What do you suppose will happen when they build them – but no one comes?
Within the next couple of years, almost every car company will be building – and trying to sell – electric cars.
It won’t be just Tesla’s cars – which cars Tesla is already having trouble trying to sell. Chiefly, because there is a built-in limit to the number of $35,000 and up cars you can sell – regardless of the number you build.
Imagine a real estate developer who only built $350,000 houses – heedless of the ability of people in the area to buy them. The homes are “nice” – they have triple-paned casement windows and granite countertops and three bathrooms.
But no one comes.
Imagine a quadrupling of EV production – and that’s a lowball figure – for a “market” that constitutes at the present moment about 1 percent of the total and which is driven almost entirely by government mandates and propped up by taxpayer-mulcted subsidies and which no one has yet figured out how to earn an honest dollar from.
The government can – and has – decreed the manufacture of all these EVs, chiefly via regulations that only EVs can comply with. These include the overt regs requiring a certain number of “zero emissions” vehicles be made. Since only EVs qualify as “zero emissions” vehicles – even though their emissions aren’t zero just elsewhere – the reg amounts to a de facto EV manufacturing quota.
Another one – less overt but just as de facto – is the federal fuel economy fatwa known as CAFE, which may soon rise to nearly 50 miles-per-gallon on average. Not highway.
Average.
The only way for a car company to get its fleet of vehicles to average anywhere near 50 MPG – and thereby placate Uncle – is to manufacture lots of EVs, which use no gas at all and so up the CAFE average.
But Uncle can’t force people to buy all these EVs.
Soon, he will have to do exactly that. In order to avoid both embarrassment as well as the collapse of the car market itself, which is probably going to happen regardless – and especially if Uncle decrees that people must buy EVs.
Which would amount to the same thing as a decree that everyone must buy a $350,000 home – regardless of their ability to pay for it.
Why not prime rib dinner every night for everyone, too?
So long as people have the alternative to buy a non-EV that costs half as much and goes twice as far and doesn’t take five times as long to recover a partial charge as a non-EV takes to fully refuel, the majority are going to choose that alternative.
This will become embarrassing – as tens of thousands of unsold EVs begin to pile up at dealerships. It will then become costly – to the dealerships – as it becomes necessary to heavily discount these EVs in order to get them off the lot via any means necessary.
This has already happened – not once, but every single time an EV has come to “market” – which is bracketed in quote marks because there isn’t one.
Tesla doesn’t sell electric cars. It sells carbon credits – and gives away EVs at a net loss per.
GM – when it tried to sell EVs (Volt, ELR) couldn’t and had to give them away and then – finally – stop making them altogether. In order to avoid bankrupting itself. 
People – most people – don’t want EVs and aren’t going to buy them – unless they are compelled to.
Just imagine the electric train wreck that’s coming.
This isn’t about “green” – which is about politics. It is about economics. What people are willing to spend their money on – within the context of how much money they have to spend.
AOC, et al may believe in Obamaphones and EVs raining – free – from the heavens – but most people cannot afford to spend $30,000-plus on an electric car, even if they wanted one. And most people don’t want a small, capacity limited and functionally gimped car. Which is what the least expensive electric car – the $30,000 Nissan Leaf – is. This car is fine for short-distance commuting but in that case, it makes a great deal more economic sense to buy a $15,000 non-electric equivalent.
Which most people will do, so long as they can.
Most people also want – and need – something larger and more capable than the Leaf. There are – or soon will be – electric versions of such cars. But they will cost a great deal more than $30,000.
Given the choice between a $45,000 electric crossover SUV and a non-electric crossover of the same general size (and with more range and without needing to be hooked to a “fast” charger for 30-45 minutes to recover a partial charge) that can be bought for $20,000 less, which do you suppose most people will choose?
If they are allowed the choice. Improve your home with the latest tech gear.
Which is why that choice must be and will be eliminated.
How it will be done remains an unanswered question. Perhaps by outright bans on the manufacture of non-electric cars – as has already occurred in the UK and other European countries. Or by bans on the use of non-electric cars in certain areas – such as downtown areas – which would have the effect of making non-electric cars politically useless and thereby forcing people into EVs in order to be able to get to work.
Non-electric cars already in circulation would also have to be dealt with since they would be the last redoubt. If people are not allowed to buy a new car other than an electric car but were still able to drive their older non-electric car, they will do so.
Therefore, those cars – their owners – will be hit with deliberately punitive “carbon” taxes (this is already occurring in Ireland) in order to force them out of them. These older, non-electric cars will not be technically outlawed – just made all-but-impossible to keep.
All to “stimulate” demand for EVs – for which there isn’t any – because EVs are political cars, the progeny of laws and regulations rather than market demand.
It’s going to be one hell of a mess – and it’s coming, soon.
…
Got a question about cars – or anything else? Click on the “ask Eric” link and send ’em in!
If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos.
We depend on you to keep the wheels turning!
Our donate button is here.
If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:
EPautos
721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079
PS: Get an EPautos magnet (pictured below) in return for a $20 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a sticker – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)
My latest eBook is also available for your favorite price – free! Click here. 
I think the government is going to do another one of those “cash for clunkers” programs, but this time they’re just going to buy up any car, and they’re going to pay prices people can’t afford to pass up which they will regret when they discover that everyone else sold their cars and there are no more left.
The main reason to get an electric car is they are fun and they are low maintenance. No more gas, no more oil changes, no more coolant changes, no fan belts to change, no valves to adjust, no spark plugs to replace, no catalytic converter to get clogged up, no air filter to replace, etc. A Tesla is as fast as a Porsche. That is why they are expensive to insure. Instant torque is addicting.
Also no more long trips without planning to reach charging stations, no more 3-minute fillups, and a whopping big bill to pay when the batteries fail which will probably put your electric car into the junkyyard while its 1/2-price gasoline-engine equivalent will have many years of productive use left in it. The least expensive gasoline-engine car is far more practical in everyday use than the most expensive electric.
Hi 3Boy,
You write:
“The main reason to get an electric car is they are fun…”
Which is a matter of opinion. I find them much less fun because there is much less for the driver to do. No gears to shift. Just push on the accelerator pedal. It is more a ride than a drive.
Regardless, fun ought not to be mandated – or subsidized. Teslas and the rest are just expensive toys that happen to be electric. I think people ought to buy their own toys!
As for “low maintenance”: You won’t have to change oil and belts – just a battery pack. Which means exchanging occasional small expenses for one catastrophically big one.
They aren’t low maintenance though. They might be if they ever get sorted out. But then they are low maintenance like a disposable item is. You use it until it is time to throw it away. People complain about the days of planned obsolescence but they weren’t even close compared to the EV. The EV’s built in failure mode will even make the greatest die hard most likely to give up and throw it away.
I’m no authority when it comes to EV’s, but other than the batteries, tires, etc., there doesn’t seem to be all that much maintenance. How could there be more when it has maintenance free batteries, and fewer moving parts?
From what limited knowledge I have of them, it seems to me the only big hurdle they have is to come up with a better battery; one that allows a longer range for less money.
If they could swap out a battery like a tire, nobody would bat an eye. Some enormous and prohibitively expensive battery is what seems to me to be the newest version of the elephant in the room.
Batteries are getting better.
As for battery swaps, Tesla demonstrated them, but they never rolled it out. Elon Musk does this video to show how much quicker a battery swap is vs. even pumping gas. You can see the battery swap here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5V0vL3nnHY
The only problem I noticed with this video is that it doesn’t actually show a battery swap at all. They never rolled it out because: ” The strategy has since been abandoned due to faster supercharging and high complexity of swap stations.”
Supercharging a battery doesn’t sound all that appealing to me. How many times can a battery be supercharged anyways? How much does it cost to supercharge one of these batteries? I suspect Elon wants the taxpayers to subsidize that as well, no?
If you look on YouTube, you can find a close up video of the pack swap. It was filmed by someone in the audience, because the audio and video quality aren’t as good. That said, it IS good enough to see the machinery working. You can go here to see it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlaQuKk9bFg
Hi Mark,
Yes, they are getting better – vs. batteries. They are still massively inferior to gasoline. And always will be absent a completely new – and unknown – battery chemistry. Or a quadrupling of the cost of gas to make up for the cost of the EV.
The whole thing is demented, a kind of mania – unlike anything I have ever seen before in my lifetime.
Hi SVB,
Unless they do it NASCAR pit crew style, even the time it takes to swap a tire is much too long. It is absurd. Do you want to wait even twice as long to recharge as it takes to refuel?
How about at least 5-6 times as long?
How about a 40-50 percent price premium for the vehicle?
And a 40-50 percent reduced service life – because the EV is a throw-away?
And they ask my why I drink…
They use the term “battery swap” which seems like a good idea if the battery isn’t all that heavy or big. If you could just drive up to a battery swap station and some mechanism exchanged the batteries in the same amount of time it takes to fuel a car, then it doesn’t seem that bad to me.
I don’t know much about batteries though. I’ve seen a lead acid battery explode and almost blind a couple of mechanics, but I don’t know if that’s an issue with these new batteries. I thought they were supposed to be quite large and heavy though, not to mention expensive, and a drain on the environment to manufacture, as well as to dispose of. That seems to be something I don’t hear the environmentalists talking about much.
Hi Scharkle,
This battery swap thing sounds good in theory… but try to imagine how it would have to work in practice to be practical. By which I mean it would need to be performed in five minutes or so, else we get back to this insanity of making a simple/quick process (refueling) complicated and time-consuming.
A whole new infrastructure of expensive/complicated automated machinery would be needed to pull/replace the battery. How will this be paid for? Who will pay for it?
And why pay for it?
My teeth are practically falling out of my head. Gas is cheap, abundant and easy. Why this insanity to replace it with something expensive and time-consuming?
Because it’s “neat”?
Eric, Tesla demonstrated that they can do a pack swap in about 1:30. The machinery would be complex though. Musk said that they used the same automated wrenches as they do on the assembly line, so as to torque the bolts to proper spec. In the video, they swapped the packs in two cars, just to show how quick it is even compared to refueling with gasoline.
That said, the video does prove that refueling with gas takes only a few minutes; in the video, it took around 4 minutes for the guy to refuel his Audi.
You could make a video of some person fueling their car in 4 minutes. Probably little to see there unless it’s a hot chick with short shorts cleaning her windshield on a lifted diesel pickup….very well. OTOH, let’s take the average person you don’t have to pay too much, to be a competent person doing a well-rehearsed job in perfect conditions. They didn’t say how many takes and what sorts of machines and tools were needed and what the environment they worked in might cost spec’d to the one in the video.
What a lot of us here think of as just regular knowledge is fairly much not as “regular” as it might seem. There’s a large portion(mainly feminine but including a fair amount of the other sex….working with only 2 sexes….since that’s all there are.
Imagine trying to devise a place of changing batteries with 10 stations operating simulataneously, set it up so it worked and safely with emergency equipment, esp. fire extinguisher…and for safety’s sake, having all the passengers in the vehicle exit(so much fun when it’s 110 and you were asleep. OTOH, they would more than make up for it with their on-site convenience store with longer waits, expensive prices, etc.
Sounds better all the time eh? Maybe they’d have a 24 hr mariachi band so you wouldn’t dawdle too long in the store
Now you have to find 60 technicians…..if you want it to operate 24/7….and if it didn’t, that would really suck. I do my best driving at night since it’s cool and less crowded at certain times(but don’t count on it). So you need 60 techs working 8 hrs. of have another 10 to avoid OT), then having to wait your turn, like I have to wait 3 or 4 minutes behind someone pumping their own or those who leave their vehicle just sitting there that I go complain about in the store and draw the ire of the fat gal that just left it there for a shopping/bs spree with the cashier, her bf, cousin, sister, etc, etc.
What an insurance hog that whole set-up would be. Ask yourself how you’d feel if you couldn’t get within 30 or 40 feet of the vehicle the entire time it was being “teched”. It might be one of those places you can get a bed by the hour and that could be interesting.
The video did seemed well rehearsed. The more people who are driving these vehicles with a shorter range translates into longer lines as well.
I’d like to see it catch on with the elites, and even main street because the more people driving these EV’s the fewer people in line at the gas stations, and presumably the price of gas would come down, no?
I hear that hoopla from people not from Texas and have to smile. They’ll have a choice in a lot of places of using electricity for their house or their car. It’s easy done(and that’s what they want)with digital meters and a vehicle charge will show just as clearly a boulder in a stream.
Meanwhile, due to ERCOT Texas sits on a massive over-abundance of power it can’t and won’t share with anything outside its grid since it’s a closed grid.
Hi eric, the reason is because that’s the mentality that is spawned by a technocracy. It’s new technology, therefore it’s better. It’s all pure nonsense.
I’ve been weed wacking for over two decades, and finally it dawned on me that these things are practically useless in comparison to a simple $17.00 swing blade. Those damn weed wackers are infuriating to get running, then they run out of wire, which is constantly getting cut on twigs, etc. They’re exhausting, while a swing blade is about as difficult as swinging a five iron.
When the blade is really sharp I can cut grass, or brush on both swings, and tear through a good sized patch of knee to waist high grass or brush before the next guy can get his weed wacker started.
A swing blade will never break down. There’s no moving parts. No gas to mix. No string to buy. And yet, most people think they’re just so much better because it’s just so much more technologically advanced. It’s ridiculous.
Amen, Schnarkle!
There is also this: Making things which don’t need to be complicated highly so tends toward centralization because of scales. It’s easy for an individual to maintain a Model T on his own. It is almost impossible for anyone to maintain an EV on their own.
Yep, and from that standpoint, I’m not sure the automotive industries really care if they make internal combustion cars or EV’s anymore because either way, they’ve got most people hooked into coming to them to get their car fixed. It’s a win/win for them. When the aftermarket stops making parts for these older cars, I will probably go back to riding a horse.
Why would they care which they make when they make more off the financing than off the sale of the vehicle?
Hey eric, Re: “Because it’s “neat”?
Yep, basically because that’s the whole scam of the technocracy. Look what new technological innovations we’ve come up with today because everyone knows that a new technology must be better, right?
I’ve mentioned this before and I will do it again. Battery swap will have people trying to pawn off their damaged, modified, and near dead packs. The things cost a few grand so finding ways to cheat whatever testing is done at pack swap time will be worth it and it will be done. When the bad pack lands on you guess who’s stuck with it? Unless you play the same game, say nothing and swap it back into the pool.
And even if the testing keeps out the really bad ones there will always be battery packs right on the edge of being acceptable. Probably most of the batteries in the pool will be that way.
You won’t want to swap your new or well cared for pack.
I suspect that’s one reason why Tesla never rolled out the pack swapping stations. Also, how do you BILL people after taking the pack condition into consideration?
The only way you could be assured of getting somewhere would be with an extra battery pack. That’s gonna be one hell of a heavy trunk and front. It will switch from one to the other to the other source. There will be main battery packs for those that can live with it. There will be as close to double packs as can be made for others.
They sure better not hope it’s a long mileage race.
The trucking things is hilarious. Some class 8 but mostly class 7 trucks are made for short haul with tiny cab and tiny fuel tank.
Musksksksks trucks are, according to the video……nothing you can pin down. Define “long distance”. See, got you right there.
No worries though, his trucks drive themselves while the “operator” entertains himself in a small environment less than a sleeper even on a flat top Pete….which aren’t bad at all.
Of course this “operator” that will never exist if he ever gets his way to run a regular route, they’ll simply communicate with HQ and do what they do. God save the Queen so to speak. Think they won’t take that right turn blinker for the truth? Already they have had a car not see a big semi box rig. That’ll be a hell of a thing if it’s reversed. That keeps me to gravel roads…but that’s ok. Not a patch of pavement between me and the liquor store and it’s 10 or more miles.
They have cooling and lubrication needs. There’s all sorts of stuff that just breaks. I watch richrebuilds on youtube and I am astounded by all the different ways these cars fail. Rich’s latest failure? The main fuse wore out. Yes the fuse wore out and popped. Left him at the side of the road. Now he’s got the better new design fuse. Required dropping the battery pack to replace.
The really practical solution is obviously diesel.
The engines are bulletproof, able to last a lifetime.
They run on almost any kind of fuel.
It’s infuriating how clover bureaucrats have made them illegal for no good reason.
No one who owns an electric car complains about how slow they are to charge on a regular basis. They might be inconvenient for long trips, but not on a day to day basis for regular commutes. On a regular basis, it takes about 7 seconds to charge. That’s the time it takes to plug it in. That’s all EV owners care about or have to worry about. All the magic happens in the next few hours while the EV owners go about their daily lives. No EV owner and I mean none, miss going to the smelly gas stations and touching the disgusting pump nozzles where who knows what is on them from who knows who.
It amuses me how folks who don’t own electric cars think they know so much about electric cars. They don’t, and this author doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Give him an electric car or force him to buy one and he’ll quickly change his tune.
Paul,
You arrange your life to adjust to the EV’s limited range and lengthy recharge time. You don’t mind having to plan around recharge times.
Which is your right; I don’t take issue with that at all. But I do take issue with being forced to help finance the purchase your EV – and that the manufacture of EVs is mandated.
You yourself use the word – force. How lovely. Do you enjoy being a thug?
I wouldn’t force anyone to buy an electric car. But the author says he’s being forced to buy one. Speaking of force, should we be forced to subsidize fossil fuel companies? You seem to have no problem with that.
I’ll make you a deal. We can end subsidies to EV manufactures if you agree to end subsidies to fossil fuel manufacturers. What do you say? I think subsidies are a bad idea now that EVs are maturing.
Paul,
I said I was being forced to help you (and other EV owners) buy one. And that EVs are forced on the market.
Facts. Inarguable.
It’s despicable to force other people to “help” pay for your EV; it’s despicable to force the manufacture of anything for which there isn’t a natural market. Yours is the gotta-break-eggs-to-make-omelettes argument.
There are no “subsidies” for IC cars – or fossil fuel companies. In fact, they are among the most heavily taxed – the money used to subsidize other things. Like EVs.
No mandates are needed to “stimulate” demand for IC cars; they sell on the merits – at an honest profit.
Take away the EV subsidies – and mandates – and they go away tomorrow because they are much too expensive and cannot be sold in numbers sufficient to make it worth making them absent the subsidies and mandates. Leaving aside the functional gimps.
PS: If you dislike fossil fuels, you ought to not like EVs… which (in this country) depend almost entirely on fossil fuels to produce the electricity they “burn.”
Fossil fuel companies receive massive subsidies. Be it the US military spending used to protect foreign countries that produce oil for and transport oil to the US, Expensing of Intangible Drilling Costs, Percentage Depletion for Oil and Natural Gas Wells, Domestic Manufacturing Deduction for Fossil Fuels, Exception to Passive Loss Limitation for Working Interests in Oil and Natural Gas Properties, and several other tax provisions.
Utter bilge.
https://www.realclearenergy.org/articles/2016/10/23/debunking_the_fossil-fuel_subsidy_myth_110091.html
https://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/448794-debunking-democrats-claims-about-fossil-fuel-tax-breaks
Hi 3Boy,
This is not true. In the first place, the U.S. is on the verge of becoming a net exporter of oil. It is currently the largest producer of oil in the world.
The money spent on “military” stuff is designed to keep the price of oil stable – at a high level. If the spigots were truly opened up, the cost of gas would be much less than it is now.
And even at current cost, the EV cannot make an economic case for itself vs. IC. Which is why it tries to focus on its quickness (while not talking about its limited range and preposterously long recharge times).
The other things you cite are not the same thing as the EV subsidy for this reason: Without the subsidies and mandates, EVs would practically cease to exist as of tomorrow. Gas (and IC) cars do not require subsidies to exist.
The things you mention are just the usual corporate tax write-offs.
Any fossil fuel that might once have been present on the planet was long ago subsumed in mineral oil deposits.
The only problem I noticed with this video is that it doesn’t actually show a battery swap at all. They never rolled it out because: ” The strategy has since been abandoned due to faster supercharging and high complexity of swap stations.”
Supercharging a battery doesn’t sound all that appealing to me. How many times can a battery be supercharged anyways? How much does it cost to supercharge one of these batteries? I suspect Elon wants the taxpayers to subsidize that as well, no?
Hi SVB,
Elon, et al, always downplay both the length of time it takes to “fast” charge as well as the fact that it is necessarily a partial recharged (80 percent). For obvious reasons, in both cases.
If the video link that was provided is any indication, Elon isn’t downplaying anything. He’s flat out lying.
He may as well since it is working so well for everyone in positions of control and power.
Paul,
I’m a rarity on this site in that I’m an EV fan in general, and a Tesla fan in particular. I also watch FIA Formula E racing religiously; I NEVER miss a race! Not only is FE developing and refining EV technology; the racing is simply among the BEST on the planet. If you want to see plenty of nose-to-tail, wheel-to-wheel, and bumpin’ & bangin’ action, FE is the place to go! Anyway, I’m a big EV fan.
I looked into buying a Tesla when it came time to replace my old 2006 Nissan that had 191K on the clock; I really did. I could live with an EV on a daily basis, and I could even live with one on a road trip. When I’m on a road trip, I stop every 2-4 hours anyway; I do so to get gas, eat, and go to the rest room. By the time I do those things, I could have easily charged my Tesla on the supercharger and be ready to go. Living with an EV would be no problem for me. Skipping stops to the gas station would be nice, but those aren’t that big a deal; they only last a few minutes. I could easily live with an EV-at least in terms of my lifestyle.
What stopped me from buying a Tesla or other EV is the COST. There’s the purchase price, of course, but there are other, additional costs. One cost is the charger one must have installed in his garage. Another charge is the higher insurance, because Teslas use aluminum body work; fewer shops know or understand aluminum, and the aluminum costs MORE than steel does. This leads to higher insurance, because in the event of an accident, the repairs will be more expensive than those of an ICEV. Servicing and maintenance will be more difficult and costly as well. Let’s look at those higher costs one at a time, shall we?
First of all, there’s the initial purchase price. For the standard (i.e. base) Model 3, you’re looking at $35K for the car itself; that was more than TWICE what I paid for my gently used, 2015 Ford Focus late last year! However, the base Model 3 only has 215 miles or so of range; in winter, this will be seriously degraded by the colder temperatures. For peace of mind (i.e. reduced range anxiety), that would dictate going to the higher trim level Model 3 that offers better range; that costs what, $44K? That’s almost THREE TIMES what I paid for my Focus! If the Model 3 had been, say $10-$12K more than my Focus, I could have justified it because I’d save that much in fuel costs over the life of the car. I cannot justify paying 2-3 TIMES what I’d pay for an economical ICEV alternative.
Keep in mind that my Focus is practical, economical, and fun. In the city, it’ll get around 26-27 mpg; combined, it gets around 30 mpg; and, on the highway, it’ll get about 40 if I set the cruise control at 65-70 mph. That’s pretty impressive; it’s a damn sight better than my old Nissan! It’s a nice improvement, mileage wise, and I’m happy with the car. The best part was that I was able to write a check for it! I cashed out part of my mutual fund, plus had enough left over to generate more compounding returns so I can buy my next car when the Focus is ready to go to the great junkyard in the sky in 12-15 years. I could not have done that (write a check and have money left over for a future car purchase) if I’d bought the Tesla Model 3, or even the Nissan Leaf. Now, let’s look at the other costs of EV ownership…
The second big expense is the charger. To make EV ownership a viable proposition, it’s best to charge the car at home; this can easily be done while you’re sleeping, so the car is ‘filled up’ and ready to go the next morning. However, to charge the EV at home, one has to have-gasp-a charger! That not only means buying the charger itself; that means having a professional electrician come out to your house to INSTALL the thing. If you get a 240V charger (and to make sure you’ll be ready to go the next morning, you’ll need a 240V charger vs. a 120V unit), you’ll probably have to enhance and/or upgrade your home’s electrical system to HANDLE said 240V charger. Between purchase and installation, you’re looking at $1K, easy. The charger itself will be $500, per Tesla’s website; that’s NOT counting installation, mind you. If you get the mobile charging cable and CHAdeMO adapter (and you’d better have the adapter, because a lot of public EV chargers use CHAdeMO), you’re looking at hundreds of more dollars. Ah, but we’re not done; there’s more!
The insurance WILL cost more; that’s all there is to it. My brother, who purchased a fully loaded SUV about two years ago, said that he gave Tesla’s Model X a look. Why didn’t he buy it? He said that the insurance was a lot more expensive for one. Tesla, in order to reduce vehicle weight and increase range, uses aluminum rather than steel to make body panels. While this does accomplish those goals (decreased wt. & increased range), aluminum costs a lot more than steel does. It’s also harder to repair. Finally, there are far fewer body shops capable of working with aluminum; few body shops UNDERSTAND aluminum. This will translate to much higher cost repairs, and this will be reflected in the insurance premium. Ah, but there’s still more!
What if you need your Tesla serviced? Where can you go? With my late model Ford Focus, I can go to pretty much ANY repair shop in America; the Focus has been made for years, is plentiful, and it’s well understood; parts are easy to get too. With a Tesla, I have to go-gasp-to the Tesla shop! These are a lot harder to come by; there simply aren’t that many Tesla service centers. For me, the closest is over an hour away. That will translate to higher costs, simply because Tesla has NO competition whatsoever. Also, there are few shops that understand EV technology. This will translate to higher maintenance costs as well. Guess who PAYS those higher maintenance costs? You, the owner, do!
Now, IIRC, Tesla will not only give you a loaner car when you need servicing; they’ll bring it to you. That’s a nice touch, so routine servicing is covered. What if you’re on a road trip and need a repair? I haven’t had that happen to me in a long time; it hasn’t happened to me often, either, because I stay on top of my car’s maintenance; that said, I’ve had it happen to me. Even with an ICEV, getting a needed repair can be challenging if you’re away from a town or city when the breakdown occurs. I can’t IMAGINE having to deal with that while road tripping in an EV!
In closing, what stopped me from buying an EV were the costs. It’s not just the initial, or buy-in, cost, either; it was all the other ADDED costs too. I’d have to buy a 240V charger, then pay an electrician to install it; while I’m at it, I might need to upgrade my home’s electrical system to handle the charger. There are the insurance costs, which are a lot higher for Tesla vehicles because they’re made of aluminum; aluminum costs more than steel, and your insurance premium reflects this. There’s also the fact that there are few body shops that understand aluminum; those that do WILL charge more because they have a rare expertise. Between the higher parts and repair costs, the insurance will be higher. The servicing and repair costs are also higher, because there are few shops that UNDERSTAND EV tech. That translates to higher out-of-pocket costs for you, the EV owner. Anyway, as much as I like EVs, for now, they simply do not make sense-as in DOLLARS & CENTS-for most people. For those earning $100k a year or more, these added costs are no problem. However, most of us have never seen and never will see that kind of money, so those higher costs WILL be a problem. Ergo, EV’s simply will not gain traction until those issues are addressed. Those are my thoughts…
Can’t buy one in Texas and most wouldn’t be able to go much of anywhere even if they could buy one.
One reason insurance is higher on a Tesla is because there’s a plethora of lawsuits already since T can’t seen to make legitimate repairs either. Everyone is offered another Tesla for some price when they had an accident making it more profitable instead of losing money for Tesla.
The Leaf has to be the ugliest thing I’ve seen since the Prius.
You can’t get a Tesla in TX because it’s against the law to sell direct to the customers; they told Tesla that they had to have a traditional dealer network in order to sell there. That goes against Tesla’s business model. Since Tesla doesn’t want to sell via dealers, they can’t sell in TX.
As for the Nissan Leaf, I don’t think it’s ugly; it’s not a good looking vehicle, but it’s not ugly, either, like the old Pontiac Aztek was. To me, it’s kinda ‘meh’.
The issue I have with the Leaf is that, in order to get decent range, you have to spring for the $40K version of the car. If it offered 200+ miles of range for $30k, that would be one thing. To charge $40k for it, that’s something else; in addition to buying a better battery pack, you have to buy a bunch of other stuff you might not want. They make you buy a higher trim level, which bumps the cost up to $40k. Sorry, I’m not paying $40k for that! THAT’s the issue I have with the Nissan Leaf.
Hi Mark,
To me, the fundamental issue is not range, it’s cost. Even if the 30K Leaf had a 200 mile range, it would still be idiotic, from an economic and practicality perspective, to buy one. After all, it is just a gimped and really expensive econo-box. EV’s will never compete with IC cars on range, nor will they ever be practical for those who routinely need to drive long distances. However, a huge number of people live in suburban America, rarely, if ever, drive more than 30 miles at one time and have a personal charging station, you know, a garage or carport with a plug.
To these people, an inexpensive electric car would be enormously practical and far more convenient than an IC car. Imagine something like a Fiat 500 that was price competitive with a Nissan Versa and had a 60-80 mile range. I would buy such a vehicle. Of course, I’d keep my truck for hauling, car camping and long distance trips. An inexpensive, electric econo-box, as I described, would be an ideal daily driver for millions of people.
As long as the car will reliably meet the actual distance needs, plus a little more, of a particular driver, extra range is mostly irrelevant. The problem is that EV’s are ludicrously expensive. If EV companies focused on cost, rather than range and performance, maybe they’d make cars that were actually practical to people like myself.
Cheers,
Jeremy
Speaking of econoboxes, a Mitsubishi Mirage starts around $15k; even fully loaded, they’re less than $18k-much cheaper than the Leaf.
Hi Mark!
And you can buy a Mirage for less than $15k. Haggle it down to about $13k. For a car that gets 40 on the highway and will go 400 miles on a full tank … for the next 15-20 years. Do it right and the total cost to own it over that span will be about $100/month.
What did ol’ MC used to say?
Can’t touch this…
MC Hammer-now THAT’S a blast from the past! But yeah, the Mitsubishi Mirage is as good as it gets for economical transportation these days… 🙂
I was referring to the G4 version, not the regular Mirage. The G4 starts $14,795, while the regular Mirage starts at $1k less. Those are MSRPs, so there’s no reason why they couldn’t be haggled down. You have to work hard to get them priced @ $18K.
Hello MarkyMark,
I’m a big race fan and I’ve watched EV racing, eh. If you want wheel to wheel, door to door racing, in my opinion and in this order,
American Flat Track, by far the most intense close racing out there right now,
Any midget or sprint car race, weather on dirt or pavement, I prefer dirt,
And last but not least, Ausie V8 Supercars.
https://www.americanflattrack.com/#news
Watch the Lima 1/2 mile race
I should have mentioned, the 2019 Lima race.
I miss the old WoO; that was GOOD STUFF! I don’t know if they still exist, but they’re not carried on TV anymore. I miss seeing Steve Kinser, Danny Lasoski, and the rest of the guys…
Marky,
WoO is on TV (not now, but after the BS ends) I think it’s on the CBS sports channel. Visit your local track if you have one.
On any road, the traffic speed is determined by the courage of those willing and intent on passing.
The traffic speed in Wyoming is determined by whether it is safe and reasonable, similar to what it was like in Montana for the very brief time that they suspended speed limits on their highways.
Not sure where you got your wrong information ???
It is self-evident after 45 years of moving violation and accident free driving.
Since you can’t be bothered to define “wrong information,” I can only assume that I didn’t get it where you got yours.
Well, funny – I drive through Wyoming several times a year and they definitely have speed limits: 80 mph on most of the interstates. Not sure how much leeway they give you as I don’t try to find out. I’ve definitely seen a few folks at the side of the road having an official conversation about something or another. I do know of at least one lady that got a ticket for doing 90 back when it was still posted 75.
You would think that Colorado has no speed limits judging by how fast most folks there drive, a lot faster on average than in Wyoming where the posted limit is mostly 5 mph faster. You will get run over in Colorado doing 80 in a 75 zone.
We still had “reasonable and prudent” in Montana the first few years after I moved here, until some jackass had to muck it up for everyone. I’m not sure how long it had been that way, some years at the minimum.
How will you know what the enforced speed limit is if you never exceed the posted one? I have a friend with a Mach 1 who knows all the Wyoming Highway Patrol officers in his district because he knows the California felony stop posture and always admits that he was going faster than the posted speed, after which they get into a conversation about his experience running the Nightsun in a sheriff’s helicopter in Southern California, and he drives away with, at most, a written warning. All speed limits posted on white signs are prima facie and subject to the arresting officers discretion. Speed limits posted on amber signs are advisory, not statutory. Make nice with officers and they will make nice with you.
You STATED that the Law in Wyoming was similar to the “reasonable and prudent” statute in Montana 20 some odd years ago. So which is it – no posted limits or “you might get away with it” ???
Murder is Legal as long as you don’t get caught.
I never used the word “law.”
You don’t understand enough about law to use the word,
is that why you never used the word? Why are these emogis associated with our posts so angry looking?
The word “law” is as non-specific as the word “car.”
I don’t use “emogis.”
These scowling expressions next to our posts are emogis I never claimed that you use emogis. I simply pointed out that they seem to be scowling for some reason. Perhaps there is some sort of algorithm which detects abrasive comments and then provides an appropriate emogi to go with it. The word “law” is quite specific. Perhaps even more specific than car which is easily distinguished from a bike, boat, truck, airplane, rocket, or even a hoop and a stick.
There doesn’t seem to be anything vague about the context in which is was being used. I doubt anyone would have been inclined to assume the post was referring to the Mosaic law, or natural law.
Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.
The globalists are going to have a hard time pulling of the mandating of EVs. A lot of people pay lip service to abusive government policies from the TSA, IRS, NSA, etc., but they won’t actually fight against those policies. However, try to take away the ability of the average couch potato to hop in a 2-ton SUV to drive to the store two blocks away, and that is where they will draw the line. They will be protesting more than the Yellow Vests in France. Note that I am not saying that EVs are good. I agree with Eric that EVs are as bad as he says they are. But the fight against mandatory EVs won’t be because of any principled opposition to EVs. It will because the impatient, lazy Americans won’t tolerate vehicles that require a long time to charge. Even in leftist cities like San Francisco, L.A., and New York most car drivers oppose fairly benign transportation changes such as bike lanes that only inconvenience auto drivers slightly. They are never going to tolerate vehicles that take a long time to refuel (charge).
“Electric” cars are such a scam. The “carbon footprint” these things create just from building them, is far more than a fookin’ dead dinosaur fueled car. Same thing with these silly “hydrogen” powered cars. They tried electric cars clear back in the early 1900’s, and gave up because they are way to expensive and costly to produce. The market can’t bear all of this garbage. The fact that gooberments have to bribe people to buy them through “tax incentives” should tell you everything. Not only that, but now suddenly the states that are pushing these cars are whining about not having enough money to fix roads. The gooberment is dumber than a turd.
I suspect the ptb have no intention of getting us to all buy their electric cars. It’s just a distraction that plants this idea that, “if I can’t drive my fossil fuel burning vehicle, I’m not driving anything”. This is what they really want.
From what I understand, Tesla doesn’t make one of those $30k cars until someone orders it. What’s to stop the other auto makers from doing the same thing? This seems to be the new way to sell a lot of stuff nowadays. “Build it and they will come…” has been thoroughly debunked as just wishful thinking.
I see people buzzing around on golf carts all the time now. There are a few signs here and there that notify the driving public that golf carts may not drive on certain roads. So they’re everywhere else though. I just picked up one of those motorized bikes with the cheap Chinese engines for a few hundred bucks, and this thing sips gas. The law doesn’t seem to care if or where I drive it either so it’s a win/win.
I also wonder if the government couldn’t just buy up the automaker’s inventory of electric vehicles. There are a lot of government employees who drive around in government vehicles, and when they’ve driven them around for a few years and it’s time to auction them off, the public might be interested in purchasing one at a significantly lower price, no? That’s how I think it’s going to happen.
I don’t know if any of y’all put any credence in the Georgia Guidestones which is supposed to be something like the ten commandments from the elite. It is proclaimed there that the human population on earth should be maintained at 1/2 billion. That’s something like 7 billion less than the number of humans currently inhabiting the planet. Then there is the UN agenda 21 and Agenda 2030, which I encourage everyone to investigate, advocating humans all be relocated to human habitation zones (cities) and everything else restored to wild lands. That means giving all rural and suburban homes back to the deer, buffalo and antelope (with a few exemptions for certain special people). All this bullshit we see coming down from on high is just incremental steps to get us to those goals. Elites across the board from Ted Turner to Bill Gates to the UN have made it very clear that they don’t want any commoners (dirt people) living anywhere outside of an urban area. They don’t want us owning property, and especially not rural property. They’d like to reserve that as their own sole privilege. Everything that is taking place from AI to EVs and all the other measured to render us obsolete all makes sense when viewed from the perspective of their stated goals.
Hi Hank,
It does make sense – once you view it from the right perspective. The trouble is, it is hard for most normal people to imagine such a monstrous evil could exist. And yet, it does.
I’ve been at this a long time. I’ve seen a great deal – some not meant for eyes like mine.
Nor yours.
We are cattle, you see.
May be the reason GM seems to be phasing out the US. They have seven(7)companies that are have contracts with the Chinese military. They don’t need to stinkin emissions controls, air bags, seat belts or crush zones. Once the people with guns are rounded up, it’s cattle cars and big ships at piers…..leaving.
Better put on my glasses next time. Geez
Hi Eight,
There are so many factors in play it’s hard to keep track of them all! The regulatory state has made it almost impossible to make money selling cars anymore – or soon will. At least, not without a new model of perpetual revolving debt (i.e., ride-sharing). Political correctness is making it impossible for any business to openly question “climate change” and all that goes with.
But “electrification” isn’t going to fly in Europe or China any more than it will here; the same practical problems exist.Of course, these problems are irrelevant because “electrification isn’t about getting “emissions” under control. It is about getting the population under control.
eric, there’s really no need for a car company to add to the stupidity. GM is pushing hell out of their new pickups. I’ve seen in-depth reviews of them and almost every review has been very positive.
No matter how positive though, it’s mainly flyover country that buys pickups…..or at least work pickups. Debuting a brand new model is stupid with the “Out with Chevy” moniker. Do we want the model with a built in Fleshlight or the vibrator….or both(apparently)?
Does Ferrari still build them and bill them as “sexy” showing a male model with a huge bulge in his undies? Maybe they don’t even allow attractive young women near vehicles now. After all, they wouldn’t want to piss off a group that might be able to buy one unit if they all pitched in.
Once again, I think of Will Ferrel’s character in Zoolander 2 when he says “I feel like I’m in crazy land”. I never thought years later I’d feel that way every day.
A buddy of mine has a 70’s era Toyota tercel that gets right around 50 mpg. He’s got about 350k miles on it and could probably put another 300k on it before he dies. One of my cousins used to have a volkswagon golf tdi that got 50 mpg. It was a nice car. He actually sold it for more than what he paid for it. In the long run he probably lost money just in fuel economy.
Hi Scharkle,
Here’s a tragic thing: We could have new cars that averaged 80 MPG – and cost less than $20,000.
But we don’t have them – not for technical or even environmental (legitimate environmental) reasons.
For political reasons.
Hi eric, I can see the political reasons, but I can also see how a car that gets double mpg isn’t going to be stopping in and buying as much gas. So the corporate oil producers have an incentive to keep those cars off the road. They can afford to buy patents and lobby against them.
I’m keeping my eyes open for an old Toyota tercel or a vw golf tdi. I’d settle for 50mpg right now.
It will be difficult to round up a population that out-numbers and out-guns the military in small arms.
I met a member of the local National Guard a couple of years ago. He told me about a recent muster at his post. All present were allowed to speak freely and when asked for a show of hands of those who would be willing to volunteer to confiscate guns based on orders from outside the state, none were raised. When they were asked what they would do if ordered by their CO to confiscate guns, the majority response was shoot their CO. I’m confident that I’ll never see guns being confiscated here. Anyone who cannot say the same should consider relocating.
What about New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina? There was PLENTY of gun confiscation going on.
Yeah the weak minded and limp wristed handed them in.
Yeah, but there were Nat’l Guard and NOPD guys DOING the confiscations. Also, they were quite FORCIBLE. There’s a video on YouTube about how they roughed up an old woman for having a revolver for-gasp-self defense after the hurricane! It wasn’t weak minded people handing them over; it was jackbooted THUGS confiscating them.
I think you’re correct to assume guns will not be confiscated. However, I think the reason is to allow the masses the means to kill each other. It’s an old, but sure fire way to let the sheep do the job for them. All they have to do is crash the economy, and BAM; instant pandemonium.
Then after a few days or weeks of SHTF, they simply announce that anyone who needs medical attention, food, shelter, etc. need only make their way to the nearest government facility to be bussed to your favorite FEMA camp. Of course you’ll have to check your weapons at the door before boarding.
I don’t think they’re going to meet with all that much resistance to their rules at that point.
For those who have no intention of complying, they’ll probably just wait them out, and anyone who gets in their way isn’t going to have tanks, or any of the newest military gadgets that are so effective at killing or controlling crowds.
I’m already working on my means of relocating now.
What do you mean “already”?…. you might be a mite bit behind the curve…….
The only one’s behind the curve are those who can’t get out. Sure, it’s better to be a few years too early than a day too late, but last time I checked, I didn’t have any problem leaving the country.
I’ve already relocated from CA to FL. and that alone was like moving from a prison barrio to a first world free country.
I’ve already spent some time outside the country, but I don’t just want to survive so I’m working on living in comfort as well. I don’t know what’s going to happen or when so I have a two pronged approach which is to have a place out in the sticks where no one bothers me. I’ve already got a place like that, but still looking for something a bit more remote as well. I’ve got a place I can stay outside the country, but I can’t be sure I can get a flight out if or when the SHTF so I’ve got a boat as back up transportation if I need it. It also allows me to the option to head to some place more appealing if necessary.
Compared to most Americans who are perfectly content to buy each and every meal from some fast food joint, and are living paycheck to paycheck, I’m a bit ahead of the curve.So yeah, I’m already working on it and have been for quite some time.
I haven’t renounced my citizenship yet, but not sure it will matter at this point. The line to process the application is somewhere around four years now and they keep bumping the application fee up as demand increases. I think it’s up around $3 or $4k now.
Where I’m really lagging is in not having a foreign passport yet.
Passports are easy to get. Just go to the post office, and they can do it for you. I don’t know if all post offices do passports, but many of them do. Also, it’ll be cheaper if you’re not in a rush; if you don’t request expedited service, you’ll have your passport in 10-12 weeks.
The only thing that I worry about WRT to leaving the country is jumping from the frying pan and into the fire. I’ll explain…
I read a story (might have been on here) about how a man in the 1930s saw what was coming, so he made arrangements to get out. He thoroughly researched and planned his relocation to what he thought would be the best place to ride out the coming calamity. Guess where he ended up? Guadalcanal, where in 1942-43, one of the most SAVAGE battles of all time was fought. That story always gives me pause…
I’m in the same boat right now. I wanted to head down to Panama, or Nicaragua. I’ve been down there before, and they’re both beautiful. The problem is that Uncle Sam is now actively doing the EXACT same crap he pulled in Africa and the middle east down there now. They’re actively messing around in Nicaragua, Guatemala, Venezuela, etc. They’re going to turn it into a huge disaster area so now I’m looking at the Caymans, Cozumel, the BIV’s and the Bahamas instead, but who knows how far from there is really safe? If there are boatloads of refugees invading the rest of the Caribbean, it could be a total mess.
Panama is already a US colony so in that regards youre relatively safe there. Its also quite nice and reasonable prices. Columbia is similar. Bogota sucks imo but Medellin and Cartagena are good. if you like beautiful latin women uncorrupted by a US education not bad choices.
I can see how you might view Panama as a US colony with so many expats living down there, but there’s just as many people from the UK, Canada, etc. It’s a booming world trade center as well. I tend to stay out of the large metropolitan centers like Bogota and Medellin. Santa Marta is just about right, and the surf is pretty damn good too. The women are hot, but they’re also hot headed. I had one come after me with a bread knife 30 years ago.
The last time I was down there, I was hanging out on the beach watching some guys fish. I looked back at a vacant lot sitting between a few skyscrapers. It had a few palm trees and some brush, and there was this old horse that just seemed to be wandering around the city. He hung out there quite a lot as it had something for him to eat, but it was still weird how animals roamed the streets. I watched a dog walk across four lanes of traffic as if none of it was there. We were both standing on the curb, and he just nonchalantly stepped into oncoming traffic. I’ve seen it in sleepy little towns down there as well, but that’s not as strange as seeing a dog wandering around in busy traffic like that. I like the small towns better though. There’s not as much drama, and confusion going on.
Russia is also a good one. great to visit at least. the women are all basically have bodies like tall leopards that want to be women and treated as such. No fast food or CNN there. unique place.
I’ve been looking at property over there just out of curiosity, and there are some really good deals. I remember shortly after the USSR collapsed, P.J. O’Rourke was writing a lot of articles about how great it was over there. You could smoke in restaurants, and they were all full of yuppies and entrepreneurs from the US, UK, etc.
I can’t recall WHERE, and it was before the internet, but in the early 80s, I read an interview with a high-level GM executive or manager of one of their brands, who said that GM was considering leaving the US market entirely. He did not imply that they were considering it in the near term, but as an option in the future. And I don’t know if he was even authorized to say so publicly- maybe the reason that I can’t find the interview. I have tried to find that interview again, but so far no luck.
Hi Nathan,
I have a few retired GM executive friends; these are guys I worked with back in the ’90s. I can’t name them, for obvious reasons. But I can tell you they are disgusted by what GM has become under Barra.
Hank, I think if you look at how it is accomplished that it really begins to make sense. Look at what a huge issue health care is today. The biggest reason is because everyone is so sick. People living in first world countries tend to be the sickest of all. No wonder when you look at what people are eating. It’s all packed full of sugar, preservatives, nitrites, gmo guk, etc. Add a sedentary lifestyle, a lack of sleep, and a few addictions to prescription narcotics, technological gadgets, apps, etc. and it’s a glaring “buy” signal to pick up a few thousand shares of Pfizer, Merck, etc.
It’s a not so well known fact that most people are incapable of fasting for more than a week or so without dying due to having so many toxins flushed into their body at once. I just went on a two week fast and felt great! But then I don’t eat processed crap, no sugar, no flour, nothing the government subsidizes like wheat, corn, or soy.
Stay away from as much technology as possible. Cut your cable, limit the time you spend online, grow your own food.
There is no need for health care where there is no health. Modern medicine isn’t interested in healing or curing, just treating until the current symptoms go away, after which new ones appear to be treated by the provider on the return visit, and so on, and so on.
Everything an American can buy in a grocery store is full of poisons, most of which cause the symptoms that doctors treat. The soil that food is grown on is totally depleted of all of the micronutrients that humans require to be healthy. All of the meat is raised on genetically modified grains that make the animals sick. Part of what packing plant workers do is cut tumors off of the carcasses before they send them on down the line.
Growing your own food wouldn’t be an improvement unless the plants get all of the nutrients that you need so they can pass them on. Unless all of the water used in growing your plants and watering your animals is either distilled or properly reverse osmosis filtered, they will pass on the poisons in it onto you.
After a couple of decades of autodidactic education, I have devised a diet that doesn’t attempt to avoid the poisons and the malnutrition so much as it provides what my body can’t get anywhere else to deal with what it can then deal with. Avoiding technology is like avoiding air. You can’t unless you want to walk around in a space suit, which is, guess what, high enough technology to support life in outer space. Those who believe in a deity would be better off spending all their time praying to it.
The neighbor and I were just speaking of this. You can cure yourself of cancer better than the health industry can or rather won’t.
Wealthy people go to Europe for cancer cures as well as all other sorts of disease cures.
I should collect the water off my barn and house to avoid some of the glyphosate in well water and use an RO system combined with filters.
We’re about to have venison and I wouldn’t tell you it doesn’t have glyphosate in it but less other chemicals including antibiotics. We used to be over-run with wild hogs.
Some company came up with a cure for that too, a blood thinner dropped from the air in bait that will eventually kill the hogs. So eating wild hog has become risky.
And get this, the TP&WD(Texas Parks and Wildlife Dept)said they would take a poll from Texans before using this drug. It was totally one-sided with everyone screaming to not use it. Then they simply began using it anyway although they won’t admit it publicly. It’s not about the hogs, as always, it’s about the money.
The problem being, wild hog is one of the best meats we could eat…..before this happened. Wild hog meat is nearly white. Remember the old ad campaign by the pork industry “The New White Meat”? Eat it at your own risk now.
There are churches that take busloads of people down south of the border to get healthy; many to get free of their cancer. There was a story not too long ago about a guy who had stage 4 cancer and his doctors, oncologists etc. had all given up on him. They gave him a few weeks to live. Somehow he heard about how a group doing some cancer study had decided to give their lab rats a dewormer before they injected them with cancer tumors. The cancer tumors never materialized. They all just disappeared. They couldn’t figure out what had happened until they figured out that the only thing they had done differently was to give the de-wormer.
This guy tried it himself and a few months later went to see his doctors who were all incredulous that his cancer was completely gone.
The drug company, I think it was Merck is now getting ready to jack the price up and relabel it for treating cancer.
I had to get a CT/PET scan a few years ago after having some cancer removed. I asked the technician how the dye knows where to find the cancer. He informed me that the radioactive dye is mixed with a “delivery system” which consists of glucose, which is SUGAR. Cancer and cancerous tumors LOVE blood sugar. They thrive on it, and yet you will never see anything suggesting that there is any correlation between sugar and cancer in any literature from the American Cancer Association. or any other cancer research group. It’s also the primary contributing factor for heart disease, diabetes, etc.
it isn’t just added sugar either. Wheat, corn, and flour practically metabolize into sugar before it gets to your stomach. Most fruit in stores today has been hybridized to boost the sugar content upwards of 70% There’s more sugar in an apple or an orange than in a candy bar.
And now they’re blocking Dr. Mercola who holds their feet to the fire.
They’ll probably do everything they(google)can to block LRC. I have been greatly helped twice by Bill Sardi, one of the most moral people I’ve known.
No telling what I’d weigh if I quit drinking beer and lessen the chances of cancer.
Gallagher used to have a great skit about pot and alcohol and include drinking beer is like drinking bread. It was damned funny.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-0P-p1wQu0
Yep, alcohol is the purest form of sugar there is. Most alcoholics are really addicted to sugar, and even though their lives may be drastically improved by getting off the booze, they still end up with all sorts of health problems from all the complex carbs they can’t live without.
What most people don’t know is that if you get off all forms of sugar, and any other addictive substance it gets progressively easier to stay off as time goes on. The problem is that most people have no clue that they’re still consuming something addictive without knowing it.
When I finally got off everything, the weight came off effortlessly. I went from 300 lbs. down to 150 lbs. in less than a year. The weight came off so fast it made my head spin. I was shoveling food down my food whole as fast as I could, and still losing weight. I finally had to add more oil and grains back into my diet just to prevent myself from disappearing altogether.
I just dumped google as my default browser, and probably going to have to get a new email account so I can get rid of this crappy gmail address. I think Bill Sardi had that article about the guy who took the de-wormer. Some of his articles are incredible! I like Dr. Mercola as well. I’ve taken a lot of his suggestions to heart and always see improvements to my health when I do.
There’s a social media site called GAB that is about to release a new version in a few days that is supposed to be able to get around google’s games. I joined GAB a few months ago and while it can take a bit of getting used to, eventually you figure out how to mute the bozos and can really start to enjoy it. I think it’s going to pave the way for a better internet experience in the future. If the gov. doesn’t meddle with it, I think it could be a really good investment.
The thing about cancer is that it’s one of those diseases where people have to get it before they begin to think about preventative medicine, and even then very few are willing to do that. Most just get it cut out and start their radiation and chemo. I’ve seen way too many people just quit half way through and plop down dead. The chemo kills more people than cancer does nowadays.
You’re probably already familiar with it by reading Bill Sardi’s articles, but cancer cells have this nickname. I forget it, but it’s something like “immortal”. They don’t seem to age like other cells do. They actually serve a purpose. They prevent cellular death due to oxygen deprivation. The problem is that when people engage in activities or dietary regimes that promote oxygen deprivation, cancer cells thrive and eventually take over. They’re a marker for an unhealthy lifestyle.
But like Wed. nite and the next day, I’d been up and mainly driving for 22 hours when I got some of those great fries at Whataburger(don’t think I’d been there this entire century), and after fueling, I felt a need for some cold beer to wash that salty sugar down. Damned if it wasn’t good. My problem with beer is I love the taste….always have.
I took a taste of my dad’s beer when I was around 5. He told me that I wouldn’t like the taste. I didn’t at first, but as the taste faded, I wanted another drink. Now I know the only reason I didn’t like the taste initially was because it was Budweiser. I started drinking scotch soon after and loved the taste as it tasted like candy to me.
The dewormer has been the subject of numerous scientific publications before the patient’s veterinarian suggested that he try it, after his success was reported on area television stations. No self-respecting pharmaceutical maker will ever market a well-known generic veterinary drug for a human condition. They aren’t interested in thing that cure or heal.
Immortality is not a nickname. It is a well-known feature of malignancy. Sardi has been gaining credibility now that he has relented from his advocacy for resveratrol for every disease.
I get my water from my own well, and have been testing it for the last four years. I’m no where near anything that can pollute my water supply. My soil has plenty of organic matter tilled into it every year so I’m not just getting good looking produce, I’m getting everything I need from it. I have quite a few relatives who are farmers, and it’s no secret that they only use three ingredients to produce what appears to be healthy fruits and vegetables.
I can’t stand eating store bought tomatoes anymore. They taste like bland balls of water. Spinach, lettuce, etc. all just taste like green pieces of paper.
I finally canceled my health insurance a couple years ago. I had been to the dentist, the dermatologist, a cardiologist, and a neurologist, and each and every one of them were screwing me over with their fees, charges, and pointless doctor’s visits. I’m in better health today without them.
When I say technology, I mean modern technology. I just spent two weeks out on the ocean with no functioning technological devices whatsoever, and didn’t have any problems at all. No radios, no cell phones, no internet, no television, etc. No mechanical devices of any kind making any sounds, or pumping out exhaust from fossil fuels. it was quite relaxing in many ways. Peace and quiet for two whole weeks without the aid of any technological devices. No spacesuits either, nor any need for clothing for that matter.
You can supplement all you want, but the fact is that there is no better way to get what you need than from the fruits and veggies themselves. The problem is that most people have no clue how much they need to consume to get what they need. I eat a bowl of salad that most people would assume would be used to feed a family of four or five. I eat it right out of a mixing/ serving bowl.
The other way they can do it is to make it nearly impossible, and very expensive, to sell gasoline.
Gasoline at say, $25/gallon, assuming you can even find a gas station, will curtail most people’s driving habits.
However, there may be some hope.
Today’s LA Times reports the AQMD is “gunning” for diesel trucks in the LA basin.
The proposed alternatives are “electric semis” (sure!) or hydrogen powered vehicles.
Appears to me that hydrogen is the only feasible alternative.
But that requires a network of hydrogen refueling stations, as well as acceptance by the public of hydrogen as a safe, environmentally friendly alternative. Never mind the Hindenburg disaster, and especially never mind “hydrogen bombs.” Hydrogen *can* be as safe as any other chemical motor fuel, and guess what, the combustion product of hydrogen and oxygen is….hydrogen oxide, a.k.a. water, in gaseous form.
No CO2 emissions. No “global warming” scam.
So I say, bring it on, AQMD. Let’s start building those hydrogen refueling stations for a clean and mobile future.
Gasoline could easily go to $25 a gallon if the Strait of Hormuz were to be be closed.
The only governmental action that would be required is the ignoring of the requirement that Congress declare war, and the subsequent false flag event.
Closing the Strait of Hormuz would activate $1.2 quadrillion in derivatives, which, being more than all the bank deposits in the world, would close all the banks in the world. Once the banks are closed, anyone without currency and/or precious metals would be poor.
If your bank closed today, how would you pay for a tank of gas, regardless of what it would cost?
There’s another alternative – violent revolution. That’s was why the Framers created the 2d Amendment, right after the first. It was intended that “we, the people” could kill the overbearing SOBs if they got out of control and overstepped their defined bounds. The ridiculous electric car fatwa could be just the issue that could finally upset the federal apple cart.
I doubt that most Americans would be in a position to defend their 2A rights, let alone their bankrupt households.
Or their 1A, 3A, 4A, 5A,…….
Guns and bunkers are of little resistance to high tech unlimited budget players. *Resistance is futile* (unfortunately)
https://www.activistpost.com/2019/06/robobee-insect-drone-does-not-need-a-power-source-to-take-flight-for-surveillance.html
That mosquito that just bit you? Was it really a mosquito?
I can’t say for sure. Are the drones full of blood?
Only if they need it to feed their baby drones like mosquitos do.
V, so you’re saying a break into tv like the movie, and people will…..in this country……weigh whether to put down their double double or 64 ouncer to decide “Let’s see how you do and we’ll get back to you”.
People used to be tough and get mad. Now……not so much of either.
Violent revolution is pretty much out of the questions since it is pretty clear that fed gov will use as much force as it takes including nuclear weapons to put down a revolution. That leaves only making compliance to its laws difficult and expensive while risky to the government employees. Having firearms works to those ends. Mass armed resistance to obeying edicts is still possible.
Someone, I wish it were me, is eventually going to create a large, a refinery sized plant to turn plastic into #1 fuel/jet fuel. They’ll be digging those dumps up and using them to produce fuel. I would say it ain’t rocket science but that’s just about the size of it. We just don’t need to make anything go “up” which is much simpler. No H2S to deal with. No 20,000 feet of drilling pipe. Just dig and sort…..and cook.
If and when it happens, it will be because the opportunity costs will have decreased below the production costs, as is the case in any capitalist plan.
Those who fear H2S shouldn’t work in the petroleum industry before retail sales.
The Japanese were the first to set up proper recycling facilities and theirs are still operating at a profit. Working at one of them is similar to working in a plutonium machining facility. Instead of glove boxes they have containment suits for the workers.
One thing I’ve noticed is that with the rise of electric cars, there is little or no talk of the need to greatly expand/modernize our electrical power grid.
There’s going to be a LOT more demand for electricity with electric cars. This means we’re going to need a lot more power plants, we’re going to need to update and expand transmission lines, transformer substations, and switchgear, and we’re even going to need to build and upgrade electrical service to homes and commercial buildings to handle the higher voltage and amperage requirements of charging electric cars.
Doing so will mean some significant environmental impacts, from needing to mine and smelt more copper, aluminum, and steel for wiring and electrical equipment, to cutting down trees for poles and power line rights of way…and then there’s power generation. If we’re serious about emissions, then most, if not all, of the power plants need to be nuclear fueled, as nuclear energy is the only source that can meet that increase in demand while keeping carbon emissions in check.
Incidentally, our current power grid is struggling under the demands on it right now. A stiff breeze knocks out the power in my neighborhood. Can you imagine what would happen in a Hurricane Katrina situation? Or if a bunch of people were stuck at home because the power went out and their cars couldn’t charge?
The silence on these problems with electric cars that The Powers That Be who are touting them is absolutely deafening. I think it’s because, simply put, electric cars are not an attempt to control the climate, but control YOU.
The very limited demand for additional electricity to charge electric cars’ batteries would be much easier to provide with small generators at each charging station than to resuscitate an electric grid which is subject to some high school kid hacking it in his spare time.
That would be like letting them see behind the curtain. Harding to virtue signal when you see an engine using fossil fuel.
I have never used fossil fuel.
The idea is to ration energy.
Technocracy was absorbed into progressivism. Technocracy wants an energy based currency and each person gets only so many currency units per month. It all makes sense when one follows it all to the roots in the late 19th and early 20th century. The ideas, the goals, were all pretty much fully formed by the 1930s. That’s why books like “1984”, “Brave New World”, and “The Shape of Things to Come” could be so accurate. It’s only details of implementation that have changed over time. The one world company town concept continues.
You must have as twisted a definition of technocracy as you do of all of the other words that you refuse to define when asked to.
Have you ever read the full-length versions of “1984” oir “Brave New World” instead of the CliffsNotes?
Ok smartass, make an actual point, explain technocracy,
I am sure the wait will be infinite.
A technocracy is a government run by technologies. A good example would be Google, Twitter, and Facebook who are all using “persuasive technologies” to control those who use their platforms. Look around at all the people who can’t stop checking their Facebook pages. Look at all the people who can’t feel good about themselves unless they receive “likes” from other people. They need “virtue signaling”. China has already got some sort of social merit technology that punishes people for transgressing politically correct norms.
The government can shut down your bank account with the push of a button. They can manipulate your ability to drive your car. Most of the modern day “bread and circuses” are all found on technological devices.
The word “government” literally means to govern the mind, and technology today easily manipulates people’s minds.
Hi sVB,
Technocracy is the idea that society should be governed and controlled by an elite group of technical experts. According to Patrick Wood, the author of Technocracy Rising, the scheme would transform the economy into an energy based and rationed system, run by an elite technocratic class instead of elected officials.
https://www.amazon.com/Technocracy-Rising-Trojan-Global-Transformation/dp/0986373907
Brent’s view is consistent with the case made by Patrick Wood.
Cheers,
Jeremy
Now vonu has the answer.
The pretty version of technocracy is seen in HG Wells’ “Things to Come”.
No that’s not it. I wanted vonu to answer anyway.
All governments have always made use of the contemporaneous technologies at hand.
I’ve already peed on Brent’s Cheerios, so I’ll never be able to satisfactorily answer his questions. Too bad that WordPress doesn’t have a block function.
The fact that governments use technologies doesn’t make them technocracies. When technologies become the dominating force in the forefront of governing one’s mind, that’s a technocracy.
When technology is sought for is own sake rather than ANY other purpose, that’s a technocracy. I can take a swing blade and destroy knee to waist high grass in half the time as anyone with a weedwacker that costs anywhere from five to ten times as much, requires gas mixed with oil, and will wear them out twice as fast as me with a swing blade.
Their so-called technologically advanced machine will require much more maintenance than my swing blade as well. It will assuredly run out of wire, and break down shortly after any warranties expire while my swing blade will need only minor maintenance to keep the blade sharp.
When I was a child, checkers at the local supermarket could read and punch in the price of all our groceries faster than any scanner can today. All our groceries were bagged into paper bags which are a renewable resource that can’t pollute the environment, but today we use plastic which has been scientifically shown to cause a laundry list of genetic as well as biological health problems in pretty much anything that can move and breathe. It’s idiotic, but these technologies are viewed as progress simply because they’re new technologies. That is THE tell-tale sign of a technocracy.
Saturday Night Live did a skit years ago where Will Farrell is first shown talking on a normal old school phone, then the first cordless phone, then the first cell phone, then the cell phones start to get smaller and smaller until, he’s attempting to talk on a phone that is about half the size of a thimble. He’s fumbling with it, and can’t even punch in a number because it’s so small, and these new small technologies are superior, right? Who says so?
These smart phones are idiotic. I have to hit half a dozen buttons just to get to a point where I can actually punch in a phone number. If I inadvertently bump a mute button after waiting for half an hour on hold, my call is dropped, and I have to start over.
I now have to listen to some customer service representative drone on for a few minutes because I can’t stop her from her babbling because she can’t hear me while she’s ranting on about something completely irrelevant to the reason for my call. This isn’t an improvement. It’s just new.
I’ll beat my laundry on a rock before I buy one of these new low water use washing machines. I don’t know anyone who doesn’t hate them. I live next to a spring where the water is literally so abundant that it is under pressure to bubble up right out of the ground. So I don’t have to conserve water ever. Yet, our technocratic regulators have decided that newer is better and leave us with no other choice than to use their waterless washing machines.
Someone comes up with a weak formula for rubber tires figures out a way to bill them as “biodegradable” to the environmentalists, and BAM we all now get to drive around on crappy tires that are guaranteed to wear out before the tread has half a chance to wear down. All in the beatified name of technology.
Hi sVB,
While I share your distaste for the newer is better mentality that drives a lot of so-called technological improvement, this attitude is not the tell-tale sign of a technocracy. Technocracy is defined by the idea that an elite group of technical “experts” should be empowered to govern society.
From the wikipedia article,
“Technocracy is a proposed system of governance in which decision-makers are selected on the basis of their expertise in a given area of responsibility, particularly with regard to scientific or technical knowledge”.
From Webster’s,
“government by technicians; specif., the theory or doctrine of a proposed system of government in which all economic resources, and hence the entire social system, would be controlled by scientists and engineers.”
From Collins,
“a theory or system of society according to which government is controlled by scientists, engineers, and other experts”.
Kind Regards,
Jeremy
My posts don’t deny those definitions, but they certainly spotlight, albeit anecdotally the same exact phenomenon.
Tell tale signs are most definitely the effects of a technocracy, and that’s exactly what I was pointing out. Your definitions only affirm what I posted.
These clowns literally believe that their expertise gives should give them the power to make these executive decisions for the rest of the world; of which the vast majority couldn’t care less.
Hi sVB,
“My posts don’t deny those definitions”
Because you defined technocracy as “a government run by technologies”. And challenged the legitimacy of the wikipedia article, it seemed that you were.
But, I think I understand your larger point, getting people addicted to new technologies is certainly compatible with, and advantageous to, aspiring technocrats.
As for experts, I share your disdain for most of them. However, I appreciate genuine experts who understand that expertise in a given field does not qualify them to control the lives of others.
Anyone who believes that their expertise grants them such a right is, by far, the least qualified to govern. Of course, I don’t believe that anyone is qualified to govern, in the political sense, at all.
Cheers,
Jeremy
“All governments have always made use of the contemporaneous technologies at hand.”
Of course, but technocracy is the rule of or using experts.
“I’ve already peed on Brent’s Cheerios, so I’ll never be able to satisfactorily answer his questions. ”
That’s what you do, piss all over the place but not make any arguments.
“Too bad that WordPress doesn’t have a block function.”
You’re the one going around pissing for the sake of doing so. You wouldn’t block me if you could.
Occasionally even a one-armed batter will hit one out of the park, like Wikipedia does in this case: wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocracy
Vonu,
The wikipedia article you reference is consistent with Brent’s statement,
“Technocracy wants an energy based currency and each person gets only so many currency units per month”.
From the article,
“In the 1930s, through the influence of Howard Scott and the technocracy movement he founded, the term technocracy came to mean, ‘government by technical decision making’, using an energy metric of value. Scott proposed that money be replaced by energy certificates denominated in units such as ergs or joules, equivalent in total amount to an appropriate national net energy budget, and then distributed equally among the North American population, according to resource availability”.
This from Brent,
“The ideas, the goals, were all pretty much fully formed by the 1930s. That’s why books like “1984”, “Brave New World”, and “The Shape of Things to Come” could be so accurate”.
is shared by Patrick Wood.
“Wood contends that the only logical outcome of Technocracy is Scientific Dictatorship, as already seen in dystopian literature such as Brave New World by Aldous Huxley (1932) and Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell (1948), both of whom looked straight into the face of Technocracy when it was still in its infancy”.
Can you explain what is so twisted about Brent’s definition?
Jeremy
Wiki is for morons, and your link is no exception. As I pointed out before, the so-called experts don’t know squat, and in most cases what they decide is always a disaster.
My first computer came with Window Vista Home Premium. I had no idea how to use a computer, but I followed all the instructions on that program, and was up and running in no time. After mastering that, I was then informed that they were offering a “new and improved” version which actually sucked, but some “skilled” code warrior with nothing better to do decides that he knows what we all really want and BAM, now I have to learn this crap all over again. The worst part is that it still sucks, and each successive improvement is really just a bigger pain in the ass. I just gave someone my desktop with that Vista Home Premium and after getting it up and running, was still amazed at how superior it was to what’s in a new computer. Most of the crap that comes with a new computer isn’t user friendly, and isn’t even anything I’m interested in using in the first place.
Same goes for automobiles. They can have all their new technological crap from China. I’m about ready to go back to riding a horse.
Curious where your definition of Technocracy is sourced from if “Wiki is for morons”.
Are Collins and Websters, as noted above, for morons too?
Would like to read your ‘not for morons’ sources please.
Shnarkle,
Windows 10 (the current version) is designed primarily to permit Microsoft to monetize their user base with persistent monitoring of usage habits and phoning home with that data. It is possible to minimize this somewhat, but it’s a moving target with Microsoft aggressively pushing out updates and new versions with little or no end-user control.
I gave up on Microsoft products a very long time ago and went with Linux instead. Linux certainly has plenty of warts but at least it’s not a spy app pushed by some mega-corp looking to exploit its users.
As far as cars I’m sticking with my ancient ride and its carburetor and ignition points as long as possible. Not a computer or air bag in sight.
Hi Jason, could you suggest the best way to uninstall an old Windows program and install a user friendly version of Linux?
I’ve got a car that the younger generation seems to really like and who also know how to not only remove the air bags, but to trick the computer into believing its still hooked up and ready to blow. I’m debating whether or not to keep this car for the rest of my life. If I do, I think I might give that a try. Otherwise, I’m going to find me a good old car without air bags, and all that computer controlled crap as well.
Probably the easiest version of Linux for most people is going to be Linux Mint:
https://www.linuxmint.com
You don’t need to erase your old Windows in order to try it – you can download Linux and put it on a DVD or flash drive and start the computer off of that to try it out without making any changes to your computer.
If you decide to install it, you can elect to use a “dual boot” setup, where you pick whether to run Windows or Linux when the computer starts up. Or you can let the installer delete your old Windows and run Linux exclusively. Just be sure to back up anything important first in case something goes wrong.
A nice feature available is full disk encryption with no back doors for law enforcement.
Thanks for the info, and the link. I looked through it, but already got confused with the “integrity check” and the “authenticity check”. Even the process of copying it to the memory stick looked complicated. I’m wondering if I could get some local computer repair place to copy it to a memory stick and just give that to me to plug into the computer. Is that how it works? Do you just plug in the memory stick and operate the computer from that?
or do you then copy everything from the stick to the computer?
I’m sure a computer shop can do that, but it’s not that tough really to copy it to a memory stick.
There are 3 Mint varieties, Cinammon, Mate, and Xfce. Cinammon is based on some newer tech and I tend to avoid that. Xfce is best for old computers since it needs less memory. I would generally recommend the “Mate” version for most purposes.
Here are step-by-step instructions, you will want the “Windows” section:
https://linuxmint-installation-guide.readthedocs.io/en/latest/burn.html
Once the USB stick is written, you need to tell your PC to boot of it. The way this is generally done is to hit a specific key when the computer fires up but before Windows starts loading. This is different on various computers. On Dells, it is the “F12” key. On most HP computers, it is the “Esc” or “F9” key.
Once up and running on the USB stick you can play around with Linux without changing anything on your hard drive.
If you decide you like it, there is an “Install” icon on the desktop, but you’d want to really be sure and get your ducks lined up in a row before doing that.
Forgot to add, generally you need to hit the required function key several times as the PC is firing up to make sure it is recognized. There’s a short window of only a few seconds for the key to do its thing.
Okay, thanks Jason. Thanks for the links for Windows as well. I’m on my third Dell computer, but my recollection is that I need to press the F8 key repeatedly to get it to load those other options. I’ll give it a try. Thanks again.
Schnarkle,
Another wrinkle if your PC is relatively new is “secure boot”. This is designed to be sure only “authorized” software can be fired up on your computer – and surprise! Only Microsoft’s Windows operating system is permitted by default.
Linux has adapted to this toxicity to one extent or another using various means but still may have problems with secure boot. Fortunately this “feature” can be turned off in the BIOS settings. Dell makes it easy from what I’ve seen, giving you the option to change the boot mode when you go into the startup menu with the F12 (or F8?) key.
Airbags, the very reason my cut-off year is 94.
A lot of vehicles have impact switches that cut the fuel. Even if an airbag does not deploy, you may not be able to drive away from a hard hit that does not make the vehicle otherwise non-operational. Airbags are switch-disableable, and this is a good upgrade if you have a baby in the front seat.
If there is a year where things suddenly got worse, it was maybe 1996 model year, which brought OBD-2. The difference between a 1995 9C1 Caprice and a 1996 Caprice 9C1 inside the engine control is significant, even though both are LT1 350ci.
I have an 85 Suburban with no computer. It has a 4 speed manual transmission (so no computer controlling the transmission), no fuel injection (so no computer controlling that), and no options except an AM radio and a heater. EMP-proof or as near as possible.
1985 Suburban has electronic ignition, and Solid State diodes in the alternator. Gas engines don’t run without a spark. Get a pre-1985 MBZ OM61x Diesel with manual trans for EMP-resistence running. Your radio and some gauges will be killed by a close pulse, but the engine will run until it is out of fuel.
Kidding. Prepare to walk.
Diodes and alternators can be easily replaced. Not so with computers. For that matter, non-electronic ignition systems can be easily changed out on the small block 350 engine.
If “govt.” has the figures of how much EMP it takes to disable various things it’s not available to the public but I have heard from other sources that it takes quite a bit to kill something like the old HEI distributor. I think they may have been the best thing invented.
I used to run a dual point distributor on my hot rod. It was PITA along with the solid lifter cam. I did learn to adjust valves though….enough so that everyone who knew me would get me to do the dirty deed for them. I wouldn’t do the valve cover thing though. There has to be a point……so to speak, in which charity doesn’t apply.
Technocracy defined ITSELF in the 1930’s as an Engineering and Science Based Material Goods and Energy Distribution System. They promised Free and Easy Stuff and Energy for Everyone, just like the Red’s in the Soviet Union but without the Bolshevik messiness. Read their books before proclaiming that they believe one thing or another. I have first edition, and later editions, as well as a bunch of their periodicals. Pure Communist Dreaming, perfect for some other species.
How ’bout those AntiFa’s in Portlandia? Effing terrorists, like ELF, KKK, or Hamas. Wear a mask, get arrested as a conspirator for whatever crimes the group commits.
Most modern technology hadn’t even been imagined in 1930, let alone become possible by the invention of the large scale integrated circuits that make everything from 4-function calculators to digital cellular phone capable of fitting in a shirt pocket.
America’s exceptionalism is its only reason for being unable to recognize that it is the world’s biggest bully and terrorist.
America didn’t need integrated circuits or cell phones that fit in your shirt pocket to become the world’s biggest bully and terrorist. The Industrial Revolution occurred a bit before the 1930’s, and so did the bullying.
I can tell you’ve never read any old science fiction or even seen the films. There is very little that hadn’t been invented or imagined in or before the 1930s.
Details are sometimes off, but the general theme and purpose of the technology was there.
Why not watch HG Wells’ film that shows the wonderful promise of technocracy here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atwfWEKz00U
They even have flat screen TVs. Everything lovelier and lovelier if we just submit to our technocratic betters.
I was sitting waiting to talk to a banker a few days ago, and noticed the ads on the walls all talking about how wonderful it is to be able to do all your banking right from the convenience of your smartphone. Each picture had groups of people who were all smiling or laughing as they did their banking transactions from their phone. I just called to have a document sent to my email, but their computer won’t allow me to open it. That stunt cost me $5.00 so I had to go into the bank branch and get it for free. At no time was there a smile on my face so I’m not being suckered by a bunch of smiling faces into this technocratic nonsense being so much better.
It’s better for them because they can keep their charges, fees, etc. where they are or even raise them while automating the whole thing, laying employees off, etc.
Ebanking will only be improved after the entire system fails, leaving all of its supporters illiquid.
Bill Bonner explains this well at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tt_NMQUPSV4
Hi Vonu,
I dread this – the digitized (only) economy, in which cash transactions become impossible and the government knows everything about every transaction you make.
I think that might bring back bartering.. and maybe gold value. That’s the only good thing I can see coming of that..
Eric,
The collapse of the digital payment options will herald a wonderful time for those who don’t keep their money in banks or cash equivalents. I haven’t left anything in a bank since 2008 that I didn’t need there to use a debit card to make a payment. I have nearly $1500 in one dollar bills and $400 in fives readily available for the time when illiquidity will make them far more valuable for barter. The rest of my unbanked is in twenties, gold, or silver.
Hi Vonu,
We already have the option. My fear is it will be the only option. In which case, every transaction will be traceable. Which means the bastards will be able to tax everything.
No doubt, our new Clover – Marc – would approve!
There was a time I banked the real stuff in the pasture, in sealed Igloo water jugs.
I got a little nervous when I couldn’t find 70K. I had to calm down and THINK. What a relief when I dug and was rewarded.
Of course when you’re losing your ass in the cattle bidness(drought starting in 93 and stops hopefully this year), it doesn’t last long. The good news is I did sell them. The bad news is 25 cents on the dollar. Cargill closed their beef processing plant in Hereford that year…..still closed.
Good news is the deer are thick so we have something to eat. Hisser, the cat, prefers venison. Good deal cause that’s about all we have but we’re gonna celebrate today with the last of a side of bone-in ribeyes. The closer to the bone, the sweeter the meat. BTW, Hisser can make a hand with steak too, he’s open to expanding his horizons. CJ can scarf up whatever is dropped or just left alone too long. He has no problem eating off a plate…..doesn’t need silverware.
Hey 8 south, when you say, “there was a time”, it sounds like it was a long time ago, but with interest rates so low now, I can’t think of a better time to bank your money in the ground. When they get rid of cash, they’ll start charging you interest just for keeping your money in a bank. Even so, with inflation being what it is, you’re better off keeping your money out of a bank anyways.
If the whole banking system fails, a lot of people aren’t going to put their trust into banks again, regardless of the how much technologies improve.
Banks are already in trouble. Peer to peer lending is growing in popularity as well as bitcoin, etc. Banks may very well become a relic of the past.
What would be the point in putting your trust in a bank after you have starved due to illiquidity?
Cryptocurrencies wouldn’t be any more use than closed banks when the Internet is down along with SWIFT.
Hey Vonu, Re: “What would be the point in putting your trust in a bank after you have starved due to illiquidity ” Where are you getting these ideas from? I don’t see anyone posting this. I’ve noticed your posts to others also seem to suggest the opposite of what they’re posting. Maybe it’s just the format of this cite. I’ve noticed that some posts don’t offer the opportunity to reply so I’m assuming that you’re responding to someone else’s post. I guess I just can’t find who it is you’re responding to. On the screen, it looks like you’re responding to my post, but I’m not suggesting that I or anyone else trusts any of these banking cartels.
States are already complaining about lost gas tax revenue due to even the current modest use of electric and hybrid cars, and drivers of these cars are being slapped with a by-the-mile tax to make up for the shortfalls (in Utah, for example). (Can’t win for losing. For decades, we’ve been cajoled into driving fuel-efficient cars only to be constantly slapped with higher gas taxes to make up for the corresponding revenue shortfalls. Cui bono? Certainly not the consumer.) What’s going to happen when the majority cars is electric/hybrid? That’s when they’ll for sure track us wherever we go and keep track of miles driven and charge us by the mile. Can’t wait.
It’s a bunch of nonsense. These governments will take gas tax money and spend it on anything but roads. The reality is that the entire interstate system was built in 20 years with a 4 cent a gallon gas tax. Today, we are driving almost 4 times the number of miles and cars as a whole, maybe get 50 percent better mileage overall that they did in 1970. They are lying.
Gas tax in Texas goes to everything but the roads….these days. Back in the 70’s you could ride in a vehicle and know when you went into another state riding passenger asleep(it would wake you). Now a lot of our roads are overloaded and torn up.
If every penny of gas tax went to roads, we’d be riding on perfect roads using a quarter capacity everywhere you wanted to go.
If every penny of the gas tax stayed in the state where it was collected instead of going to the federal government which we have to spend time, money, and effort trying to get it back from, the likelihood of it being used on highways in that state would be far greater.
The states collect the Federal gas taxes, and send it in to Washington DC. I don’t know the percentage NOW, but in the 70s or 80s the Federal government kept exactly 15% of it and sent it right back to the states, according to the governor of a midwestern state.
Vonu, the last time I looked, Texas was supporting 16 other states in tax money. It’s been well past time to secede for decades. And yes, that’s my pickup with the sticker in the window of a Texas flag and SECEDE under it.
Pa. has been upping the toll on the turnpike for a decade with no end in sight. Now it’s been revealed that the money was used elsewhere and there’s a maintenance shortfall. We know what that means.
Pretty typical everywhere. Very few people remember at this point that on many toll roads and bridges promises were made that the tolls would be discontinued when the construction cost was paid off. With modern technology tolls are changed (that is, increased) with ease at the push of a few buttons.
Most of these projects were funded with state-sponsored REVENUE bonds. Yes, there was the “sell” that once the toll roads and bridges were paid for, toll fees wouldn’t be necessary; but that’s like so many “temporary” taxing or tax collecting measures, like income tax withholding.
What’s often forgotten is that a revenue bond is used to insulate the state, and by extension, its taxpayers, from the risk that a bridge or toll road won’t be cost-effective. The bond holders themselves assume the risk, which is reflected in that typically they pay better returns than state or municipal general obligation bonds. Like any corporate entity, the state, usually through a tolls commission, can pay the investors a hefty return even if the project isn’t initially bringing in the dough; in fact, that’s often factored into the project cost. It then becomes a balancing act of paying interest on the bonds versus retirement of debt, which often by statute has to meet a minimum amortization schedule, ranging anywhere from 20 to 50 years. However, virtually all states have laws that allow for continuation of tolls even beyond the retirement of the bonds, and, revenue bonds can be refinanced as well.
I can see continuing toll collections to ensure perpetual maintenance and upgrades, but putting politicians and bureaucrats in charge, whom eye those funds greedily for their pet projects, especially those that line their pockets and those of their cronies, is a bad idea. And IF a bridge is such a damned good idea, then why not have it as a private, for-profit venture?
Eric wrote:
“Non-electric cars already in circulation would also have to be dealt with since they would be the last redoubt. “
Just read this on Drudge link this morning:
“The average age of cars and trucks in the U.S. has hit a record 11.8 years, as better quality and technology allows people to keep them on the road longer.”
https://apnews.com/bc5bc21edffb422290c9ca66345e0748
Methinks that people are keeping cars longer or most likely buying older cars because that’s all they can afford. This is also hurting new car sales.
I drive a 2002 Ranger and wouldn’t mind a newer one but, so far I can’t find one to fit my price range. Hell I’d be willing to go as high as $5,000.00. Maybe along with forgiving the student loans, free health care for everyone in the world, and a universal basic income our congress critters could just, give everyone a free car.
I’m too old and unstable for a motorcycle unless I had a trike, so when they do push us out of our old IC vehicles I plan on buying a small tractor or a big lawn mower and just take the mower deck off.
Parts are cheaper than $400 monthly payments for four years.
You’ve got that right! But these days it tends to be more like $600-$700/month for six to eight years if buying, lower but perpetual payments if leasing. I can’t even imagine going into debt servitude like that just for a vehicle.
I’ve seen three of my neighbors do just that, although one hasn’t removed his blades yet and actually will mow grass on public property as he heads to the store.
I bought a 2001 Ranger Edge new and it was affordable. Not so anymore.
Have you seen these heroic comments by BMW?
https://www.motoring.com.au/nobody-wants-evs-says-bmw-119190/
A couple excerpts:
“There is no customer requests for BEVs,” BMW’s director of development, Klaus Frölich, told a shocked round-table interview in Munich yesterday. “There are regulator requests for BEVs.”
“If we have a big offer, a big incentive, we could flood Europe and sell a million cars but Europeans won’t buy these things,” Frölich insisted.
Hi OP,
Indeed. I can vouch for this – the fact that everyone inside the business knows this is going to be a catastrophic fail. But almost none will say so publicly because they understand it’s career suicide to voice politically incorrect sentiments.
Weird, eh?
Those car warranty phone calls drive me nuts. A couple years ago one of them hit the nail on the head. I was waiting at a location when this radio ad came on for an extended warranty and their message was “Due to the declining economy……”. It’s the only time I’ve heard and ad that nailed it. This next one is going to make 2008 look like the gay old days. Probably the only way I’ll live is to have enough ammo and team up with other “deplorables”. It won’t take me long to steal a dozer and backhoe and do what needs to be done. I may have to move onto some property with a rock pit. Somebody with one is going to be amenable to my plan.
In the meantime, stockpile ammo and fuel.
I get those calls as well. Funny thing is when I ask what kind of warranty I can get on my 1972 Matador they just hang up on me.
Those car warranty phone calls are easy to end quickly. All I do is ask them if they will warranty my van which is 5000 miles short of 300,000 miles. They don’t even bother to call again.
I read that Trump’s planning to freeze the fuel mileage (CAFE) rules about where they are right now. If that happens, won’t it postpone or end the awful future you describe? Here’s a link:
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/5/3/17314000/trump-epa-cars-trucks-fuel-economy-cafe-standards
Hi Mike,
He is trying – but the weight of CA, several other states, the federal regulatory apparat, the UAW, the media – and even a number of major car companies – are fighting him. It’s by no means clear whether he’ll succeed – and if he loses in 2020, forget it. Whichever socialist (skip the “Democratic” part) replaces him will impose the fatwas.
Give it a little time and the Great Correction will solve all of these problems with all of the relevant industries thrown into a flash bankruptcy.
Double edged sword for the automakers. 1) EV’s don’t sell so the CAFE higher level is the only thing keeping demand alive there. And they’ve agreed to this regulatory capture and invested billions in making EVs no one wants, can’t tell shareholders that is all for waste eh? 2) On other hand it is making all their cars that actually sell much move expensive, driving down cash flow.
They are in quite a pickle. As Vonu said below, a good down turn out to sort out the bad debt.
Hi Brazos,
Amen!
The whole industry needs a good douching. Der Tag kommt…
I have to wonder where the manpower will come from to stop us rural folk from giving each other access across our land and we’ll drive whatever we want. Getting to a county road, they could install something to stop traffic across it and with less than a well-armed post of guards, it would be defeated easily. It’s hardly feasible to put a wall outside every fence….and a guy can make a gate on his own fence anywhere he wants.
I’ll steal to survive and so will everyone else. Hunger is a great motivator.
I have a very good friend who lives on 5 acres with her son. Their acreage is the first stop along the dirt road that all of her neighbors use to access their land. In the past, she has received complaints from the condition of the road from her neighbors. The complaints stopped when she closed the gate across the road at the rear of her property along with posting a sign that the road was unsafe and trespassing was not allowed.
Those who steal to survive have to be better equipped to survive than those they steal from, who will kill to survive.
When the SHTF, you can bet that plentiful, cheap and easy will dominate. It’s the reason I keep my fuel tanks topped of. Propane, Gasoline, Diesel….the more the better. It won’t be the time to start building a charging station. It won’t be the time to even consider charging. What is going to work……always? Something you can pour or transfer and have power…..instantly. Not dissing the other forms like solar but that’s the rich man’s game for the most part. I’ll keep my propane topped off, my diesel tank(I have nothing diesel right now)full or maybe change to gas with diesel storage. Whatever it is, I’ll only wish I’d had more.
Water always finds a bottom. And so does energy and money.
Currency always finds a bottom at the value of the paper it is printed on.
Fortunately, the Constitution specifies that gold and silver are our money.
Unfortunately, neither the Fed nor the Treasury has enough gold and/or silver to provide a bottom anywhere below historical highs.
Vonu,
Gold and silver can be debauched too; only the METHOD is different. This has happened before in history. I’ll explain…
During Ancient Rome, copper was a precious metal, much like gold and silver are. In fact, they used it to make their money, which was called the As. I will show you, from the Roman example, that precious metals aren’t the foolproof store of value you think they are.
Like the US during modern times, Rome engaged in foreign adventurism and empire building. Then, as now, this proved to be expensive-so expensive that paying for it all was problematic. That put the Roman gov’t in, shall we say, a tenuous position? How could they PAY for all their financial profligacy? I’m glad you asked, because I’m about to tell you!
What the Romans did was HALVE the copper content of the As, which doubled their money supply overnight. That’s right; they reduced the precious metal content so as to expand the money supply. If you think about it, on a conceptual level, it’s no different than printing more fiat money; it has the same aftereffect too: increased inflation because more money is chasing the same goods and services.
This begs an obvious question: if the Ancient Romans could debauch their precious metal based money; if they could devalue their version of ‘honest money’; what’s to stop someone from doing it again? Say we still used gold and silver, per the Constitution. What would stop someone from following the Roman example and decreasing the precious metal content of the money? The gov’t has ignored almost all of the Constitution, so why would they stop with the money supply? Why wouldn’t they dick around with the money, so as to pay for their profligacy?
You know, it really BURNS ME UP when I hear people saying that gold and silver are ‘honest money’, that it’s the perfect defense against inflation, etc. All we have to do is use gold and silver, and our monetary problems would be magically solved overnight-wow! Sorry, but history doesn’t support that wishful thinking. If anything modern events show that the US gov’t is so corrupt that they WOULD follow the Roman example, and that they would debauch and debase our so-called ‘honest money by reducing its metal content. The only thing that would change is the METHOD of debasing the money, not the end result.
MarkyMark,
Gold and silver need not be foolproof because their value is based on what they are. Their value is based on their intrinsic value, of which paper documents like currency and bonds have none. The value of the currency is irrelevant if it is nothing but an IOU, or a promise to pay. The gold content of the dollar is specified in statute, which most Romans were too illiterate to read. If you aren’t, it isn’t a problem unless you won’t read, which is where our public school system has brought our majority.
Being ignorant and naive is anything but protection from being cheated. God didn’t make us ignorant and stupid. We do that to ourselves and have no one else to blame when we do. Those who are so ignorant of whatever they trade with that they can be cheated, deserve to be, good and hard.
Vonu,
Yes, the metals, gold and silver, will have value in and of themselves. That said, if used as money, they CAN be debauched and debased, a la Ancient Rome. Furthermore, the after effects are the same; the money is worth less. Those who don’t learn from history are condemned to repeat it.
Name ONE form of money that cannot be debauched.
Those who never learning anything will never know anything.
Uh, that was my POINT: to wit, all money can be debauched and debased. All that changes with the form of the money is the method used.
It’s going to be a hell of a mess alright….Consider that EV’s are just one expensive slice of the “green” pie…Wait until these bastards eliminate natural gas and nuclear power generation…no heat or A/C…no lights. Mega thousands of dollars more personal debt needed to retrofit and “green” every home in America…
And no mass production of electric vehicles. How ever there will be mass production of death and misery.
Hi Sal,
After many years of observing/covering this business, I have come to the conclusion that the long term goal (almost achieved) is a national “company town” in which 95 percent of the population exists to serve the remaining 5 percent, who control and micromanage the population through restrictions on everything. Conditional privileges in place of rights. Perpetual debt; the legal impossibility of ever owning anything more than your clothes and small personal items via rent in perpetuity on real property.
They are now in the process of curtailing our mobility – which was once among the few real freedoms we enjoyed.
Not for much longer.
my vision of the future is what is happening in south afreaka where it is 95% legal to kill whites and take what they got. It will happen here also
SPQR, the weaponized underclass is used to take out the independent people that the government can’t take out directly.
That is its fine if the underclass kills off the middle class but once it threatens the self proclaimed elite it will be well dealt with permanently.
19th century elite Jay Gould has been credited with the statement, “I can hire one half of the working class to kill the other half.”
We are fortunate that he was not a military man.
Yep, that’s exactly it and what I’ve been putting forth for a long time and I’m probably no where near the first to see it. The powers that be want what they failed to attain in the late 19th and early 20th century privately.
The one world company town is the end goal and it is being pushed by so many people who will loudly moan about how the free market will result in the company town conditions of old. It’s the free market that was the fatal blow to it then. People just found better options. So now it’s all about using government so there are no options.
People want nice cages it seems. The cages won’t stay nice though.
China is the latest “success” story. 1/2 the Democrats running for President think one party rule is a good idea. The other half think that the existing system just needs businesses to have Uncle as a shareholder. Either way, China now, China tomorrow, China forever!
Right up until China has its first big recession and the bankers pull out.
Eric,
What do you think that the richest 2% of the world’s population controlling 50% of the world’s assets constitutes if not a worldwide company town?
Hi Vonu,
No argument. The source of most of our problems arises from same fountain of fecality…
Aren’t all of our fountains of fecality on the west coast?:-)
Vonu, there are a few fountains of fecality in Australia.
Where what part of the Bill of Rights is known, let alone respected? Totalitarian authoritarian regimes are far more common in the anglophile world than in North America.
“Which would amount to the same thing as a decree that everyone must buy a $350,000 home – regardless of their ability to pay for it.”
This is already the case for most of the United States. Why are there homeless people in San Francisco? Because they can’t afford to buy one of the mega-million dollar properties. Why isn’t anyone building cheaper, more affordable homes? Because everyone who has tried has been NIMBY’d out of business by everyone who already got theirs. The market used to provide flophouses and bachelor hotels for men (and don’t kid yourself, it’s men) who were down on their luck until they got back on their feet. That ended with urban renewal and destruction of the city. And the idea that extreme poverty was a woman’s issue, so the “projects” favored them over men.
Or perhaps a bunch of people get together and form a coop to buy a house? Well, that’s no good either, since zoning requirements say that a single family home is for a single family. Many immigrants have been good at ignoring or skirting the law, and usually that means a lot of visits by AGWs for every little thing that the neighbors don’t like, eventually ending with someone getting hauled off to jail. And besides, with today’s lot and building sizes it would be difficult to have multiple families (or generations) in a home anyway.
Meanwhile everyone is ignoring the elephant in the room.
you cant sell a house to junkies. like in the ghettos they don’t pay for water electric etc
You don’t need to sell them a house. You need to sell them a room. Like Elwood’s place in The Blues Brothers. Sure, not nice, not inspiring, but hey, you’re out of the rain and can play cards with the other bums.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICHEkYRZg3w
I moved into a van in December 1984, long before I gave up recreational drugs.
I haven’t encountered a good reason for renting or buying a room or a house since I discovered that my best paid years were spent living in a truck sleeper and forgoing drugs.
I attended the first Rubber Tramp Rendezvous. There were 45 of us. There were, reportedly, over 10K the past year. Living in a vehicle seems to be a growing lifestyle. Those with families tend to choose motorhomes instead of Prii.
http://www.cars.com/articles/2011/02/plural-of-prius-prii-not-according-to-latin-experts/
I can recall times I just couldn’t sleep(been that way since I was 20). I’ve trudged out to the truck, got into the sleeper and passed out till the sun woke me. The wife would be irked, but then again, if she had to sleep with herself, she’d be even more irked. It’s a real drag to wake up in a cold room with no covers every night and find you had 18″ of that king size bed to call your own. Once moved into another bedroom with the dog, it was fine for him and me. He could top me in fart wars but depended on me to keep him covered….which I did dutifully, after all, that’s why I moved.
I moved into my first van around 1990 a VW camper bus. After that there were three more GM vans. A drapery van with commercial plates and a Ryder box van both had enough room for my motorcycles. I also stopped doing drugs sometime after I sold the first GM van.
For me, the attraction is still the minimalist mentality. There’s just not enough stuff to clutter up and confuse things. Having so little stuff is liberating. I’m currently getting rid of as much of my garbage as I can, and contemplating moving back into a small RV or travel trailer. One of the biggest headaches was finding a good place to park where I wouldn’t be hassled. So my plan is to rent my place out, and park the travel trailer in the back yard.
Yep. People whine about affordable housing but the outdoor and animal spirit of men make our “livable” area far below the standards of women. A tent in a campground with a communal shower is enough to get by
A van with a wash basin beats a communal shower every time.
Why would any man with an animal spirit be interested in a woman without one?
Valley girls need not apply.
I don’t have a communal shower, but I do prefer a shower to a wash basin in a van. I currently have indoor plumbing and hot water when I need it, but for a good ten months out of the year, I rely on about 100′ of black hose on the roof to heat my shower water which is dispensed from one of those multiple head garden sprayers. Most showers I’ve used always have the shower nozzle below eye level so I have to crouch down to wash my hair. I’ve got my outdoor shower up a good foot above my head, and I only have to clean my indoor shower during the coldest months of the winter when I’m using it.
I’m thinking of doing something similar for the kitchen sink. An outdoor kitchen sink would be a great way to keep my indoor kitchen clean. Hell, why stop there? I might as well go all the way and set up an outhouse.
I guess when it precipitates an outhouse is acceptable but I’ll catch a break in the rain and go nature boy. I have taken many showers outside and they’re fine. I’ve come in so filthy I’d take off my clothes and shower outside just to avoid getting it into the house. It’s not much fun when it’s snowing but otherwise, it’s a ok with me. We used to have a “sunshower” from Cabela’s that held 5 gallons. That would clean a minimum of 3 men or one woman. I’d put gallon jugs on a black mat and getting in at midnight it would be so hot I’d have to mix cold with it.
Yep, another great reason to have a shower outside. I also have my washing machine outside as well. I can peel off the muddy clothes and hose them off prior to tossing them into the machine. The black hose is scalding hot during the day so I can do a load of wash on hot to get rid of all that steaming hot water and then when it gets down to a comfortable temp, I can take a shower.
I’ve got another hose and a splitter, but haven’t gotten around to hooking it up to mix the hot and cold
A lot of people used to have those old Fridgidaire Chugger washers that went up and down. They’d clean hell out of your filthy stuff. Most were on the back porch with another in the house for those who don’t need that.
Than “mud” rooms became common but you still have to get through the back door and strip down in the house.
I’ve done what you described countless times and have a black hose that I can’t handle except with a plastic sprayer on the end or wear leather gloves. It’s definitely hotter than the water heater 120 degrees by a good bit.
I noticed my washer was leaking a little water so rather than deal with fixing it, I just tossed it out into the back yard. Then I noticed that when it got to the rinse/spin cycle, there was a lot of soap coming out even if I filled it up with just water and did another rinse/spin. Now I put some environmentally safe soap in, but just a little, and let it pump the water out into the landscaping in the backyard.
The black hose is definitely hot enough to scald. I really should hook up a cold line to mix the two.
Good luck with that. Same thing I did but the leak turned out to be on the drive seal and it toasted the bearing.
it seems to be working fine. I think I tossed it outside a year and a half ago. Sometimes it stops and won’t go the rinse cycle. So I just skip it and go to spin.
Plenty of places on a washer to leak. Mine is leaking on a water inlet. Just need to remove hoses and install new ones.
“We used to have a “sunshower…” That would clean a minimum of 3 men or one woman.”
LOL. Quote of the day.
I have had three vans and none of them had or needed running water.
I have a 3.5 quart tea kettle that I use with a 30,000BTU/hr stove to heat water or cook breakfast. I put 2 gallons of water in a Sterilite container from which I fill the tea kettle. It seldom takes more than two cycles to heat the water to where I can comfortably put my head into the container to wet, wash, and rinse my hair. From there I use one of two washcloths to wash the rest of me. Because of the wiping involved, I can get cleaner with less than 2 gallons of water than with any amount in a shower. I use any clean hot water remaining to clean the skillet after breakfast is eaten. Since my cooking is usually done with the lid off the 2 foot x 2 foot hatch, and I only have the stove, skillet, quart sauce pan, and utensils to clean, nothing resembling a kitchen is involved, and it is equally indoor and outdoor.
The van provides all the privacy afforded by an outhouse and a 5 quart pickle bucket lined with two nested 7 gallon kitchen garbage bags and topped with a GammaSeal completes the number two part of a toilet. The number one has been handled for a long time with a liquid laundry detergent bottle with the spout removed. It is especially nice when it is chilly because I can pee without getting out of bed.
Re: “pee without getting out of bed”. This reminds me of the days I spent living in a hammock up in the trees. I spent a few months hanging from an old oak on the side of a hill, as well as a Eucalyptus tree a good 40 or 50 feet up. In both cases, I could just lean over to the side and pee into the black abyss below me.
Another time a buddy and I hiked up the side of a rock slab formation to camp out in some wind caves. At the top was an old bay leaf tree with gnarled roots growing out from the rocks. He climbed up into the canopy with a roll of toilet paper. I was probably a good 15 to 20 feet below(and safely our of range), and suddenly my view of the valley below was split in two by a falling turd which must have fallen a good 150′ before splattering on the rocks below.
I don’t know what it is, but there’s just something so much more liberating about being able to use the greater more spacious environment around you as your personal toilet rather than peeing or pooping from some enclosed space into some plastic container that then needs to be disposed of.
I also eventually became accustomed to the “thud” while living on the street, camping, etc. rather than the more soothing “plop” into water followed by a quick flush. Again, I can’t deny that I prefer being able to flush a bowl of crap immediately from my presence rather than having to put a lid on it, and carry it around with me until I could dispose of it later.
There were many days when I couldn’t help think of potatoes as I dumped my bucket of crap into the nearest Port O let.
Working in the patch for years I only used the shower in the bathroom. It was much nicer out in the pastures where I hauled “stuff” into. Wish my Gal.S4 hadn’t simply died with everything in it. I had pics and vids of things I hauled I couldn’t exactly put a name to except for big dirt working equipment and crushed rock.
Speaking of cellphones, I have noticed every model of every brand has the ability to never give a warning before taking a shit of its own. Now I try to back up everything often. Wish it would automatically back up to the sim card.
Eric,
I think ICEVs will be around for a while yet. Unless one lives in a handful of cities, a car is a virtual NECESSITY for the vast majority of Americans; outside of those handful of cities, the public transit simply isn’t good enough to allow one to do without a car. That’s how it is where I live. While I use the local buses once in a while (I have a 10 ride ticket for this to save money over the single fare), it’s only to go downtown when they have a special event and I can’t PARK over there. They shut down whole streets, and that makes parking difficult. Other than that, I use my car for everything. I submit most Americans are in the same boat.
What will happen if what you say comes to pass is our own version of the “yellow vest” protests. Who’da thunk it? The gutless, spineless French of all people shutting down Paris for an extended period! Why? Because that globalist POS, Macron, tried to jack up gasoline taxes in the name of climate change. If our people experience similar hardship, sooner or later, the same will happen here.
I could see cities here banning ICEVs in city centers. NYC has already done ‘congestion pricing’-well, FORMALLY, anyway. Truth be told, they’ve been doing it for years in the form of exorbitant bridge tolls to enter the city. To enter from NJ, you’ll pay $15 to use the bridge or tunnel. If you use the Big Brother EzPass, it’s less, but I don’t know by how much; I don’t have it. Anyway, the Port Authority instituted the high bridge tolls to keep cars OUT of NYC.
If the gov’t simply bans ICEVs in city centers, that won’t affect a lot of people. Even though I can do so now, when I go to NYC, I take the bus or train in; ain’t NO WAY I want to drive there! It’s a royal PITA; traffic is crazy; and, if you’re lucky enough to find parking, it’ll COST you, big time. So, most who live outside the big cities will leave their cars home anyway if they have to go there. Most who LIVE in the bigger cities like NYC don’t own cars anyway; I think something like half of NYC residents don’t own a car. If the gov’t doesn’t go any farther than banning ICEVs from city centers, they’ll get away with that.
However, if they try to make life difficult or impossible for those of us living OUTSIDE the cities, that’ll be another matter. Though I looked at Teslas and other EVs, I bought an economical ICEV when I got rid of my old Nissan; for most people, ICEVs simply work better. I think we could see our own yellow vest protests here if the gov’t goes too far. As much as the greenies would like to, ICEVs will be around for a while.
Oh, and there are technologies coming that’ll enable ICEVs to get better mileage. I tweeted you a link about these nano pulsing devices that can bolt right in to where you put your spark plugs now. These nano pulses can increase ICEV efficiency by up to 20%! That could help the car makers meet the increasingly demanding (not to mention unreasonable) fatwas. You can read more about this technology here: https://arstechnica.com/cars/2019/06/swapping-spark-plugs-for-nanopulses-could-boost-engine-efficiency-by-20/
Anyway, I don’t see how ICEVs can go away; as you pointed out, they’re simply the best solution to the vast majority of people’s transportation needs. I could see them banned from city centers, but I can’t see it going much farther than that. People will not only rebel, but the car companies will too. I know, I know; they go along with Uncle now, but they’ll want to survive too.
I meant to say above that, as much as the greenies would like to ban ICEVs, they’ll be around for a while.
Ford has just announced 12000 layoffs and plant closures in Europe and Russia. They must know their not going to survive yet keep talking up the EVs. Commenters on other sites think EVs are the best thing since sliced bread.
I am utterly shocked! (Shocked!! I tells ya.) that people cannot see the creamy BS being spread liberally around what little remains of their minds. Scary….
This might be one way to get those cars to the crusher.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/26/us/google-maps-detour-colorado-trnd/index.html
Or even a way to the re-education center.
Eric,
Loved the debate last night, secretly and ironically joining the DNC to get Tulsi nominated in the primaries for shits and giggles, even if she is a plant. One thing they harpies kept harping on last night was Healthcare as a Right. I’m sure you have already done the mental math that healthcare is a service and requires someone to provide that service. But what if every doctor in your area just upped and quit? Do they hold them at gunpoint and say “heal the damn patient and accept the medicare wages”? It will be interesting once the Musk-o-vite fan boys run out of money and demand craters (oh wait…), what lengths will they go to to get people in EVs? Castro mentioned una persona in the debate last night that had only been to a doctor once in his life. At first I thought damn is he talking about me? I don’t even go for sinus infections anymore and just let them run their 1.5 week course and get over it. It has been 5 years since I have been in a doctor’s office and I’m a millennial. Anyways HUD-Julian’s comment was about medicare for all and not being self sufficient, go figure. Cash for Clunkers and Medicare for all are the same thing, different industry. Guaranteed business through uncle Scam and his merry henchmen. Just lower quality products and possible shortages of service. Again, what lengths will they go to get people working on their 5 year plan if no one physically wants to? What if no one physically goes to the doctor to get the mandatory vaccines they tout? Or takes the pills? Jail time for Non-EV drivers is definitely in our coming sphere of influence.
The thing I’ve noticed about the people who go for the leftist politics is a desire to turn into rights things that can be normally obtained economically voluntarily. Especially those things their political office holders have made much more expensive than they should be.
What they never want to do is turn into rights things which are usually achieved through social game play. There’s no turning it into a right to be a senator or have sex with beautiful women for instance. That all stays bootstrappy as frig.
But take the guy who through hard work and ability makes a little bit money and then suddenly the earnings are good fortune that has to be redistributed to be fair. Here being bootstrappy is some sort of sin.
I am not sure if they can’t see people as whole individuals with different mixes of advantages or disadvantages or that those less economically inclined but more socially inclined are just being self-interested and selfish. Can they not see that maybe some people have their economically viable skills as their offsetting advantage to other disadvantages? Is it that they cannot imagine someone not having social and institutional inclinations they do?
It simply baffles me how they can try and portray themselves as good and virtuous while kneecapping people because of how their inclinations and abilities align.
Hi Brent,
A right, properly understood, cannot conflict with another right. If it does, one or both is not a right. Another way to see this is that if the exercise of a “right” creates an involuntary positive obligation on another, then it is not a right. Statists do not accept the concept of rights as they believe that such “rights” are conferred by government and negotiated through the democratic process. To a Statist, a “right” is nothing more than a democratically “agreed” to privilege.
Statists either do not admit, or cannot understand, the glaring problems with this concept of rights. First, one cannot make a meaningful distinction between a right and a privilege, this elevates preference over principle and perverts language in pursuit of specific social goals. Second, such a conception guarantees perpetual war between different groups. Which, as Randolph Bourne noted, is “the health of the State”.
Statists revile the concept of natural rights because this concept minimizes conflict and limits the aspirations of social engineers. This is why “all the smart folks” embrace utilitarianism which, to paraphrase Jeremy Bentham, is hypocrisy on stilts. If you poke a utilitarian hard enough, they will eventually invoke a natural rights principle. In fact, even the basic formulation, “the greatest good for the greatest number”, assumes a moral principle that cannot be derived solely from utilitarianism. In fact, even within that constraint, how can a utilitarian object, on utilitarian grounds, if I assert that the mentally feeble should be benevolently enslaved and tasked with performing mundane duties on behalf of their betters. Or why not special privileges and funding for the most gifted, including giving those benevolently enslaved to them as servants. Either of these proposals could be conducive to “the greatest good for the greatest number”.
Cheers,
Jeremy
Giving the “we need rulers” group hell one day in college. I asked how we determine the pecking order. IQ perhaps? and this got a rousing jeer even though I don’t think an IQ test reveals anything but if you have answers to questions just learned in the last few years…..in school.
Could you cram for an IQ test? Definitely. It seemed to mainly be women who were offended.
Nobody could answer that question the TA seemed ready to leave behind quickly. Question authoritah and you done offended nearly all the females in the room. I get it. I wasn’t getting laid because I was smart. It was much easier to buy your way into their drawers, they just didn’t call it by its name.
Not only IQ, but how does a meritocracy get information? How can a central planner know the desires and thoughts of 333 million people? Can that even be boiled down to a number? The bureaucracy thinks so, yet how many times have they been completely off base, or went with gut instinct instead?
Hence the desire for ever greater data collection, ever greater intrusion and ever greater requests for power.
RK, they get their information with “study” groups, you know, like car companies do, hence the reason they build so many turds. They take their own idea and want the people to say which parts they like. They never seem to ask, Is this a machine you’d want? How many “might” buy one? Well, I “might” buy one. How much are they when you get down to brass tacks? A few hundred dollars? Sounds good, I’ll try one when I find it “used”.
Castro also brought up that if a MAN gets pregnant, then decides he wants an abortion- will the government PAY for it ? 27 crazies each crazier than the last, and one of them will be running against Trump. Trump will get 49 states !
Boy I missed hearing that gem. We turned it off after Madcow fumbled the microphones and cut to break.
I missed this one too: https://www.wsj.com/articles/rachel-maddows-reality-check-11561649572
Delaney better take out a life insurance policy soon the way he is talking. First he rightly mentioned medi-crap for all would bankrupt every hospital and then he outsmarted the moderator in Trump fashion which is a no go for the DNC.
John Delaney is the only reasonable candidate out of the bunch. He even wore a flag pin. Naturally (((they))) stationed him at the far end and tried to “Ron Paul” him.
Yang was treated even worse. I thought he might fall asleep and they’d need a gong to wake him up.
Hmmm, perhaps ((((you)))) are onto something.
On second thought, nah.
Reasonable? I think you mean “least worst” or “least socialistic”.
Eric, If what you say, here and the article re snail paced speeds for self-driving cars, comes true, this would seem to force an important sector of modern life to be out of whack with the rest, i.e. out of whack with the speedy flow of information, goods and services and people. But then again you would expect state intervention to destroy the spontaneous harmony created by the market.
On a crowded road, the traffic speed is controlled by the slowest car.