
Slate Auto's electric pickup is no longer ‘under $20,000' — thanks, Donald
That sub-$20,000 price for the Indiana-built pickup was a big selling point for the EV startup backed by Jeff Bezos, and was only possible after applying the $7,500 tax credit to the retail price. The price promotion was scrubbed from the Slate Auto site as recently as yesterday, according to TechCrunch. The website now shows an expected price of 'mid-twenties.'
Slate's under $20,000 price tag for a vehicle it won't start delivering until late 2026 was always accompanied by an asterisk, with fine print highlighting federal incentives that were 'subject to change.' And change was certainly expected: Trump campaigned heavily on the promise to end President Biden's fictitious 'EV mandate,' because electric cars are for socialists in MAGA world.
Trump's embrace of oil and gas, while simultaneously dismantling incentives meant to spur the adoption of EVs and clean energies, is a gift to Chinese makers of electric cars, solar panels, and batteries. The US is now on course to own the past while China is firmly positioned to dominate the future.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
'The World Is Set Up Against Families With Two Working Parents' – A Couple Earning $260,000 Per Year Shares Their Struggle With Summer Camps
Many children look forward to summer getting started. After nine months of sitting at desks, writing notes, and taking exams, they're ready for a more flexible schedule. However, these summer vacations are stressful for many parents. They have to plan camp trips and keep their children busy while juggling full-time work. This concern recently made its way into the HENRY Finance Reddit community. This group is filled with high earners who aren't rich yet, and many of them explained how challenging it is to take care of the kids during summer. "The world is set up against families with two working parents," the original poster mentioned. Don't Miss: Maximize saving for your retirement and cut down on taxes: Invest early in CancerVax's breakthrough tech aiming to disrupt a $231B market. The couple, with one of the spouses being the original poster, earns a combined $260,000 per year. They have a 3-year-old in daycare and a 6-year-old in a summer program that has been disappointing so far. Other Redditors shared their experiences with raising children during the summer and how they are navigating the current environment. One of the top comments came from a Redditor who encouraged the community to give gyms a try. Many gyms have activities for children and offer structured activities. The commenter specifically mentioned two gyms that offer a wide range of activities. "Both the YMCA and Lifetime Fitness do full summer camps with drop-off and pick-up flexibility. All day programming, but time by the pool, weekly fieldtrips, etc." If you work out at the gym each day, you may want to take your kids with you during some of those days. That way, they're getting in good exercise, which will let them use their energy early in the day. Trending: GoSun's Breakthrough Rooftop EV Charger Already Has 2,000+ Units Reserved — Many Redditors emphasized the value of creating structure in your children's schedules. Some parents were stay-at-home moms until they saw it was too hard for them to commit to structured schedules for their children at a consistent rate. It's also an uphill battle since many parents in the neighborhood may also have their kids in a summer camp. This trend plays out in many areas, and it gives parents fewer options for their kids if they don't want to embark on a summer program. "We would all be miserable with an extended period of no structure," one Redditor stated. Another person commented right under that post in you have to work to put food on the table, you don't want to overdo it either. It makes more sense to work extra hours and pursue every good opportunity when you are single, but the dynamic shifts for many people when they become adults. One Redditor summed this trend up nicely. "Make sure you are spending time wisely at work and not just working for work's sake. Cut back rigorously on [stuff] that doesn't matter. When I had no kids, I put in 60 hours regularly; as a parent, I put in 35-45, depending on the situation. My performance reviews never got worse." The original poster responded to the comments with some thoughts and a career journey that encapsulates many individuals who are grappling between their work and being present for their children. "My current work is actually closing in the middle of July. And I've already lined something else up, but it's gonna take a little [time] to be credentialed, and so I am going to pull the kids from everything and spend some nice weeks with them at home. But the new job is definitely gonna be longer hours at first. But, it's also good for the career. But, I don't want to forget what's important for sure." Read Next: The average American couple has saved this much money for retirement —?Up Next: Transform your trading with Benzinga Edge's one-of-a-kind market trade ideas and tools. Click now to access unique insights that can set you ahead in today's competitive market. Get the latest stock analysis from Benzinga? APPLE (AAPL): Free Stock Analysis Report TESLA (TSLA): Free Stock Analysis Report This article 'The World Is Set Up Against Families With Two Working Parents' – A Couple Earning $260,000 Per Year Shares Their Struggle With Summer Camps originally appeared on © 2025 Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data


Bloomberg
25 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Mellody Hobson on Capitalism, Disruption and Contrarian Investing
Mellody Hobson, president and co-CEO of Ariel Investments, spoke with Sonali Basak at her office in New York City. This is an extended version of her interview from "Bullish" on Bloomberg Originals. (Source: Bloomberg)

Wall Street Journal
25 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
Insurance Can Be Disastrous
Regarding 'When Towns Rebuild From Disaster, Prices Go Up' (Page One, June 21): It is clear that the rebuilding process negatively affected low-income residents. But the deeper issue I see is that existing government systems had long set them up for instability with policies that made it easy for 'improvement' to come at the cost of affordability and inclusion. Disproportionate climate resilience levels increase the social and economic burden of natural disasters for vulnerable groups. Home insurance is central to climate resilience, and inequitable public insurance programs such as the National Flood Insurance Program, or NFIP, contribute heavily to skewed government disaster response. The NFIP functions as a housing subsidy for wealthy homeowners in desirable but vulnerable areas such as Panama City, Fla., and Paradise, Calif. Using taxpayer dollars, the program can offer artificially low premiums that aren't fully risk-based and are instead designed so that the government assumes most of the risk. NFIP premiums tend to decrease as property values rise, so wealthy homeowners end up with cheaper, better coverage than their low-income counterparts.