What will poor people drive ?

[Malo83]

The Meek shall Inherit the Earth'

 

[Imp4]

Won't they just drive 20 year old clunkers like they do now?
What kind of strange question is this???

 

[Big E]

We are going green and this will be the future of mass transit.

Way to much greenhouse gas and PM 2.5 emissions coming off that setup.

 

[gregk24]

Poor people don't buy 3 brand new Jettas in a year!

Touche.

 

[Zee09]

Touche.

I am shocked at your behavior...

 

[gregk24]

I am shocked at your behavior...

Lol. We are far from wealthy. The Jetta "situation" may be a bad example. Due to timing and the current market we were able to get out of both of the previous Jettas for little money. Otherwise it would never have been an option.

 

[OVERKILL]

Surely he was being sarcastic. At least I hope so.

I'm doubtful he was. UBI has a lot of support from people on the far left up here, I suspect the same is true for California and other left-leaning states.

 

[Kjmack]

Won't they just drive 20 year old clunkers like they do now?
What kind of strange question is this???

I apologize for asking such a question . How about can I run Super Tech oil and filters for 10k oci ? Seems to be the most asked ? these days . And the question and answers go on for 18 pages then gets locked into purgatory.

 

[Zee09]

Lol. We are far from wealthy. The Jetta "situation" may be a bad example. Due to timing and the current market we were able to get out of both of the previous Jettas for little money. Otherwise it would never have been an option.

That is how you get rich right?
Only a fool would not take advantage of this market. Good for you...People here need to qualify what rich is... Of course that would be a real fiasco just like all the rich threads...to each his own eh?

 

[JHZR2]

The batteries will be the biggest issue IMHO, their cost makes them very comparable to an engine failure, which sends a lot of cars to the wreckers. Thing is, if you are resourceful, you can wreckers pull an engine in good shape and get another 10 years out of it, provided the body on the car holds up, you wreckers pull an already 8 year old battery, it doesn't have 10 more years left in it, it has a very finite lifespan, that's going to be problematic for people that currently shop in the $500-2,500 used vehicle market.

They will. The ability to continue will be based upon how the automakers design controls to self-protect.

That’s a balancing act. The automakers will let you drive on a junk engine until it seizes or throws a rod.

Batteries are typically condemned when capacity drops to 80% and/or impedance doubles. But will the BMS permanently condemn the battery? If a cell drops will it be bypassed? How many until the battery is unusable?

I suspect with the overwhelming performance of EVs in terms of speed that nobody needs, what we will see is 50-mile, much lower HP cars that have somewhat faulted batteries. The cars will work, the question is will the BMS permanently cut out and/or limit the battery in some cases such that the car can’t propel at all? Allowing the bms to do that is a safety risk in driving, but not allowing the bms to forbid certain use is a safety (fire) risk always.

 

[measureman]

I can afford a car payment on a 5 year old Mercedes.
But I can't afford to pay for the repairs nor would I want to.
I would spend the same payment on a brand new Chevy,Toyota etc.
This would be the same for people buying used electric cars.

 

[javacontour]

Some of you are assuming that we will still have "poor" people in the near future. If things continue the way they are headed, we won't. Everyone will be equal and those "poor" people will drive the same cars as everyone else, except they won't be paying their "fair share" for the car, the insurance or the gas or electricity needed to run it. The rest of us will pay for it in order to achieve equality and equity. That is the government solution to the problem.

We've had the "War on Poverty" in the US since 1965. We still have plenty of poor, so the war hasn't seemed to put a dent in the problem.

Seeing a pattern? War on poverty, war on terror, war on drugs, all have largely failed.

 

[measureman]

We've had the "War on Poverty" in the US since 1965. We still have plenty of poor, so the war hasn't seemed to put a dent in the problem.

Seeing a pattern? War on poverty, war on terror, war on drugs, all have largely failed.

I did some work for a local DEA agent.
I asked him how the war on drugs was going.
He said there's 4000 of us how do you think it's going?
I will say he must be paid well he had a real nice house.

 

[Dave Hess]

We've had the "War on Poverty" in the US since 1965. We still have plenty of poor, so the war hasn't seemed to put a dent in the problem.

Seeing a pattern? War on poverty, war on terror, war on drugs, all have largely failed.

No incentive to work if ______ will take care of you from cradle to grave.

Why work ???

 

[IndyIan]

We've had the "War on Poverty" in the US since 1965. We still have plenty of poor, so the war hasn't seemed to put a dent in the problem.

Seeing a pattern? War on poverty, war on terror, war on drugs, all have largely failed.

Canada and the US could do alot better in levelling the social economic playing field, but having a significant population of working poor certainly raises the rest of our standards of living, and I think most people know it... And the idea that raising the minimum wage somehow negatively effects how rich the rest of us can get? How much would chicken cost if we didn't have minimum wage or foreign laborers working in farms and processing plants? It might go up 25- 33% although its been stupid cheap here for years now... Going from $2/lb to $3lb isn't going to bankrupt anyone.

 

[javacontour]

Canada and the US could do alot better in levelling the social economic playing field, but having a significant population of working poor certainly raises the rest of our standards of living, and I think most people know it... And the idea that raising the minimum wage somehow negatively effects how rich the rest of us can get? How much would chicken cost if we didn't have minimum wage or foreign laborers working in farms and processing plants? It might go up 25- 33% although its been stupid cheap here for years now... Going from $2/lb to $3lb isn't going to bankrupt anyone.

But today we have places offering $15/hour and still not getting workers. The last I checked, there were over 11 million job openings in the US. They are not all minimum wage jobs.

If a job is paying minimum wage, it must not have high skill demands or there are a lot of folks willing to work it. The last time I worked a minimum wage job was in college as my work-study job that was part of my financial aid package.

People say we need to spend more on education. Yet when I compare Chicago Public Schools district 299 to the state averages, CPS spends 25% more per student compared to state averages and doesn't get outcomes as high as state averages.

Downstate, we are told that Chicago supports the state. But CPS299 doesn't even locally fund at levels that meet state averages. The state average is about 75% local funding for education where state and federal funds make up the other approximately 25%

CPS299 is closer to 50% local funding, ranging from 48-52% depending on the year examined, with the other half of the 25% above average spending coming from other taxpayers. Not only are other taxpayers supporting the city as much if not more than they support themselves, in many cases, external taxpayers are expected to send more to CPS299 than they provide for their own district.

CPS299 makes up 20% of the Illinois student population, so they skew the numbers being such a large slice of the pie.

People want to throw money at problems when they are really more complex. If parents don't care about education, no volume of cubic dollars is going to make the children care. And the cycle continues. How much do people care if they are not throwing their own money into the system?

I'm not going to say there are not inequities. But to suggest that taxpayers haven't been supportive doesn't hold up when we look at the money spent to help folks catch up.

We keep hearing about the social responsibility of the rich and corporations. Okay, what about the social responsibility of those receiving the assistance?

At some point, they have to WANT to catch up. No amount of cubic taxpayer or corporate dollars are going to make some want to catch up.

 

[OVERKILL]

But today we have places offering $15/hour and still not getting workers. The last I checked, there were over 11 million job openings in the US. They are not all minimum wage jobs.

If a job is paying minimum wage, it must not have high skill demands or there are a lot of folks willing to work it. The last time I worked a minimum wage job was in college as my work-study job that was part of my financial aid package.

People say we need to spend more on education. Yet when I compare Chicago Public Schools district 299 to the state averages, CPS spends 25% more per student compared to state averages and doesn't get outcomes as high as state averages.

Downstate, we are told that Chicago supports the state. But CPS299 doesn't even locally fund at levels that meet state averages. The state average is about 75% local funding for education where state and federal funds make up the other approximately 25%

CPS299 is closer to 50% local funding, ranging from 48-52% depending on the year examined, with the other half of the 25% above average spending coming from other taxpayers. Not only are other taxpayers supporting the city as much if not more than they support themselves, in many cases, external taxpayers are expected to send more to CPS299 than they provide for their own district.

CPS299 makes up 20% of the Illinois student population, so they skew the numbers being such a large slice of the pie.

People want to throw money at problems when they are really more complex. If parents don't care about education, no volume of cubic dollars is going to make the children care. And the cycle continues. How much do people care if they are not throwing their own money into the system?

I'm not going to say there are not inequities. But to suggest that taxpayers haven't been supportive doesn't hold up when we look at the money spent to help folks catch up.

We keep hearing about the social responsibility of the rich and corporations. Okay, what about the social responsibility of those receiving the assistance?

At some point, they have to WANT to catch up. No amount of cubic taxpayer or corporate dollars are going to make some want to catch up.

Very well stated!

 

[OLEJOE]

People want to throw money at problems when they are really more complex. If parents don't care about education, no volume of cubic dollars is going to make the children care. And the cycle continues. How much do people care if they are not throwing their own money into the system?

I'm not going to say there are not inequities. But to suggest that taxpayers haven't been supportive doesn't hold up when we look at the money spent to help folks catch up.

We keep hearing about the social responsibility of the rich and corporations. Okay, what about the social responsibility of those receiving the assistance?

At some point, they have to WANT to catch up. No amount of cubic taxpayer or corporate dollars are going to make some want to catch up.

^^^^



Exactly

 

[Kjmack]

But today we have places offering $15/hour and still not getting workers. The last I checked, there were over 11 million job openings in the US. They are not all minimum wage jobs.

If a job is paying minimum wage, it must not have high skill demands or there are a lot of folks willing to work it. The last time I worked a minimum wage job was in college as my work-study job that was part of my financial aid package.

People say we need to spend more on education. Yet when I compare Chicago Public Schools district 299 to the state averages, CPS spends 25% more per student compared to state averages and doesn't get outcomes as high as state averages.

Downstate, we are told that Chicago supports the state. But CPS299 doesn't even locally fund at levels that meet state averages. The state average is about 75% local funding for education where state and federal funds make up the other approximately 25%

CPS299 is closer to 50% local funding, ranging from 48-52% depending on the year examined, with the other half of the 25% above average spending coming from other taxpayers. Not only are other taxpayers supporting the city as much if not more than they support themselves, in many cases, external taxpayers are expected to send more to CPS299 than they provide for their own district.

CPS299 makes up 20% of the Illinois student population, so they skew the numbers being such a large slice of the pie.

People want to throw money at problems when they are really more complex. If parents don't care about education, no volume of cubic dollars is going to make the children care. And the cycle continues. How much do people care if they are not throwing their own money into the system?

I'm not going to say there are not inequities. But to suggest that taxpayers haven't been supportive doesn't hold up when we look at the money spent to help folks catch up.

We keep hearing about the social responsibility of the rich and corporations. Okay, what about the social responsibility of those receiving the assistance?

At some point, they have to WANT to catch up. No amount of cubic taxpayer or corporate dollars are going to make some want to catch up.

 

[ripcord]

Who wants to work all day to afford a car when you can stay home and watch cat videos all day?