Featured Tax Dollars Wasted Building EV Charging Stations in Cold Climates

REA, Rural Electrification Administration. This is how electricity reached dad's farmhouse, in 1948, long long after it was available in town.

Something similar was done for dial telephone service, which reached the house in the early 1960s, more than 40 years after the first dial phones were installed in Virginia in 1919. Before that, they used the old fashioned hand-crank telephones (no automatic switching, the caller told the operator who to connect to, and she manually plugged it in), maintaining the single-wire line to the farm themselves. (I can remember the stack of salvaged insulators. We are still using coils of salvaged galvanized wire for other purposes.) These days, instead of being subsidized by the feds, high cost rural service is being supported by the Universal Service Fund fees that all landline customers must pay, one of those very many itemized taxes and fees on the monthly bill.

Nowadays, a similar federal program is helping to support universal broadband internet access to areas with a dearth of service.

 

Why does anybody go to Wyoming? Tourism. Visiting Yellowstone and the Tetons. Mining too, but those people aren't driving EVs.

The numbers are declining year on year, but tourism was worth $4 billion to the state in 2021. You'd imagine the state would try to attract more visitors, but who's seriously going to take an EV up there if there aren't any chargers? Like it or not...this EV thing isn't going away

A great service for those on limited income. And I recall that the Trump pick for head of the FCC, Ajit Pai, wanted to restrict (or abolish?) the program

 

I think when I started reading I had to look at the source, because this information looked really strange. The source is part of heritage that wants to slow ev adoption.

I don't disagree that a lot of federal dollars are wasted. In terms of government waste fraud and abuse this is fairly this is nothing - $130 Million over a 5 year period to build charging infrastructure in the 4 states she doesn't like. Telephone coverage was very expensive going to remote rural areas yet government mandated that it go. This is the same with charging. Tesla has been not just building. network where people travel.

IMHO the whole package is too big, but it is likely already profitable for tesla to build charging stations in california. I'm sure the federal government could pay them a lot less than the $383M it is allocating to california and have them build the stations where they want and include ccs connectors. That seems like a much bigger amount of waste fraud and abuse than going those last miles, but the author really doesn't want people to be able to drive to Yellowstone in a bev from another state. I am not sure why. But you can probably guess the reason. Is the $130 million over 5 years more or less than those states share of the $20B/year gasoline and oil subsidies?

But yes Salamander the tesla network gets you to yellowstone, but they could get you there more conveniently if chargers were closer together. No need for federal funding to drive your tesla there though, if more people in teslas visit the park, tesla will build more. This federal spending is to get it so you can drive a future Toyota, or other bev to yellowstone. I think if they spent it smarter and let the low bidders do it, the cost would be around $1.5B instead of $5B for the network of L3 ccs chargers.

They want to build more than one every 50 miles, that is a minimum. Allocation? It is the federal government. Each of those low population states have 2 senators, and california has lots of congress critters. IMHO its not about funding the network. California is probably getting the most wasted money in this bill.

 

Mostly, they just go through Wyoming, to get from coast to coast or Midwest. That is what the Interstate Highway System is for, beyond its initial military purpose.

 

The title of the OP article - if one analyzed it;

"Biden Spending Billions on Electric Vehicle Charging Stations Many Americans Will Never Use"
1st ... Biden isn't congress - it's a consensus of the parties in that governmental branch.
2nd ... Spending Billions is the majority amount now that fiat dollar value requires more & more of 'em.
3rd ... "Americans will never use" is often the case with lots of fed spending ... like homeless costs ... roads we'll never use ... military use/rationals ... pork/waste/special interests / medical & other research ... etc. We don't all benefit from each/every expense.
4th ... "Many Americans" is implicit in that EV's will not reach over 50% of vehicles for at probably at least a decade. There isn't a demand for expenditures just because there's a majority. Fed's for example don't wait to spend on social security until after over 50% are old / crippled and/or out of cash.
ie - nothing to see here - move along

.

 

What? What!

I'm not going to get a ride in a B2?


Bob Wilson

 

I've ridden in a B-17 "flying fortress", so there's still hope for a ride in a B2. But advance warning: they are hell on fuel, as in many gallons per mile.

 

The last that I heard... Social security is an insurance program that was to be funded by payroll deductions. It's not paid for out of taxes, unless of course you want to misrepresent the FICA deduction as a tax.

This is a very important thing to understand. When I get my Social Security check, it's because I paid for 40 years between 6.2% and 12.4% of my income for that insurance policy. I'm just getting my money back.

I'll never see a benefit from allowing someone to drive in a private car from Florida to Wyoming. If your argument is that it will reduce GHG, why not just stay home! That's the true Zero GHG car. The one that is not built.

 

In your hypothetical situation, nobody drives a private car from Florida to Wyoming on a regular basis...that might be a once-in-a-lifetime road trip, so I'd suggest the hit from GHG in this individual act is negligible in the grand scheme of things.

However, as electric cars become more common the infrastructure needs to be in place to allow people to make x,000 mile journeys. It's pretty short-sighted to say "Well we've only got a handful of electric cars in our state, so we're not going to build out and maintain a charging infrastructure even if the federal government contributes financially"

On your last point: if we're serious about wanting to reduce GHG, make it harder and more expensive for people to drive the cars and trucks that pollute the most, and make it easier and cheaper to drive cars that pollute less. But that might be seen to infringe peoples' personal freedom...just like telling them to stay home

 

maybe we should move to another thread, but ss is very interesting.

i don't know how to define 'tax', but it was deducted from my pay for 40 years without my consent, and from what i have read, it goes into the general fund.

politicians decide on what we get back, if anything,
idk if the bookkeeping keeps track of totaly paid in and total paid out, or if the money is invested in some type of interest bearing account, or if it is principle only. seems a very complicated subject/

i do read a lot of hype about it running out, like peak oil

 

lol. Are payroll taxes taxes? well the government put tax right in the name.

The money is "invested" in US treasury bonds. I put the quotes on there because the government doesn't fund social security properly for a pension fund rather they double counted the surplus, using it both to make the deficit smaller and to purchase bonds. In 2021 social security ran a deficit for the first time, meaning it couldn't buy bonds or pretend it was reducing the deficit. There are enough bonds and taxes until 2033 or 2035. If payroll taxes are not increased or age increased, then either it will add to the deficit or drop to what the people at the bottom of the pyramid are paying in. At first this will be 80% of current benefits.

I don't expect to get back what I put into social security, I don't think my partner will make it to 65 so she definitely won't get any. My mom did get more than she put into it, but not nearly as much as if it had invested in a stock and bond portfolio. There are no plans to make it act like a pension plan or make it fair to younger workers. Still I don't object to it It isn't a ponzi scheme because the government will likely just print money to give those at the bottom of the pyramid part of what they paid in as taxes.

 

Having attended several of the NEVI planning meetings for the state of Minnesota, importance of establishing EV travel corridors is quite obvious.

Having traveled through South Dakota to Wyoming to visit family, complete absence of DC fast-charging makes that trip impossible.

Complicating matters is the lack of connection & billing standards made worse by mixed reliability.

So... I don't see any waste making an effort to at least break ground on what will eventually be part of ordinary travel... lots of places to charge using renewable energy generated locally and stored on-site. Gotta start somewhere.

 

thanks!
i don't agreewith the plans for stock investments. there should be some safety to them.
we've been collecting for two years, and it has been amazing. no idea what we paid in, or how much we'll get back.

 

Everyone's information is available online once you set up a login. Go to my Social Security | SSA It looks like this at the bottom of the link to check your earnings:

As you can see, that person paid $337422 before retiring. If it were me, I'd expect to get most of that back before I kick off. I've already recovered 85%, but guys in my family tend to die in their early 70s, so it should work as any good insurance does. The SS fund will redirect the $50,000 that I don't collect to a person or persons who are living longer than expected.

You should be getting a yearly notice if you are collecting SS.

I agree that stock investments of the SS funds are a terrible idea. Most pension funds were converted to 401Ks in the late 1990s. That means that like it or not, most Americans are already relying on the health of the stock market for our retirement, with SS as a backup.

 

or why not live in a cave w/ no internet, or phone ... as the OP article reminds us .... that fed investing in electric things (whether it's a Hydro Dam or electric cars) makes things easier & cleaner
.

 

That's a good question Hill. Most people are all for asking others to do the right thing, as long as they don't have to change their lifestyle themselves. Unfortunately, the government is stepping in here. It might become too expensive to drive from Chicago to Seattle in a 3-1/2 ton BEV SUV: instead of an electric train, bus or plane.

 

We got rid of our model X in 2018. Loaded with luggage, two people, & recreational equipment it sits at nearly 3½ tons. During ownership our longest trip meandered through several States starting in SoCal & farthest waypoint was Park City utah. Almost 2,000 miles w/ Mountain climbs. We had free charging on the road - and fully amortized PV roof starting full charged when we left & once home, but EVEN if we HAD to pay for electricity, our total electron fuel cost based on the car's efficiency would it be tantamount to the fuel costing us around $155 in 2018.
Please help with understanding how this efficiency would be more expensive than say - a Ford Excursion or Chevy suburban.
.

 

Aw, you should have read the quoted text. The BIL requires researching a replacement for the federal excise tax on gasoline sales. We might see the implementation of a national motor vehicle per-mile user fee. It effectively would make every road a toll road.

 

Nothing new. Individual states have been doing studies on per-mile fees for the last 20 years or more. I don't think any new ideas have been found in that time

Aside from installing GPS tracking devices (which people would never agree to), increasing the tax on fuel is arguably the best way to charge people who drive the most. At the same time, create a tax rebate system of some kind for business users like trucking or bus companies.

Also I'm not sure the toll-road analogy is a good one because a toll is levied on a specific stretch of road/bridge/tunnel, and doesn't necessarily have any bearing on the distance driven. Statements like "every road becomes a toll road" are emotive and probably just make people mad rather than anything else

 

The new idea is that they are looking for a way to implement it nationwide. New technology includes transponders, cell phones and built in GPS, all of which can "phone home" with your daily mileage.

The toll road is quite a good analogy. If you want to go anywhere, it will cost you, and the further you travel, the more it will cost. That's how the modern toll roads work, right down to the radio transponder to identify your account, track your entry / exit and to bill you.