It limits travel distance. Fine in the city but if you need to get somewhere far away? Plus no guarantee of a charging station, or one that would work if everything went to hell.
People who live in rural areas tend to depend more on using their personal vehicles to travel further distances. Even if there's an airport nearby, flying out of a regional airport tends to cost more than flying out of a hub. Rural areas are also less likely to have chargers for electric cars.
Limiting travel distance would encourage people to live in cities, where their children can be indoctrinated in Democrat run schools. The higher cost of living also tends to mean that both parents must work full-time and don't have the time to keep track of what their children are being taught.
I have a theory that feminism is the patsy in this scenario. There are number of very rich interests that are looking to make a very good ongoing profit from climate fraud. Government coercion to buy their flawed "products" - note this includes carbon credits - means a lot of profit for someone(s).
Because feminists are easily influenced especially by causes / movements that demonise cis hetro patriarachal capitalism and men, they are very useful to push this agenda.
We, as a society, have accepted feminist logic as the norm hence decision making is based on emotion instead of logic.
Who knew that throwing out the tried and tested for something completely new but stylish would be a bad idea?
But hey, at least the carbon is emitted at the coal-burning power plant and not by your car. HOW DARE YOU?
Yeah, and automatic drives used to be total pigshit when they first came out.
Your point?
Also, as for the "coal plants" thing: maybe stop letting fucking France of all countries kick your ass when it comes to nuclear energy?
these batteries are far from the first generation... theres not much more to improve besides the energy capac afaik
It limits travel distance. Fine in the city but if you need to get somewhere far away? Plus no guarantee of a charging station, or one that would work if everything went to hell.
Ionization. To trap people and keep them isolated and contained.
People who live in rural areas tend to depend more on using their personal vehicles to travel further distances. Even if there's an airport nearby, flying out of a regional airport tends to cost more than flying out of a hub. Rural areas are also less likely to have chargers for electric cars.
Limiting travel distance would encourage people to live in cities, where their children can be indoctrinated in Democrat run schools. The higher cost of living also tends to mean that both parents must work full-time and don't have the time to keep track of what their children are being taught.
You can control people's movement, where they go, how far they go. Does Tesla have that in mind? Nah, but the government might like that power.
It's a cult.
to force the poor into buying cars that average 10k+ higher than what they can afford.
I have a theory that feminism is the patsy in this scenario. There are number of very rich interests that are looking to make a very good ongoing profit from climate fraud. Government coercion to buy their flawed "products" - note this includes carbon credits - means a lot of profit for someone(s).
Because feminists are easily influenced especially by causes / movements that demonise cis hetro patriarachal capitalism and men, they are very useful to push this agenda.
We, as a society, have accepted feminist logic as the norm hence decision making is based on emotion instead of logic.
its not feminism its big business and the govts seeing $$ signs from yearly replaced batterie packs