[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by MSS1LE

This is the only post you've ever made that actually pissed me off. I've disagreed with you, but never been irritated that you held a different opinion.

So let's be clear. You do NOT KNOW for a FACT what the green agenda is. Therefore you have no basis to label my statement as "not correct".

I do not know for a fact. Just like I did not know for a fact that Cali Legislature would pass on putting Newsom’s ED into law. But I was wrong and they did. YOU do not KNOW for a FACT any more than I do what unspoken plans are and you did state it as if it is inevitable. That is incorrect. Nobody said it was the “plan” and there is no evidence that it is “the plan” so stating that it is “the plan” is incorrect. What is correct is that the law applies to new cars not used cars and the law says nothing about the operation of cars owned by 12/31/34.

Originally Posted by MSS1LE

You took my statement, which said absolutely nothing about what the current laws are, labeled it incorrect, then responded to something I didn't say.

Your exact words were “They plan to make it impossible to own or operate an ICE vehicle”. There is zero proof that this is indeed the plan of anyone who would have the power to enact it so it is not correct. That means it’s incorrect.

Originally Posted by MSS1LE

I said 'they plan'. Please provide evidence that supports your contention that there is no plan to eliminate ICE vehicles in California.

I can do a lot of things, but I cannot prove a negative. I can demonstrate absence of a positive and I think I’ve done that.

Originally Posted by MSS1LE

It's clear you're a smart guy and you're plugged into the industry. Given that, it's hard for me to take you seriously when you pretend that there isn't an agenda to tax and regulate ICE vehicles out of existence.

That probably is an end goal for somebody somewhere. Thing is, that somebody dos not appear to be in a position to forward whatever that agenda might be. I don’t react to voices crying out in the wilderness. I’ll just stop here because I am not going to respond to the wack job unsupported opinion pieces you linked. Everybody has an opinion. Very few of them tie to foundational data and fact. I ignore those. In God we trust. All others must bring data.

Originally Posted by Evergreen6

One has to wonder why you’re not quoting actual proposed legislation, but rather spin that discusses extremist groups. Probably to support a narrative that creates FUD about the situation.

This. There are extremist groups and media “sources” on both sides of the discussion. I equal opportunity ignore both sets of extremist.