Batteries now have a 5 minute charge time.

[Blues Man]

I've said this for a long time when people complain about the shortcomings of electric vehicles. The reply has been that they are simply a stepping stone to the next thing. Oddly many think staying in the 19th century is the answer.

An EV can replace a daily driver for most people today.

When I get rid of my truck I an considering an EV for my daily driver but I don't think I will get rid of my Jeep any time soon.

My next car will be electric. The reasons not to seem to diminish every day.

I have a Volt, I will be getting rid of it and will not be replacing it with an electric. The state charges more for EV with an additional $250 tax over the tag costs. Almost $400 a year for my electric as opposed to my Denali and K900 at $130 a piece.

Thats a bizarre set up. Our taxation is geared to encouraging lower emission cars. The lower the emissions the lower the tax. I would expect this to become more pronounced.

Quick ?

Why go to an expensive as shit car that is electric, presumably to reduce emissions and tackle global warming while China continues to open all of these coal plants every single year?

Connect the dots for me s0n.............

That's not a reason not to try to reduce emissions here.

 

[skookerasbil]

I've said this for a long time when people complain about the shortcomings of electric vehicles. The reply has been that they are simply a stepping stone to the next thing. Oddly many think staying in the 19th century is the answer.

An EV can replace a daily driver for most people today.

When I get rid of my truck I an considering an EV for my daily driver but I don't think I will get rid of my Jeep any time soon.

My next car will be electric. The reasons not to seem to diminish every day.

I have a Volt, I will be getting rid of it and will not be replacing it with an electric. The state charges more for EV with an additional $250 tax over the tag costs. Almost $400 a year for my electric as opposed to my Denali and K900 at $130 a piece.

Thats a bizarre set up. Our taxation is geared to encouraging lower emission cars. The lower the emissions the lower the tax. I would expect this to become more pronounced.

Quick ?

Why go to an expensive as shit car that is electric, presumably to reduce emissions and tackle global warming while China continues to open all of these coal plants every single year?

Connect the dots for me s0n.............

That's not a reason not to try to reduce emissions here.

But why?

Just so you can feel less guilty? Because it is completely illogical.......particularly when it takes $ out of peoples pockets and accomplishes nothing..........zero........egg. d0y........if the USA disappeared from the face of the earth for 100 years, temperatures would fall just a fraction of a degree. Scientific fact.

s0n........youve been sold a bag of dog doo. Only programmed people sign on to global warming theory. Time to do a little research outside the matrix and the dots will be able to then be connected.

In life, everything has a cost.......it matters. You will notice something........people embracing global warming theory never ask themselves the question, "At what cost?". Because when they have to answer it, their argument gets train wrecked.

 

[pknopp]

I've said this for a long time when people complain about the shortcomings of electric vehicles. The reply has been that they are simply a stepping stone to the next thing. Oddly many think staying in the 19th century is the answer.

An EV can replace a daily driver for most people today.

When I get rid of my truck I an considering an EV for my daily driver but I don't think I will get rid of my Jeep any time soon.

My next car will be electric. The reasons not to seem to diminish every day.

I have a Volt, I will be getting rid of it and will not be replacing it with an electric. The state charges more for EV with an additional $250 tax over the tag costs. Almost $400 a year for my electric as opposed to my Denali and K900 at $130 a piece.

Thats a bizarre set up. Our taxation is geared to encouraging lower emission cars. The lower the emissions the lower the tax. I would expect this to become more pronounced.

Quick ?

Why go to an expensive as shit car that is electric, presumably to reduce emissions and tackle global warming while China continues to open all of these coal plants every single year?

Connect the dots for me s0n.............

That's not a reason not to try to reduce emissions here.

But why?

Just so you can feel less guilty? Because it is completely illogical.......particularly when it takes $ out of peoples pockets and accomplishes nothing..........zero........egg. d0y........if the USA disappeared from the face of the earth for 100 years, temperatures would fall just a fraction of a degree. Scientific fact.

s0n........youve been sold a bag of dog doo. Only programmed people sign on to global warming theory. Time to do a little research outside the matrix and the dots will be able to then be connected.

They are a step out of the 19th Century.

 

[Blues Man]

I've said this for a long time when people complain about the shortcomings of electric vehicles. The reply has been that they are simply a stepping stone to the next thing. Oddly many think staying in the 19th century is the answer.

An EV can replace a daily driver for most people today.

When I get rid of my truck I an considering an EV for my daily driver but I don't think I will get rid of my Jeep any time soon.

My next car will be electric. The reasons not to seem to diminish every day.

I have a Volt, I will be getting rid of it and will not be replacing it with an electric. The state charges more for EV with an additional $250 tax over the tag costs. Almost $400 a year for my electric as opposed to my Denali and K900 at $130 a piece.

Thats a bizarre set up. Our taxation is geared to encouraging lower emission cars. The lower the emissions the lower the tax. I would expect this to become more pronounced.

Quick ?

Why go to an expensive as shit car that is electric, presumably to reduce emissions and tackle global warming while China continues to open all of these coal plants every single year?

Connect the dots for me s0n.............

That's not a reason not to try to reduce emissions here.

But why?

Just so you can feel less guilty? Because it is completely illogical.......particularly when it takes $ out of peoples pockets and accomplishes nothing..........zero........egg. d0y........if the USA disappeared from the face of the earth for 100 years, temperatures would fall just a fraction of a degree. Scientific fact.

s0n........youve been sold a bag of dog doo. Only programmed people sign on to global warming theory. Time to do a little research outside the matrix and the dots will be able to then be connected.

So tell me if your neighbor's yard is a trash heap do you say "Why should I clean up my yard?"

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

We should base our decision on what China does? Does that really somehow make sense to you?

We should waste trillions to reduce our CO2 when all China does it negate our reduction? Does that really somehow make sense to you?

 

[skookerasbil]

Back in the 1970's, there was an increase in people dying in the subways in NYC. Homeless people. The genius of government decided it was because the subway trains were going too fast. They were regulated to only go 50 mph........."to save lives".

Commuters could no longer get into the city and to work on time. They took to driving into NYC by car and car+bus. In a couple of years time, traffic fatalities increased exponentially. d0y.

Lets face it.....we have alot of people out there who never bother to ask the question, "At what cost?"

These peoole are dangerous mofus..........

The liberal mind always leads to ideas that cause misery to increase.

 

[skookerasbil]

I've said this for a long time when people complain about the shortcomings of electric vehicles. The reply has been that they are simply a stepping stone to the next thing. Oddly many think staying in the 19th century is the answer.

An EV can replace a daily driver for most people today.

When I get rid of my truck I an considering an EV for my daily driver but I don't think I will get rid of my Jeep any time soon.

My next car will be electric. The reasons not to seem to diminish every day.

I have a Volt, I will be getting rid of it and will not be replacing it with an electric. The state charges more for EV with an additional $250 tax over the tag costs. Almost $400 a year for my electric as opposed to my Denali and K900 at $130 a piece.

Thats a bizarre set up. Our taxation is geared to encouraging lower emission cars. The lower the emissions the lower the tax. I would expect this to become more pronounced.

Quick ?

Why go to an expensive as shit car that is electric, presumably to reduce emissions and tackle global warming while China continues to open all of these coal plants every single year?

Connect the dots for me s0n.............

That's not a reason not to try to reduce emissions here.

But why?

Just so you can feel less guilty? Because it is completely illogical.......particularly when it takes $ out of peoples pockets and accomplishes nothing..........zero........egg. d0y........if the USA disappeared from the face of the earth for 100 years, temperatures would fall just a fraction of a degree. Scientific fact.

s0n........youve been sold a bag of dog doo. Only programmed people sign on to global warming theory. Time to do a little research outside the matrix and the dots will be able to then be connected.

So tell me if your neighbor's yard is a trash heap do you say "Why should I clean up my yard?"

fake

the analogy is ghey

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So tell me if your neighbor's yard is a trash heap do you say "Why should I clean up my yard?"

How much should we waste...err...invest to capture a ton of carbon dioxide when we can see
China just throwing another tire on the fire?

 

[Blues Man]

I've said this for a long time when people complain about the shortcomings of electric vehicles. The reply has been that they are simply a stepping stone to the next thing. Oddly many think staying in the 19th century is the answer.

An EV can replace a daily driver for most people today.

When I get rid of my truck I an considering an EV for my daily driver but I don't think I will get rid of my Jeep any time soon.

My next car will be electric. The reasons not to seem to diminish every day.

I have a Volt, I will be getting rid of it and will not be replacing it with an electric. The state charges more for EV with an additional $250 tax over the tag costs. Almost $400 a year for my electric as opposed to my Denali and K900 at $130 a piece.

Thats a bizarre set up. Our taxation is geared to encouraging lower emission cars. The lower the emissions the lower the tax. I would expect this to become more pronounced.

Quick ?

Why go to an expensive as shit car that is electric, presumably to reduce emissions and tackle global warming while China continues to open all of these coal plants every single year?

Connect the dots for me s0n.............

That's not a reason not to try to reduce emissions here.

But why?

Just so you can feel less guilty? Because it is completely illogical.......particularly when it takes $ out of peoples pockets and accomplishes nothing..........zero........egg. d0y........if the USA disappeared from the face of the earth for 100 years, temperatures would fall just a fraction of a degree. Scientific fact.

s0n........youve been sold a bag of dog doo. Only programmed people sign on to global warming theory. Time to do a little research outside the matrix and the dots will be able to then be connected.

So tell me if your neighbor's yard is a trash heap do you say "Why should I clean up my yard?"

fake

the analogy is ghey

no it's not it happens to be quite correct.

You say we shouldn't care about pollution or carbon emissions because China doesn't.

So my analogy is just a scaled down version of your statement.

 

[Blues Man]

So tell me if your neighbor's yard is a trash heap do you say "Why should I clean up my yard?"

How much should we waste...err...invest to capture a ton of carbon dioxide when we can see
China just throwing another tire on the fire?

we don't have to capture it we just have to produce less of it.

 

[pknopp]

We should base our decision on what China does? Does that really somehow make sense to you?

We should waste trillions to reduce our CO2 when all China does it negate our reduction? Does that really somehow make sense to you?

What we do does not have anything to do with what China does. China has become a crutch with some of you. Anything you do not like the response is "China, China, China. It's a disease.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So tell me if your neighbor's yard is a trash heap do you say "Why should I clean up my yard?"

How much should we waste...err...invest to capture a ton of carbon dioxide when we can see
China just throwing another tire on the fire?

we don't have to capture it we just have to produce less of it.

We should stop wasting money to capture it? Ok.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

We should base our decision on what China does? Does that really somehow make sense to you?

We should waste trillions to reduce our CO2 when all China does it negate our reduction? Does that really somehow make sense to you?

What we do does not have anything to do with what China does. China has become a crutch with some of you. Anything you do not like the response is "China, China, China. It's a disease.

What we do does not have anything to do with what China does.

Should we waste trillions to filter our rivers to eliminate any trace of toxin when we can see China,
just downstream from us, dumping tons of cadmium and lead into the water?

What have we gained with our trillions in investment?

The river is more polluted than ever.

 

[Blues Man]

So tell me if your neighbor's yard is a trash heap do you say "Why should I clean up my yard?"

How much should we waste...err...invest to capture a ton of carbon dioxide when we can see
China just throwing another tire on the fire?

we don't have to capture it we just have to produce less of it.

We should stop wasting money to capture it? Ok.

I never once said anything about capturing CO2

that was all you.

 

[pknopp]

We should base our decision on what China does? Does that really somehow make sense to you?

We should waste trillions to reduce our CO2 when all China does it negate our reduction? Does that really somehow make sense to you?

What we do does not have anything to do with what China does. China has become a crutch with some of you. Anything you do not like the response is "China, China, China. It's a disease.

What we do does not have anything to do with what China does.

Should we waste trillions to filter our rivers to eliminate any trace of toxin when we can see China,
just downstream from us, dumping tons of cadmium and lead into the water?

What have we gained with our trillions in investment?

The river is more polluted than ever.

Buy a geography book. Then stay on topic. This is about a move from the 19 th century technology to 21st Century technology.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So tell me if your neighbor's yard is a trash heap do you say "Why should I clean up my yard?"

How much should we waste...err...invest to capture a ton of carbon dioxide when we can see
China just throwing another tire on the fire?

we don't have to capture it we just have to produce less of it.

We should stop wasting money to capture it? Ok.

I never once said anything about capturing CO2

that was all you.

Are you familiar with that monumental waste of time, energy and money?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

We should base our decision on what China does? Does that really somehow make sense to you?

We should waste trillions to reduce our CO2 when all China does it negate our reduction? Does that really somehow make sense to you?

What we do does not have anything to do with what China does. China has become a crutch with some of you. Anything you do not like the response is "China, China, China. It's a disease.

What we do does not have anything to do with what China does.

Should we waste trillions to filter our rivers to eliminate any trace of toxin when we can see China,
just downstream from us, dumping tons of cadmium and lead into the water?

What have we gained with our trillions in investment?

The river is more polluted than ever.

Buy a geography book. Then stay on topic. This is about a move from the 19 th century technology to 21st Century technology.

Is the geograpy book going to show that China's CO2 doesn't impact us?

 

[pknopp]

We should base our decision on what China does? Does that really somehow make sense to you?

We should waste trillions to reduce our CO2 when all China does it negate our reduction? Does that really somehow make sense to you?

What we do does not have anything to do with what China does. China has become a crutch with some of you. Anything you do not like the response is "China, China, China. It's a disease.

What we do does not have anything to do with what China does.

Should we waste trillions to filter our rivers to eliminate any trace of toxin when we can see China,
just downstream from us, dumping tons of cadmium and lead into the water?

What have we gained with our trillions in investment?

The river is more polluted than ever.

Buy a geography book. Then stay on topic. This is about a move from the 19 th century technology to 21st Century technology.

Is the geograpy book going to show that China's CO2 doesn't impact us?

We have covered your argument. Rant all you want. The number of electric cars is going to grow.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

We should base our decision on what China does? Does that really somehow make sense to you?

We should waste trillions to reduce our CO2 when all China does it negate our reduction? Does that really somehow make sense to you?

What we do does not have anything to do with what China does. China has become a crutch with some of you. Anything you do not like the response is "China, China, China. It's a disease.

What we do does not have anything to do with what China does.

Should we waste trillions to filter our rivers to eliminate any trace of toxin when we can see China,
just downstream from us, dumping tons of cadmium and lead into the water?

What have we gained with our trillions in investment?

The river is more polluted than ever.

Buy a geography book. Then stay on topic. This is about a move from the 19 th century technology to 21st Century technology.

Is the geograpy book going to show that China's CO2 doesn't impact us?

We have covered your argument. Rant all you want. The number of electric cars is going to grow.

Yup.

And so are China's CO2 emissions. We're melting!!!

 

[Tommy Tainant]

We should base our decision on what China does? Does that really somehow make sense to you?

We should waste trillions to reduce our CO2 when all China does it negate our reduction? Does that really somehow make sense to you?

What we do does not have anything to do with what China does. China has become a crutch with some of you. Anything you do not like the response is "China, China, China. It's a disease.

What we do does not have anything to do with what China does.

Should we waste trillions to filter our rivers to eliminate any trace of toxin when we can see China,
just downstream from us, dumping tons of cadmium and lead into the water?

What have we gained with our trillions in investment?

The river is more polluted than ever.

Buy a geography book. Then stay on topic. This is about a move from the 19 th century technology to 21st Century technology.

Is the geograpy book going to show that China's CO2 doesn't impact us?

We have covered your argument. Rant all you want. The number of electric cars is going to grow.

Yup.

And so are China's CO2 emissions. We're melting!!!

China has committed to tackle this and should be encouraged. You have a very narrow focus on this issue.