Difference between revisions of "US/NC/2022/HB/1049"
(Created page with "<hide> page type::article thing type::legislation where::US/NC </hide> ==About== '''HB 1049''' is a proposed law that would: * require any business which offers fr...") |
|||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
The one logically-viable counterargument is an objection to the use of tax money to pay for free electricity, but this ignores the much larger benefits of providing it. | The one logically-viable counterargument is an objection to the use of tax money to pay for free electricity, but this ignores the much larger benefits of providing it. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The incentives to the "business community" which funds most political activity is obvious: if someone is getting anything for free, then said community isn't selling it to them at profit. | ||
| + | |||
| + | This move is very much in line with the NC law which prevents municipalities from starting their own internet (even if they make a profit on it; it's never really about concern for tax dollars spent -- it's about sales revenue lost). | ||
==Links== | ==Links== | ||
===Official=== | ===Official=== | ||
| − | * [https://webservices.ncleg.gov/ViewBillDocument/2021/54057/0/DRH40706-LMa-163 | + | * [https://www.ncleg.gov/BillLookUp/2021/H1049 NC General Assembly] |
| + | ** [https://webservices.ncleg.gov/ViewBillDocument/2021/54057/0/DRH40706-LMa-163 full text] (PDF) | ||
===News (to file)=== | ===News (to file)=== | ||
* '''2022-07-07''' [https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a40543385/north-carolina-wants-remove-free-public-ev-chargers/ North Carolina Looks to Remove Public EV Chargers, Probably to the Trash] ([https://twitter.com/davidgura/status/1545424566360702980 via]) | * '''2022-07-07''' [https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a40543385/north-carolina-wants-remove-free-public-ev-chargers/ North Carolina Looks to Remove Public EV Chargers, Probably to the Trash] ([https://twitter.com/davidgura/status/1545424566360702980 via]) | ||
** Commentary: [https://hardware.slashdot.org/story/22/07/08/2111230/north-carolina-looks-to-remove-public-ev-chargers-probably-to-the-trash Slashdot] | ** Commentary: [https://hardware.slashdot.org/story/22/07/08/2111230/north-carolina-looks-to-remove-public-ev-chargers-probably-to-the-trash Slashdot] | ||
| + | * '''2022-06-13''' [https://electrek.co/2022/06/13/bill-eliminate-free-charging-electric-cars-north-carolina-poor-argument/ Bill tries to eliminate free charging for electric cars in North Carolina with poor argument] | ||
| + | * '''2022-05-25''' [https://www.carolinajournal.com/bill-aims-for-equity-in-fueling-vehicles-for-free/ Bill aims for ‘equity’ in fueling vehicles for free] ({{flag/red|The Carolina Journal is fiscally conservoid / laissez-faire-capitalist in ideology.}}) | ||
Revision as of 20:15, 9 July 2022
About
HB 1049 is a proposed law that would:
- require any business which offers free electric-vehicle recharging must provide a receipt showing the "pro rata share paid by each customer for the free electricity".
- prohibit "the use of public funds to provide or fund electric vehicle charging stations on public owned or leased property" unless gasoline and diesel fuel are also provided at no charge.
This (especially the second provision) only makes sense as a political publicity stunt: reasonable people will decry it, then conservoids will see all the "liberals" being unhappy and reason to themselves that it must be a good thing, and will therefore rally around it. Politicians who back it will thereby gain donations and votes.
The one logically-viable counterargument is an objection to the use of tax money to pay for free electricity, but this ignores the much larger benefits of providing it.
The incentives to the "business community" which funds most political activity is obvious: if someone is getting anything for free, then said community isn't selling it to them at profit.
This move is very much in line with the NC law which prevents municipalities from starting their own internet (even if they make a profit on it; it's never really about concern for tax dollars spent -- it's about sales revenue lost).
Links
Official
- NC General Assembly
- full text (PDF)
