“Slower EV Adoption” . . .

  • November 28, 2023

An article published the other day by one of Bill Gates’ PR outlets (MSN.com) says the outcome of the presidential selection a little less than a year from now may result in “slower EV adoption.”

As if people were choosing to take home a new babe from the orphanage  – as opposed to being pushed into accepting an EV in their garage via the elimination of alternatives to them.

The Left – which depends on force because it cannot rely on persuasion – always soft-sells the force it relies upon, as via gentle-and-voluntary-sounding manipulative language. People do not “adopt” cars. And no one is being prevented from buying an EV – if they want one.

The issue at hand – that will be decided by the next selection – is whether people who don’t want to “adopt” an EV will be prevented by the apparatus of the state from having the option not to. It depends on whether the Left re-selects itself to control the apparatus of the state, which it probably will – having not only done it last time but having gotten away with it last time. Expecting a thief who goes uncaught – and unpunished – to not steal again is like expecting Lucy to hold the football still this time, so that poor ol’ Charlie Brown can kick it, this time.

Stellantis CEO Carlos Tavares laid it all out the other day in an interview published by Automotive News. “There are two important elections next year, ” he noted. “The European Parliament elections in June and the U.S. elections in November. It could be that politics will be different then.” 

Italics added.

Politics, indeed.

The only reason almost all of us haven’t yet been pushed into “adopting” EVs is because the Orange Man’s politics were different. At least in the sense that high tide is different from low tide. He did not eliminate the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) regulations (another mildly styled expression of force) that are being used to push people to “adopt” EVs by making it almost-impossible for the car manufacturers to offer anything that isn’t one.

But he did hold them back for awhile.

He gave a breather – to Stellantis, in particular – that allowed the latter to continue selling cars like the Charger and Challenger for Four More Years. Actually, until this year. Next year will be different, of course – because the politics changed in 2020. Someone with different politics was selected – and he was able to do what the Orange Man might have prevented from happening. Just as the Orange Man might have prevented the selection of his replacement by not having selected Dr. Fauci to run his government – and allowing a selection that lasted for a year rather than a day, in which votes were counted but never vetted.

Orange Main could have ended the regulations – as they are so blandly styled – that are being used to force people to “adopt” EVs by systematically pushing alternatives to them off the market (and, inevitably, off the road).

He might have done it by asking an obvious question, directed at the public: Have any of you ever been denied the opportunity to buy a car that gets high gas mileage? Or an electric car?

If the answer is no – which of course, it is – then why is the government pretending otherwise? And why is the government using force to supersede people’s choices? Does anyone like being pushed to “adopt” anything?

And if it has to be pushed, what does that say about the thing being pushed? It says that people have to be pushed, else most of them won’t.

And that says a lot about the ones doing the pushing, doesn’t it?

The car industry has been pushed so hard and for so long it stopped pushing back years ago. As the MSN piece puts it: “Stellantis is currently running with its Dare Forward 2030 plan, which aims for all sales of new cars and trucks in Europe and half in the United States to be fully-electric models.”

As if this were the result of something other than a push.

And it is something worse. Not the obsequious, we-don’t-want-any-trouble-here Ned Beatty (in Deliverance) language.  “Dare Forward”? What, exactly is “daring” about not only doing what you’ve been told to do but making as if you are daring for doing it? As if it were your decision.

As if you took a risk by taking it.

You know what would have been actually daring? How about the people running the car companies telling the state to stop pushing them to make products their customers aren’t interested in “adopting”?

How about pushing back?

Ford’s CEO Bill Ford – who is the great grandson of the founder of the company he now leads – says he “never thought I would see the day when our products were so heavily politicized.” 

Well, that’s what happens when you don’t stand up to people intent upon pushing you – and your customers – to “adopt” that which they do not want but which you (finger-crossed) hope they’ll still buy after the state pushes the alternatives they do want off the market.

The next selection will determine whether this pushing continues – or is pushed back against.

It all comes down to who is “adopted” a month less than a year from now.

. . .

If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos. 

We depend on you to keep the wheels turning! 

Our donate button is here.

 If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:

721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079

PS: Get an EPautos magnet or sticker or coaster in return for a $20 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a magnet or sticker or coaster – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)

If you like items like the Keeeeeeev T shirt pictured below, you can find that and more at the EPautos store!





The post “Slower EV Adoption” . . . appeared first on EPautos – Libertarian Car Talk.

Spread the love