"It's probably because you're asserting that the mod down process validates your "facts"."

If you want to claim what I'm saying isn't factual, the onus is on you to provide some counter evidence, or at minimum, counter arguments. When people mod down an opinion because they don't agree with it they have surrendered the point.

When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

I'll bet you are the life of the party, amiright?

Personally, I'd rather stay young at heart and mind....especially when the body starts to fail a bit.

Can you cite some examples of overreach besides vague recollections?

Sackett vs EPA is the one I was thinking of...easy to google my friend.

And I found one from NPR to satisfy your liberal bent...

;)

This ruling arrowed the scope of the Clean Water Act and the agency's power to regulate waterways and wetlands.

There have been others, this is setting precedent in a number of unrelated cases of citizens vs govt agency overreach.

A number of pending 2A cases going before SCOTUS use this and other rulings to fight against the ATF in their recent rulings...some of which turn millions of every day citizens into felons overnight for buying weapons that the ATF expressly stated for years (in writing) that it was legal to buy and own....pistol braces for one, and even the bump stock case.

I'll leave those for you to google.

here does it state anything will be shutdown? This about cleaning up their act which might cut into the constant record quarterly profits.

Well, to start with, it is expressly mentioned in the title of this thread:

"New Rule Compels US Coal-Fired Power Plants To Capture Emissions - or Shut Down"

EVs are perfectly fine for daily commutes within a 120 mile round trip (just pulled that number out of my ass with 1 hour each way @ 60mph) as long as you can charge at home over night. The entire problem for those potential customers is PRICE PRICE PRICE.

Everyone seems to be missing a BIG factor that isn't price.

It's the fact that a LARGE, very significant number of people do not live in single family dwellings they own with off street parking where they can "charge overnight"....

Right now as it stands, they are not interested in EVs either as that refueling is VERY inconvenient.

Sure, but the public demands some God-given right to drive everywhere that is not urbanized or otherwise densified enough to encourage alternative modes of transit like ebikes (bikeshare is in a lot of these locations already, often with government funding e.g. Washington DC's capital bikeshare). There is an unbelievable lack of acknowledgement that the roads infrastructure and city/town layout disaster we have created requires a change in thinking. BEVs are a politically appealing & personally appealing - they are more fun to drive - solution to at least making the driving everywhere issue produce less smog.

You seem to think that everyone in the US yearns to live in a dense urban city, sharing walls and stacked on top of each other like rats.

That simply is not the lifestyle everyone WANTS.

God given right? Well, I believe everyone has the GGR to live however most makes them happy. And for me...it's having a single family dwelling, where I don't share walls with anyone, I have a back yard where I can keep and fire up my wood burning offset smoker, or ceramic grill (lump charcoal)....park my motorcycle...have room for friends to come over and maybe set up for a big crawfish boil, etc.

I'd not be happy in an urban city where I couldn't plant my summer veggie garden and BBQ....and basically HAD to walk everywhere and buy groceries multiple days of the week.

I have no animosity to those that prefer that, but I do believe in CHOICE in the US, and I like the choices I have.

I'm far from being alone in this train of thought.

The public demand argument (it's there, cost is the issue currently)

It's not just cost....it's range anxiety, and the fact that not everyone has a single family home they own with covered parking where they can recharge overnight....and the lack of charging infrastructure in the vast swaths of land between CA and NYC on the extreme coasts.

For a number of reasons, the people that really want EVs....have them, the rest of the country for the most part is "meh"....and not really in the market.

At least not for the present. I don't know of any one in my circle of friends that owns an EV. I only know of one, that had a Prius years back, and told me him and his wife are thinking of getting maybe an EV Jeep in the future, but other than that, I don't know of anyone with interest in going EV just yet.

I haven't seen any in my neighborhood....middle class. I see a few teslas here and there...mostly Uber drivers from what I've observed around town.

This is in the New Orleans area.

While that's true, the economies of scale are lacking.

This may be compounded in that EV sales in the US, in general, over the past year or so, have been down, and new car inventories of EVs are piling up on sales lots as compared to their ICE counterparts.

It seems, to a large extent, the people that actually really WANT an EV, have one....and the rest of the US, for reasons ranging from price, range anxiety to insurance, etc....aren't really in the market for one.

See here .

and

Here ....

I read so many contradicting numbers. Stuff like this [oberlo.com] where Apple apparently has close to 60% of market share in the US, but then reading the article in this post says new activiations are around 33%.

Well, two things may be in play here.

Yes, iPhones may be the most popular phone in the US.

But also, perhaps the phones are made such that people aren't needing to upgrade them as often as they do Androids....hence, "new" activations could be down?

I'm still on iPhone 12 Pro Max and see no reason to upgrade anytime soon....battery is still first rate, camera good enough...I always buy with largest amount of memory available...so, it isn't filling up, etc.

republicans want to gut the EPA. It puts a dent in donor profits. Yes, that woke EPA signed into power by noted left winger Richard Nixon, and only now half a century later is unconstitutional.

The lawsuits against the EPA haven't been to destroy or remove it...BUT, to curtail the overreach by the EPA and other Executive offices have been guilty of in the past couple decades especially.

I forgot the exact cases, but essentially someone bought some land that had areas on the property that during heavy rain times would have a pond...or maybe it was within spitting distance of a small body of water....and the EPA was acting like this was a major body of water needing protections from pollution, etc...and basically disallowed the new property owners from building on the property, etc.

The recent SCOTUS rulings basically slapped the EPA's hand and said "No"...this is beyond the powers that congress gave you and you are essentially making new law.

It's basically efforts to keep the EPA and other govt offices from running roughshod over the common citizen....

I mean, turning everything off before replacements are online is a bit foolish, no....?

I think that age changes you. You just happened to have kids, but you are still aging. I am a totally different person than I was in my 30's who was, himself, a totally different person than the 20's version.

Your mind bends and adapts to your situation.

It isn't age that does it....at least not everyone.

I'm pretty much the same in my head as I was in my 20's-40's, etc.

The only difference is...my body is physically slowing and telling me I cannot do what I used to do...can't stay out as late, drink as much etc...

I basically still have the will/want to do such things...but my body says a resounding "NO"....so, I don't.

Age really hasn't changed who I am mentally...except I'm learning to accept things I no longer can physically do.

Having children later increases the risk of defects and complications

And besides....most of us prefer to bang younger chicks rather than older ones....

40's are pretty hard on most womens' looks.

"Economic Hardship" has jack-shit to do with most of the declining birthrate. Women have more money than ever. If being poor hurt the birthrate, the Third World would have ceased to exist centuries ago. Women choosing careers over marriage has far more to do with it. Those that are getting married are doing so much later in life, when their fertility is already declining, and having few children is a consequence of that. Why do you think IVF and egg-freezing are in such demand? Because women that waited until 30 to get married discover, often to their surprise, that their best chances of pregnancy are in the rear window.

Women were told that they could have it all, the best of both worlds: that they could live like men in their twenties, living the single sexual life and moving up their corporate ladder, and after they had their fun, then they could marry the man of their dreams and have their family. All in a neat package. Except nature doesn't work that way. The Biological Clock is a thing, women have a set number of eggs, and by thirty, they start heading downwards in terms of fertility. Late pregnancies have a greater chance of complications and birth defects. The peak year for fertility and healthy birth is, IIRC, age 24 on average for females.

That and the women in their 30's and 40's that you describe, while having their fun, are running up very high body counts....and when they are ready to "settle down"...the men that are in their 30's and 40's, largely are not interested in them...

They are interested more in the younger, more virile good looking women...either to just get laid, or if looking for marriage, to grab younger women before they get that high body count.

It also seems, that women that have high body counts, have difficulty pair boding with a mate as deeply and intimately as those that do not.

I supposed because, in general, the old standard that women almost by nature involve emotion with sex, while men can largely separate the two, and it doesn't seem to "ruin" them later down the line for marriage or pair bonding.