German Resolution to ban ICE engines by 2030 passes

[John___Angela]

It will be interesting to see how this affects availability of chassis for class C and B motorhomes. Still thirteen years away but right about then we will be downsizing to a small B class. Might be interesting.

This is the only English article I could find on the article. The German article is more encompassing. This follows Norways 2025 and Hollands 2026 plans for the same thing although the details are different.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/future-cars/news/a31097/german-government-votes-to-ban-internal...

[Bumpyroad]

qtla9111 wrote:

Bumpyroad wrote:

qtla9111 wrote:


Even in Mexico we are seeing a lot of electric vehicles, hybrids and solar has become the in thing for residential use.

But, most people aren't much interested in clean air or water.

nonsense, and the air quality in Mexico City is perhaps the worst I have ever seen. but I/we want decent air and water quality, just don't think the greenies are approaching it from the right direction, carbon credits, etc.
bumpy

You don't know a lot about Mexico do you. Nonsense.

well I did notice that many/most/all houses had a "propane"??? tank on the roof that according to my boss who was born in Mexico all leaked to a degree. but here's your chance to educate me, what is the AQI in mexico city right now?
bumpy

[qtla9111]

Bumpyroad wrote:

qtla9111 wrote:


Even in Mexico we are seeing a lot of electric vehicles, hybrids and solar has become the in thing for residential use.

But, most people aren't much interested in clean air or water.

nonsense, and the air quality in Mexico City is perhaps the worst I have ever seen. but I/we want decent air and water quality, just don't think the greenies are approaching it from the right direction, carbon credits, etc.
bumpy

You don't know a lot about Mexico do you. Nonsense.

[Bumpyroad]

qtla9111 wrote:


Even in Mexico we are seeing a lot of electric vehicles, hybrids and solar has become the in thing for residential use.

But, most people aren't much interested in clean air or water.

nonsense, and the air quality in Mexico City is perhaps the worst I have ever seen. but I/we want decent air and water quality, just don't think the greenies are approaching it from the right direction, carbon credits, etc.
bumpy

[qtla9111]

RGar974417 wrote:
Where do these people think electric comes from?Either fossil fuels, hydro electric or nuclear all which liberals despise.There is no way they will be bale to generate enough electricity from renewable sources by then. And what about over loading the electrical grid? Right now in the US our electric grid during really warm summers are in danger of collapsing.Now add hundreds of thousands of car chargers? These people are delerious.

Anything is possible when presented with a problem. Oil producing countries will wait until the last drop is used up. Now with the possibility of a massive EPA restructure and layoffs we can see that advances such as those in Europe will be way off.

Even in Mexico we are seeing a lot of electric vehicles, hybrids and solar has become the in thing for residential use.

But, most people aren't much interested in clean air or water.

[Bumpyroad]

I read someplace, if the internet it has to be true, that the INTEREST on the national debt is the largest expenditure in this countries finances. that is what worries me, the debt just keeps growing and growing, doubling in the last 8 years.
bumpy

[Aridon]

CampbellDaycruiser wrote:

troubledwaters wrote:

John & Angela wrote:
I think the need for tax incentives will be gone in about three years. The incentives are/were worth it if helps to reduce fossil fuel usage. There is no down side to that.

The down side is we are $20T in the hole and it's getting bigger every day. Someone is going to have to pay that debt somewhere along the line. As a US taxpayer my portion is apparently now $166,750.00+; I don't have that kind of money sitting around. If it was fully funded it wouldn't have a downside, but it's not funded at all.

As far as I'm concerned, that's a huge downside. I don't like the picking winners and losers thing. It stands on its own or not.

This is something no one has been able to explain to me: why does "someone have to eventually pay the debt somewhere along the line"? I have loans/owe money on several commercial properties, I just roll them over every few years and refi the debt taking out a few hundred thousand cash each time, something I have done for decades and intend to do for several more. What's the big deal?

It's not just the size of the debt it is the speed that it grows. So long as debt grows slower than GDP everything is fine. Debt is more or less meaningless. However when you have exponential rises in debt, especially crappy debt which doesn't invest in infrastructure or the people, there is a huge problem.

Sure we can print our way out if we like. However that will have far reaching consequences the least of which would be losing reserve status, pricing of commodities in dollars and more importantly inflation. Something we haven't had to worry much about because of our unique position in the world. If we ever get to that point it is over for us because everything, I mean everything will change and not for the better.

Something people don't understand is we've gotten away with a lot by being the world reserve currency. Keep racking up unsustainable debt which is something we are talking about doing now with the proposals floating around DC and our position can and will change. Because you know, we really need more military spending.



You can't keep doing what we are doing. The growth rate in our debt is unsustainable.

Keep going like we are and we are going to implode all on our own. No need to worry about the Boogyman overseas our biggest issue is our own spending on stupid things like unnecessary wars and tax cuts.

[CampbellDaycrui]

wing_zealot wrote:

CampbellDaycruiser wrote:
This is something no one has been able to explain to me: why does "someone have to eventually pay the debt somewhere along the line"? I have loans/owe money on several commercial properties, I just roll them over every few years and refi the debt taking out a few hundred thousand cash each time, something I have done for decades and intend to do for several more. What's the big deal?

Stick around for a few years and I'll show you first hand what the big deal is. You're heading for a rude awakening.

IIRC I've heard that since around 1974/75...... I'm still waiting and I'm glad I did not make any financial plans based upon this particular worry. So what do you suggest instead: gold bars under the mattress? LOL

[Mr_Mark1]

Campbell, I was just making a general statement a lot of people can relate to. Personal finance is very important.

I've seen people who 'like to use other people's money'... funny, those people never really seem to get ahead and always have debt hanging over their heads.

I sleep better owing no one.

YMMV,
Safe travels,
MM.

[wing_zealot]

CampbellDaycruiser wrote:
This is something no one has been able to explain to me: why does "someone have to eventually pay the debt somewhere along the line"? I have loans/owe money on several commercial properties, I just roll them over every few years and refi the debt taking out a few hundred thousand cash each time, something I have done for decades and intend to do for several more. What's the big deal?

Stick around for a few years and I'll show you first hand what the big deal is. You're heading for a rude awakening.

[CampbellDaycrui]

Sure, but what does that have to do with international finance? It's not the same as household budgeting after all.......... Unless you can print your own money of course. The two have nothing in common.

[Mr_Mark1]

Campbell, I think everyone has their level of comfort.

One day, when the music stops, there is no where to sit and a person will lose everything. I've seen it happen to several people during the recent economic downturn. Those folks were riding 'high-on-hog' and BOOM, credit dried up, people stopped spending money and 'voila'....bank comes knocking on the door wanting their monthly payment. They lost everything.

There is a plus side to being debt-free..... YOU are in control!

YMMV,
MM.

[CampbellDaycrui]

troubledwaters wrote:

John & Angela wrote:
I think the need for tax incentives will be gone in about three years. The incentives are/were worth it if helps to reduce fossil fuel usage. There is no down side to that.

The down side is we are $20T in the hole and it's getting bigger every day. Someone is going to have to pay that debt somewhere along the line. As a US taxpayer my portion is apparently now $166,750.00+; I don't have that kind of money sitting around. If it was fully funded it wouldn't have a downside, but it's not funded at all.

As far as I'm concerned, that's a huge downside. I don't like the picking winners and losers thing. It stands on its own or not.

This is something no one has been able to explain to me: why does "someone have to eventually pay the debt somewhere along the line"? I have loans/owe money on several commercial properties, I just roll them over every few years and refi the debt taking out a few hundred thousand cash each time, something I have done for decades and intend to do for several more. What's the big deal?

[John___Angela]

troubledwaters wrote:

John & Angela wrote:
I think the need for tax incentives will be gone in about three years. The incentives are/were worth it if helps to reduce fossil fuel usage. There is no down side to that.

The down side is we are $20T in the hole and it's getting bigger every day. Someone is going to have to pay that debt somewhere along the line. As a US taxpayer my portion is apparently now $166,750.00+; I don't have that kind of money sitting around. If it was fully funded it wouldn't have a downside, but it's not funded at all.

As far as I'm concerned, that's a huge downside. I don't like the picking winners and losers thing. It stands on its own or not.

I hear ya my friend. My country has a deficit too. No easy answers and its hard to please everyone all the time.

Safe travels.

John

[troubledwaters]

John & Angela wrote:
I think the need for tax incentives will be gone in about three years. The incentives are/were worth it if helps to reduce fossil fuel usage. There is no down side to that.

The down side is we are $20T in the hole and it's getting bigger every day. Someone is going to have to pay that debt somewhere along the line. As a US taxpayer my portion is apparently now $166,750.00+; I don't have that kind of money sitting around. If it was fully funded it wouldn't have a downside, but it's not funded at all.

As far as I'm concerned, that's a huge downside. I don't like the picking winners and losers thing. It stands on its own or not.