Site Information
About Us
- RonPaulForums.com is an independent grassroots outfit not officially connected to Ron Paul but dedicated to his mission. For more information see our Mission Statement.
- Kim KardashianIt's all about taking action and not being lazy. So you do the work, whether it's fitness or whatever. It's about getting up, motivating yourself and just doing it.
Donald Trump / Crenshaw 2024!!!!
My pronouns are he/him/his
Don't you Luddites understand?
Electricity comes from electrical outlets.
Problem solved.
https://twitter.com/HoboWealthFund/s...22421474484226
![]()
This almost makes me long for the day when natural forces provided a check on this level of stupidity. It may well enjoy a resurgence if these people actually get the world they think they want. If so, it’s possible that many of these idiots will not survive the fulfillment of their wish.
Chris
"Government ... does not exist of necessity, but rather by virtue of a tragic, almost comical combination of klutzy, opportunistic terrorism against sitting ducks whom it pretends to shelter, plus our childish phobia of responsibility, praying to be exempted from the hard reality of life on life's terms." Wolf DeVoon
"...Make America Great Again. I'm interested in making American FREE again. Then the greatness will come automatically."Ron Paul
EVs can't work, and are just stepping stones to banning all personal transportationScientificScientistic American: there isn't enough lithium, sonon-EV cars will be needed(private) cars should be used less or not at all.
https://twitter.com/sciam/status/1620186119563362307
![]()
"Unity, for the sake of unity alone, is a fool's objective.
Who and what are you "uniting" with?
I would much rather be divided by the truth than united by lies." - Seth Dillon and Anti Federalist
"Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
"Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
"Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
"Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul
Proponent of real science.
The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.
"Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
"Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
"Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
"Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul
Proponent of real science.
The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.
Hardly Able
https://www.ericpetersautos.com/2023/02/05/hardly-able/
By
eric -
February 5, 2023
People who ride motorcycles still care about motorcycles – as opposed to all-too-many-drivers, who view cars as appliances. Who have been conditioned to view them as such.
Evidence of this disparity in attitude comes in the form of what sells – and what doesn’t.
Like electric “motorcycles” – the latter being an absurdity on par with a meatless vegan double “cheeseburger.” Those don’t sell, either. And neither has the Harley LiveWire, which is the electric scooter Harley hilariously thought people who like motorcycles would buy.
To be fair, Harley has sold a few LiveWires. As in 69 of them in the last quarter of 2022. Probably comparable to the number of “plant-based” (i.e., meatless) Impossible Whoppers sold by Burger King. Does anyone bother to wonder why a person who doesn’t want a burger would go to Burger King?
Harley apparently hasn’t thought about essentially the same question. An electric scooter being essentially the same thing (on wheels) as an Impossible Whopper on your plate; i.e., something ersatz. And even that isn’t quite accurate since “ersatz” simply means substitute, as in margarine rather than butter. An electric “motorcycle” – like a meatless “burger” – is a kind of fraud. A thing that wants to be taken for the real thing.
Motorcycle people won’t abide it.
Chiefly because there is no point to it.
A motorcycle being, to those who love them, much more than an appliance – i.e., a means of transportation.
As cars have in the main become, creating – interestingly – a kind of feedback loop of buyers who don’t care much about cars, who regard them as appliances. This has resulted in cars becoming more and more appliance-like. The apotheosis of this trend being the electric car. A thing as devoid of personality or differentiation as a cell phone, beyond its size, shape and color. Drive one – if you can call it that – and you have driven them all. Take that from a guy who test drives new cars – thousands of them, over the years, including a number of electric cars. The latter differ from one another much as a Makita electric drill differs from a DeWalt electric drill; close your eyes and see whether you can tell the difference.
The car companies fail to understand the import of this. What happens when this wonderful “transition” to electric vehicles is concluded and every vehicle is essentially the same vehicle? Does anyone remember what happened to GM’s Oldsmobile and Pontiac divisions? To Ford’s Mercury and Mopar’s Plymouth divisions? After they had been reduced to selling ersatz iterations of the same things?
The last “Oldsmobiles” and “Pontiacs” were Chevys, differing only in color and price, with a few minor trim/cosmetic embellishments. And the same for the final run of “Plymouths,” which differed even less from Dodges – even to the extent, in the case of the Neon, of having the exact same name.
It didn’t sell.
Well, what happens when everyone is trying to sell the same thing – an electric whatever-it-is – under different labels? What will be the difference between, say, the forthcoming electric “Camaro” crossover SUV and the “Ford” Mach e, so-called “Mustang”? Both being what they are named to the same extent that an Impossible Whopper is a burger.
Then again, maybe they will sell – to people who do want an appliance. Fifty years of effort toward that end has achieved its intended purpose. Over that span of time, cars have been systematically shorn of most of what once made them interesting and so desirable as opposed to merely useful.
An appliance is useful. A Lotus 7 is less so – but far more interesting and so, much more desirable. The latter is a thing valued by people who like to drive because they like cars. It is, for them, about much more than just getting from one point to another point (which, interestingly enough, electric vehicles are not especially good at, even as transportation appliances). Such people drive without having anywhere to go specifically. It is about the drive, itself.
It is even more so for people who ride motorcycles. It is in fact the main point of the thing. Motorcycles being less adept at being appliances, by definition. Most don’t carry much – including passengers. They expose the rider to the weather. They require more of the rider, who cannot ride unless he knows how to shift – the latter a thing all-but-eliminated from cars, even “sporty” ones. The Chevy Corvette, for instance, is now automatic-only, rendering it a very fast appliance. An electrified one is in the hopper, which will complete the transition.
But the transition lags with regard to motorcycles – thank God – probably because of the fact that to ride, you do still need to know how to shift. The near-ubiquity of the automatic transmission – in cars – is more than any other single thing the reason for the transitioning of them into appliances. At least two generations have learned to “drive” – if you can call it that – without ever having learned how to shift. This, in turn, accelerated the transition to almost-automatic-only new cars and to cars as appliances, on the verge of becoming moving versions of the stove in your kitchen, the dryer in your laundry room or the cell phone in your pocket.
Motorcycles are nothing like that – yet – because motorcycle people do not want that. They want to shift for themselves and – thank God – all of them know how. Because they have to know how. You cannot ride a motorcycle without knowing how. And the reason for that – the saving grace, as it were – has to do with the handsome fact that motorcycles (even big Harleys) get good gas mileage, which has thus far immunized them from having to become appliances, like cars, in order to “comply” with federal fuel efficiency mandates. The latter being almost entirely responsible for the automatic-only’ing of most new cars.
That has created a different kind of feedback loop. One that kicks an Impossible Whopper on wheels such as the LiveWire to the curb, where it belongs.
And where – with any luck – it will remain.
"Unity, for the sake of unity alone, is a fool's objective.
Who and what are you "uniting" with?
I would much rather be divided by the truth than united by lies." - Seth Dillon and Anti Federalist
Oh holy $#@!...buddy of mine just laid his hands on one of these atomic death toboggans, got to take it for a twist the other day.
Holy crap biscuits...165 hp, twin cylinder, two stroke Rotax, making 165 HP and a claimed top speed of 120 mph.
I cracked 100 and had plenty of legs left.
What a rush.
Heat engines for the win.
"Unity, for the sake of unity alone, is a fool's objective.
Who and what are you "uniting" with?
I would much rather be divided by the truth than united by lies." - Seth Dillon and Anti Federalist
Holy $#@!!! Lol. I played with a snow machine in AK and got it up to almost 50 MPH and was hanging on for dear life - I couldn't imagine doubling that speed!! Yikes!
(For the record, I've now piloted planes, trains, automobiles, buses, semis, boats, motorcycles, bicycles, scooters, hang gliders, tractors, forklifts, bulldozers, dogsleds, horses, camels, donkeys, and an even elephant once. Still missing submarines and hovercrafts, but not sure what else.)
"And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat
"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire
You got me beat with the livestock and hangliders.
I've got ROV pilotage, helicopters and hovercraft under my belt.
The control tech they build into the new breed of snow machines is incredible.
Like going 200 in a Bugatti.
That only costs 20 grand.
Snowmobiles and motorcycles: by far the best bang for your speed dollar buck.
ETA - I love that Skater boat video. At 1:45...when you think he hasn't got anything else, he finds another inch or two of throttle and BOOM!
Ludicrous speed: achieved.
Last edited by Anti Federalist; 02-12-2023 at 04:57 PM.
"Unity, for the sake of unity alone, is a fool's objective.
Who and what are you "uniting" with?
I would much rather be divided by the truth than united by lies." - Seth Dillon and Anti Federalist
https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...ium-shortages/
UC Davis... lol. "Oh, you're worried about the material problems with EV's? Well, we just shouldn't drive. We should stack people in condensed locations and have them walk for things they need and work from their cell - I mean, their home."Making the Entire U.S. Car Fleet Electric Could Cause Lithium Shortages
Converting the existing U.S. car fleet to electric vehicles would require more lithium than the world currently produces, showing the need to move away from private cars as a primary means of travel
The transition to electric vehicles could lead to lithium shortages unless the United States and other countries overhaul their transportation systems and move away from private cars as the primary means of travel.
Simply converting the existing U.S. car fleet to battery-powered electric vehicles, for example, would require three times more lithium by 2050 than the world currently produces, according to new research from the University of California, Davis, and the Climate and Community Project.
A spike in lithium demand could cause other problems too, such as greater environmental damage and worsening international tension over supplies of the metal, which is primarily mined outside the United States....
...The world currently produces a little more than 100,000 tons of lithium a year. Under the base case scenario the researchers established, the United States alone would require 306,000 tons a year by 2050. That assumes the transportation system doesn’t change and consumers buy vehicles with batteries roughly the same size as those used in today’s electric sedans.
In the worst-case scenario — in which the system remains unchanged and battery sizes grow significantly — the United States could consume 483,000 tons of lithium a year by 2050. That would mean that vehicles use as much lithium as Ford’s F-150 Lightning pickup or GM’s recently introduced electric Hummer, which weighs 9,000 pounds and has a battery that’s heavier than some cars. <more at link>
But their study does highlight another BIG issue with electrified transportation. Not only are you subject to all the environmental impacts of generating power, you're also subject to the new and ever evolving environmental impacts of storing that power.
"And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat
"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire
- Kim KardashianIt's all about taking action and not being lazy. So you do the work, whether it's fitness or whatever. It's about getting up, motivating yourself and just doing it.
Donald Trump / Crenshaw 2024!!!!
My pronouns are he/him/his
Lightning Strikes
https://www.ericpetersautos.com/2023...ing-strikes-2/
By eric - February 15, 2023
There is apparently a problem with the Ford F-150 Lightning’s battery pack significant enough for Ford to stop production and delivery of its electric three-ton half-ton. No word as yet what the problem is. Only that it was “identified,” according to Ford spokeswoman Emma Berg, during “pre-delivery quality inspections.”
No fires, as yet.
But the bigger problem is the F-150’s price, which has inflated like a loaf of Weimar bread some 38.9 percent over the course of a little more than one year (2022 being the electric truck’s first model year) to $57,869.
When Ford launched the truck, the pledge was that it would sticker for just over $40,000 – a price that made it cost-competitive with the price of a non-electric F-150 SuperCrew, which has a base price just under $40,000.
After three consecutive price hikes, the Lightning is now pushing $20k more expensive than a non-electric version of the F-150 SuperCrew.
And it’s actually worse than that.
News stories about the production/delivery stop neglect to mention that the quoted base price of the ’23 Lightning is for the model with the lower-performance (98 kilowatt-hour) battery that has a best-case range of 230 miles. And the problem with that – the problem with every electric vehicle – is that, unlike a non-electric car’s range on a full tank, an EV’s actual driving range is often much less than advertised.
This matters even more when you start out with less. Especially because with EVs, it is smart to always keep enough in reserve to avoid the risk of not being able to reach a place to plug in. And it’s smart for another reason – one Ford mentions in the Lightning’s owner’s manual. It is that running the battery down to “fumes” – i.e., heavily discharging it – is “unhealthy” for the battery’s longevity. Therefore, keeping it “topped off” is a good idea if you don’t want to have to buy a new battery sooner rather than later.
But if you only have 230 miles of best-case range and keep 50 in reserve to preserve the “health” of the battery, then you haven’t got much range for other than short-hops in between charges.
It is a worse problem for an electric truck because of the way trucks are used, as for example to pull trailers. This can reduce the full-charge range by half or even more, if it is very cold outside or the truck is pulling a trailer uphill.
Ford touts the pulling power of the Lightning, but it’s a problem if you can’t pull very far.
Word about this has leached out over the past year as the electric truck has gotten into the hands of journalists (including this one) who have discovered the problem. It’s a problem made worse by the solution – which is to buy the optional, higher-power (131 kilowatt-hour) battery that has an advertised range of 300 miles on a full charge. This way, if you lose 50 percent of the range pulling a trailer, you can at least make it 100 or so miles down the road before you risk running out of charge before you can make to the next “fast” charger.
But there’s another problem.
Several, actually.
The first is that you can’t buy the stronger battery in the base Pro trim. That’s the one that now starts at $57,869. You have to move up to at least the XLT trim first – and that one stickers for $63,474 to start. Then you can spend another $12,500 to get the 300-mile-range 131 kilowatt-hour battery pack. Plus another $500 to get the “mobile charge” apparatus, so you can plug in to both standard 120V and 240V “Level II” outlets at home.
This brings the actual base price of a Lightning useable for more than short-hop driving and light trailer-towing to an eye-popping $76,474. And for that, you still only get a truck that can travel maybe (but probably not) 300 miles and will definitely travel much less if you hook it up to a trailer and try to pull anything much in the cold.
There are certainly buyers who have the money to buy such a truck – and don’t need it to be capable of doing much work – at least, for very long (or very far). The problem, for Ford, is that there are probably only so many buyers who have the means – and the interest.
The former is a problem that goes beyond “electrification” in that any vehicle with a starting price over $50,000 is by definition a luxury-priced vehicle, irrespective of what’s under the hood – or the floorpans, in the case of EVs. There is a limited pool of buyers who can afford to spend about 80 percent of what the average two-income family earns in a year (about $67,000) on a vehicle. Even if the monthly payments are stretched out over seven years, the New Abnormal in car – and truck – financing.
The $50k-and-up price point is a kind of hard deck – to borrow an aviation term – that imposes a similar limit on what can be sold to whom – and how many. If this were not so, practically everyone who drives would be driving a BMW, Mercedes, Lexus, Cadillac – etc. So long as EVs are priced similarly, they will sell in similarly small numbers. Bearing this out is the fact that, in spite of all the hype surrounding its launch, Ford has only sold about 15,000 Lightnings so far.
During the same time period, it sold more than 500,000 non-electric F-150s.
It is certain Ford will sell even fewer Lightnings this year relative to non-electric ones unless it can somehow reduce the price by something in the range, as it were, of $25,000 – so as to make it plausibly competitive on price with a $40k non-electric F-150 SuperCrew.
And even then, it still won’t be competitive on function.
The just-under-$40k-to-start F-150 SuperCrew has a range of 624 highway miles (494 in the city) and even though that range will go down if you pull a trailer with this truck, it does not matter much because it can be refueled in about 5 minutes, as opposed to the at-least 30-45 minutes it takes for the Lightning to recover a partial charge at a “fast” charger.
Most people who buy trucks value their time which costs them money if it is wasted waiting with a truck that cannot be used and that can only be used for a little while before it costs its owner more time, again.
These problems are showing up in Ford’s earnings and stock prices, which don’t bode well.
For “electrification,” generally.
If, that is, the goal is to get more people into EVs rather than out of cars.
"Unity, for the sake of unity alone, is a fool's objective.
Who and what are you "uniting" with?
I would much rather be divided by the truth than united by lies." - Seth Dillon and Anti Federalist
I keep hoping that this will make an impact. Unfortunately, there are offsetting influences. These institutional investors (who are the first who get access to Federal Reserve funds, as well as other global bank institutions) who are part of the ESG cult will continue to pump money into businesses based on their ESG statements and promises rather than their financial payoff.
So, they get free money and call it "stakeholder capitalism" when they take that free money and place it into the hands of the corporate boards that do their bidding. At some point, you'd think it'll all fall apart, but who knows how long that will take. I imagine you'll have to see a global crash in the value of financial holdings and then people will spend more effort trying to invest in "value" rather than ideology. But they have a plan for that, too. Governments can just steal your wealth to prevent those realities from impacting the global elite.
"And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat
"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire
"Unity, for the sake of unity alone, is a fool's objective.
Who and what are you "uniting" with?
I would much rather be divided by the truth than united by lies." - Seth Dillon and Anti Federalist
"And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat
"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire
H/T @Origanalist
"Unity, for the sake of unity alone, is a fool's objective.
Who and what are you "uniting" with?
I would much rather be divided by the truth than united by lies." - Seth Dillon and Anti Federalist
^^^^ And by running that carbureted generator engine, with no emission controls at all, they discharged more pollutants in a few hours than a month's worth of average driving would have emitted in a 2022 ICE powered F150.
"Unity, for the sake of unity alone, is a fool's objective.
Who and what are you "uniting" with?
I would much rather be divided by the truth than united by lies." - Seth Dillon and Anti Federalist
It's just a game...
If the stampman tells you to kiss his ass, shall he get away with it and live? Don't let your courage cool, or a few bullies scare you. We've nothing to fear but slavery. Love your liberty, and fight for it like men who know its value. Once lost it will never, never be regained.
-Hugh Ledlie, 1774.
"And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat
"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire
If the stampman tells you to kiss his ass, shall he get away with it and live? Don't let your courage cool, or a few bullies scare you. We've nothing to fear but slavery. Love your liberty, and fight for it like men who know its value. Once lost it will never, never be regained.
-Hugh Ledlie, 1774.
The Greens Aren’t Just Coming for Your Gas-Powered Car—They’re Coming for All Cars
https://www.breitbart.com/environmen...-for-all-cars/
JAMES PINKERTON 18 Feb 2023
Greens (and Reds) Don’t Like Cars, Period
Late last month, Joe Biden was mocked for posting a photo of himself in an electric vehicle (a GMC Hummer) that costs $110,000 and up. And for touting a $7,500 federal tax credit that doesn’t apply to vehicles that cost over $80,000. In other words, the 46th president was ripped for confirming the stereotype that electric cars are a vanity passion for rich green liberals.
But what was less noticed, at least by the right, was that left-wing greens didn’t like Biden’s photo-op, either. You see, Middle Class Joe insists that he wants to replace internal-combustion vehicles with electric vehicles (EV), but the hardcore greens–including those within his own administration–want to get rid of cars, period. At certain times, as when he is trying to appeal to the far left during his campaign for the 2020 Democratic nomination, Biden has said that he wants to get “millions of vehicles off the road.” But that was then: Now Biden, eyeing his re-election campaign, wants to play the champion of Main Street, where they have cars, not the New York City Metropolitan Transportation Authority.
Still, history shows that when green activists draw a bead on something, they often hit their target. That’s been the whole story of the green movement this past half-century, as it has shifted the Democratic Party from its New Deal blue-collar orientation to its current affluent-suburban affectation.
One of the greens’ key concerns about EVs is lithium. As we shall see, they can’t live without it, but they also can’t live with it.
The World Economic Forum (WEF, think Klaus Schwab and Davos) relates that each EV battery needs about 18 lbs of lithium. And since WEF calculates that two billion EVs will have to be on the road by 2050 to meet its Great Reset climate targets, that’s a lot of lithium. And of course, all the lithium a Great Resetted world needs won’t just go into car batteries; the element is needed for wide variety of industrial and ecological uses.
But lithium production is currently only about 100,000 tons annually, so WEF’s projections show that the needed ramp-up in lithium production will have to be, well, exponential. For their part, greens don’t like to hear about the exponential growth of anything economic.
A particular flashpoint has been the effort to start up a lithium mine in Thacker Pass, Nevada, near the Oregon border. That proposed $3 billion venture has been met by pushback from a coalition of greens, Native Americans, and NIMBYs. Needless to say, that was all the signal the Main Stream Media needed to choose a side. NBC News headlined last year: “The cost of green energy: The nation’s biggest lithium mine may be going up on a site sacred to Native Americans.” And The New York Times added some more green liberal perspective:
The fight over the Nevada mine is emblematic of a fundamental tension surfacing around the world: Electric cars and renewable energy may not be as green as they appear. Production of raw materials like lithium, cobalt and nickel that are essential to these technologies are often ruinous to land, water, wildlife and people.
For its part, the Biden administration, mindful of its environmentalist base as well as its EV goals, has tried to avoid taking sides on the fight. Just on February 7, a federal judge ordered a further review of the project, so its future is unclear.
Thacker Pass in Nevada, the proposed site for a massive lithium mine. (Carolyn Cole/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)
Members of the Fort McDermitt Paiute Shoshone tribe and supporters gather for a circle dance for healing during a gather in opposition to the proposed lithium mine at Thacker Pass, Nevada, which has historical significance for the tribe. (Carolyn Cole/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)
The hardcore greens want action against lithium—and against EVs and against the Biden administration. One such is Kate Aronoff, who writes for The New Republic, a venerable liberal publication, dating back to 1914, that has lately gone woke and left, as well as hard green. Aronoff tweeted her own mockery of Biden for his Hummer tweet and then wrote in her magazine, “Investing in mass transit, walkability, biking infrastructure, and other means of reducing personal car ownership . . . could reduce the amount of lithium needed.”
Warming to her anti-auto theme, Aronoff lamented that cars and trucks are getting bigger: “The best-selling vehicle in the U.S., the F150 Ford pickup truck, has ballooned in size since it debuted in the 1970s . . . Even the comparatively diminutive Mini Cooper has gotten 64 percent heavier since it debuted in the 1950s, and 61 percent larger.” To Aronoff, this is all part of the grave crisis; indeed, the section of the magazine that she writes for is called “Apocalypse Soon” (see below).
The New Republic’s “Apocalypse Soon” section.
Moreover, Aronoff is not just worried about lithium, or the size of cars—she’s worried about cars themselves. In her article she cited Andre Gorz, a 20th century French Marxist, who wrote in 1973, “The worst thing about cars is that they are like castles or villas by the sea: luxury goods invented for the exclusive pleasure of a very rich minority, and which in conception and nature were never intended for the people.” So we can see: 50 years ago, Gorz was a red who thought cars were only for rich people. (As a general rule, Marxists need to get out more.)
Yet now, long after his death, Gorz and his anti-auto sentiments, which were based on red commie class warfare, have been drafted into a new kind of class warfare: the green cause of depriving the proletariat of its preferred mode of transportation. It’s this sort of intellectual fusion–red and green–that has led critics to refer to greens as “watermelons.” In fact, in 2021, Aronoff published a watermelon-y book entitled, Overheated: How Capitalism Broke the Planet–And How We Fight Back. (Back in 2014, the like-minded Naomi Klein published a book with the subtitle, “Capitalism vs. the Climate”; and there’re many more similar titles in that watermelon patch.)
But our focus today is not the class struggle, but rather, the car struggle. Which is ongoing. In January, a lefty-green group, the Climate + Community Project (CCP) called for “less mining” and, of course, fewer cars:
Reordering the US transportation system through policy and spending shifts to prioritize public and active transit while reducing car dependency can also ensure transit equity, protect ecosystems, respect Indigenous rights, and meet the demands of global justice
Not surprisingly, when CCP outlined its plan for a Green New Deal, the personal car gets it with both barrels:
Transportation often exacerbates social inequity and racial injustice within and between communities. Its infrastructure speeds the movement of those who are better off, to the detriment of those who are most in need. In far too many communities, governments, planners, and engineers prioritize vehicles over people.
(For what it’s worth, CCP is careful to provide the proper pronouns for its staff, and bills itself as being financed by the Tides Center, which Breitbart News has covered extensively, if not admiringly.)
Car Companies Look Beyond Cars
So where does this anti-car movement leave the automakers? They have to be careful, because while they are in the car-manufacturing industry, they are also in the government-subsidy-collecting industry. For instance, General Motors declared Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2009, and was subsequently saved by $51 billion in federal help. Since then, all the automakers have been immersed in myriad green subsidies, leaving them extraordinarily attuned to whatever Washington wants.
This ongoing boondoggling led Sen. John Thune (R-SD) to gripe in 2022: “American automakers have been on the receiving end of historic amounts of taxpayer money, yet we see them raising vehicle prices right when they’re preparing to receive even more government support.” So the South Dakotan proposed a legislative remedy: “My common-sense bill would make automakers choose between grants and loans that subsidize their manufacturing operations or having the vehicles they make remain eligible for the expanded electric vehicle tax credit. Automakers shouldn’t be able to double-dip at taxpayers’ expense.” Thune’s bill did not pass.
One leading auto expert sees the day when the automakers will be phasing out of cars as we have known them. In a 2017 essay about the future of automation, Bob Lutz, a Detroit legend, connected EV to AV (autonomous vehicles). In Lutz’s view, cars of the future will not be cars, they’ll be “modules” in a mass-transit fleet, a kind of blend of Uber and a bus company. Lutz, born in 1932, is himself an old-time car enthusiast—a “gearhead”—and so he didn’t pretend to be happy about such a development. As he wrote in Auto News, “Everyone will have five years to get their car off the road or sell it for scrap or trade it on a module.” In other words, the Little Deuce Coupe—or any other kind of car that speaks to individualism and the freedom of the open road—will be replaced by Big Brother and the Driving Company, controlled by some combination of the Department of Transportation and Silicon Valley. Sound good to you?
A illustration conceptualizing a smart city grid with autonomous vehicles. (iStock/Getty Images)
Still, it sounds good to some. Some in the cities won’t mind—not much privacy in a metropolis, anyway. As one recent headline trilled, “Car-free futures: How European cities are embracing green transport.” It is certainly true, of course, that it’s common for people living in dense cities not to have cars. And yet here in the U.S., less than 20 percent of the population lives in the 100 biggest cities—not all of which are dense. But to put that another way, more than 80 percent of us live in places where cars are for sure a necessity—and autonomy, too, is nice. As an aside, have you noticed that the same people pushing transport “modules” have also been pushing Covid lockdowns, mask mandates, and vaccination requirements? There is a commonality of control.
Journalists look at the interior of Baidu’s Apollo RT6 next-generation autonomous vehicle during its unveiling in Beijing on July 20, 2022. The Apollo RT6 is designed for fully autonomous driving with detachable steering wheel, and is set to join the Apollo Go ride-hailing service starting in 2023. (NOEL CELIS/AFP via Getty Images)
Indeed, the anti-auto momentum of the green left is growing. And here again, the big automakers are complicit. In 2018, Ford Motor Company announced plans for an “inclusive, vibrant, walkable mobility innovation district.” [emphasis added] In other words, Ford seems to be okay with a post-private-car future, especially if the greens continue to shower it with greenback subsidies.
Indeed, it’s even possible that the phrase “auto maker” will become obsolete, as the manufacturers transition themselves into some sort of Uber-ish new business model, enabling them to abandon actual auto workers, trading them in for cheaper cubicle people.
One who caught this anti-car trend early was Donald Trump. In 2019 the then-president told a crowd, “They want you to have one car instead of two, and it should be electric, OK? So tell people, no more cars. No more cars.”
But of course, when they say no more cars, they don’t mean no more cars for themselves. And here we’re not just talking about such lifetime limousine riders as Biden and John Kerry. In 2019, The New York Post reported on Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY): “Since declaring her candidacy in May 2017, Ocasio-Cortez’s campaign heavily relied on those combustion-engine cars—even though a subway station was just 138 feet from her Elmhurst campaign office.” It seems that in just a two-year period, AOC took more than a thousand trips on Uber and other app-ride platforms.
Of course, fewer cars on the road is good for those who still have cars. So, if all goes according to plan, Biden, Kerry, AOC, and the Davos crowd can look forward to zipping along in emptier streets.
Joe Biden’s Legacy
At least through Election Day, 2024, Biden will insist that he’s in favor of personal cars, tilted, of course, toward EVs. But after that, who knows, because as Biden says, the climate crisis is an “existential threat.” So with all that weighing on him, don’t be surprised if a second-term Biden administration—if there is one—takes a turn toward building his “legacy,” which will be defined as harder-core greenism. As one ally of the Biden administration said to Politico last year:
Do you know how many cryptocommunists are now working for the Biden administration? How many former Bernie Sanders staffers who are pretty f—ing deep in the White House’s policy nexus? The revolutionary socialist phase has kind of faded for the left. But the flip side of that is that a lot of those people have infiltrated to the highest levels of Democratic politics.
As they say, personnel is policy. So if Biden wins re-election, in 2025 we can expect a tighter squeeze on personal cars—either because they emit too much carbon or require too much lithium—and a greater emphasis on “modules” and other kinds of mass-transit.
This is how Biden can grasp for the title of Greenest President in History. That might not seem like such a great title to you, dear reader, but you don’t face the prospect of funding a presidential library.
The Associated Press
President Joe Biden speaks during the UN Climate Change Conference COP26 in Glasgow, Scotland, on Nov. 2, 2021. (Erin Schaff/The New York Times via AP)
In the meantime, here at Breitbart News, this author has warned that the greens were not going to give up on another of their long-term goals, getting rid of gas stoves. And in fact, just in the past few weeks, there’s been a flurry of green reports and MSM touts, as well as scoops from Fox News and Bloomberg News on ongoing Biden administration efforts to snuff out stoves. A headline on February 6: “U.S. officials eye new route to ban gas stoves.” On February 7, The Boston Globe expanded the green’s anti-household agenda beyond stoves, worrying that “cooking appliances aren’t the only household items that run on methane gas,” and citing the menace of furnaces, water heaters, and fireplaces. “We should be very concerned,” said one worrier to the Globe. (Happily, there’s also pushback–even pushback you can wear.)
You see, the greens and their climate modelers are sure that they everything figured–and so we have to do it their way. So even truly startling development–such as the news, reported on February 10, that a piece of the sun had broken off creating a tornado-like twirl on the sun’s surface, and is something that nobody had in their model–will have no effect on the declared need to save you from your gas stove. Indeed, as the greens get more aggressive, they’re coming, too, for your lawnmower. And needless to say, green zealots such as Greta Thunberg oppose everything.
Yes, they’re still coming for your stove. And they want your car, too.
"Unity, for the sake of unity alone, is a fool's objective.
Who and what are you "uniting" with?
I would much rather be divided by the truth than united by lies." - Seth Dillon and Anti Federalist
Connect With Us