Yes it’s bad. Competing for market share should be balanced and free of government intervention. How does a company (small or large) hope to compete against a company that is being subsidised.
Tesla can then undercut their competitors as they don’t need to make a profit. They’re subsidiesed.
Then the government has also imposed regulations for car manufacturers, that if they don’t sell enough EVs in the year, they have to pay a penalty by buying carbon credits.
Well Tesla sells those carbon credits. So they can undercut their competition, entice consumers with lower prices and recoup the losses through subsidies and selling these credits. All thanks to government intervention.
Basically screwing competition and screwing you. As these have knock on effects.
I would also like to point out. It’s not always so one dimensional. Don’t forget fossil fuels is not only energy. Ammonia derived from gas is heavily used as fertiliser, which is incredibly important for food production.
A lot of manufacturing requires fossils fuels to heat, melt and process materials.
Oil is also used in manufacturing, lubrication, transportation. It’s also converted into plastics, lotions, medicine, electronics, you name it.
Fossils fuels plays a very important part in everyday life. I feel people think it’s easily replaceable but it’s interwoven so deeply in everyone’s lives. Advocating to drop funding and fossile projects could have some serious knock on effects.