The Unofficial "Elon Musk trying to "Save Everyone" from Themselves (except his Step-Sister)" Thread...

[Hersh]

30 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

They aren't the only ones doing this and disagree momentum will collapse without Tesla.

 

 

Nah, man, some companies have figured it out, especially in regards to what Americans want to drive in context of gas prices (preference for larger vehicles likes trucks and SUVs get ridiculous when gas starts selling over a certain # in CONTUS). American car companies learned their lesson the hard way.

 

 

Maybe I'm biased with my sister having driven Semis for years, no, I'm not comfortable with giant self-driving tractor trailers everywhere.  It's not neccesary and rather a human at the helm somewhere just in case.

 

 

Killing isn't the word for it.  Taking my business elsewhere is Freedom of Speech and Capitalism rolled into one big Eagle screeching American pie.

 

 

Trying to buy only American is actually hard as hell, even ive tried and failed. 

 

Every tried to feed a family without products someway involved with Monsato or Nestle?  Good luck.

 

An overall demand for that would be nice, but companies realizing it may be more cost-effective to move back to the states and being incentized to do so would be better strategy from our countries standpoint (chips bill was a great idea).

 

Corporate America needs wholescale accountability, but a wholescale boycott wouldn't work, that's not the way, imo.

 

I don't think we will really see driverless semis. Always a person driving and it's more getting the old semis off the road. Only place I think we will see driverless vehicles like that are within private company factories. 

 

There are tens of millions of Americans that don't care about EVs and won't but them. There will always be a market for gas guzzlers unless the US outlaws them. 

 

People taking their business elsewhere is fine, people actively cheering for the company to fail is ****ed up. Musk doesn't own nearly as much of Tesla anymore. But the point is that people are cheering for all things Musk to fail when there are far more powerful people ****ing up the world and those same people don't say one word about. There are also companies that do real harm to the world with their products. The Tesla mission is fantastic. It's why I have wanted him gone for a long time now. Take the company to the next level. 

 

BTW, anyone wanting to buy American, if you are in Raleigh, check out https://raleighdenimworkshop.com/ Best jeans I've ever owned. (do we have a made in the US thread in this place?) I also try to find made in the US but companies like patagonia are still great. 

 

Edited December 21, 2022 by Hersh

[CousinsCowgirl84]

11 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

I don't think we will really see driverless semis. Always a person driving and it's more getting the old semis off the road. Only place I think we will see driverless vehicles like that are within private company factories. 

 

There are tens of millions of Americans that don't care about EVs and won't but them. There will always be a market for gas guzzlers unless the US outlaws them.

 

 

or we make gas reflect it’s true price per gallon instead of continuously subsidizing it. $8/gallon gass will change hearts and minds really quick, though we have to get to an ev with 300 miles range for under 30k first.

 

11 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

 

People taking their business elsewhere is fine, people actively cheering for the company to fail is ****ed up. Musk doesn't own nearly as much of Tesla anymore. But the point is that people are cheering for all things Musk to fail when there are far more powerful people ****ing up the world and those same people don't say one word about. There are also companies that do real harm to the world with their products. The Tesla mission is fantastic. It's why I have wanted him gone for a long time now. Take the company to the next level. 

 

 

Musk is the key figure behind Tesla’s transformation. There have been several EV startups that started around the same time as Tesla but most of them failed or remain super niche products. Rivian appears to have created a great product but the company is having difficulty executing.
 

He stepped in **** big time with this Twitter fiasco. It’s just a shame his midlife crisis has to affect two world-changing companies. (Twitter isn’t one of them)

 

 

Edited December 21, 2022 by CousinsCowgirl84

[Hersh]

2 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

or we make gas reflect it’s true price per gallon instead of continuously subsidizing it. $8/gallon gass will change hearts and minds really quick, though we have to get to an ev with 300 miles range for under 30k first.

 

Musk is the key figure behind Tesla’s transformation. There have been several EV startups that started around the same time as Tesla but most of them failed or remain super niche products. Rivian appears to have created a great product but the company is having difficulty executing.
 

He stepped in **** big time with this Twitter fiasco. It’s just a shame his midlife crisis has to affect two world-changing companies. (Twitter isn’t one of them)

 

 

 

This country won't stop subsidizing oil in our lifetimes. 

 

Musk was the figure head, but now it's time for a CEO that is fully committed to continued product development. You know I've been beating this drum for a while. You replace Musk and the new CEO comes out talking about getting back to the real values of Tesla and the company will keep rolling. 

[China]

15 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

I don't think we will really see driverless semis. Always a person driving and it's more getting the old semis off the road. Only place I think we will see driverless vehicles like that are within private company factories. 

 

 

They just don't want you to know about the Navitron systems that are already in place.

 

 

[Renegade7]

5 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

I don't think we will really see driverless semis. Always a person driving and it's more getting the old semis off the road. Only place I think we will see driverless vehicles like that are within private company factories. 

 

Right, and Tesla is not the only company investing in EV or at least non-diesel semis, so we'll survive.

 

5 minutes ago, Hersh said:

There are tens of millions of Americans that don't care about EVs and won't but them. There will always be a market for gas guzzlers unless the US outlaws them. 

 

Cali has already passed a law banning sale of new gas powered vehicles starting in, coincidentally, 2035:

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/08/25/california-bans-the-sale-of-new-gas-powered-cars-by-2035.html

 

We're heading to a future where buying old gas powered vehicles may be common, but new ones hard as hell to come by.

 

Read an article today about folks converting old gasoline classic cars to electric, gravity is clearly going to win on this one.

 

5 minutes ago, Hersh said:

People taking their business elsewhere is fine, people actively cheering for the company to fail is ****ed up. Musk doesn't own nearly as much of Tesla anymore. But the point is that people are cheering for all things Musk to fail when there are far more powerful people ****ing up the world and those same people don't say one word about. There are also companies that do real harm to the world with their products. The Tesla mission is fantastic. It's why I have wanted him gone for a long time now. Take the company to the next level. 

 

Perception is reality, man, if Musk cares about the mission more then his ego, he'll dial back. 

 

Stepping down from running Twitter is a start, Apple at one point pushed Steve Jobs out only to bring him back, it's possible Musk "gets it" before it gets to that point. 

 

People don't need Tesla's anymore then they did Macs back in the day.  I'll give you that boycotting them and being loud about it is easy, but boycotting some of the other companies I mentioned is hard. 

 

I tried boycotting Amazon, but I found out I was going to be a Dad in the middle of 2020, my Wife convinced me to be pragmatic not knowing how long that flaming hot pandemic was going to go on for at the time, we made our baby registry there.

 

Here I've been sounding the alarm on Bezos buying the Commanders and told to stop being a wet blanket over and over again.  You right we have bigger problems from bigger companies, uphill battle, but pretty fn delicious to see Amazon first company to lose a trillion dollars in market value *chefs kiss

 

 

 

5 minutes ago, Hersh said:

BTW, anyone wanting to buy American, if you are in Raleigh, check out https://raleighdenimworkshop.com/ Best jeans I've ever owned. (do we have a made in the US thread in this place?) I also try to find made in the US but companies like patagonia are still great. 

 

 

I love the idea for this thread, do it, Gordon.

3 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

This country won't stop subsidizing oil in our lifetimes. 

 

 

Man, 2035 is like barely 12 years from now.  A lot of cars are shell of themselves after 20 years if they aren't like a Honda or something.

 

2055 I'll be 67 years old...I can see ExxonMobil on its knees begging to be state-owned to survive, let alone an end to oil subsidies been happening by then. 

[Hersh]

22 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

2055 I'll be 67 years old...I can see ExxonMobil on its knees begging to be state-owned to survive, let alone an end to oil subsidies been happening by then. 

 

This explains a lot. You are still young enough to not be a complete cynic. 

Seriously though, we are anti-Amazon in our house unless no other option. Took awhile to set in but once I started explaining how they put other companies out of business, **** kicked in here. That was all about their business practices and the way they **** on employees. 

 

It would only be appropriate for China to start the made in the US thread. Or a thread on companies worth supporting. Like Tesla 

Edited December 21, 2022 by Hersh

[CousinsCowgirl84]

40 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

I don't think we will really see driverless semis. Always a person driving and it's more getting the old semis off the road. Only place I think we will see driverless vehicles like that are within private company factories. 

 

Driverless semis are already driving routes. 
 

https://www.autoweek.com/news/green-cars/a41351858/torc-robotics-autonomous-trucks/

 

In the relatively near future it should be possible to at the very least have one driver lead a caravan of driverless trucks.

 

 

 

25 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Right, and Tesla is not the only company investing in EV or at least non-diesel semis, so we'll survive.

 

you realize Nikola went belly up and it’s owner was exposed as a fraud, right? Tesla is the only manufacture delivering electric semis currently.

 

30 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

This country won't stop subsidizing oil in our lifetimes. 

 

I know, but they should.

 

 

[Hersh]

7 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

you realize Nikola went belly up and it’s owner was exposed as a fraud, right? Tesla is the only manufacture delivering electric semis currently.

 

 

Only concern is how many companies will not order cause of Musk being a dumb-****. They should otherwise do great in that market. 

[Renegade7]

1 hour ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

you realize Nikola went belly up and it’s owner was exposed as a fraud, right? Tesla is the only manufacture delivering electric semis currently.

 

 

It's probably going to come out that something like hydrogen hybrids is better option in reality for semis or other large transporters attempting to get away from oil, but Nikola being out the picture, or even Tesla, isn't stopping companies already making desiel semis from taking all electric seriously.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alanohnsman/2022/05/13/big-rigs-going-electric-as-navistar-cummins-daimler-rev-up-next-generation-trucks/?sh=79c15245419d

 

Again, even you brought up how hard we are trying to hide our fuel prices from looking like Europe, Capitalism it seems has accepted its better to limit dependency on the fluctuating price of oil if it can threaten their own solvency as a company.  It's now pragmatic to go green with respect to traditional and non-traditonal transportation that doesn't involve oil.

Edited December 21, 2022 by Renegade7

[The Evil Genius]

Again, Elno lied about a story, made himself the main subject, and got caught. Just like the made up story of his infant dying in his arms. 

 

 

Edited December 21, 2022 by The Evil Genius

[tshile]

Re: oil companies - their product is needed for more than just gas. They’ll be fine one way or another. and we’ll pay for it, one way or another. The other products are needed, and they require drilling and refining, costs will just adjust. People may not pay attention or understand or care - but that’s how that works. 
 

re: subsidies - removing them would likely be regressive. Some of you think making people pay 8$/gallon (or whatever) is good, but I’m guessing that significantly hurts the bottom end of society more than anyone else. 
 

re: Tesla and the EV market - they were instrumental in kick starting it but I’m skeptical that Tesla collapsing would matter much at this point. The whole market is and has been moving that way and I wouldn’t expect that to change because Tesla collapsed. And I think you can make a strong case Tesla has actively harmed the autonomous vehicle movement, and we’d be better off with out them there. 
 

 

[PokerPacker]

1 hour ago, tshile said:

Re: oil companies - their product is needed for more than just gas. They’ll be fine one way or another. and we’ll pay for it, one way or another. The other products are needed, and they require drilling and refining, costs will just adjust. People may not pay attention or understand or care - but that’s how that works.

Plastics?  Because that's another one we need to get away from.  Sure, we can't get rid of it entirely, but definitely need to start coming up with alternatives where we can.

[The Evil Genius]

I also doubt the California ARB is moving off their 2035 zero emissions cars only sales date (and NY state passed it recently too).

 

https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/california-moves-accelerate-100-new-zero-emission-vehicle-sales-2035

 

 

Edited December 21, 2022 by The Evil Genius

[tshile]

15 minutes ago, PokerPacker said:

Plastics?  Because that's another one we need to get away from.  Sure, we can't get rid of it entirely, but definitely need to start coming up with alternatives where we can.

Lubricants too. And even if cars are off gas, there’s a whole series of vehicles that rely on numerous  byproducts to work - construction comes to mind with hydraulics, oil, and diesel 

I think the environmental concerns around plastics are important, but I don’t know how anyone can seriously suggest we should get away from them. I’m not aware of a competing product to even consider? And plastics are part of everything these days. Houses are full of plastics to the point fire departments have long since changed policies on entering homes on fire. Structural beams now made from glued together wood and plastics. Anyone with vinyl siding is living in a house covered in a petrol byproduct. 
 

cars. Electronics. Even some clothes. Medical devices and equipment. Plastics have made things lighter, more Econimic to manufacture/purchase. They’ve also made things safer (cars especially since it makes them lighter and assists in key crumple areas to reduce the force of impact)

 

I guess what I’m saying is if everyone switched to EV’a tomorrow, oil companies still have a big market. And we still need them and what they produce. They wouldn’t just go away. Everything else would become more expensive to make up for it. 
 

now maybe long term it being more expensive drives research into alternatives and we eventually get them and they’re better for the environment than plastics. And that would be great. But I think people are missing reality when they discuss the growing popularity of EV’s and oil companies. There’s a hell of a lot going on there besides the gas that goes into a typical commuter car. 

Edited December 21, 2022 by tshile

[Hersh]

2 hours ago, tshile said:

Re: oil companies - their product is needed for more than just gas. They’ll be fine one way or another. and we’ll pay for it, one way or another. The other products are needed, and they require drilling and refining, costs will just adjust. People may not pay attention or understand or care - but that’s how that works. 
 

re: subsidies - removing them would likely be regressive. Some of you think making people pay 8$/gallon (or whatever) is good, but I’m guessing that significantly hurts the bottom end of society more than anyone else. 
 

re: Tesla and the EV market - they were instrumental in kick starting it but I’m skeptical that Tesla collapsing would matter much at this point. The whole market is and has been moving that way and I wouldn’t expect that to change because Tesla collapsed. And I think you can make a strong case Tesla has actively harmed the autonomous vehicle movement, and we’d be better off with out them there. 
 

 

 

Y'all are taking this too far. 

 

High gas prices would certainly hurt people at the bottom of the economic ladder, but it would move car companies toward better fuel efficiency cause their sales would slow. 

 

Yes, we need oil for other products, but it would be great to reduce the overall need. 

 

I'm extremely skeptical that the market will continue to move to all EVs. 

1 hour ago, tshile said:

Lubricants too. And even if cars are off gas, there’s a whole series of vehicles that rely on numerous  byproducts to work - construction comes to mind with hydraulics, oil, and diesel 

I think the environmental concerns around plastics are important, but I don’t know how anyone can seriously suggest we should get away from them. I’m not aware of a competing product to even consider? And plastics are part of everything these days. Houses are full of plastics to the point fire departments have long since changed policies on entering homes on fire. Structural beams now made from glued together wood and plastics. Anyone with vinyl siding is living in a house covered in a petrol byproduct. 
 

cars. Electronics. Even some clothes. Medical devices and equipment. Plastics have made things lighter, more Econimic to manufacture/purchase. They’ve also made things safer (cars especially since it makes them lighter and assists in key crumple areas to reduce the force of impact)

 

I guess what I’m saying is if everyone switched to EV’a tomorrow, oil companies still have a big market. And we still need them and what they produce. They wouldn’t just go away. Everything else would become more expensive to make up for it. 
 

now maybe long term it being more expensive drives research into alternatives and we eventually get them and they’re better for the environment than plastics. And that would be great. But I think people are missing reality when they discuss the growing popularity of EV’s and oil companies. There’s a hell of a lot going on there besides the gas that goes into a typical commuter car. 

 

According to google, and it's never wrong, 45% of oil goes to gas, 29% to diesel fuel and the rest to other products. But I'm certainly open to another source. 

[tshile]

3 minutes ago, Hersh said:

High gas prices would certainly hurt people at the bottom of the economic ladder, but it would move car companies toward better fuel efficiency cause their sales would slow

Is that true though?

my understanding is that fuel efficiency changes are directly caused by government mandates, not impact on sales from fluctuating gas prices. Ie: this idea this would be the result is entirely based in theory, and we don’t have any real world data to say otherwise as it’s always been driven by government regulation despite issues with gas prices coming/going over the years

 

But to the general point - I would assume getting rid of oil subsidies would lead to EV subsidies. Not saying it’s a bad thing or even changes your argument. Just that removing oil subsidies would hurt poor people and it seems obvious to me the next step would be to make EV’s cheaper (vis

subsidies or tax credits or whatever.)

[The Evil Genius]

The true suffering that comes from ZEV usage (and higher MPG cars in general) is federal/state transportation funding. Since we have been taxing gas for decades, a switch over to a road use tax would likely have to occur. But will anyone ever pass or even pay that? So how do states and feds make up the loss of gas tax revenues? 

[PokerPacker]

19 minutes ago, tshile said:

Is that true though?

When gas prices had gone to $5/gal however many years ago, SUVs--especially big ol' Hummers--weren't such popular vehicles anymore and smaller vehicles were.  When gas prices eventually came back down, SUVs and other gas-guzzlers made their triumphant return.

4 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

The true suffering that comes from ZEV usage (and higher MPG cars in general) is federal/state transportation funding. Since we have been taxing gas for decades, a switch over to a road use tax would likely have to occur. But will anyone ever pass or even pay that? So how do states and feds make up the loss of gas tax revenues? 

Why do we have to use a regressive tax in the first place?

[tshile]

22 minutes ago, PokerPacker said:

When gas prices had gone to $5/gal however many years ago, SUVs--especially big ol' Hummers--weren't such popular vehicles anymore and smaller vehicles were.  When gas prices eventually came back down, SUVs and other gas-guzzlers made their triumphant return.

Right I’m aware of that

 

im not aware of the industry making fuel efficiency changes because of it. As far as I understand those changes are directly caused by government policy (much like safety changes) 

28 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

The true suffering that comes from ZEV usage (and higher MPG cars in general) is federal/state transportation funding. Since we have been taxing gas for decades, a switch over to a road use tax would likely have to occur. But will anyone ever pass or even pay that? So how do states and feds make up the loss of gas tax revenues? 

Virginia has already been tackling this. The idea was drop gas tax and raise sales tax. The entire reason was gas tax revenue was unreliable because of swings in prices but also going forward would be unpredictable with EV’s. 
 

 

[PokerPacker]

11 minutes ago, tshile said:

Right I’m aware of that

 

im not aware of the industry making fuel efficiency changes because of it. As far as I understand those changes are directly caused by government policy (much like safety changes) 

It depends on if you are referring to fuel efficiency as in engine efficiency, or efficiency as in "less mass to transport means less fuel consumed".  Although I guess there's also something about going with a big enough chassis exempts you from car fuel efficiency standards, which is why when Ford brought the name "Ranger" back from the dead, it came in the form of what used to be an F150 rather than an actual compact pickup truck.

11 minutes ago, tshile said:

Virginia has already been tackling this. The idea was drop gas tax and raise sales tax. The entire reason was gas tax revenue was unreliable because of swings in prices but also going forward would be unpredictable with EV’s.

I hadn't heard that.  I'm onboard.  My problem isn't the EVs, but the fact that it was a regressive tax and to add insult to injury, it didn't even succeed in charging more to those that tear up the roads the most, as is supposedly the intention of tying it to gas, because big ol' Semi trucks destroy the roads at a greater pace than your average commuter per gallon of fuel consumed.

Edited December 21, 2022 by PokerPacker

[tshile]

42 minutes ago, PokerPacker said:

It depends on if you are referring to fuel efficiency as in engine efficiency, or efficiency as in "less mass to transport means less fuel consumed".  Although I guess there's also something about going with a big enough chassis exempts you from car fuel efficiency standards, which is why when Ford brought the name "Ranger" back from the dead, it came in the form of what used to be an F150 rather than an actual compact pickup truck.

both. For example I believe Ford explained their move to making F150’s out of aluminum as a fuel efficiency move - but it was forced by the legislation requiring them to meet a certain MPG by a certain year. 
 

it wasn’t forced by Ford asking themselves, how do we better guard against sales issues when gas prices surge. 
 

At least, that’s just my understanding. 
 

 

42 minutes ago, PokerPacker said:

I hadn't heard that.  I'm onboard.  My problem isn't the EVs, but the fact that it was a regressive tax and to add insult to injury, it didn't even succeed in charging more to those that tear up the roads the most, as is supposedly the intention of tying it to gas, because big ol' Semi trucks destroy the roads at a greater pace than your average commuter per gallon of fuel consumed.

 

one of the few concerns about the move that at least made a little sense to me, during all the debate, was a gas tax brings revenue from out of state people passing through but needing gas. Whereas a sales tax comes mostly from residents because people passing through don’t stop and shop like they stop for gas. 
 

Idk how much that matters or what the real difference is but it was a point raised. 
 

one thing we do that’s progressive is personal property tax. You pay tax on the value of a vehicle. So if you buy a more expensive vehicle you pay more on taxes - which is completely unrelated to how much you use (or even tear up) the roadways. 
 

I think it’s bull**** but it’s how we operate. I value having a nice car, but there’s plenty of people who don’t. The idea my tax burden is increased because of that, over someone who spends their money elsewhere (and no judgment can be made on income, or how much you use the roads) seems dumb to me. 
 

if I want to spend an extra 20k (in value) in my vehicle to make it nicer, but you want to spend an extra 20k (in value) on your home tv/audio setup, why is my tax burden increased and yours isn’t? The situation says nothing about our income or how much we use the roads, only that I value the niceness of my car and you value the niceness of your home audio setup. 

Edited December 21, 2022 by tshile

[CousinsCowgirl84]

4 hours ago, tshile said:

 

re: subsidies - removing them would likely be regressive. Some of you think making people pay 8$/gallon (or whatever) is good, but I’m guessing that significantly hurts the bottom end of society more than anyone else.

 

Partially solve that problem by encouraging the use of mass transit through investment in it using the much higher gas tax to pay for it.  Yes, we want to change peoples behaviors so the opt not to drive.

 

4 hours ago, tshile said:

 

. And I think you can make a strong case Tesla has actively harmed the autonomous vehicle movement, and we’d be better off with out them there. 
 

 

No way. Teslas autonomous driving software is pretty good and improving rapidly. If you can make the case, make it.

 

 

Edited December 21, 2022 by CousinsCowgirl84

[tshile]

3 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

No way. Teslas autonomous driving software is pretty good and improving rapidly. If you can make the case, make it.

I and others have.

specifically to you, and I find it funny don’t even remember. 
 

It’s been proven a waste of time. 

[CousinsCowgirl84]

1 minute ago, tshile said:

I and others have.

specifically to you, and I find it funny don’t even remember. 
 

It’s been proven a waste of time. 

No you haven’t.

[tshile]

That’s funny but not gonna work. The fact that you don’t even remember it falls in line with the rest of the issue and your track record. It is what it is.