You're viewing a single thread.
I read a great comment on here from someone that destruction of Teslas on a lot is not the right tactic or is not as effective because of they simply get replaced (and more get made) and paid for with insurance money.
I read that spray painting personal Teslas is great for spreading the fear in media so that people don't buy one in the first place and they sit unsold on lots.
The orgional person that said it was much better with the points than me. Did anyone else see it / can link it it?
Insurance isn't free.
It also becomes more expensive if some damaging event just keeps happening.
And then you take down the people insuring the Nazis and the Nazis
It gets more expensive regardless
Yeah but if you burn the whole showroom gonna be awhile before you can even buy more to sell more Teslas anyway. Which would be a huge disincentive to try to sell Teslas again anyway.
- Buy a share in a publicly-traded insurance company.
- At a shareholder meeting, ask if the company has factored increased political risk, vandalism, arson, third-party damage from arson, etc into its premium calculations for: Tesla owners; Tesla showrooms; Tesla charging stations; car parks that even have Teslas in them; any other conceivably exposed company or individual.
- Repeat with every other insurance company.
- Repeat said concerns in every other possible medium (is there a Lemmy community for insurance actuaries?)
- Sit back and watch people and businesses scramble to avoid "the Tesla tax" of ever-increasing insurance premiums.
Paint ball guns do some real damage to a cars finish. Happened to my car before Tesla existed and the paint sunk into the finish and was impossible to cover up.
In high-school some people froze their paintballs and it made dents. I would never suggest it.
It's the same tactic as getting rid of pigeons. You don't destroy the eggs, you make them unusable (plaster eggs). Because destroyed eggs are immediately replaced by the pigeons with functioning eggs.