I'm in the US but if the US govt passed a ban on gas vehicles effective today, I'd be extremely upset. I love my car.
Or am I incorrect?
"Tech" in a vehicle sells, and connected services like app based locks and remote starts are an easy subscription sell.
- Got cancer, which needs expensive treatment? Yep, that's a lot of CO2, go bite dust from below.
- Are you handicapped and need others to take care of you? Well time for traditions of ancient Sparta to return.
- Elderly people doing nothing, but emitting CO2. The moment people leave productive age, they should be facing wall.
The worst part is: you're literally admitting that you're not arguing against the idea itself, you're arguing against what you think they want to do next. It's impossible to make progress if the ideas themselves cannot be discussed.
Come again without a strawman.
- there is a direct connection between the ideas of "let's ban new ICE cars and replace them with EVs to reduce CO2 emissions" and "let's kill unproductives to reduce CO2 emissions"
- this is not because you believe ICEs to be necessary to let "unproductives" live, it's literally because there is no way to engage in dicussions or conversations on an ICE ban without this leading to "let's kill unproductives"
- even though you are admitting that you're employing the slippery slope fallacy, and although we can look at the real statistical effects of ICE vehicles on harm done to people, the inevitable slippery slope of "let's kill unproductives" means that a switch from ICE to EV will result in many more deaths than continuing with ICEs
Is this an accurate representation of your thinking? Your replies so far have not expressed actual ideas beyond logical fallacies (or even "no u"), and I'd be interested in whether this is really the extent of your thought or whether there is more that you know would put you into an even worse light.
Banning meat won't reduce emissions, it will just move them around into making fake meat.
Killing unproductives won't reduce emissions, because their bodies decompose and captured carbon will return back to atmosphere.
All this thread, including GP is pointless, because there is currently no solution for excess CO2 in atmosphere and every attempt to reduce it will only increase it (see carbon capture devices). Therefore there is no reason to restrict quality of life of average citizen.
I've learned that the best way to engage these discussions is to take your partner as seriously as they say they want to. You cannot counter these things with facts, as facts aren't their own basis. Instead you engage seriously and let themselves display the problems in their logic.
A big influence for me has been the streamer Vaush.