LA Times Editorial Board Comes Out Against Prop 30, Taxing The Rich To Subsidize EVs

A slight bit of sanity. Also, nowhere in this piece do the members of the LA Times editorial board mention if they’ve bought EVs themselves

Endorsement: No on Proposition 30

There is probably no climate program in California that is more urgent than the transition to zero-emission vehicles. Transportation is the state’s largest source of planet-warming and health-damaging emissions by far. We will not meet our obligations to reduce pollution unless we move quickly to build the charging infrastructure and replace the tens of millions of gas- and diesel-fueled vehicles on our roads with electric cars, trucks, buses and other zero-emission models. But they remain too expensive and out of reach for many residents and businesses.

Of course, the big problem here is that it’s not voluntary, the Elites are forcing the citizens to engage in this scheme. But, don’t cry for them, they vote Democrat, so, they get the authoritarianism they asked for

The question, then, is how to pay for this estimated $150-billion clean-vehicle transformation?

Proposition 30 on the November ballot would do it by raising taxes on the rich to pay for electric vehicles and charging stations. While it may be tempting to put the burden on the rich — again — for one of California’s top priorities, voters should say no. Proposition 30 has too many flaws. It’s bankrolled by one special interest and it doubles down on an unsustainable funding model.

Yeah, another tax the rich scheme, which would add another 1.75% on top for those making $2 million or more. It doesn’t seem to go after businesses, though, not that I can see.

California already has the highest state income tax rate, at 13.3%, and voters have already raised taxes on the wealthiest residents to pay for education and mental health services. Proposition 30 would push the top-earner rate to 15.05%, which is much higher than other states, most of which have income tax rates in the single digits. The state’s dependence on wealthy residents’ income, which is often tied to investments and the stock market, creates tremendous instability in the budget. Revenues sharply rise and fall with Wall Street, leading to feast-or-famine cycles. It doesn’t make sense to pin another priority on such a volatile funding stream. Proposition 30 could also drive investors who fund high-risk technologies out of the state.

Wait, it would drive investors out even more? Huh. It would also drive out business owners and lots of rich folks. More of them.

There’s some concern that Proposition 30, which would generate between $3 billion and $5 billion a year, could send EV prices higher. Because of the supply shortages affecting the car market recently, some economists warn that an influx of additional vehicle incentive money could be pocketed by car dealers and manufacturers through higher prices. Proponents argue those concerns should fade as automakers ramp up production to comply with requirements that manufacturers sell increasing percentages of zero-emission vehicles, starting with 35% in 2026 of new car sales until they reach 100% by 2035.

For one thing, if there are subsidies the price of goods will go up, along with discounts disappearing. For another, there may just be a new paradigm in vehicle sales post-COVID, where there are not as many cars on lots. We’re hearing it may end up being that dealers have a 10 day supply, instead of months and months worth of cars. Don’t have what you want? Wait for something in shipping or build status. If they think they’re going to get those billions, well, look at how well the cap and trade scheme is working. And the marijuana scheme. Both are seeing way, way less than anticipated in tax revenue. But, hey, this is the state which started a bullet train scheme, which not many would ride. The initial cost was $33 billion. It’s now over $105 billion. And still not operational.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

5 Responses to “LA Times Editorial Board Comes Out Against Prop 30, Taxing The Rich To Subsidize EVs”

  1. Hairy says:

    Total tax revenue from pot is now over 4 billion dollars.

  2. Bob says:

    Have any of these greenies stopped to realize the fact that there is not enough raw material – world wide – to manufacture enough batteries for those millions and millions of cars and trucks?

    Perhaps the mass of braying green-loving sheep haven’t, but the PTB have. That’s why we are starting to hear things like “You will own nothing and love it”. That includes the greenie goal of no private vehicles for us, only mass transportation…. Streetcars, busses, bicycles.

    The rich and powerful – the Elite – like the ones that vacation on Marthas Vineyard, only they will have a private vehicle (yacht, limousine, private jet) to roam about anywhere. anytime.

    One unintended consequence of that: Not enough gas taxes to maintain our national roadway system. The roads almost everywhere will crumble into ruin. No problem tho, the elites will have their many private modes of transportation to gad about the country in.

    Don’t even start to think that the unwashed masses that will have have been herded into those massive monolithic apartment structures (like the ones you see in China) will be able to pay enough taxes to maintain the present road system. Those flyover deplorables will have only enough money to barely survive.

    Oops… wait. Most of the airports will crumble into ruin also, since the masses will no longer be able to fly anywhere. Train stations also – no more cross-country travel for the average Joe – the remnant of the train system that survives will be used for hauling heavy tonnage freight only.

    I suppose the elites will need private helicopters so they can go from their walled-in mansions to their walled-in elitist destinations. But they won’t be electric battery powered helicopters, the batteries are too heavy.

    So there will always be fossil fuels, but only for the privileged.

    But not you peasant. Definitely not you.

    • Doom and Gloom says:

      That’s why we are starting to hear things like “You will own nothing and love it”. That includes the greenie goal of no private vehicles for us, only mass transportation…. Streetcars, busses, bicycles.

      The rich and powerful – the Elite – like the ones that vacation on Marthas Vineyard, only they will have a private vehicle (yacht, limousine, private jet) to roam about anywhere. anytime.

      To understand why the left is terrified of TRUMP and the PATRIOTS.

      Army leaders and high-ranking officials were convinced that if Tsar Nicholas II abdicated, the domestic unrest would subside. Nicholas agreed and stepped down, ushering in a new government led by the Russian Duma (parliament) which became the Russian Provisional Government. This government was dominated by the interests of prominent capitalists, as well as the Russian nobility and aristocracy.

      In response to these developments, grassroots community assemblies (called Soviets) were formed.

      Today in the USA we see the soviets forming among the BLM, Antifa, Patriots, Militia and others. It is why the FBI, CIA and the ELITES frantically are attempting to crush TRUMP and the Patriots.

      America is shaping up and looking terrifyingly like Russia Circa 1915-1920 when they fought a civil war and forced the monarchy to step down.

      Many Monarchies around the world today are facing the same grass roots rebellions in their own ranks which is why they subscribe to the ridiculous idea of AGW because they are now grasping at straws to remain relevant. But they will fail. In the end they will be brought down just as the CZAR of Russia abdicated to no avail.

    • alanstorm says:

      Have any of these greenies stopped to realize the fact that there is not enough raw material – world wide – to manufacture enough batteries for those millions and millions of cars and trucks?

      When was the last time a green fanatic stopped to realize anything concerning reality?

      I can’t remember either. It’s ironic that their attitude is basically “God will provide” when it comes down to it.

  3. alanstorm says:

    LA Times Editorial Board Comes Out Against Prop 30, Taxing The Rich To Subsidize EVs

    How is this possible?

    Lefty dimwits (BIRM) always want the “rich”* to pay their “fair share”*, don’t they?

    And don’t they love EVs? Especially those supplied by the taxpayer and fueled with coal?

    The sum total of common sense in the LA basin isn’t sufficient to come up with this article.

    * – never defined, but it always excluded themselves

    ** – never defined either, but it’s always more somehow.

Pirate's Cove