I still have fun asking these tree huggers where and how is the power generated to charge these EV's. I't either going to come from a coal fired, natural gas, or a nuclear power plant. Wind and solar just isn't going to do the job needed............

Dem governor withdraws electric vehicle mandate in stunning blow to environmentalists 'Common sense has prevailed,' says Connecticut Senate GOP leader

Democratic Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont is withdrawing his plan to mandate future electric vehicle (EV) purchases after the proposal received bipartisan pushback from lawmakers on a key legislative panel.

Lamont ultimately pulled the proposal just four months after unveiling it and characterizing it as "decisive action to meet our climate pollution reduction targets." In July, Lamont unveiled the proposal, tethering Connecticut's emissions standards to those set in California, which mandates that every passenger vehicle sold is electric by 2035, the most aggressive target of its kind nationwide.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dem-gov...mentalists#

---

You know trouble is right around the corner when your best friend tells you to hold his beer!!

State level mandates worked for California emission standards, decades ago and continuing today. But that was California, a very big state, and that was for a car that still worked like a normal car and just cost a little more. The idea that CT could do something even bigger was pure insanity.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

The government has no business telling people what kind of vehicle we can buy.

---

The government has no business telling people what kind of vehicle we can buy.

You're right.  If I want to buy a car with no ABS and no airbags that's my business.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

How do you cut people off from driving?

Make all cars electric. Then electricity becomes scarce, and therefore too expensive for anyone to own a car.

Why ban oil, natural gas, propane, etc appliances?

You can't cut service for the others but electricity can be cut in a second with a smart meter.
It's crazy to think about it but why are they trying to move people back to electricity when the cheaper and cleaner options have always been the others.

It doesn't make sense unless the conspiracy theories are true.

Sent from my SM-T970 using Tapatalk

---

The government has no business telling people what kind of vehicle we can buy.

You're right.  If I want to buy a car with no ABS and no airbags that's my business.

I’m kind of old school so for me it’s seatbelts. Damn government gets their nose into everything. Plus they mess up my clothes.

---

I'm condescending. That means I talk down to you.

You're right.  If I want to buy a car with no ABS and no airbags that's my business.

I’m kind of old school so for me it’s seatbelts. Damn government gets their nose into everything. Plus they mess up my clothes.

Meh, the seatbelts themselves are cheap and don't do anything unless you put them on.  What gets me is the government now makes you wear them! If I want to ride 80mph loose and free, MY BODY MY CHOICE!

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

I’m kind of old school so for me it’s seatbelts. Damn government gets their nose into everything. Plus they mess up my clothes.

Meh, the seatbelts themselves are cheap and don't do anything unless you put them on.  What gets me is the government now makes you wear them! If I want to ride 80mph loose and free, MY BODY MY CHOICE!

No worries, a strong pair of cutting shears will help you MAKE YOUR CAR GREAT AGAIN.

---

I'm condescending. That means I talk down to you.

I’m kind of old school so for me it’s seatbelts. Damn government gets their nose into everything. Plus they mess up my clothes.

Meh, the seatbelts themselves are cheap and don't do anything unless you put them on.  What gets me is the government now makes you wear them! If I want to ride 80mph loose and free, MY BODY MY CHOICE!

Click it or Ticket. One more way the government inserts itself into your life to take your money.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Meh, the seatbelts themselves are cheap and don't do anything unless you put them on.  What gets me is the government now makes you wear them! If I want to ride 80mph loose and free, MY BODY MY CHOICE!

Click it or Ticket. One more way the government inserts itself into your life to take your money.

I personally funded Clay County with new Christmas Lights because of traffic cameras..

---

The government has no business telling people what kind of vehicle we can buy.

You're right.  If I want to buy a car with no ABS and no airbags that's my business.

There is a difference between ABS/airbags and an EV. You know that.

---

You're right.  If I want to buy a car with no ABS and no airbags that's my business.

There is a difference between ABS/airbags and an EV. You know that.

I agree.  My first post had that nuance.  Your reply did not have it.  Sorry my sarcasm got the better of me.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

The government has no business telling people what kind of vehicle we can buy.

I respectfully disagree.  There's an old saying, "Your freedom ends at the tip of my nose."  Which is to say, sometimes, your freedom infringes on my freedom, and then the government has to step in and set the rules.  In the case of what kind of vehicle you can buy, you obviously don't have any constitutional right to pollute the air I breathe, and since this administration believes we are headed for an environmental disaster in large part because of gas-powered cars, then if you believe that, you have to agree that it is the responsibility of the government to step in and restrict what kind of car you can buy in order to protect everyone else from the pollution generated by that car.  

You can argue the science of it all you want, but in theory, the government does have the right to restrict your freedoms in order to protect everyone else.

---

The government has no business telling people what kind of vehicle we can buy.

I respectfully disagree.  There's an old saying, "Your freedom ends at the tip of my nose."  Which is to say, sometimes, your freedom infringes on my freedom, and then the government has to step in and set the rules.  In the case of what kind of vehicle you can buy, you obviously don't have any constitutional right to pollute the air I breathe, and since this administration believes we are headed for an environmental disaster in large part because of gas-powered cars, then if you believe that, you have to agree that it is the responsibility of the government to step in and restrict what kind of car you can buy in order to protect everyone else from the pollution generated by that car.  

You can argue the science of it all you want, but in theory, the government does have the right to restrict your freedoms in order to protect everyone else.

I have every right to buy a vehicle I can afford. I'm not arguing pollution, I'm arguing the option of choice. Not everyone can afford an EV. Hell, the country doesn't even have the proper infrastructure to support all the EVs these folks want to enforce. 

Build the infrastructure, make the cars and home charging stations affordable along with the cost of an elevated electric bill FIRST, then talk about phasing out the regular vehicles. 

The idiots in charge know this but are more concerned with the liberals cancelling them.

---

I respectfully disagree.  There's an old saying, "Your freedom ends at the tip of my nose."  Which is to say, sometimes, your freedom infringes on my freedom, and then the government has to step in and set the rules.  In the case of what kind of vehicle you can buy, you obviously don't have any constitutional right to pollute the air I breathe, and since this administration believes we are headed for an environmental disaster in large part because of gas-powered cars, then if you believe that, you have to agree that it is the responsibility of the government to step in and restrict what kind of car you can buy in order to protect everyone else from the pollution generated by that car.  

You can argue the science of it all you want, but in theory, the government does have the right to restrict your freedoms in order to protect everyone else.

I have every right to buy a vehicle I can afford. I'm not arguing pollution, I'm arguing the option of choice. Not everyone can afford an EV. Hell, the country doesn't even have the proper infrastructure to support all the EVs these folks want to enforce. 

Build the infrastructure, make the cars and home charging stations affordable along with the cost of an elevated electric bill FIRST, then talk about phasing out the regular vehicles. 

The idiots in charge know this but are more concerned with the liberals cancelling them.

---

I respectfully disagree.  There's an old saying, "Your freedom ends at the tip of my nose."  Which is to say, sometimes, your freedom infringes on my freedom, and then the government has to step in and set the rules.  In the case of what kind of vehicle you can buy, you obviously don't have any constitutional right to pollute the air I breathe, and since this administration believes we are headed for an environmental disaster in large part because of gas-powered cars, then if you believe that, you have to agree that it is the responsibility of the government to step in and restrict what kind of car you can buy in order to protect everyone else from the pollution generated by that car.  

You can argue the science of it all you want, but in theory, the government does have the right to restrict your freedoms in order to protect everyone else.

I have every right to buy a vehicle I can afford. I'm not arguing pollution, I'm arguing the option of choice. Not everyone can afford an EV. Hell, the country doesn't even have the proper infrastructure to support all the EVs these folks want to enforce. 

Build the infrastructure, make the cars and home charging stations affordable along with the cost of an elevated electric bill FIRST, then talk about phasing out the regular vehicles. 

The idiots in charge know this but are more concerned with the liberals cancelling them.

Your point about affordability is spot on.  The government has some limited powers in this area, not rights, but the affordability to the end user is one of the main limits on their power.   At one time the government may have had the power to say, "these cars pollute too much, everyone adopt this unaffordable clean tech or else go back to horse and buggy." But that was long ago, if ever at all.   The only reason anyone in government, CA, CT, federal, or otherwise, was able to mandate catalytic converters or unleaded gas was affordability. The industry experts said they could make it affordable if the market was mandated and they delivered. Industry experts don't really believe EVs will ever be as practical or affordable as gas cars, even with a guaranteed market.  That could change.  But no one thinks the tech is there today.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

The government has no business telling people what kind of vehicle we can buy.

You're right.  If I want to buy a car with no ABS and no airbags that's my business.

Not quite true.  While airbags only make your car safer for the occupants, ABS does make your car safer for all the other cars on the road around yours.  The federal government has a long history of mandates for safety issues.

---

When you get into the endzone, act like you've been there before.

I respectfully disagree.  There's an old saying, "Your freedom ends at the tip of my nose."  Which is to say, sometimes, your freedom infringes on my freedom, and then the government has to step in and set the rules.  In the case of what kind of vehicle you can buy, you obviously don't have any constitutional right to pollute the air I breathe, and since this administration believes we are headed for an environmental disaster in large part because of gas-powered cars, then if you believe that, you have to agree that it is the responsibility of the government to step in and restrict what kind of car you can buy in order to protect everyone else from the pollution generated by that car.  

You can argue the science of it all you want, but in theory, the government does have the right to restrict your freedoms in order to protect everyone else.

I have every right to buy a vehicle I can afford. I'm not arguing pollution, I'm arguing the option of choice. Not everyone can afford an EV. Hell, the country doesn't even have the proper infrastructure to support all the EVs these folks want to enforce. 

Build the infrastructure, make the cars and home charging stations affordable along with the cost of an elevated electric bill FIRST, then talk about phasing out the regular vehicles. 

The idiots in charge know this but are more concerned with the liberals cancelling them.

I was only arguing the very narrow point of whether the government has the right to regulate what kind of vehicle you can buy.  I was not arguing that it would be wise to do so.  Just that they have the right to do it.  And they do.  That's why we have a government- to set various rules.  

Incidentally, home charging is affordable already.  Just plug it in to a 220 volt outlet, like a dryer outlet, and it will charge the car completely in a few hours (this works if you don't live in an apartment).  You can tell the car to start charging at times when the electricity rates are lowest.  And the cost of an elevated electric bill will be much less than the cost of gas, and there are no trips to the gas station if you charge it up at home.  Besides, 99% of people's driving is around town, and doesn't require access to a charging station, except for plugging it in at home.  

About the affordability of electric vehicles, it is true that right now, an electric car will cost you $30,000 to $50,000 minimum.  But Tesla is setting up to produce a $25,000 vehicle and market them sometime in the next couple of years.  Cheap EVs are about to flood the market.  It's a huge opportunity for EV makers, and an EV is an ideal 2nd car just for driving around town.  (Road trips aren't that hard anyway, but people seem to be concerned about range.)

I know there are a lot of things standing in the way of electric vehicle adoption right now, I'm not denying it.  I just think a lot of the objections people have are exaggerated.

---

I have every right to buy a vehicle I can afford. I'm not arguing pollution, I'm arguing the option of choice. Not everyone can afford an EV. Hell, the country doesn't even have the proper infrastructure to support all the EVs these folks want to enforce. 

Build the infrastructure, make the cars and home charging stations affordable along with the cost of an elevated electric bill FIRST, then talk about phasing out the regular vehicles. 

The idiots in charge know this but are more concerned with the liberals cancelling them.

Your point about affordability is spot on.  The government has some limited powers in this area, not rights, but the affordability to the end user is one of the main limits on their power.   At one time the government may have had the power to say, "these cars pollute too much, everyone adopt this unaffordable clean tech or else go back to horse and buggy." But that was long ago, if ever at all.   The only reason anyone in government, CA, CT, federal, or otherwise, was able to mandate catalytic converters or unleaded gas was affordability. The industry experts said they could make it affordable if the market was mandated and they delivered. Industry experts don't really believe EVs will ever be as practical or affordable as gas cars, even with a guaranteed market.  That could change.  But no one thinks the tech is there today.

You say affordability is what restricts them.  I believe the exact opposite is the end game.  It appears to me like the mandates are an attempt to price the common man out of the market and force him to use public transportation, which is the ultimate goal of the government.

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

Does anyone who is anti-EV have a reason specific to the technology? I’m curious to know if the reason has more to do with a fear of being forced to buy one eventually and not having a choice vs a concern that there is something inherently bad about the concept.

Full disclosure, I don’t have an EV and wouldn’t want to be forced into buying one but I think the tech has some promise. A friend has a Tesla and is constantly extolling the virtues of it. They take trips between Jax and Indiana from time to time with no issue. On the other hand, hybrids and hydrogen vehicles have some advantages without the drawback of needing a charging station.

---

I'm condescending. That means I talk down to you.