalows. Black Lives Matter signs adorn front lawns in the largely white neighborhood surrounding the church, and in the 2020 election, about 67 percent of voters in Park Hill cast ballots for Joe Biden.

So, an upper middle class/rich Democrat neighborhood, who want to help the homeless, just elsewhere.

When members of the church approached the Colorado Village Collaborative about transforming the lot into a safe outdoor space, Adams and many of the 400 people on an informational call were supportive. Two such camps had already opened in December near the state Capitol downtown without any major problems.

Were they supportive because they didn’t think it would actually happen, or because they didn’t want to appear to be bigots and haters on the call, wanting to express their Virtue Signaling cred?

Despite the call to action, five Park Hill residents filed a lawsuit earlier this month in Denver District Court to stop the encampment and sought a temporary restraining order to prevent the project from moving forward.

They said in the lawsuit that the proposal “pose[s] a real danger to minors and school-aged children,” does not address the impact on the neighborhood and displaces people from one part of the city “with available resources to an area not equipped to handle” the safe-camping site.

The lawsuit was dismissed. Might residents, and more of them, try again once the encampment actually starts, and they seen the homeless wandering around, many drug and alcohol addled, peeing in the bushes, pooping on their driveways, hassling their kids, reducing their property values, committing crimes, and so forth?

Yet Booth-Nadav’s daughter, Ariella Nadav, 18, said she will fear for her safety when she gets home from work late at night and has to park on the street.

“I don’t want to walk into my house every night over the summer and be scared for my life, and not just my life, but my well-being,” she said. “I don’t want to have to deal with getting sexually harassed every day.”

This is not a discussion on trying to help the homeless. We can have that, if you like. This is about Progressives Virtue Signaling about the huge numbers of homeless in their Progressive cities, wanting to Do Something, as long as it is Somewhere Else. Just wait till they see all the illegal aliens Joe is shipping to their towns.

Read: Denver Progressives Were Happy To Support The Homeless Till The Camps Interfered With Their Lives »

Posted in Liberal World | 18 Comments | Trackback URL

Climate Advisor Gina McCarthy Says It’s Not Quite Yet Time To Force Citizens To Sacrifice

By William Teach May 24, 2021 – 7:04 am

Gina McCarthy is combing climate cult worship with a bit of reality, so, it begs the question, when is it the right time to force the climate cult down the throats of citizens using Fascist government?

Biden adviser Gina McCarthy calls it “ridiculous” to push climate sacrifice now

electric vehicleOn “Axios on HBO,” White House national climate adviser Gina McCarthy called for a practical rather than idealistic approach to getting Americans to change their routines to save the planet.

McCarthy told me that with all the lost jobs, “Now is not the time to sit them down and say: ‘Let’s talk about climate. How can you sacrifice?’ … [I]t’s never going to be a winning strategy. Right now, it’s ridiculous.”

Why it matters: Electric vehicles have had a luxury image. But McCarthy took me for a spin in an electric Chevrolet Bolt before the interview, as part of an effort to show electric vehicles can be an economical part of the average American’s future.

The average American is not going to spend a starting $36500 for a new Bolt. The average American isn’t looking to pay $600-700 a month for a car payment on something that will depreciate around 50% in under 3 years. The average American typically looks at the $30,000 range and under.

McCarthy — the head of the EPA under President Obama, and now in a new job created by President Biden — noted that change is hard, because people love their routines.

McCarthy said that with all the new technology, “the whole job is to get people excited about what’s available, get that deployed to its maximum.”

“They don’t want to have to do research on things like cars,” she added. “They just want ’em to be what they used to be. And if you want to make the kind of shift that we need for climate, you’ve got to be optimistic about the future.”

Is it really the government’s job to be the shills for the auto industry and EVs? Is she calling consumers lazy and dumb, as they don’t want to do research? Of course, their research ends fast when they see the price tag, unless they happen to be an upper middle class/rich person who wants the status of driving an EV around town …. and have a fossil fueled vehicle for longer trips. You don’t see that many, if any, EVs when driving the longer distance roads.

Further, Gina is rather admitting that the government is looking to force people to “sacrifice” for the climate crisis (scam). She doesn’t delve deep into that in the video at the link, but, we all know that means higher taxes, higher cost of living, government telling us how to live our lives, where we can go, where we can live, you name it, because the Cult of Climastrology has linked their cultish beliefs to pretty much everything. All while the leaders in the CoC refuse to change their own lives.

Read: Climate Advisor Gina McCarthy Says It’s Not Quite Yet Time To Force Citizens To Sacrifice »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Surprise: Multiple Wuhan Lab Employees Went To Hospital Sick In November 2019

By William Teach May 24, 2021 – 6:45 am

This story is, unsurprisingly, mostly being ignored by most of the big media players, because they need to protect China, I guess. Or, is it that they do not want to give credence to a Trump and MAGA theory? Because TDS? Or, are they just not wanting to engage in speculation and “conspiracy theories”, despite constantly engaging in them against Trump?

Intelligence on sick staff at Wuhan lab fuels debate on COVID-19 origin

Three researchers from China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology became sick enough in November 2019 that they sought hospital care, according to a previously undisclosed U.S. intelligence report that could add weight to growing calls for a fuller probe of whether the COVID-19 virus may have escaped from the laboratory.

The details of the reporting go beyond a State Department fact sheet, issued during the final days of the Trump administration, which said that several researchers at the lab, a center for the study of coronaviruses and other pathogens, became sick in autumn 2019 “with symptoms consistent with both COVID-19 and common seasonal illness.”

The disclosure of the number of researchers, the timing of their illnesses and their hospital visits come on the eve of a meeting of the World Health Organization’s decision-making body, which is expected to discuss the next phase of an investigation into COVID-19’s origins.

Current and former officials familiar with the intelligence about the lab researchers expressed differing views about the strength of the supporting evidence for the assessment. One person said that it was provided by an international partner and was potentially significant but still in need of further investigation and additional corroboration.

Another person described the intelligence as stronger. “The information that we had coming from the various sources was of exquisite quality. It was very precise. What it didn’t tell you was exactly why they got sick,” he said, referring to the researchers.

November 2019 is roughly when many epidemiologists and virologists believe SARS-CoV-2, the virus behind the pandemic, first began circulating around the central Chinese city of Wuhan, where Beijing says that the first confirmed case was a man who fell ill on Dec. 8, 2019.

Is this something, or just a cause of correlation isn’t causation? A bit of serendipity?

The Biden administration declined to comment on the intelligence but said that all technically credible theories on the origin of the pandemic should be investigated by the WHO and international experts.

This would be the same WHO which protected China through most of the pandemic, right? Not like there will be much cooperation from China to start with. They have been less than forthcoming since this started, and were just fine with Democrats Blaming Trump. They aren’t going to start cooperating now. Does China Joe actually want answers which could hurt the amount of money he and his kids have made from China?

Read: Surprise: Multiple Wuhan Lab Employees Went To Hospital Sick In November 2019 »

Posted in Bat Soup Virus | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Say, Is America Ready To Switch To Electric Vehicles?

By William Teach May 23, 2021 – 3:00 pm

Well, sure, if we were all rich, right? Because EVs are primarily toys for the rich

Turn off the gas: is America ready to embrace electric vehicles?

Electric vehicleIn Detroit, auto plants have for decades churned out trucks built with Motor City steel and fueled by gasoline. But this week’s rollout of the Ford F-150 Lightning electric truck offered a vision of the future in America’s automotive heartland: aluminum-clad pickups running off of electric powertrains with lithium batteries.

An electric model of the nation’s best-selling vehicle at an accessible $40,000 has the potential to shift the auto industry’s course, and do more to advance the transportation sector’s electrification than any recent development, analysts say.

“Offering a well-known vehicle at a competitive price could really help push the EV agenda in the US,” said Jessica Caldwell, executive director of insights at Edmunds.com.

We can all afford a $40k base model truck, right?

It’s uncharted territory, said Autotrader executive analyst Michelle Krebs. The success of the Lightning or any EV hinges on a major infrastructure build-out that’s far from certain.

Wouldn’t the success be based on consumers actually wanting them and buying them?

The Lightning feature that seems to be catching the most attention isn’t under the hood or in the cab, but on the price tag. With EV tax incentives, the truck’s base model could cost about $32,000 – less than a $37,000 gas-powered F-150 with a crew cab. By contrast, the GMC Hummer EV and Rivian R1T, are priced at $80,000 and $70,000 though they are slightly flashier.

That is a lie. You get a tax credit, not actual cash off. And that tax credit doesn’t equate to saving $7000, $7500, $10000, or whatever the credit is.

The Lightning’s range is also notable. One charge will take a base model Lightning 230 miles, or, for an additional $20,000, the extended range trim will travel 300 miles. It can haul up to 2,000lbs of payload and tow up to 10,000lbs. However, Ford doesn’t offer any data on range with a heavy payload or tow, and Car And Drive estimated it at as little as 100 miles.

Wait, $20k to go an extra 70 miles? And towing range is extraordinarily limited?

That’s the type of detail that could keep consumers away from not just the Lightning, but all electric pickups. On a 150kw DC fast charger, the extended-range trim targets up to 54 miles of range in 10 minutes, or just under an hour for a full charge.

It’s not hard to imagine a scenario in which someone who may be buying a truck to tow a camper a long distance once or twice per year opting for a gas-powered F-150 instead being inconvenienced with an hour-long stop to recharge every 100 miles or so, Caldwell said.

You can fill a regular F150 in under 10 minutes, be on your way.

Buy-in from the auto industry could help Biden push his proposal with Congress, though it’s uniformly opposed by the GOP. Republican leadership has pointed to the lack of infrastructure as a chief reason for opposing spending on the EV transition, but at the same time opposes funding an infrastructure build-out.

If the auto industry thought a lot of consumers would buy EVs they’d be making more. Even regular hybrids sell a lot less than straight gas cars (note: I’m heavily considering leasing a Honda Insight when my current one is up in February, provided the lease rates are worth it. Have to be comparable to Civics and Accords). Buy-in means nothing if consumers won’t purchase. Having a shit-ton of charging stations will mean nothing if consumers won’t buy them, if they don’t want them. If they don’t want to deal with the inconvenience, if they realize they can get a car that still gets pretty good MPG and have a lot of features vs more expensive base model EVs.

Read: Say, Is America Ready To Switch To Electric Vehicles? »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Energy, Global Warming | 14 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach May 23, 2021 – 1:00 pm

…is an area that will be decimated by climate change, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Blazing Cat Fur, with a post on voting machines in Pa. that wouldn’t recognize Republican votes.

It’s Italy week!

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 3 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove