Government forces automobile companies to sell electric cars - and then forces all taxpayers to subsidize the purchases. With mandates and subsidies, there is no free market and that means companies primarily want to make the cars that will generate the most profit, which means the most expensive. The opposite of capitalism.

It is why, like with solar panels, the market is moribund where no corporate welfare exists. If you aren't already rich, you can't get one, and if you are rich you also own regular cars - and a new study shows that you end up driving those more and the electric cars less, which means you aren't even lowering emissions as much as hopeful EPA claims during the Obama administration suggested.

That hasn't stopped government from persisting. A program born under the bloated Cash For Clunkers program - which added $25,000 of government debt for each automobile sold and primarily led to cars being replaced that were going to be replaced anyway -  the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act has never left us despite our being told electric cars are wildly popular.

If they are actually popular, they don't need a mandate and welfare for the sector. And if they are popular, driving miles would not plummet after purchase. Yet less usage than conventional is what happens with electric cars - nearly 4,500 miles less. Gasoline-powered cars are the same while electric cars drop up to 70 percent. So not only is the earth being ruined for the materials to make them, they are not being driven enough to generate emissions benefits.

I liken them to the espresso machine craze of the COVID-19 pandemic. Lots of people bought them, so lots of new models came into existence, and so did accessories like acupuncture needles for coffee grinds (no, really) but now there is a glut in the aftermarket. In California, people purchased them during that weird period when the Governor declared you could buy a pot brownie before getting a tattoo but not get a haircut - or a coffee inside Starbucks. Without the social aspect, people decided to make coffee at home.

Then reality set in. They weren't saving any money and mostly got terrible coffee. People went back to their Keurig or pourover or drip process.  If only government had forced coffee makers on us, it would be a lot cheaper than what we got with cars and solar panels.

With the electric cars, we did get, people are driving those less even though people they don't drive less. Then advocates make excuses, like not enough convenient charging stations, but excuses mask the reality that they're not as convenient as the sales brochure claimed.

When the entire industry is propped up by government, no company is going to build charging stations counting on the free market - there is no free market for the cars. Ownership is fake and inflated. California also mandated composting by consumers and is has now spent billions collecting food garbage which can't be processed. The Governor insisted the private sector would want to build new processing plants but CEOs are smarter than politicians. They are waiting for government to pay them.

And now California has been forced to agree to spend another $5 billion it does not have to subsidize more processing plants, and those use a tremendous amount of energy, so they will compete for natural gas and imported electricity with individuals already paying the highest energy costs in the US due to the solar power fiasco.

People who drive a lot of miles, and presumably are killing Gaia, don't want them. If they are just shopping trip rides for rich people, why make everyone in America subsidize them?