Dude, I'm neither crapping on
Dude, I'm neither crapping on the first guys to market the fine technology or those who purchase them. I'm simply pointing out the obvious: EVs are not affordable by the masses right now; but that is not sufficient reason to be subsized by the masses for those few who have the resources to afford them.
It's up to the OEMs to deliver products that people can afford; that is their challenge; and that has to be met in a free market. Subsidizing anything but research is not free market; and implies the government is choosing the tech preference for us.
When disc brakes first appeared, they showed up on premium vehicles, but they were not subsidized; same goes for air bags, ABS, cruise control, etc.; all safety components that helped society. Yet, those first adopters who could afford them bought them on their own without any help from me and other taxpayers. Why is it different with EVs? If energy independence is the goal, then the faster route is natural gas, based on the government's own data which shows by 2030 less than 20% of total vehicles will be full EVs.
If you want to pay the premium for an EV, then I applaud you. But do NOT expect me or your fellow citizens to help pay for your transportation choice, as it is NOT in everyone's financial capacity to take advantage of the same offering. At least with busses, anyone can use the services whether they choose to or not. You even have a vote with regard to funding at the ballot box; not so with EV subsidies; and at a time when the national deficit is already absurd.
Yes, prices will eventually come down for EVs, but right now a high tech IC engine like Ford's EcoBoost is the better financial choice for the masses. Now change turbos to electric superchargers, or better yet change the engine to split cycle with air hybrid, and the ICE is an even better buy than today's EVs on a pure financial and affordability basis.