> which is a mess of 50 states who spend varying amounts of money on their infrastructure.

That is not a tech problem, which is the claim I was replying to.

I saw your deleted comment about four charging stations costing $200,000 or so. Four petrol stations also cost that much. Nobody is saying infrastructure is free, but phasing out infrastructure is simply a matter of time and political will, not a fundamental tech problem.

▲

quickthrowman 2 days ago | parent [-]

I agree that we’ll eventually fully convert to EVs, it’s just going to take way longer than a lot of people expect. It’s going to be tens or hundreds of billions of dollars to upgrade electrical transmission, distribution, and premises distribution.

Edit: You nailed it, it’s a political problem in the US.

▲

applfanboysbgon 2 days ago | parent [-]

> It’s going to be tens or hundreds of billions of dollars to upgrade electrical transmission, distribution, and premises distribution.

Would certainly happen a lot faster if, for example, America spent the $200 billion the Pentagon just asked for the Iran war on infrastructure instead. It would even benefit Americans, imagine that! America is the wealthiest country in the world by far, it has the capital to facilitate the process, but taxpayers would rather blow it on bombing schools across the world.

▲

danaris 17 hours ago | parent [-]

> taxpayers would rather

I think if you look at poll numbers, you'll find that taxpayers, on the whole, would very much rather not be bombing schools across the world.

Trump's pointless (indeed, highly counterproductive) strikes on Iran are not at all popular, and quite the opposite of the platform he campaigned on.

	▲	rjrjrjrj 16 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The taxpayers, on the whole, voted for a pathological liar. And that is what they got.