Please don't break the site guidelines by going on about downvotes. As they say, it's boring.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

> Calling that a "discount for causing pollution" when their cost is increased by a need to reduce pollution is absurd.

What if the added costs to ICE vehicles are less than the environmental costs they incur?

I'm not saying that's definitely the case or not, but just because ICEs spend money on mitigation doesn't mean they are not still getting a subsidy. You are acting like it is obviously wrong because ICEs do some things to mitigate pollution, which is clearly not obvious.

mitigate, but nowhere near eliminate

+1. So many people confuse CO2 with pollution. CO2 emission is not a pollution and causes near zero negative effects to human directly in the current concentration or in the most pessimistic prediction for future.

Studies show that CO2 reduce cognitive capacities at common indoor level https://thinkprogress.org/exclusive-elevated-co2-levels-dire...