Electric cars?

[Smurf1976]

Then conveniently forgets the waste of throwing away perfectly good ice with huge embedded energy

Logically the time to change is when the vehicle is replaced anyway.

For mainstream cars in round figures the average lifespan from new to scrapped is 20 years with very few survivors at the 30 year mark indeed most models basically are extinct at that point.

There’s no rational reason to be scrapping good cars to replace them, the fleet turns over anyway.

We didn’t force the scrapping of cars using leaded petrol or which have zero safety features but they’re essentially gone today even for the most common models.

A Charger or Kingswood for example would noticeably stand out on the road today despite being extremely common a generation ago.

Apart from enthusiasts the rest are all gone now indeed even a common at the time 1980’s car is rare at this point. For that matter even many 1990’s models are mostly gone - the once ubiquitous Excel isn’t at all common today despite huge numbers being sold at the time.

 

[rederob]

Classic scare mongering tactics. Where are these 'poor emissions' ICEVs going to come from? Australian standards is Euro 6 emissions meaning every new car since 2015 must meet that standard to get registration approval. Europe, the largest market in the world, is introducing Euro 7 emissions. Eventually any manufacturer wanting to sell into Europe will have to meet that standard, Australia usually follows. We will see les polluting vehicles imported as the world moves away from Diesel and towards Euro 7 emissions, electric and hydrogen.

I suggest you read what manufacturers have said as you appear to have missed that part:

Car makers say lack of emissions regulations putting handbrake on electric vehicles in Australia​

That type of comment has been made many times, eg:

By comparison, Australia’s lack of mandatory fuel efficiency standards means we end up as the dumping ground for vehicles that don’t meet international regulations.​

Smoke and mirrors. Yes, EV's are cheaper to run and maintain, I've said so many times. My statement "I'm all for EVs but not at any cost" is about the cost to tax payers that can least afford a new car; why should they miss out on the $2000 tax cut for $50,000 EVs.

?
Governments are not a charities. Policies should have beneficial outcomes, and incentivising vehicles which are safer, assist CO2 reduction, and clean city air meets that standard.

And if we start giving it to all, how will that help a family starting out that do not have the money to buy a new car?

I bought 3 cars second hand before I could afford a new one. Moreover, I will be selling my present car privately as the BYD arrangement does not cater for trade ins. I will not be Robinson Crusoe in that regard and the market will therefore see lots of good second hand cars available cheaply!

Your first comment does not even come close to answering anything I said there. More smoke and mirrors. If there is a world shortage there will be no more EV's coming here because of a "$2000" tax cut, not unless the manufacturer gets to keep that money which increases their profit.

It does not work that way.

Markets, the people do influence national policy.

That's laughable. Why do you think we have been bypassed? Were it not for EVDirect we would not be getting BYD cars here, now.
Markets influence investment, and investment is centred around making a profit.
Oversaes markets offer better prospects for profit with minimal effort from manufacturers.

Exactly. But you called for incentives for EV manufacturers to bring cars here, which includes dropping tax revenue.

I recall saying better policies are needed. The fact that Labor is proposing to drop a tax component that should not exist is beside the point.

I'd rather manufacturers spend some of their profits to build infrastructure, but if any incentives are going to be offered I'd rather it on infrastructure rather than to vehicle manufacturers sales. Infrastructure can be used for decades, it improves and strengthens the country in many ways and offers more people a benefit than a discount on a car.

The horses have already bolted. There is a plethora of State/Territory incentives out there. That also includes infrastructure spend.

Yes, tax revenue being removed which needs to be made up from somewhere else.

On the contrary. Research backs the fact that NEVs will lead to significant long term savings.

A tax discount that the wealthy can take but someone/family misses out on because they have other priorities to spend their limited income on. Whereas an infrastructure build creates jobs, which creates wealth, and is will be accessible over a long period of time allowing people to catch up and benefit.

I linked to ACT policy on zero interest EV loans. I have put many ideas into this thread that preclude the wealthy from tax offsets and actually enhance the ability for those less well off to buy an EV.

I don't know, is that the same as the School Halls incentive, or the home insulation scheme?

No as those were job creation positive and relatively cheap. Unfortunately the Home Installation Program was an administrative and compliance disaster and rightfully discontinued early.

 

[JohnDe]

I suggest you read what manufacturers have said as you appear to have missed that part:

Car makers say lack of emissions regulations putting handbrake on electric vehicles in Australia​

That type of comment has been many times, eg:

By comparison, Australia’s lack of mandatory fuel efficiency standards means we end up as the dumping ground for vehicles that don’t meet international regulations.​

What emissions standard is that? Euro 6 or Euro 7? Fuel efficiency standard, how will that increase the number of EVs in Australia when there is a world shortage. Manufacturers are pulling the wool over your eyes to cover their stuff up of not preparing for an EV future.

?
Governments are not a charities. Policies should have beneficial outcomes, and incentivising vehicles which are safer, assist CO2 reduction, and clean city air meets that standard.

Governments have many responsibilities, offering incentives for people to buy a car shouldn't be one of them. Building infrastructure for the benefit of the people and to strengthen a country for future generations.

I bought 3 cars second hand before I could afford a new one. Moreover, I will be selling my present car privately as the BYD arrangement does not cater for trade ins. I will not be Robinson Crusoe in that regard and the market will therefore see lots of good second hand cars available cheaply!

Oh, trickle down economics you say?

It does not work that way. I suggest you read more widely and come up with better ideas.

Of course 'it does not work that way', that is why I am against government trying to influence by tax cuts. When world stock levels increase manufacturers will bring more EVs to market, competition will reduce prices, customers will come, and a used market will start. There is no reason for a government to waste tax dollars (loss of revenue) that will mainly benefit the manufacturer. Especially when the real problem of supply is a shortage of stock, not the BS reason of emission rules.

That's laughable. Why do you think we have been bypassed? Were it not for EVDirect we would not be getting BYD cars here, now.
Markets influence investment, and investment is centred around making a profit.
Oversaes markets offer better prospects for profit with minimal effort from manufacturers.

Bypassed? Tesla has sold vehicles in Australia when it was unfashionable for most. The truth is that no other manufacturer is ready, they are not prepared, they have not invested, they do not have the infrastructure, they can not build enough stock to supply the countries that they are in, let alone one on the other side of the world. You and the labor party are being hoodwinked. The manufacturers are blaming others and at the same time squeezing for dollars.

I recall saying better policies are needed. The fact that Labor is proposing to drop a tax component that should not exist is beside the point.

Fair enough, most EV and environmental supporters are calling for the same. I am one of those, I want policy that will put in place an infrastructure that will benefit all. I think that it should follow the Tesla model; Charging stations with more than 4 chargers, in a location that is usable, a format that will be easy to use, infrastructure that can be used for decades by the majority. I presume you have seen this

The horses have already bolted. There is a plethora of State/Territory incentives out there. That also includes infrastructure spend.

Great. Now the Feds can concentrate on legislation that brings all infrastructure under one scheme for useability and sustainability. No need to waste more Tax dollars on incentives for vehicle manufacturers to boos their profits, on a wish of more stock to Australia when there is a world wide shortage.

On the contrary. Research backs the fact that NEVs will lead to significant long term savings.

For who? The people that don't have the $50,000 to take advantage of the $2000 tax cut? No. The benefit goes to people like you and me that don't need an incentive. The money is better spent on infrastructure, which will create jobs and build something for all when your trickle down car comes through.

I linked to ACT policy on zero interest EV loans. I have put many ideas into this thread that preclude the wealthy from tax offsets and actually enhance the ability for those less well of to buy an EV.

What is the average pay in the ACT? Doesn't really sound like something for all, I can't imagine a family on a base wage able to buy a new $50,000 EV just because the loan is interest free. An infrastructure build across the ACT would have been better value, create wealth by increasing the wages of workers while they build for the future.

No as those were job creation positive and relatively cheap. Unfortunately the Home Installation Program was an administrative and compliance disaster and rightfully discontinued early.

Relatively cheap? Builders had so much work before the School Halls that there became a shortage of everything, prices skyrocketed, short cuts were taken. Not to mention halls built just to get the grant, not properly designed, poorly located due to space restriction.

 

[3 hound]

Most of the “working class” believe they are “middle class”, and in the last election Labor attacked the middle class, so they got smacked.

Labor forgot that if you try to initiate a class war, you have to make sure the people that you need to support you understand exactly which class they are in.

But the current state of Australia is that the upper working class believe they are middle class, while the actual middle class is focused on trying to become upper middle, and the upper middle are focused on trying to join the capitalist class.

Mean while the rest of the working class is kept in place by Alcohol, cigarettes and consumer debt,

The Alcohol and cigarettes keep the working class working longer, paying more taxes and shortens their years they are a burden to the pension system.

I think your view of the working class is about 100 years out of date.

Nearly all the people I know that weren't born with money and who are still in their prime that own shares, investment properties, own a beach house have a jetski, Harley, patriot camp trailer behind their $130 000 79 series are all plumbers, mechanics, electricians, plant operators and truck drivers, caterers, cleaners.... etc - the working class.

The heavy drinking & smoking consumer debt people are nothing like the working class I see everyday, honestly mate you would have to be an out of touch wannabe snob to think the way you have described the working class.

 

[3 hound]

Relatively cheap? Builders had so much work before the School Halls that there became a shortage of everything, prices skyrocketed, short cuts were taken. Not to mention halls built just to get the grant, not properly designed, poorly located due to space restriction.

My god this brings back bad memories. Criminals, crooks and incompetents took up putting in those home insulation schemes. It was a disaster and so many died in the process it was outrageous

The best thing the gov can do is do nothing and let the market work it out.

 

[Value Collector]

I think your view of the working class is about 100 years out of date.

Nearly all the people I know that weren't born with money and who are still in their prime that own shares, investment properties, own a beach house have a jetski, Harley, patriot camp trailer behind their $130 000 79 series are all plumbers, mechanics, electricians, plant operators and truck drivers, caterers, cleaners.... etc - the working class.

The heavy drinking & smoking consumer debt people are nothing like the working class I see everyday, honestly mate you would have to be an out of touch wannabe snob to think the way you have described the working class.

Most Tradesmen, That own shares and investment properties would be Middle class not working class.

The “working class” label generally refers to low skill workers or low income jobs and also most other people living pay check to pay check who would drop into the welfare class (underclass) if they stopped working. (Alcohol, cigarettes and consumer debt could stop a tradesman joining the middle class and staying working class though if it prevents him growing his business or investing)

If you are a successful Tradesman, you are probably part business man maybe even employing others, have a decent superannuation, own your own home, have other investments and are not living pay check to pay check, so wouldn’t be classed as working class they would be middle class at the lowest, and as their super and other investments grow they would be becoming more capitalist class.

The biggest test is if someone stopped working, how long would they last before needing welfare eg the dole or the pension? if the answer is less than a month, they are definitely working class, if the answer is never need welfare because of super and other personal assets they are definitely capitalist class, middle class are the people somewhere in the middle between the paycheck to paycheck people and the financially free.

 

[rederob]

What emmisions standard is that? Euro 6 or Euro 7?

Governments have many responsibilities, offering incentives for people to buy a car shouldn't be one of them. Building infrastructure for the benefit of the people and to strengthen a country for future generations.

Oh, trickle down economics you say?

Of course 'it does not work that way', that is why I am against government trying to influence by tax cuts. manufacturers will be bringing more EVs to market, competition will bring down prices, customers will come, a used market will be start. There is no reason for a government to waste tax dollars (loss of revenue) that will mainly benefit the manufacturer. Especially when the real problem of supply is a shortage of stock, not the BS reason of emission rules.

Bypassed? Tesla has sold vehicles in Australia when it was unfashionable for most. The truth is that no other manufacturer is ready, they are not prepared, they have not invested, they do not have the infrastructure, they can not build enough stock to supply the countries that they are in, let alone one on the other side of the world. You and the labor party are being hoodwinked. The manufacturers are blaming others and at the same time squeezing for dollars.

Fair enough, most EV and environmental supporters are calling for the same. I am one of those, I want policy that will put in place an infrastructure that will benefit all. I think that it should follow the Tesla model.


Great. Now the Feds can concentrate on legislation that brings all infrastructure under one scheme for useability and sustainability. No need to waste more Tax dollars on incentives for vehicle manufacturers to boos their profits, on a wish of more stock to Australia when there is a world wide shortage.

For who? The people that don't have the $50,000 to take advantage of the $2000 tax cut? No. The benefit goes to people like you and me that don't need an incentive. The money is better spent on infrastructure, which will create jobs and build something for all when your trickle down car comes through.

What is the average pay in the ACT? Doesn't really sound like something for all, I can't imagine a family on a base wage able to buy a new $50,000 EV just because the loan is interest free. An infrastructure build across the ACT would have been better value, create wealth by increasing the wages of workers while they build for the future.

Relatively cheap? Builders had so much work before the School Halls that there became a shortage of everything, prices skyrocketed, short cuts were taken. Not to mention halls built just to get the grant, not properly designed, in the wrong are.

C'mon John, your replies are weak at best.
First, it's irrelevant as to whose "emission standard" as manufacturers are basing their decision on what we have compared to other nations. That is, they decide and have made clear why.
Second, in the absence of federal policies, States/territories have offered incentives. And the infrastructure is for a select few who are wealthy EV buyers ATM, so it seems to run counter your points. Nevertheless, the whole issue of how NEV adoption can or should be supported remains a dogs breakfast because the feds have been neglectful and incompetent. It's covid all over again where the States championed what needed to be done.
Third, owning a new car is not a necessity for those less well off. That has nothing to do with trickle down economics, but the reality is that even-cheaper second hand cars will be an outcome.
Fourth, stop banging on about federal tax cuts as there have not been any. And if they do come then I have pointed out that they actually derive a benefit rather than a loss.
Fifth, manufacturers gain nothing financially from tax offsets as they would otherwise recoup any taxes paid from actual sales made.
Sixth, why don't you believe what manufactures and industry say about why our market is as it is?
Seventh, you keep overlooking that other markets have considerable choice by comparison. Given the depth and variety of vehicle dealerships in Australia your point about manufacturers not being prepared or ready does not wash!
Eighth, your point about manufacturers boosting their profits has no reasoned basis. We are a pitifully small market and manufacturers will do much better elsewhere, and they are!
Ninth, the long term savings are to national and state coffers by virtue of the benefits I spelled out earlier. For example, the higher level of electronic safety features of most NEVs will lead to fewer deaths, lesser injuries, and greater productivity.
Tenth, do some research on how many people, irrespective of income, borrow to buy cars. In this case the ACT loan is specifically targeted to those who are less likely to buy an EV, and the loan could make the difference. Your point about the wage levels of those working in the ACT was a sideshow.
Eleventh, JobKeeper cost 108B and no jobs were created. The HIP cost under 2B and was supposed to create 9,600, but was cut short so created a lesser number.

 

[3 hound]

Most Tradesmen, That own shares and investment properties would be Middle class not working class.

The “working class” label generally refers to low skill workers or low income jobs and also most other people living pay check to pay check who would drop into the welfare class (underclass) if they stopped working.

If you are a successful Tradesman, you are probably part business man maybe even employing others, have a decent superannuation, own your own home, have other investments and are not living pay check to pay check, so wouldn’t be classed as working class they would be middle class at the lowest, and as their super and other investments grow they would be becoming more capitalist class.

The biggest test is if someone stopped working, how long would they last before needing welfare eg the dole or the pension? if the answer is less than a month, they are definitely working class, if the answer is never need welfare because of super and other personal assets they are definitely capitalist class, middle class are the people somewhere in the middle between the paycheck to paycheck people and the financially free.

View attachment 140304

I don't know what class or if that concept makes much sense anymore despite what the neat infographic says.

I do know the people that are cashed to the eyeballs and have assets in my experience are not tertiary trained and they don't vote for Labour. In fact the Labour party treats these people with utter contempt as evidenced in the last federal election.

 

[Value Collector]

I don't know what class or if that concept makes much sense anymore despite what the neat infographic says.

I do know the people that are cashed to the eyeballs and have assets in my experience are not tertiary trained and they don't vote for Labour. In fact the Labour party treats these people with utter contempt as evidenced in the last federal election.

If they are cashed up to their eyeballs, they aren’t working class, regardless of their training level, they would be one of the higher classes perhaps even capitalist class, hence why they probably don’t vote labour. as I said the biggest test is how long you can survive if you stop working, I myself am in the capitalist class because of my asset level but never went to university or did any trade (unless you class being a soldier a trade)

1, Working class are people that rely on working eg paycheck to paycheck types.

2, Capitalist class don’t rely on working, due to being capital owners.

Middle class are in the middle of those two obviously, eg not at the top yet, but not close to the bottom either that’s why they are called the middle because they either are accumulating assets that are pulling them closer to being in the capitalist class or have skills or work ethic that allow them to earn at levels above the average working class people.

As I said though, alcohol or cigarettes and consumer debt can stop even a highly skilled person from joining the middle class if it prevents them accumulating assets or growing their business.

 

[Boggo]

And everyone gets paid by a capitalist, either directly or indirectly.

 

[3 hound]

everyone gets paid by a capitalist

Welfare and stimulus is neither paid for capitalists or taxes (indirect).

In 2022 and for some time now these things are "paid" for by entering digits on a keyboard and into a spreadsheet/balance sheet.

 

[JohnDe]

C'mon John, your replies are weak at best.

That's a great way to end a debate.

Strange how you will believe Volkswagen Group Australia’s managing director Michael Bartsch reasoning for VW's lack of EVs in Australia and his sudden expertise in emission standards. Especially after the Volkswagen emissions scandal where they lied to the whole world for years, possibly causing health issues and shortened life expectancy for millions of people across the globe.

First, it's irrelevant as to whose "emission standard" as manufacturers are basing their decision on what we have compared to other nations. That is, they decide and have made clear why.
Second, in the absence of federal policies, States/territories have offered incentives. And the infrastructure is for a select few who are wealthy EV buyers ATM, so it seems to run counter your points. Nevertheless, the whole issue of how NEV adoption can or should be supported remains a dogs breakfast because the feds have been neglectful and incompetent. It's covid all over again where the States championed what needed to be done.
Third, owning a new car is not a necessity for those less well off. That has nothing to do with trickle down economics, but the reality is that even-cheaper second hand cars is going to be an outcome.
Fourth, stop banging on about federal tax cuts as there have not been any. And if they do come then I have pointed out that they actually derives a benefit rather than a loss.
Fifth, manufacturers gain nothing financially from tax offsets as they would otherwise recoup any taxes paid from actual sales made.
Sixth, why don't you believe what manufactures and industry say about why our market is as it is?
Seventh, you keep overlooking that other markets have considerable choice by comparison. Given the depth and variety of vehicle dealerships in Australia your point about manufacturers not being prepared or ready does not wash!
Eighth, your point about dealerships boosting their profits has no reasoned basis. We are a pitifully small market and manufacturers will do much better elsewhere, and they are!
Ninth, the long term savings are to national and state coffers by virtue of the benefits I spelled out earlier. For example, the higher level of electronic safety features of most NEVs will lead to fewer deaths, lesser injuries, and greater productivity.
Tenth, do some research on how many people, irrespective of income, borrow to buy cars. In this case the ACT loan is specifically targeted to those who are less likely to buy an EV, and the loan could make the difference. Your point about the wage levels of those working in the ACT was a sideshow.
Eleventh, JobKeeper cost 108B and no jobs were created. The HIP cost under 2B and was supposed to create 9,600, but was cut short so created a lesser number.

You keep believing those nice vehicle manufacturers that blame Australia for the lack of stock, instead of sharing the truth. The truth being that all the European and North American vehicle manufactures did not believe that an EV future was coming so fast, that they got blind sided by the popularity of Tesla EV sales, that not one of those manufacturers have built a single EV factory, no other EV manufacturer except Tesla has the capacity to supply their own market let alone markets on the other side of the world

Looks like someone and a political party are being fooled by a few companies crying wolf. Those companies that can't manufacture the EVs to supply any single marketing enough quantity, the same companies that lied about their diesel emissions and now try to pull the wool over the eyes of their customers by blaming governments for not having 'mandatory fuel consumption legislation, which has nothing to do with the number of EVs that they can send to us.

You can also keep believing that "manufacturers gain nothing financially from tax offset". No they won't gain a cent for 6 months after dropping the price, and it's not their fault when after 6 months pricing pressures force them to increase the price $1995. Poor manufacturers, they'd never do that would they?

Yes, you keep up those strong arguments for VW, after all they only care for us people and the environment, not there bank account. And don't forget to keep backing those tax cuts for the new EV buyers, because after 10 years everyone that couldn't afford a new car will own a second hand one from your 'trickle down' scenario. All those that benefited from the tax incentives an the saving they got from not have the high fuel prices and benefited from the high resale that others missed out on.

Yes nice of you and those governments believing those car manufacturers, because they are so honest when it comes to money.

 

[Value Collector]

And everyone gets paid by a capitalist, either directly or indirectly.

Capital and Labour are joined at the hip, it takes both to produce all the goods and services that keep our society above the poverty line and keep the taxes flowing.

The good thing about a capitalist society is you are not locked into one side or the other, you can be a worker and a capitalist at the same time. Eg you can be stacking shelves in Woolies and buying shares in Woolies and you are operating on both the labour and capital sides of the economy.

That’s the good thing about superannuation, it forces people to become capital owners, even if they never would other wise.

 

[sptrawler]

Capital and Labour are joined at the hip, it takes both to produce all the goods and services that keep our society above the poverty line and keep the taxes flowing.

The good thing about a capitalist society is you are not locked into one side or the other, you can be a worker and a capitalist at the same time. Eg you can be stacking shelves in Woolies and buying shares in Woolies and you are operating on both the labour and capital sides of the economy.

That’s the good thing about superannuation, it forces people to become capital owners, even if they never would other wise.

I don't now if the scheme still exists, but woolies workers used to get woolies shares as some sort of bonus share purchase plan, it sounded like a good idea.

 

[JohnDe]

I don't now if the scheme still exists, but woolies workers used to get woolies shares as some sort of bonus share purchase plan, it sounded like a good idea.

Tesla offer share packages to their workforce. Some have retired early.

 

[rederob]

That's a great way to end a debate.

Well this effort from you is weaker still!

Strange how you will believe Volkswagen Group Australia’s managing director Michael Bartsch reasoning for VW's lack of EVs in Australia and his sudden expertise in emission standards. Especially after the Volkswagen emissions scandal where they lied to the whole world for years, possibly causing health issues and shortened life expectancy for millions of people across the globe.

Bait and switch in not an argument. VW was not alone, and I gave links.

You keep believing those nice vehicle manufacturers that blame Australia for the lack of stock, instead of sharing the truth. The truth being that all the European and North American vehicle manufactures did not believe that an EV future was coming so fast, that they got blind sided by the popularity of Tesla EV sales, that not one of those manufacturers have built a single EV factory, no other EV manufacturer except Tesla has the capacity to supply their own market let alone markets on the other side of the world

Your point is off the mark as Tesla is not at issue here. We don't have the vehicle range because manufacturers chose other markets ahead of ours. I suggest you look at the post I made on top UK EV sales to get an idea of what is possible.

Looks like someone and a political party are being fooled by a few companies crying wolf. Those companies that can't manufacture the EVs to supply any single marketing enough quantity,

Avoidance personified. Try buying a Skoda Enyaq EV here today! I can buy any of the Skoda ICE models today but would have to wait until late 2023 for their EV! I could name many more with similar outcomes.

You can also keep believing that "manufacturers gain nothing financially from tax offset". No they won't gain a cent for 6 months after dropping the price, and it's not their fault when after 6 months pricing pressures force them to increase the price $1995. Poor manufacturers, they'd never do that would they?

Not an argument.

Yes, you keep up those strong arguments for VW, after all they only car for us people not there bank account. And don't forget to keep backing those tax cuts for the new EV buyers, because after 10 years everyone that couldn't afford a new car will own a second hand one form all those that benefited from the tax incentives an the saving they got from no have the high fuel prices and the high resale that others missed out on.

Not an argument.

Yes nice of you and those governments believing those car manufacturers, because they are so honest when it comes to money.

Not an argument.

Here's where your case fails. EV penetration in every European nation is superior to ours because they have more choice. We don't!
The fact that some - not many - EVs are in strong demand here is more a reflection on what is available to purchase here rather than what is potentially available.
There are literally hundreds of EV manufacturers in China, and apart from MGs very few are yet on our roads here. What's more they range from cheap basic models to expensive long range luxury cars.

 

[JohnDe]

Well this effort from you is weaker still!

Looks like someone knows when they’re on a loss, but to throw out rational debate for below the belt hits, I never picked you as one of those.

 

[rederob]

Looks like someone knows when they’re on a loss, but to throw out rational debate for below the belt hits, I never picked you as one of those.

You keep raising irrelevances and cannot address the key issues.
Moreover, you don't want to believe what industry says about our market.
On top of that you want to bring in the topic of incentives, which are incidental to policies.
You have no rational response to the issue of a minimal available EV range in Australia and now want to say I am the one not up to it.
There is a really simple explanation for our EV market today, and it's a total failure of coherent State/territory policies as a result of the fact there is no national policy that makes sense.

Lift your game!

 

[JohnDe]

You keep raising irrelevances and cannot address the key issues.

key issues? What, the issues that only you think relevant?

My point is that I do not want tax dollars thrown at vehicle manufacturers so that people like us can buy a cheaper EV. If any tax dollars or incentive is going to be given I want it on infrastructure so that a lot more people can benefit from it.

 

[rederob]

My point is that I do not want tax dollars thrown at vehicle manufacturers so that people like us can buy a cheaper EV.

If that's the case, show where it is so.

If any tax dollars or incentive is going to be given I want it on infrastructure so that a lot more people can benefit from it.

I suggest you look at the logic of that statement!
Without incentives only those well off will be buying EVs. In that case it's the select few who benefit.
But I look forward to you showing why that is not the case.

Here's why national policies supporting EV adoption are more important than financial incentives per se: