Administering a policy with a ton of loopholes and exceptions almost always becomes a rotting, horrible thing. Look at tax codes.
You need exceptions for 90 million people? How does that get enforced, generally? Even though no one has mentioned a specific policy that we can have a concrete discussion about, I see the abstract problem.
I don’t know. It sounds like you’re just annoyed at the thought of some regulation getting in the way of you and your car, and will come up with random arguments against it.
I was actually thinking of writing "as a non-driver..." at the beginning of my post. Dude. I'm 20 and I don't own a car, I take public transit and bike everywhere. But I also have traveled to rural areas and I see how they use automobiles and it doesn't seem feasible to implement a system like this to me.
Well, when you decided it's your business to judge what car I should be buying, based on your perception of my needs and wants, it did feel a bit annoying.
Just because 90 million is a minority doesn't make 90 million insignificant. This is a difficult problem to solve. Recognizing that first and foremost will bring you down the path of:
1. We need a solution for actual urban populations
2. We also need a solution for the 90 million that don't fall under solution 1
3. and finally, we shouldn't be forcing people to buy specific cars. Not saying EV are bad, just that the market needs to start being more competetive, and automakers need to care more. People tend to follow the crowd, if lawmakers were serious about the environment, automakers would have a harder time continuing selling new cars every year(waste), and even more so non electric vehicles.
I think there will still be a niche market for ICE vehicles for a very long time, but people who are not "car people" would very easily be driving EVs if they were more popular. Most won't notice the difference.
This is an important pragmatic point that reminded me of a study that tried to change people's behavior as it related to environmental impact. As I remember it, they tried three approaches:
1) Communicating the benefits of the change (e.g., look how much money you'd save)
2) Shaming the current behavior (e.g., look how much damage you're creating in the environment)
3) Communicating that a large proportion of your neighbors have already changed their behavior
The only one that effectively made any difference in people's behavior was #3
You need exceptions for 90 million people? How does that get enforced, generally? Even though no one has mentioned a specific policy that we can have a concrete discussion about, I see the abstract problem.