27
Countries Eye Weight Tax To Counter Public Safety Threat Of Extremely Heavy, Large EVs
(www.techdirt.com)
this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2023
27 points (74.5% liked)
Fuck Cars
9604 readers
886 users here now
A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!
Rules
1. Be Civil
You may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.
2. No hate speech
Don't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.
3. Don't harass people
Don't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.
4. Stay on topic
This community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.
5. No reposts
Do not repost content that has already been posted in this community.
Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.
Posting Guidelines
In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:
- [meta] for discussions/suggestions about this community itself
- [article] for news articles
- [blog] for any blog-style content
- [video] for video resources
- [academic] for academic studies and sources
- [discussion] for text post questions, rants, and/or discussions
- [meme] for memes
- [image] for any non-meme images
- [misc] for anything that doesn’t fall cleanly into any of the other categories
Recommended communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Garbage article. Completely manufactured conclusions on the article's author not even supported by they "supporting" links. I read 3 of the "supporting" are articles and one is straight up an opinion piece, and the other supposed sources contradict the techdirt article suggesting EVs are getting singled out. Its the opposite, heavy vehicles in general, and EVs are actually getting a pass in some cases. In one case the author claims EVs are getting extra scrutiny and the very next line shows that its nothing specifically about EVs, but all heavy vehicles regardless of how they're powered.
Don't waste your time on this one.
You're pretty angry about a piece that shares a few facts and opines that governments typically don't do anything meaningful until people start dying.
Nah, not angry. Its presented as a news article presenting factual evidence. Not only doesn't it present facts, its own sources contradict the author's conclusions.
Its a waste of time to consume it.
...and you're doing the same thing. Heavy vehicles aren't new. Vehicle design isn't new. The outrage presented in the article, and your incendiary statement, have existed for decades. Why are you only now outraged?
I'm not outraged.
Your quote of me is a simplification of the excerpt the OP provided (the corpses pile up line). But if I were outraged (I'm not), my comment about your emotional denouncing of the article doesn't magically become the starting point for your imagined outrage.
I read the article. I read techdirt often for their good sourcing and no pulled punches. I fail to see how using other articles for a source is a problem, especially when the source is supporting a claim like, "pointy cars."
There were other sources for the facts of the article, like the NSC for fatality data.
One of the sources is someone's unsubstantiated opinion. Its fine for someone to write an opinion piece, but the techdirt article's author is citing the opinion piece as fact. Other sources completely contradict the techdirt author's statements where techdirt cites the other source as where that wrong statement came from. After checking 3 sources and finding problems with all three I gave up. The article and the author have zero credibility.
You're welcome to keep reading that author's work, just don't make the same mistake the author makes and passing the article off as credible.