Anybody that was looking to buy an e-motorcycle, I hope you bought one last year. The credit of up to $6000 is gone for this year.
The state now says motorcycles and scooters are not classified under the federal emissions tier 2 bin 1 classification, and hence not part of the credit program.
That credit made a huge difference in my buying decision back in 2010.
The world has been flooded with liquidity by central bankers of all industrial nations.
They did this because when as asset bubble "pops" there is a temporary vacuum of money and if you don't flood the system with liquidity you get deflation.
Governments can offer incentives (like this one) during these "vacuum periods" in time.
---------------
Unfortunately the "vacuum period" is over and we are more likely to see the next stage occur which is increased taxes and reductions in the size of government.
After WWII the government was spending 42% of the nations GDP, but within two years government spending was cut to 15% GDP.
Taxes on the rich were as high as 75%.
...so if history repeats (which it seems to be doing) you have to figure these "vacuum period" enticements are going away.
It's kind of inevitable.
Sorry.
.
Fed Signals Possible Slowing of QE Amid Debate Over Risks
http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-21/fed-signals-possible-slowing-of-qe-amid-debate-over-risks.html
The Federal Reserve signaled it may consider slowing the pace of asset purchases as officials extended a debate over whether record monetary easing risks unleashing inflation or fueling asset-price bubbles.
-----------------
This really applies to the entire spectrum of everything going on politically these days.
We have gone from a "desperate" desire to stimulate and create more liquidity in 2008 to now (2013) being in a situation where the central bankers are talking about REDUCING their asset purchases which will reduce liquidity in the system.
The general public is likely "unaware" the turn has occurred.
Tax breaks that were designed for a previous era no longer make sense.
.
Reducing asset purchases does not reduce liquidity in the system. It reduces the rate of growth in liquidity. If the Fed were to sell some of the assets they have already purchased that would reduce liquidity.
Right now the economy is juiced up on 1.5 trillion in deficit spending and about 1 trillion in asset purchases by the Fed annually. That works out to spending above income of about $12,600 per year for every man, woman and child in the United States. Frankly, global warming and tax credits pale in comparison to this as a problem this nation faces.
If you saved an extra $12,600 dollars for retirement last year, the government has already spent it for you. If you didn't, you, your children and grandchildren are in the hole.
That money was spent and it sure as heck wasn't spent to solve global warming and won't be there to spend when it becomes necessary.
Think about that.....
LCJUTILA
Incidentally, $12,600 is about what I spent to put up solar power at my house and we now make more power than we use. Point being every house in the U.S. could have solar with that money that has been wasted by the government on payback to special interest groups and blocks of voters, unions, oil companies, the military industrial complex, etc., etc., etc. Solyndra, A123 et al.
We have all got to wake up and THINK OBJECTIVELY.
LCJUTILA
Apparently with the debt we have "so far" for every child born today they would have to pay the Federal Government something like $3 million dollars in order to actually pay back this debt.
After WWII the US was in a similiar condition and their "solution" was to radically reduce the size of government and raise taxes on the rich.
...and it worked.
So while it seems like "the end of the world" we have faced these challenges before and conquered them.
All we need is BOTH tax increases on the rich and big cuts in government.
Republicans are "okay" with deep cuts, but "not okay" with taxes.
Democrats are "okay" with taxes, but "not okay" with deep cuts.
If we could all agree then it could get better.
------------
As for "tax incentives" you might as well put them into the "nostalgic past".
.
After WWII we were the only economy standing and that led to explosive growth. Most of that war was funded with War Bonds and not deficit spending. The National Debt was much smaller when compared to the economy and we were the biggest lender in the world, not the biggest borrower. That is not the case today so the situation is much different.
The current national debt is about $15 trillion dollars which is about $50,000 for every man, woman and child. This does not include entitlements which do increase the number greatly, but not up to $3 million.
As for "THINKING OBJECTIVELY", I should add "CHECK THE MATH" (CAPS are NOT to be construed as a criticism of ANY previous post except mine!)
I made an error in my previous post...The amount spent by the government and Federal Reserve was $7,911.39 dollars for every man, woman and child. So a two person household could have gotten solar power for the same amount.
Everybody needs to pay more taxes, not just the rich. If you are receiving services you should pay for them. There are not enough rich people to cover the spending and it is unwise to take money from the people who know how to grow it and give it to people who don't. The end result is less money/taxes paid for everyone.
LCJUTILA
Debt is both an absolute and relative figure.
As an absolute we are way, way way higher than ever before.
But as a relative percentage of GDP we are not that different than the end of WWII.
...as long as we adopt "1950's" politics we will be fine.
Reduce the size of government.
Eliminate the possibility of rich people getting any richer. (tax the top incomes)
Those two principles are "biblically inspired" too... Christians oppose "The Beast" and they also prefer greater equality of wealth. So by choosing "christian morals" we can solve the problem and have a sense that there is something inherently right in making the choice.
There's too much "me generation" polluting things these days... the christian solution will work better.
The "right answer" might not be the selfish answer.
.
My beef is - the state is still providing large incentives to purchase EVs, but chose to drop motorcycles even though they are 5-6 times more efficient than e-cars.
I have two cars, but choose to use my e-moto because it is the most efficient vehicle in the fast lane, and it is more enjoyable to ride than my cars. I would like to see more people enjoying them too; but sadly, others won't have the opportunity I got.
Motorcycles: 2011 ZEV Trail 7100, 84V, 60AH, 60+mph, Cycle Analyst, TNC throttle, modified charger. 2013 Kymco GT300i
Bicycles: 2017 Sondors Thin
Cars: 2016 Leaf SV, 30KWH pack. 2007 CR-V
Solar array: 5KW. Cost per lifetime KWH produced $0.073
Bi
The source of the deficits are firstly the Bush Tax cuts, secondly the recession and thirdly the so-called "War on Terror." Unions (near extinct in the US) and "blocks of voters" have nothing to do with it. They are nothing that can't be brought under control by getting rid of all the Bush tax cuts and returning to a more steeply progressive tax schedule like we had in the 1960's.
Or the 1990's for that matter... I can see the reasoning behind cutting support for large eScooters, because they are not primary commuting vehicles for most owners, but if they're going to take that route, it's time to stop building more superhighways that just fill up again, and time to start subsidizing bicycles.
Taxing the rich will not solve the debt problem by itself.
We would tax the rich because from a Christian perspective we want to discourage all forms of narcissism.
Narcissism is caused by either Wealth or Fame. (remember the Stones song... "please allow me to introduce myself I am a man of great fortune and fame, been around for a long, long time, hope you can guess my name")
Taxing the rich has a "symbolic" meaning more than any significant revenue you might hope to get from it. (revenue might even drop because when you tax something you tend to get less of it)
So the "right thing" to do is:
Tax the rich to prevent the "wealth class".
Reduce the size of government to prevent the "political class". ("The Beast")
...the long term goal being to reduce overall narcissism in society and create more equality and humility.
(the deeper issue is that the "me generation" mindset is what got us here)
---------------
After WWII we did this and things turned out fine.
---------------
At the present rate the debt increases by $3 Billion Dollars a day. (can't keep doing that)
.
Vanity is the "original sin" on all of this.
It started with personal vanity and the drive for personal wealth. (1990's)
Then people realized that you could gain fame from being a politician and wealth too. (2008+)
Now the fastest growing area for millionaires is Washington, DC replacing Silicon Valley. (yep, it's true)
...so we need to dismantle the entire "narcissistic culture" and we can start with taxing the rich and reducing the size of government.
But in the "bigger picture" we are going to need a cultural change.
----------------
Tax breaks for specific things like "Green Toys" are just a very small part of a big issue.
.