California, soon after they passed a sweeping bill to ban the sale of all new gas-powered vehicles by 2035, with car manufacturers already in compliance, the state is now leapfrogging that and seeks to pay residents who do not own a car.
The Bill was quietly passed on August 31st, with almost a 100% sweeping passage in both the state congress and senate, which will plans to pay residents $1,000 as a refundable tax credit for not owning a car, mainly targeted at lower-income families and persons in the state.
The tax credit will be made available to single-filers earning up to $40,000 annually, and $60,000 for joint-filers. ‘And, because the tax credit is refundable, Golden State residents can claim the full amount even if they don’t have $1,000 in tax liability,’ The Washington Post notes.
SB 457 will be a dramatic attempt to remedy the challenges of not owning a car in California. SB 457 incentives folks to not own a car, rewards them for that good behavior, and provides them money for alternative forms of transportation.
Marc Vukcevich, a state policy advocate at the nonprofit Streets For All, said in a statement.
As the impacts of climate change are felt across our state, it’s time we more aggressively commit to implementing modes of sustainable transportation, SB 457 is an important step towards that goal.
State Senator Anthony J. Portantino (D), the author of the bill, said in a statement.
The WinePress has noted on many occasions that the long-term climate goals are not to electrify vehicles, per se, but to ultimately be rid of private vehicle ownership.
U.K. Is Considering Stripping Personal Car Ownership To Meet Pollution Goals
In an essay published by the World Economic Forum about life in 2030, here’s what it says:
Welcome to the year 2030. Welcome to my city – or should I say, “our city”. I don’t own anything. I don’t own a car. I don’t own a house. I don’t own any appliances or any clothes.
It might seem odd to you, but it makes perfect sense for us in this city. Everything you considered a product, has now become a service. We have access to transportation, accommodation, food and all the things we need in our daily lives. One by one all these things became free, so it ended up not making sense for us to own much.
First communication became digitized and free to everyone. Then, when clean energy became free, things started to move quickly. Transportation dropped dramatically in price. It made no sense for us to own cars anymore, because we could call a driverless vehicle or a flying car for longer journeys within minutes. We started transporting ourselves in a much more organized and coordinated way when public transport became easier, quicker and more convenient than the car. Now I can hardly believe that we accepted congestion and traffic jams, not to mention the air pollution from combustion engines. What were we thinking?
Even The Washington Post acknowledges that the move to meet these arbitrary climates goals involve driving less, and giving up the ownership of vehicles.
The outlet admits:
In Los Angeles, for example, the extra $1,000 could provide almost enough cash for monthly unlimited passes on the Los Angeles Metro. (Yes, Los Angeles has a metro!)
While the transition to electric vehicles is underway, many policymakers have begun to reckon with the needs reduce greenhouse gas emissions by cutting down on driving.
The United States is unlikely to hit its climate goals without a significant decrease in personal car ownership and driving. Thanks to a combination of car-centric urban planning and suburban sprawl, Americans annually drive a total of 3 trillion miles. According to the energy think-tank RMI, the United States must cut vehicle miles traveled 20 percent by 2030 to keep warming below 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit (1.5 degrees Celsius) — and that is true even in scenarios of aggressive EV adoption.
Originally, California would have offered its no-car incentive to a much broader swath of residents, giving a $2,500 credit to any California taxpayer without a car, regardless of income, and to households that had fewer cars than household members.
But even in its narrowed form, the bill could set an example for other state and local governments for how to encourage reduced driving and increased public transit use.
The United Nations Says Used Cars Need To Be Scrapped To Stop Emissions By 2030 & 2050
AUTHOR COMMENTARY
Counsel in the heart of man is like deep water; but a man of understanding will draw it out.
Proverbs 20:5
“You’ll own nothing and you’ll be happy!”
We’ve had their playbook in our possession for a while now, so we (those that knew this truth, and/or have been following The WP for a time) already knew that the push to electrify vehicles is only an acute goal. It is designed to bleed out the remainder of the middle class and accelerate the destruction of the broader economy, whilst also over-working the grid.
British Paper Calls To Ban All Driving On Sundays Lowering Speed Limits To Reduce Oil Usage
The mainstream media is now finally starting to admit what we knew all along. The process to get us there will take longer. But, the handlers will achieve this with a mass kill-off, via plandemics, famines, wars, etc.
[7] Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock? [8] Say I these things as a man? or saith not the law the same also? [9] For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen? [10] Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope. (1 Corinthians 9:7-10).
The WinePress needs your support! If God has laid it on your heart to want to contribute, please prayerfully consider donating to this ministry. If you cannot gift a monetary donation, then please donate your fervent prayers to keep this ministry going! Thank you and may God bless you.
It just dawned on me: this is how people gave up their guns, they were given money prizes and other perks (bribes) and they deeply regretted it.
And bingo was his name-o
$1,000 bucks. Everybody knows that metro is as safe as the East Side of Chicago at night, and for the same reasons, even in safer states ….and $1000 won’t go far with inflation & the price of safer alternative transportation. People will be trapped in their 12×25’s in which the windows don’t even open, without power, without food, with terror in the street & no protection from it. What good is $1000 going to do them? It’s a mockery. A slap in the face.
I agree. $1,000 is hardly a third of what’s needed to get by for a month!