Tesla is already selling all the cars they can make. If the goal is a higher percentage of electric cars on the road, subsidizing them won't help. The more important thing is to incentivize other manufacturers to produce more electric vehicles.
Of course this is predicting the future. Nobody does that well. In a few years we will have facts, but that doesn't say much about the future beyond that.
The electric version of the vehicle I'm buying costs just a shade over twice as much(!) as the ICE version.
I'm not fine paying more than twice as much for a product that in many respects is "less good".
How much does Tesla pre-compensate for the maintenance they won't authorize others to do?
I can take pretty much any kind of car to my local independent place - which happens to be less than 1/2 mile away - and they'll fix it for me. They'll stick to using original manufacturers parts unless I instruct them not to. If they think something ought to be covered by warranty and so ought to be looked at via the original manufacturer's servicing network, they'll decline the job and tell me why.
It's hard to imagine a system with less lock-in!
Of course the top-selling electric vehicles (Tesla and Leaf) don't have a direct ICE equivalent so it's tough to compare...
The salesman showed me the electric version. They are cool. For my usage pattern it would even be a good fit 90% of the time, lots of short trips from home.
The problem is that 10% of the time I'm on the road, and that's a bit of a deal-breaker.
The absolute killer is, of course, paying an additional $14k for a vehicle where the resale value will fall far more rapidly than the much cheaper ICE equivalent.
If you're saying "range", I counter that most trips (e.g. most commutes) are well within the range limits of current BEVs.
"Most trips" doesn't work, the EV proponents want a ban on all ICE cars. Which would force part of the population to buy a truck and commute with it.
I think this is a symptom of a larger problem and despite the fact that people have this issue as of now should not strongly colour our perception of what's possible.
If you're commuting more than 2hrs to work by car then not only are you wasting a large percentage of your own life, but you're also harming the environment. It should not be a "given" that it's A) normal, B) done by a large portion of the population, C) hampering the endeavours to adopt vehicles that allow for a more sustainable energy acquisition.
Losing the ability to do a road trip? yeah, I buy that as a concern. But if you're one of the people affected by the range limitations of current EV's for commuting (one-way) then I have nothing but pity for you and I sincerely hope you either enjoy it or that your life improves (not being condescending, I really hope it gets better for you)
Edit: colder climates will have a lot of problems adopting EVs, if ever on a mass scale.
I've got an EV in Minneapolis (colder than Toronto but less crowded) and I love it. So does every EV owner I've ever met.
Politics is all about compromise. You actually have to start out at an extreme position so that when you meet in the middle at the end, it's still somewhat reasonable.
There will be bans on ICE cars at some point, but with a lot of footnotes.
Overall it all revolves, around energy density, inability to store electricity efficiently, charge times and battery degradation (lots of them are not produced in very renewable manner)