1 1
BIGUN

The future of EV's

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, wmw999 said:

Most everyone else would rather discuss the future of EV — they appear to have one. It’s an evolving world, autos

I haven't been this excited about vehicles since the 72 Chevelle SS (that was an expensive lesson) - The little girl is coming up on driving age and Cari & I were talking about this thread and EV's last night. We also discussed hybrids as a possibility. As the daddy, I'm torn between my need to surround her with a 1965 Bonneville (which I owned and can attest to its tank-like cage) or this little electric Mini-Cooper once they get the issues worked out and some crash-testing completed.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/23/2021 at 4:56 PM, JoeWeber said:

But, $40K and less $7500 Federal and $2500 Oregon tax credits get me to $30K. Write a check at the dealership and then write it off that year and I have one for $16K. Sure seems that it was me they had in mind when they set this up.

20,000 deposits the first day. 

Don't think of this as an electric vehicle; think of it as a digital vehicle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

All I need to do is show up at the dealership and I'll get a new truck at 60% of sticker. And to everyone heading off to work this morning, thank you kindly for keeping the economy going.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, billeisele said:

Joe - not sure that red is less resistant or that being slower to change is bad. I'm in a red state and see plenty of changes.

It's basically the definition of conservative: "averse to change or innovation and holding traditional values."  Not all conservatives oppose everything new, and not everyone in a red state is a conservative.  (And not all conservatives are republicans or vice versa.)  But conservatives do indeed oppose change.

Quote

Maybe red states just evaluate things more carefully before changing.

Or - more often - they resist that change until the most conservative people in the state (generally the oldest) age out, and the remaining people, the people who grew up with the new laws/rules/technology/memes, accept it more readily because it's what they have always known.

Nowadays you won't see many people opposing interracial marriages on the basis that it's unholy or evil or disgusting.  Yet a poll in 1958 showed that only 1% of southern white men and 5% of white men outside the South accepted interracial marriage; the people against it cited religious, ethical or racial purity arguments.  What happened?  Did most men living back then "see the light" and decide that interracial marriage was OK after Loving vs Virginia? Nope.  They died off - and the next generation grew up in a world where black people married white people and it wasn't a big deal.  (Needless to say, some people still do, but today they are in the minority.)

Quote

There are incentives for renewable power. Unfortunately some of the policies are poorly written and penalize non-renewable users.

Every law, rule and tax code out there benefits some people and penalizes others.  It's inherent in any government.  401k tax breaks penalize people who do not save in 401k's; that additional tax money has to come from somewhere.  Charitable contribution deductions penalize people who do not make charitable contributions for the same reason - taxes on other people must be increased to compensate.  We decide that's OK because the result (more saving, more contributions to charity, less CO2 in the atmosphere) have a societal benefit.

Quote

We have plenty of rules protecting the environment, they are strongly enforced and there are organizations that are quite active, and law firms that make sure it's done.

Again, you can say that about anything at all.  We have plenty of laws protecting elections in the US; they are strongly enforced and there are organizations and law firms who take care to ensure that they are enforced. There are plenty of laws against illegal immigrants, rioters and illegal abortions.  But conservatives often still want more laws for all of those things - because they think those laws would have benefits, even though there are already plenty.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, billvon said:

It's basically the definition of conservative: "averse to change or innovation and holding traditional values."  Not all conservatives oppose everything new, and not everyone in a red state is a conservative.  (And not all conservatives are republicans or vice versa.)  But conservatives do indeed oppose change.

Or - more often - they resist that change until the most conservative people in the state (generally the oldest) age out, and the remaining people, the people who grew up with the new laws/rules/technology/memes, accept it more readily because it's what they have always known.

Nowadays you won't see many people opposing interracial marriages on the basis that it's unholy or evil or disgusting.  Yet a poll in 1958 showed that only 1% of southern white men and 5% of white men outside the South accepted interracial marriage; the people against it cited religious, ethical or racial purity arguments.  What happened?  Did most men living back then "see the light" and decide that interracial marriage was OK after Loving vs Virginia? Nope.  They died off - and the next generation grew up in a world where black people married white people and it wasn't a big deal.  (Needless to say, some people still do, but today they are in the minority.)

Every law, rule and tax code out there benefits some people and penalizes others.  It's inherent in any government.  401k tax breaks penalize people who do not save in 401k's; that additional tax money has to come from somewhere.  Charitable contribution deductions penalize people who do not make charitable contributions for the same reason - taxes on other people must be increased to compensate.  We decide that's OK because the result (more saving, more contributions to charity, less CO2 in the atmosphere) have a societal benefit.

Again, you can say that about anything at all.  We have plenty of laws protecting elections in the US; they are strongly enforced and there are organizations and law firms who take care to ensure that they are enforced. There are plenty of laws against illegal immigrants, rioters and illegal abortions.  But conservatives often still want more laws for all of those things - because they think those laws would have benefits, even though there are already plenty.

 

Hi Bill,

Great analogy.

Jerry Baumchen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, billvon said:

It's basically the definition of conservative: "averse to change or innovation and holding traditional values."  Not all conservatives oppose everything new, and not everyone in a red state is a conservative.  (And not all conservatives are republicans or vice versa.)  But conservatives do indeed oppose change.

Or - more often - they resist that change until the most conservative people in the state (generally the oldest) age out, and the remaining people, the people who grew up with the new laws/rules/technology/memes, accept it more readily because it's what they have always known.

Nowadays you won't see many people opposing interracial marriages on the basis that it's unholy or evil or disgusting.  Yet a poll in 1958 showed that only 1% of southern white men and 5% of white men outside the South accepted interracial marriage; the people against it cited religious, ethical or racial purity arguments.  What happened?  Did most men living back then "see the light" and decide that interracial marriage was OK after Loving vs Virginia? Nope.  They died off - and the next generation grew up in a world where black people married white people and it wasn't a big deal.  (Needless to say, some people still do, but today they are in the minority.)

Every law, rule and tax code out there benefits some people and penalizes others.  It's inherent in any government.  401k tax breaks penalize people who do not save in 401k's; that additional tax money has to come from somewhere.  Charitable contribution deductions penalize people who do not make charitable contributions for the same reason - taxes on other people must be increased to compensate.  We decide that's OK because the result (more saving, more contributions to charity, less CO2 in the atmosphere) have a societal benefit.

Again, you can say that about anything at all.  We have plenty of laws protecting elections in the US; they are strongly enforced and there are organizations and law firms who take care to ensure that they are enforced. There are plenty of laws against illegal immigrants, rioters and illegal abortions.  But conservatives often still want more laws for all of those things - because they think those laws would have benefits, even though there are already plenty.

 

If labels and generalizations are appropriate and accurate. Let's see the definition and list for blue states and liberals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
32 minutes ago, billeisele said:

If labels and generalizations are appropriate and accurate. Let's see the definition and list for blue states and liberals.

Easy peasy. Liberals are people who want more rights for more people. And are willing to take responsibility to get that.

Edited by gowlerk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, billeisele said:

If labels and generalizations are appropriate and accurate. Let's see the definition and list for blue states and liberals.

You just listed two things that are not the same, and it's in reply to a post about yet a third thing that isn't the same.  So here's a breakdown of the three things you were talking about:

The first is conservative vs liberal.  Liberals are willing to respect or accept behavior or opinions different from their own.  They are open to new ideas, and indeed look for new solutions to old problems.  They tend to promote individual rights and civil liberties, and support new efforts to expand those liberties (think gay marriage.)  They support a free press.

Conservatives prefer traditional social values, and tend to resist change.  They prefer private ownership of resources and initiatives to promote various causes over government action.  They emphasize the rights of entities (including large corporations) over individual rights supported by government action.  They object to a free press when they think it is not working to the benefit of the US.

The second is democrats vs republicans.  Those are currently somewhat aligned with the above axis i.e. liberals are democratic and conservatives are republican.  However, that wasn't always the case; democrats were the conservative party (supporting segregation, industry over individual rights, and traditional values) until about 1960, when the parties flipped.  In addition, this is changing again; Trump supporters call themselves conservatives/republicans, but support autocratic rule, oppose democratic elections and make excuses for pedophilia/rape/sexual assault allegations, which aren't really in line with traditional US values.  (This may or may not change as Trump exits the picture.)

The third is blue states vs red states.  This is simply "what party people vote for."  Most states have a close to even mix of democratic and republican voters; even the most extreme red state out there - Wyoming - only has about 2/3 republicans.  This changes based on year and current political scandal.  Undecided voters can easily swing a red state blue and vice versa.

Does that answer your question?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanwhile, to get back on topic:

LiFePO4 is lithium-ion's dimwitted cousin.  It's heavier, lower energy density, and doesn't work well when it's very cold out.  However, it is much cheaper and easier to make; like the name suggests, all you need is lithium, iron and phosphates (and often aluminum/copper for the electrodes.)  And it lasts a long time - 5000 cycles or so.  From Electrek:

"In October 2020, Tesla started producing the Model 3 Standard Range Plus out of Gigafactory Shanghai with LFP battery cells.  The move was significant because Tesla also started exporting this new version of the Model 3 outside of China for the first time."

https://electrek.co/2021/02/26/elon-musk-tesla-shifting-more-electric-cars-lfp-batteries-nickel-supply-concerns/

The LiFePO4 car has a 250 mile advertised range, and an effective (observed) range of about 200 miles in cool climates.  That is still way better than the first EV I got - a Leaf with a ~70 mile range.  

So as battery manufacturing ramps up, there will be a second cheaper option that EV manufacturers can fall back on.  And of course LiFePO4 is improving as well.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, billvon said:

You just listed two things that are not the same, and it's in reply to a post about yet a third thing that isn't the same.  So here's a breakdown of the three things you were talking about:

The first is conservative vs liberal.  Liberals are willing to respect or accept behavior or opinions different from their own.  They are open to new ideas, and indeed look for new solutions to old problems.  They tend to promote individual rights and civil liberties, and support new efforts to expand those liberties (think gay marriage.)  They support a free press.

Conservatives prefer traditional social values, and tend to resist change.  They prefer private ownership of resources and initiatives to promote various causes over government action.  They emphasize the rights of entities (including large corporations) over individual rights supported by government action.  They object to a free press when they think it is not working to the benefit of the US.

The second is democrats vs republicans.  Those are currently somewhat aligned with the above axis i.e. liberals are democratic and conservatives are republican.  However, that wasn't always the case; democrats were the conservative party (supporting segregation, industry over individual rights, and traditional values) until about 1960, when the parties flipped.  In addition, this is changing again; Trump supporters call themselves conservatives/republicans, but support autocratic rule, oppose democratic elections and make excuses for pedophilia/rape/sexual assault allegations, which aren't really in line with traditional US values.  (This may or may not change as Trump exits the picture.)

The third is blue states vs red states.  This is simply "what party people vote for."  Most states have a close to even mix of democratic and republican voters; even the most extreme red state out there - Wyoming - only has about 2/3 republicans.  This changes based on year and current political scandal.  Undecided voters can easily swing a red state blue and vice versa.

Does that answer your question?

Hi Bill,

OK, you got me to do some homework.

Here in Oregon I have been reading a fair amount, over the last 4 yrs or so, about the people leaving the Republican party.  Usually, they leave & become independents, as I am.

So, I did some looking.  From the Oregon Sec of State's office I found that of April 2021, we had almost 3 million registered voters.  Of those, 35% are D's, 25% are R's, and the rest are 'other,' 39%.  The 'lost' 1% are simply how the numbers came up.

Voter Registration Comparison by County April 2021 (oregon.gov)

Page 2 of this link is where I got my numbers.

I expect to see this trend continuing throughout the country.

Jerry Baumchen

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, billvon said:

LiFePO4 is lithium-ion's dimwitted cousin.  It's heavier, lower energy density, and doesn't work well when it's very cold out.  However, it is much cheaper and easier to make; like the name suggests, all you need is lithium, iron and phosphates (and often aluminum/copper for the electrodes.)  And it lasts a long time - 5000 cycles or so.  From Electrek:

"In October 2020, Tesla started producing the Model 3 Standard Range Plus out of Gigafactory Shanghai with LFP battery cells.  The move was significant because Tesla also started exporting this new version of the Model 3 outside of China for the first time."

A couple of readings on this point:

https://www.techbriefs.com/component/content/article/tb/stories/blog/38427

Dr. Wang collaborated on a separate paper regarding:

Quote

 

Such a thermally modulated LFP battery designed to operate at a working temperature around 60 °C in any ambient condition promises to be a well-rounded powertrain for mass-market EVs. Furthermore, we reveal that the limited working time at the high temperature presents an opportunity to use graphite of low surface areas, thereby prospectively prolonging the EV lifespan to greater than two million miles.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41560-020-00757-7

 

Two million miles. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

Two million miles. 

LFP cells have yet another advantage over other cathode chemistries: much higher charge/discharge rate. With some chargers reaching 250kW or more, sub 10-minute charges become more realistic.

So if they do solve the issue of lower energy density, LFP is a sure winner. For grid-scale batteries I think they're already taking over.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, olofscience said:

LFP cells have yet another advantage over other cathode chemistries: much higher charge/discharge rate. With some chargers reaching 250kW or more, sub 10-minute charges become more realistic.

So if they do solve the issue of lower energy density, LFP is a sure winner. For grid-scale batteries I think they're already taking over.

Cost effective battery storage is the game-changer in the electric utility industry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, olofscience said:

LFP cells have yet another advantage over other cathode chemistries: much higher charge/discharge rate. With some chargers reaching 250kW or more, sub 10-minute charges become more realistic.

So if they do solve the issue of lower energy density, LFP is a sure winner. For grid-scale batteries I think they're already taking over.

I have 4X5000W LFP batteries on board. They are 2 years old. The new ones have been out for 6 months and are 5500W. It's happening.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, billvon said:

The first is conservative vs liberal.  Liberals are willing to respect or accept behavior or opinions different from their own. 

You owe me a keyboard.  Not sure what's more troubling...the fact that you really believe that or the current trend of cancelling anyone who doesn't.

  1. Mike Lindell — The CEO of My Pillow said his company was ditched by nearly 20 retailers after he publicly questioned the electoral results of the 2020 presidential election and made his election fraud claims into a movie. Lindell is an unwavering supporter of former President Donald Trump and visited him in the White House on Jan. 15 — five days before Mr. Trump left office.
  2. Chris Harrison – The longtime host of ABC’s “The Bachelor” franchise decided to “step aside” after defending current contestant Rachael Kirkconnell when old photos surfaced of her attending an Old South antebellum party. “While I do not speak for Rachael Kirkconnell, my intentions were simply to ask for grace in offering her an opportunity to speak on her own behalf,” Harrison explained. “What I now realize I have done is cause harm by wrongly speaking in a manner that perpetuates racism, and for that I am so deeply sorry.”
  3. J.K. Rowling — The famous author of the Harry Potter series has faced backlash for voicing her fears that the push for transgender rights will ultimately endanger women’s rights. She’s since defended her comments on her website and joined 150 authors and academics denouncing “cancel culture.” These actions have only further infuriated her critics, who called for a boycott of her books and for her publisher to stop paying royalties.
  4. Adam Rubenstein — The former New York Times opinion editor and writer resigned from the paper in December, six months after its staff went into an uproar over a piece he edited by Sen. Tom Cotton. The column by Arkansas Republican argued for the federal government to “send in the troops” to quell violence in cities throughout the country in response to civil unrest following the death of George Floyd. Former editor Mari Weiss wrote on Twitter about the resignation: “Adam was hung out to dry by his own colleagues. Then he and his work were lied about, including in this mendacious editor’s note.”
  5. Gina Carano — The “Mandalorian” actress was fired by Disney after posting on social media that being a Republican in 2021 was similar to being Jewish during Nazi Germany. Her Hollywood agent dropped her, and Hasbro scrapped her “Star Wars” action figures.
  6. Tucker Carlson/Sean Hannity/Laura Ingraham — The prime-time Fox News opinion hosts have long battled with cancel culture and advertisement boycotts for airing their conservative views. Media Matters, a liberal group that opposes Fox, keeps a list of the network’s prime-time sponsors and routinely singles them out advocating for them to drop their advertisements if it deems a host says something particularly egregious one evening.
  7. Matthew Yglesias — The liberal opinion writer resigned from Vox, a publication he co-founded, after many of his woke colleagues found his articles too right of center. Mr. Yglesias argued against defunding the police this summer and took aim at the liberal term “Latinx” as alienating many people from progressive politics and the Democratic Party. He has since joined Substack, so he can voice his opinions more freely.
  8. Washington/Lincoln/Jefferson — The former U.S. presidents’ names have been wiped from San Francisco public schools after the school board decided to rename 44 schools that had “ties to racism” and “dishonorable legacies.”
  9. Sen. Josh Hawley – The Missouri Republican was dropped from his publisher, and Democrats have called for his resignation after he raised a challenge to the electors in Pennsylvania, siding with Mr. Trump and saying the state violated its own Constitution in conducting the 2020 presidential election. In the New York Post, he defended his actions, writing: “I, for one, am not going to back down. My book will be published, and I will continue to represent the people of my state without fear or favor, whatever the left or the corporations say.”
  10. Goya Foods — Liberals called for a Goya Foods’ boycott after the company’s chief executive Robert Unanue praised Mr. Trump at an event at the White House. Mr. Unanue said Mr. Trump’s leadership was a “blessing” for Hispanic Americans. The boycott turned into a “buycott,” according to Mr. Unanue. “Our sales went up significantly since the pandemic,” he told FOX Business’ Stuart Varney. “We did well because the restaurant business declined 70%, but we also did well because of the backlash of a boycott to a buycott. We have our traditional customers, we kept them, but we also have new customers.”

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/28/2021 at 6:19 AM, BIGUN said:

This thread is about EV's. Maybe shame on me for not putting [On-Topic] in the thread title, but I'm asking now if we can get back on track. 

Sorry, I'm going to keep it drifting just a bit longer. Bill asked me a specific question. I meant to reply right away, but got distracted and forgot about it.

On 5/28/2021 at 5:09 AM, airdvr said:

You owe me a keyboard.  Not sure what's more troubling...the fact that you really believe that or the current trend of cancelling anyone who doesn't.

  1. Mike Lindell — The CEO of My Pillow said his company was ditched by nearly 20 retailers after he publicly questioned the electoral results of the 2020 presidential election and made his election fraud claims into a movie. Lindell is an unwavering supporter of former President Donald Trump and visited him in the White House on Jan. 15 — five days before Mr. Trump left office.
  2. Chris Harrison – The longtime host of ABC’s “The Bachelor” franchise decided to “step aside” after defending current contestant Rachael Kirkconnell when old photos surfaced of her attending an Old South antebellum party. “While I do not speak for Rachael Kirkconnell, my intentions were simply to ask for grace in offering her an opportunity to speak on her own behalf,” Harrison explained. “What I now realize I have done is cause harm by wrongly speaking in a manner that perpetuates racism, and for that I am so deeply sorry.”
  3. J.K. Rowling — The famous author of the Harry Potter series has faced backlash for voicing her fears that the push for transgender rights will ultimately endanger women’s rights. She’s since defended her comments on her website and joined 150 authors and academics denouncing “cancel culture.” These actions have only further infuriated her critics, who called for a boycott of her books and for her publisher to stop paying royalties.
  4. Adam Rubenstein — The former New York Times opinion editor and writer resigned from the paper in December, six months after its staff went into an uproar over a piece he edited by Sen. Tom Cotton. The column by Arkansas Republican argued for the federal government to “send in the troops” to quell violence in cities throughout the country in response to civil unrest following the death of George Floyd. Former editor Mari Weiss wrote on Twitter about the resignation: “Adam was hung out to dry by his own colleagues. Then he and his work were lied about, including in this mendacious editor’s note.”
  5. Gina Carano — The “Mandalorian” actress was fired by Disney after posting on social media that being a Republican in 2021 was similar to being Jewish during Nazi Germany. Her Hollywood agent dropped her, and Hasbro scrapped her “Star Wars” action figures.
  6. Tucker Carlson/Sean Hannity/Laura Ingraham — The prime-time Fox News opinion hosts have long battled with cancel culture and advertisement boycotts for airing their conservative views. Media Matters, a liberal group that opposes Fox, keeps a list of the network’s prime-time sponsors and routinely singles them out advocating for them to drop their advertisements if it deems a host says something particularly egregious one evening.
  7. Matthew Yglesias — The liberal opinion writer resigned from Vox, a publication he co-founded, after many of his woke colleagues found his articles too right of center. Mr. Yglesias argued against defunding the police this summer and took aim at the liberal term “Latinx” as alienating many people from progressive politics and the Democratic Party. He has since joined Substack, so he can voice his opinions more freely.
  8. Washington/Lincoln/Jefferson — The former U.S. presidents’ names have been wiped from San Francisco public schools after the school board decided to rename 44 schools that had “ties to racism” and “dishonorable legacies.”
  9. Sen. Josh Hawley – The Missouri Republican was dropped from his publisher, and Democrats have called for his resignation after he raised a challenge to the electors in Pennsylvania, siding with Mr. Trump and saying the state violated its own Constitution in conducting the 2020 presidential election. In the New York Post, he defended his actions, writing: “I, for one, am not going to back down. My book will be published, and I will continue to represent the people of my state without fear or favor, whatever the left or the corporations say.”
  10. Goya Foods — Liberals called for a Goya Foods’ boycott after the company’s chief executive Robert Unanue praised Mr. Trump at an event at the White House. Mr. Unanue said Mr. Trump’s leadership was a “blessing” for Hispanic Americans. The boycott turned into a “buycott,” according to Mr. Unanue. “Our sales went up significantly since the pandemic,” he told FOX Business’ Stuart Varney. “We did well because the restaurant business declined 70%, but we also did well because of the backlash of a boycott to a buycott. We have our traditional customers, we kept them, but we also have new customers.”

 

There's a huge difference between a 'difference of opinion' and calling out lies, hatred and bigotry. Just like 'alternative facts' are not facts, the 'alternative opinions' you list are dangerous, false, bigoted and/or hateful. They should be called out as such. Those folks have a right to say what they want. They don't have a right to be free from the consequences.

Lindell, Fox News and Hawley are all promoting a very dangerous lie that threatens our democracy. It culminated in the insurrection attempt on Jan 6th. That was the first (beer?) time in our country's history that the transfer of power wasn't peaceful. 

Harrison & Rowling are promoting racism & bigotry. They are being called out for that.

Carano is pretending that criticism of her political position is equivalent to the one of the largest mass murders in history. Please.

The 'Washington/Jefferson/Lincoln" stuff is complaining that history as currently taught is not complete or accurate and the truth is uncomfortable. I've recently learned that Jefferson did a lot of research into Small Pox and the creation of a vaccine for it. Jefferson used slaves as test subjects. While something that was acceptable at the time, it's pretty abhorrent today. Should that information be suppressed?

 

The "Goya controversy" is pretty funny. Trump violated a host of ethics rules when he promoted them. He may have committed a criminal act in doing so.
Rather than admit this and apologize, the Goya company ran with it.
I'm fine with holding them accountable for that. 

On 5/26/2021 at 1:19 AM, billeisele said:

Joe - not sure that red is less resistant or that being slower to change is bad. I'm in a red state and see plenty of changes. Maybe red states just evaluate things more carefully before changing. I'm certain that "change is unnecessary" isn't true. We are addressing climate change, not at the same rate as other states but not sure that is wrong, or other states are right.

There are incentives for renewable power. Unfortunately some of the policies are poorly written and penalize non-renewable users.

We have plenty of rules protecting the environment, they are strongly enforced and there are organizations that are quite active, and law firms that make sure it's done.

So, from the perspective of the red state of SC, the generalization isn't correct. 

Agree that political influence and subsidies exist in the fossil industry, and those influences make it difficult to accurately evaluate the economics.

Bill - sorry it took so long to answer your question.

I made several generalizations in my post. They were just that. Generally, but not always true. Certainly not in every place or situation.

As others have noted, 'red states' tend to be more resistant to change. That's not necessarily a bad thing. Making radical changes too quickly, because something is 'fashionable' is a bad idea. However, holding onto old ways because they are comfortable or 'the way we've always done it' is equally bad.
As far as red states go, look at who and where 'old school thinking' is being enforced.
What states are trying to restrict voting? 
What states are enacting laws that restrict trans rights?
What states are trying to restrict free speech by enacting legislation that punishes protesters (aimed particularly at BLM)?

I'm of the opinion that a healthy opposition party is vital. It keeps the party in power in check. 
But (and it's an important 'but') that requires the dedication to the country that the current Rs clearly don't have. 
They're more interested in holding power than in allowing the citizens free access to the voting booth.
They're more interested in 'stopping the liberal agenda' than in what's best for the country. McConnell himself said he was going to oppose whatever Obama wanted, even if it harmed the country. I haven't seen him say the exact same thing about Biden, but his action certainly imply that his position hasn't changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, wolfriverjoe said:


I'm of the opinion that a healthy opposition party is vital. It keeps the party in power in check. 
But (and it's an important 'but') that requires the dedication to the country that the current Rs clearly don't have. 
 

 

Her Majesty's Most Loyal Opposition

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Her_Majesty's_Most_Loyal_Opposition_(United_Kingdom)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back on topic, the ongoing chip shortage will actually prompt carmakers to shift more to EVs - although EVs still contain a lot of electronics, they also consolidate the silicon into fewer, larger chips. And fewer of them have to pass the high temperature (+125 C) tests that electronics in the ECU need to pass, for example.

BBC: "Why electric cars will take over sooner than you think" https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-57253947

"Chip shortage prompts EV makers to shore up SiC (Silicon Carbide) supply" https://www.argusmedia.com/en/news/2212457-chip-shortage-prompts-ev-makers-to-shore-up-sic-supply

"Electric cars may get the chance of a lifetime to replace petrol guzzlers faster" https://www.scmp.com/business/companies/article/3124245/electric-cars-may-get-chance-lifetime-replace-petrol-guzzlers

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

1 1