The Affordable Car Act 2014

[Cryozombie]

If I drive my car for 12 to 14 years, it will have saved ~$25k in fuel, which means that an effectively free car is already available. the idea that alternative fuel cars are expensive is a myth.

I dunno... to me that's like saying "That Cancer treatment isn't expensive because it will extend your life by 10 years and you can earn that kind of money at your job in the extra 10 years you get" But that still doesn't make the Cancer treatment cheap.

An alternative fuel car is ****ING expensive to purchase. Its much cheaper to operate. Does it eventually balance out? Probably. Does that mean anyone can afford one over a "normal" car? Hell no. Shelling out 40k up front and maybe 15 bucks a month beyond is a hell of a lot different then shelling out 2,000 - 13,999 up front and then an extra 60-100 bucks a month beyond. In the place I live (I like to call it "The Real World") the Second option, while more expensive in the long run, is the more affordable of the two plans.

Now, when I can go to a police Auction and pick up an alternative fuel car for 1800 bucks cash like I did my current car, we can talk.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

I dunno... to me that's like saying "That Cancer treatment isn't expensive because it will extend your life by 10 years and you can earn that kind of money at your job in the extra 10 years you get" But that still doesn't make the Cancer treatment cheap.

An alternative fuel car is ****ING expensive to purchase. Its much cheaper to operate. Does it eventually balance out? Probably. Does that mean anyone can afford one over a "normal" car? Hell no. Shelling out 40k up front and maybe 15 bucks a month beyond is a hell of a lot different then shelling out 2,000 - 13,999 up front and then an extra 60-100 bucks a month beyond. In the place I live (I like to call it "The Real World") the Second option, while more expensive in the long run, is the more affordable of the two plans.

Now, when I can go to a police Auction and pick up an alternative fuel car for 1800 bucks cash like I did my current car, we can talk.

It's that "Let them eat cake," response, literally. The old story behind that line was that Marie Antoinette asked why the peasants were revolting (insert Blazing Saddles line here for laughs) and she was told that they were revolting because they could not afford the price of bread. Her response was 'then let them eat cake'.

There are many who do not understand the words that come out of their mouths. To them, if option B is cheaper in the long run than option A, you should do it. Oh, you don't have the upfront money to pay for option B? Gallic shrug. Oh, well, guess you should have saved your money then.

I'm with you; bought my last car on eBay. $500. Runs great, 30-35MPG. It just looks like hell and my neighbors hate it. Oh well. When they chip in to buy me a fancy alternative energy car, I'll get rid of it.

 

[Steve]

I dunno... to me that's like saying "That Cancer treatment isn't expensive because it will extend your life by 10 years and you can earn that kind of money at your job in the extra 10 years you get" But that still doesn't make the Cancer treatment cheap.

An alternative fuel car is ****ING expensive to purchase. Its much cheaper to operate. Does it eventually balance out? Probably. Does that mean anyone can afford one over a "normal" car? Hell no. Shelling out 40k up front and maybe 15 bucks a month beyond is a hell of a lot different then shelling out 2,000 - 13,999 up front and then an extra 60-100 bucks a month beyond. In the place I live (I like to call it "The Real World") the Second option, while more expensive in the long run, is the more affordable of the two plans.

Now, when I can go to a police Auction and pick up an alternative fuel car for 1800 bucks cash like I did my current car, we can talk.

Well, I don't think it's anything like cancer treatment, because it's a car and we're not talking about medical treatment or the possibility of death. I'm a little surprised you didn't bring up the nazis... that was someone else with their reference to the VW. Nothing like alarmism and association with things that are negative to strengthen one's position, eh?

Second, it's not anything like the math in your analogy. There's no "possibility you can earn that kind of money at your job in the extra 10 years you get." Rather, it's like, I paid X and now I pay X-$200.

But I'll gladly talk to you about my "real world" experience with both ICE cars and an EV, because, you know, in the real world, I actually have owned both. What about you? Here in the real world, where we both apparently live, how much ACTUAL experience do you have driving alternative fuel cars? Ever even seen one in person? I paid $25k for my Nissan LEAF, out the door, including tax, title and licensing fees (which can add thousands depending upon your local sales tax). It would have been $32k without the $7500 tax credit.

Also, I'm not sure where you live or how much you drive, but gas in Washington is the most expensive in the country right now. We were up into the $4/gallon range and have recently dropped back down to the $3.10 to $3.25 range per gallon. Now that they've broken the $4/gal mark, it will make its way there for good within a year.

It's about apples to apples. If you're in the market for a new car, $25k isn't that expensive, particularly if you consider cost of ownership. And I've posted the statistics in another thread about new car ownership and the average monthly car payments. This is not an issue of what people can afford. It's about priorities. And that's okay. The original premise of this thread was tongue and cheek. I certainly don't think that the government should mandate that everyone drive the same car. Drive what you want and pay what you can. If you can afford to pay gas prices that will be up in the $4/gallon range soon, more power to you. I can't. I have three kids and would rather spend my money on other things.

My comment was strictly to point out that there are some myths about alternative fuel cars and EVs that aren't true. That they are expensive is one of them. They just aren't, and if you are truly frugal, you'll understand that the car literally pays for itself in savings on fuel, if you can drive it for 15 years. The batteries have a 10 year warranty, so if I drive the car for just the 10 year period, I'll have saved somewhere in the area of $20,000 on gas, and that's if it stays in the low to mid $3/gal range... which it won't. I, frankly, can't understand how you can say that $20,000 in 10 years is other than enormous savings. It's mindblowing, to me.

Ultimately, you should be free to drive whatever the heck you want. But, I personally had reached my threshold dealing with the monopoly that the oil companies have on gas and fuel prices. It literally pissed me off to fill up my car. My threshold was $3 per gallon. I predict that most peoples' threshold for the same will be the mid-$4s to $5/gallon range. At that point, I see the rhetoric changing from reasons (true or not) to not buy an EV or other alternative fuel car.

The phenomenon is interesting to me. It's like telling some people that they don't actually need to get their oil changed every 3000 miles on a new car. Use synthetic oil and you can go 15,000 miles, but they insist. "Nope. Jiffy lube says every 3000 miles, and that's what I'll do." Waste of money? Yeah. Is it true? Maybe for some cars... I know that my air cooled VWs needed frequent oil changes, but for most people? No, it's a blatant falsehood. You just flat out don't need to change your oil that often. Most car manufacturers recommend 5000 for conventional oil and between 10 and 15k miles for synthetics. the entire thing better resembles superstition than any actual consideration of cost. And that's okay. Just don't confuse superstition for, you know, the real world.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Steve]

It's that "Let them eat cake," response, literally. The old story behind that line was that Marie Antoinette asked why the peasants were revolting (insert Blazing Saddles line here for laughs) and she was told that they were revolting because they could not afford the price of bread. Her response was 'then let them eat cake'.

There are many who do not understand the words that come out of their mouths. To them, if option B is cheaper in the long run than option A, you should do it. Oh, you don't have the upfront money to pay for option B? Gallic shrug. Oh, well, guess you should have saved your money then.

I'm with you; bought my last car on eBay. $500. Runs great, 30-35MPG. It just looks like hell and my neighbors hate it. Oh well. When they chip in to buy me a fancy alternative energy car, I'll get rid of it.

Of course, there is significant evidence that Marie Antoinette never actually said anything of the sort, but as Mark Twain said, "never let the truth get in the way of a good story." It's chuckle worthy that you guys are using myths to support other myths, though.

There will always be a place for cheap, practical transportation. In the short term, you can absolutely get around on a good condition Geo Metro for very little initial cost. But as long as gas prices stay above $3/gallon or higher, and energy prices remain regulated, there is an inevitable breakeven point on cost of ownership between ICE and EV vehicles. Driving a less expensive, more economical gas powered vehicle just pushes that point out a few more years.

And the snide, back handed insults are unnecessary. "There are many who do not understand the words that come out of their mouths?" What sort of passive aggressive crap is that? Particularly since you and I have discussed these things in the past. You know I understand your point. I'm not so sure you truly understand mine.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Bill Mattocks]

There will always be a place for cheap, practical transportation. In the short term, you can absolutely get around on a good condition Geo Metro for very little initial cost. But as long as gas prices stay above $3/gallon or higher, and energy prices remain regulated, there is an inevitable breakeven point on cost of ownership between ICE and EV vehicles. Driving a less expensive, more economical gas powered vehicle just pushes that point out a few more years.

I actually don't dispute what you're saying.

I think there is a disparity in the way people think the market should move, or be made to move.

In time, existing vehicles will age and be unable to be repaired. Newer alternative energy vehicles will become older and less expensive, if the market embraces them.

And there's the rub. If the market does not move to alternative energy itself, is it incumbent upon government to move it? And assuming that it is, how best to move the market?

Typically, mandating that people buy something based on what's good for them doesn't play well in the USA. That's why so many people like a lot of the provisions of the health care modifications, but don't like being told what to do.

 

[Steve]

I actually don't dispute what you're saying.

I think there is a disparity in the way people think the market should move, or be made to move.

In time, existing vehicles will age and be unable to be repaired. Newer alternative energy vehicles will become older and less expensive, if the market embraces them.

And there's the rub. If the market does not move to alternative energy itself, is it incumbent upon government to move it? And assuming that it is, how best to move the market?

Typically, mandating that people buy something based on what's good for them doesn't play well in the USA. That's why so many people like a lot of the provisions of the health care modifications, but don't like being told what to do.

And sometimes, people fear change, particularly when they're being persuaded to do so. We (humans) are creatures of momentum. I just got back from DisneyWorld with the family. Our 3 year old was fearful of many of the rides. It's a balancing act, though, as her parent. I know she'd like a lot of rides. So, I push her. I convince her to get on rides I know she'll like. And she does... in the end. After we're off the ride, she wants to do it again. She wasn't afraid of the ride. She was afraid of the unfamiliar. But there is a point. If she's adamant she doesn't want to ride something, there's only so far I'm going to push. I certainly won't drag her crying onto rides. If, after sharing all of the information I have about how fun and cool the ride is, she still didn't want to do it, we didn't do it. We'll try again next time.

On a larger scale, moving away from oil is the same thing. Is the Tower of Terror for everyone? Certainly not. But there are a LOT of people out there who would LOVE it, if they would get past their fear of the unknown and give it a try with an open mind. And as I did with my three year old at DisneyWorld, I'll share what information I have. In the end, I'm not going to make anyone do anything they don't want to do. It doesn't keep me from enjoying myself on the rides.

Edit: And isn't the mandate to buy the alternative auto a work of fiction? Didn't you make that up? Why are you now bringing it up as though it's a bill in Congress? I thought you wrote the OP as a joke.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Edit: And isn't the mandate to buy the alternative auto a work of fiction? Didn't you make that up? Why are you now bringing it up as though it's a bill in Congress? I thought you wrote the OP as a joke.

I did, but it really highlighted something I had not intended. A basic difference in core philosophy. Not one side good and one side bad, but enlightening nonetheless. What's it to be, the invisible hand, or the guidance of the government?

 

[billc]

It just looks like hell and my neighbors hate it. Oh well. When they chip in to buy me a fancy alternative energy car, I'll get rid of it.

You forget option "B" Bill Mattocks. Your neighbors pass an ordinance about cars that look like hell, and they send in government agents to confiscate the car if you refuse to get rid of it.

 

[Steve]

I did, but it really highlighted something I had not intended. A basic difference in core philosophy. Not one side good and one side bad, but enlightening nonetheless. What's it to be, the invisible hand, or the guidance of the government?

So, we're going to discuss it now, as though it's real? Abraham Lincoln kills vampires in the latest movie. Doest this highlight a basic difference in core philosophy? Should the Federal government should be involved in the killing of the undead? My opinion is that it's indulgent and leads to giving more stock to boogymen superstition.

You:
"Let's presume for a second that the government is mandating that everyone own a golf cart."
Me:
"But it's not."
You:
"Yeah, but let's pretend that it is."
Me:
"But it's not."
You:
"I... get that. But say it is."
Me:
"Okay. Fine. Let's pretend it is."
You:
"I hate the government and it's because they mandate that I own a golf cart."
Me:
"But they don't."
You:
"Yeah, but they MIGHT. It could happen!"

 

[billc]

Yeah, Bill Mattocks, it is kind of silly. Saying that the government might mandate that you buy an electric car would be like them saying what kind of toilet you had to use, what kind of light bulb you could use, what kind of washer and dryer you could have, what size soda you could sell in your business, how much salt you could have in your restaruant or for goodness sake thinking that the government could mandate that you get health incsurance...er tax you for not having health insurance...you're just being silly.