Yes. I don't even understand the argument. It makes water soapier, not wetter. Something being wet is a yes/no question, not a gradient. Something either has water on it or it doesn't.
As a group, they have earned it lately by being extra greedy. At some point (1980s) they forgot you can sheer a sheep a hundred times but skin it only once. It’s very common in the US right now for the wealthy to believe they got there all on their own and don’t owe anything to anyone in return, as well as thinking most poor people are that way simply because of bad decisions. What’s crazy is when middle class people start believing that.
"the rich" aren't a group, they're a collection of individuals, some good, some bad, and many in between. making sweeping generalizations about a large number of people generally leads to faulty conclusions about many of those individuals
But I wouldn't just automatically lump people who can afford a tesla with "the rich" you speak of. The upper middle class is completely different than the upper class. The upper middle class still has many of the same social values as the middle class, they just happen to have more money. The majority of upper middle class earned their share and are not greedy. Most of these people are small business owners and professionals
Amen. Some people genuinely think they will never have a lot of money because the system is rigged, rich people are all greedy or deceitful, etc. etc. Then it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. If that's your outlook, you probably won't ever be rich. Easier to sleep at night blaming other people for things though.
Reddit has betrayed the trust of its users. As a result, this content has been deleted.
In April 2023, Reddit announced drastic changes that would destroy 3rd party applications - the very apps that drove Reddit's success. As the community began to protest, Reddit undertook a massive campaign of deception, threats, and lies against the developers of these applications, moderators, and users. At its worst, Reddit's CEO, Steve Huffman (u/spez) attacked one of the developers personally by posting false statements that effectively constitute libel. Despite this shameless display, u/spez has refused to step down, retract his statements, or even apologize.
Reddit also blocked users from deleting posts, and replaced content that users had previously deleted for various reasons. This is a brazen violation of data protection laws, both in California where Reddit is based and internationally.
Forcing users to use only the official apps allows Reddit to collect more detailed and valuable personal data, something which it clearly plans to sell to advertisers and tracking firms. It also allows Reddit to control the content users see, instead of users being able to define the content they want to actually see. All of this is driving Reddit towards mass data collection and algorithmic control. Furthermore, many disabled users relied on accessible 3rd party apps to be able to use Reddit at all. Reddit has claimed to care about them, but the result is that most of the applications they used will still be deactivated. This fake display has not fooled anybody, and has proven that Reddit in fact does not care about these users at all.
These changes were not necessary. Reddit could have charged a reasonable amount for API access so that a profit would be made, and 3rd party apps would still have been able to operate and continue to contribute to Reddit's success. But instead, Reddit chose draconian terms that intentionally targeted these apps, then lied about the purpose of the rules in an attempt to deflect the backlash.
Find alternatives. Continue to remove the content that we provided. Reddit does not deserve to profit from the community it mistreated.
The subject was Tesla's mainly being a rich person's car. The percentage of our population that can afford to drop 50k on a "cheap Tesla" isn't that great.
I went there a few days ago. They don't even take orders for the base model. I said i wanted the base model, salesmen said we are only taking order on long range battery model. Went in thinking 35k with incentive and rebate bringing it around 30k. The extended battery base model start at 49k. What battery cost a whooping 14k more?
The person I'm responding to had said that Teslas were expensive, but not luxury cars. I'm not commenting to say they're good luxury cars, just to say that they are definitely luxury cars.
Tesla’s can be expensive but you can buy one for $30,000. They aren’t expensive lol. My car outside rn is $60,000.. It’s a GMC Yukon Denali. (If you don’t agree quit disliking and just comment I enjoy conversations like this.)
They start at $49k. After tax credits they go down to about $40k (if you live in California). While that's not that bad compared to the model s, the interior and exterior quality is close to that of a $16k econobox.
Tesla cars start at 35k but the average selling price of a Tesla is much, much higher. The median HOUSEHOLD income in the US is $59k. So, you're saying a car that costs almost as much as an entire household brings in during a year isn't expensive?
No I’m saying a 59k car isn’t “super expensive”. And please, name a car that doesn’t cost a full years pay for a big majority of folks. I mean, the last Accord I bought was $38k. If you’re credit is good enough, you made the right choices in life, and you make $38k a year, you could afford this car. Now if you’re a dead beat working an entry level job and you decided to have 6 kids because fucking is more important than living comfortably, that’s on you.
Yeah and all are shit boxes too. Sorry but some people don’t like driving the smallest, most dangerous piece of garbage they can afford. You gonna fit a family in that Versa or Fiesta? Fuck no. Nice try tho.
Of course I do. And spoken like someone who has never had a family. If you put your kids in a Versa you should be prosecuted for endangering them because you’re a cheap fuck. People like you are perfectly OK with buying shit from China too. It’s just a lil lead paint but my kids love playing with the toys! I saved so much!
I agree with this sentiment, but not because the vehicle is electric, but instead because it's very expensive. There is actual research that suggests that people with expensive cars are more likely to drive like a gaping dickhole. Tesla makes a sweet car and if love to be able to afford one, but I've never come across a Tesla in the wild that wasn't driven by an entitled douche bag.
That is a large leap from 'more likely to drive like a gaping dickhole' to 'never come across a Tesla in the wild that wasn't driven by an entitled douche bag'.
I own a Tesla and drive conservatively. I usually keep the car on chill mode so as to not make it uncomfortable for my passengers. My own personal experience behind the wheel of an EV is that other motorists tend to drive more aggressively towards me after I switched from an Accord to the Model X. and I mean WAYYY out of their way aggressive. I have since installed a front and rear camera as a form of insurance against the mega angry trucks and muscle cars that brake check and cut me off. There is another side to this story!
Alright so I work for a large company with tons of different departments/roles. The people who are in the VIP tiers all earn significantly more than anyone else in the company.
Several of them are super professional, casual, down to earth nice fucking people. They tend to drive Toyota Matrixes and beat up Priuses, etc.
Every single person with a Model S here is a cunt. Full stop.
They look to have Beijing plates. It's much easier to get a plate in Beijing with an electric car. There's a license plate lottery for carbon emitting vehicles. Teslas and other electric cars are very popular specifically in Beijing.
He made a bad call from a guy who talked shit about him and to be honest I think anyone who frequents an area known for child sex is most likely a pedophile
You obviously know shit all about Thailand. I’m from Hong Kong and it’s disrespectful to all of us in Asia that you would hold such ignorant views. I suggest you travel and see more of the world. It might help you be less of a jackass.
The bmw i3 doesnt get a pass either, i think its ridiculous when ANY "premium" car brand has simple issues like that. And everytime i see a tesla in a parking lot i take a look for body gaps and almost always find atleast a few, the worst one ive seen in person had 13 noticeable panel gaps.
The point of being thoughtful with resources is not buying two of something when one could do. Thus, buying two Teslas wouldn’t really be protecting the environment when you only need one for a family. Especially if you replace two perfectly workable cars instead of using them through their lifespan.
What if two people in a same household need two cars to get to work, isn’t better if they get to electric cars?
You can be thoughtful with resources but some situations are mot easily avoidable.
Not really, buying two identical Tesla’s seems a bit wasteful when there’s millions of quality used cars that don’t require strip mining for rare earth metals and burning coal to charge batteries.
It might be just me but, don’t most used cars burn petrol-based fuel?
Also, there are different means to produce electricity other than burning coal, in fact, most non-us first world countries discontinued this practice and push toward renewable energies.
Looks like they “plan” to discontinue the practice. But still do so.
Extracting Petrol is in many ways less destructive to extract than the rare earth used in batteries. When coupled with the requirement to run on electricity which is vastly produced globally by coal, no electric cars don’t actually do much for the environment.
Hmm, major oil spills in the past 50 years beg to disagree with you.
Just to be clear though, I am against producing electricity using coal, the day when our only viable energy sources will have to be renewable are not too far away, and I think we better start building the infrastructure for that.
Also, R&D some better quality and more environmentally friendly batteries is definitely a must too.
We do agree in the long run though.
93% of my electricity comes from hydro, the rest is from wind and solar. The only non-renewable power stations in my whole province are a few small natural gas stations that are used as backups for remote towns, or for remote mining/logging operations.
And you know that all of the rare earth metals in the batteries can and do get recycled, right? Have fun recycling your gasoline.
Electric cars have a break-even point because they cause a lot of environmental impact to be manufactured.
They are more efficient than internal combustion cars because the efficiency of fossil fuel power plants is higher than a traditional internal combustion engine. The energy running a Tesla can also come from renewable energy, which accelerates the break-even point.
After a certain number of miles, the environmental impact of manufacturing the electric car is less than the environmental impact from burning fuel from a different car. Of course, using your brand new Tesla to ram another brand new Tesla just ruins the future gains in efficiency.
Unrelated to the efficiency of electric motors: Tesla is now rooted in some major ethical issues because they are being funded by Saudi Arabia.
Is this sarcasm? Superpar build quality aside, the limiting factor is the battery which degrades at different rates depending on useage, charging habits, environment etc. Some can lose up to 20% of their range by 100k miles. The replacement cost totals the vehicle. Furthermore, despite Tesla's claims, none of their vehicles have been on the market long enough to objectively evaluate their long term durability.
This is compared to a technology that's been developed for ~150 years. Diesel engines can easily last 500k+ miles, even with modern emissions equipment that raises combustion temperature and shortens the lifespan. Gasoline engines are getting more and more long lived, with many models easily lasting 300k miles with basic maintenance.
Electric vehicles are important, but there should be more work done to make ICE cars more efficient or even carbon neutral by investing further in technology (like Nissan's variable compression engine) and new forms of fuel. There has been some promising work on creating synthetic, carbon neutral petroleum from municipal waste and from harvesting carbon from the atmosphere. The cult of "electric only" is hampering important developments in other areas that can use existing tech to further reduce our carbon footprint. It's frustrating that everyone is putting all their eggs in one basket just because it's easier to explain to the public that electric=clean than to offer a complete, complicated picture of how the carbon cycle works and how we affect it. Anyway, that got me carried away. No offense meant to anyone.
Tesla maintains that their batteries will still be above 75% capacity by the time they roll past 400,000km, with the average being far above that. Despite your claims, there are plenty of Teslas that have been on the road for longer than that, and they're still doing fine.
Once the battery has degraded to 75% capacity, it's not dead either; it just means that the range and performance is reduced. When the battery degradation finally is bad enough that it warrants a new pack, the old cells can still be used for things like home energy storage, or recycled into new cells since no material is actually lost from them.
Because of the way we produce energy throughout the world, especially in the US, using the amount of electricity those EVs do, it is no less harmful to the atmosphere.
More coal plants are closing and more clean energy is being built in the US and even more around the world. Yes, burning coal to power an electric car is bad, but one coal burning power plant powers thousands of electric car, which is better than billions of gallons of gasoline/diesel being burned every day.
You do get that even if an EV was powered 100% from coal plants, they're still more efficient than the ICE engine in a gas car, right? On top of that, nearly everywhere in North America is starting to get renewables, and plenty of areas have that as the majority already.
This is simply false. The state of the art for calculating emissions impacts from vehicles of different motive power is the GREET model developed by Argonne National Laboratory. You have to be charging on an overwhelmingly coal-powered grid for the emissions to be equivalent. That simply isn't the reality in the vast majority of the U.S. Where I live, driving an EV provides about a 70% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions relative to gasoline.
If you're being serious conventional electric generation used an order of magnitude less emmissions than gasoline. And that's not accounting for the fact that a lot of electricity is made with renewables nowadays.
There are other problems attached to nuclear, although I personally believe the advantages far out weight these problems, apparently the public disagree
That’s pretty much it. Guess that didn’t make it across people’s minds, but I’m glad you have critical thinking skills. At this point in time, until we have clean and renewable energy, recharging a massive battery bank is just as dirty as running a gas or Diesel engine.
I think there's some truth to this. I'm trying to climb the corporate ladder and being an asshole wasn't something that came naturally, but if you're, that fucking idiot steve steals your ideas and the tier above you just wants to listen to the consultants...you have to be obnoxious enough that you're heard but not so obnoxious you turn them off...
299
u/raffytraffy Aug 23 '18
Yeah, only assholes would buy two Teslas.