Elon Musk's epic bacon adventures

I’ll bow to your greater knowledge here (not being sarcastic, I’m clueless about US politics) but he must think that the money will help his agenda. And then we’re onto whether or not we think his agenda is worthy enough to justify giving the Republicans a relatively insignificant amount of money if it might help that agenda. Which seems to be something we won’t ever agree on, so am happy to leave it here.

Correct. The money will help his agenda. Its just that his agenda is to further enrich himself not to fight climate change.
 

There are many other car companies who are going toward electrical cars, and without Tesla making a push on it, it is very likely that it would have been delayed for another year or two.

Nothing changes the world by itself.
I’ll bow to your greater knowledge here (not being sarcastic, I’m clueless about US politics) but he must think that the money will help his agenda. And then we’re onto whether or not we think his agenda is worthy enough to justify giving the Republicans a relatively insignificant amount of money if it might help that agenda. Which seems to be something we won’t ever agree on, so am happy to leave it here.
Billionaires give money to both parties. When you give money, you might get invented to the parties, talk with politicians and so on. He is doing what everyone else does.
 
“We were very wealthy,” says Errol. “We had so much money at times we couldn't even close our safe.”


:lol:
Rich yes, but not in the sense as a billionaire or whatever. He made his money himself, he's hardly a Paris Hilton.
 
I’ll bow to your greater knowledge here (not being sarcastic, I’m clueless about US politics) but he must think that the money will help his agenda. And then we’re onto whether or not we think his agenda is worthy enough to justify giving the Republicans a relatively insignificant amount of money if it might help that agenda. Which seems to be something we won’t ever agree on, so am happy to leave it here.
To elaborate on what I wrote here:
https://www.redcafe.net/threads/elo...e-pure-simulation.433315/page-7#post-22814398

If Tesla Is Worth More Than GM, Why Are Taxpayers Still Subsidizing It?
For every Tesla car sold (up to No. 200,000), federal taxpayers kick in $7,500 to lower the costs. State taxpayers in a multitude of states pony up still more. In Colorado, they contribute another $5,000 to the electric car kitty, in California, it's $2,500.

When the Los Angeles Times crunched the numbers two years ago, it found that Tesla buyers had received more than $284 million in federal tax incentives and more than $38 million in California rebates. And that was before Tesla's banner 2016 year.

Can we wean Elon Musk off government support already?

Musk is, to be sure, an ideas man. Private, commercial space travel? Check. Washington to New York in less than half an hour in what he calls a “hyperloop” train that will travel at 800 miles per hour? Check. A new kind of tunneling engineering? Check. Solar energy? Check. Electric cars? Check, check.

As wide-ranging as these various entrepreneurial ventures may be, they all have one thing in common – not a single one of them would get funding in a competitive private capital market if it weren’t for massive (and I do mean massive) taxpayer-funded government subsidies.

A study published two years ago by The Los Angeles Times revealed that just three of Musk’s ventures – SolarCity Corp. (which manufactured and installed solar energy systems before its 2016 merger with Tesla Motors Inc.), Tesla Motors Inc. (which manufactures electric vehicles), and Space Exploration Technologies Corp., known as SpaceX (which builds rocket ships) – had received $4.9 billion in government subsidies to that point in time. By now, Musk’s various ventures have sucked well over $5 billion from government coffers.

SpaceX wins lucrative new contracts to fly GPS and earth-imaging satellites

US Air Force awards SpaceX $20m contract to support its biggest spy satellites
SpaceX and ULA win over half a billion dollars in new Air Force launch contracts


I think Matt Stoller has written a lot about monopolies and govt policies that help them. He tweets about Tesla but I'm not sure if he's written properly about them.
 
It is. But his agenda isn't the bluster about saving humanity. It's to enrich himself.

Correct. The money will help his agenda. Its just that his agenda is to further enrich himself not to fight climate change.

I would say he can achieve both. He’s certainly had a massive positive influence on the car industry; accelerating a shift away from fossil fuel dependence. Which is a big deal for people like me who worry about climate change.

I know neither of you will ever agree with me about this. Ho hum.
 
If Tesla Is Worth More Than GM, Why Are Taxpayers Still Subsidizing It?
For every Tesla car sold (up to No. 200,000), federal taxpayers kick in $7,500 to lower the costs. State taxpayers in a multitude of states pony up still more. In Colorado, they contribute another $5,000 to the electric car kitty, in California, it's $2,500.

When the Los Angeles Times crunched the numbers two years ago, it found that Tesla buyers had received more than $284 million in federal tax incentives and more than $38 million in California rebates. And that was before Tesla's banner 2016 year.

Can we wean Elon Musk off government support already?

Musk is, to be sure, an ideas man. Private, commercial space travel? Check. Washington to New York in less than half an hour in what he calls a “hyperloop” train that will travel at 800 miles per hour? Check. A new kind of tunneling engineering? Check. Solar energy? Check. Electric cars? Check, check.

As wide-ranging as these various entrepreneurial ventures may be, they all have one thing in common – not a single one of them would get funding in a competitive private capital market if it weren’t for massive (and I do mean massive) taxpayer-funded government subsidies.

A study published two years ago by The Los Angeles Times revealed that just three of Musk’s ventures – SolarCity Corp. (which manufactured and installed solar energy systems before its 2016 merger with Tesla Motors Inc.), Tesla Motors Inc. (which manufactures electric vehicles), and Space Exploration Technologies Corp., known as SpaceX (which builds rocket ships) – had received $4.9 billion in government subsidies to that point in time. By now, Musk’s various ventures have sucked well over $5 billion from government coffers.

SpaceX wins lucrative new contracts to fly GPS and earth-imaging satellites

US Air Force awards SpaceX $20m contract to support its biggest spy satellites
SpaceX and ULA win over half a billion dollars in new Air Force launch contracts

Good. Governments should subsidise businesses that are good for the planet. I’m 100% in favour of that.
 
cool. at least the kochs dont pretend to want to save the world and they dont have stans
Has Elon ever said that he is going to save the world?

He has been pushing in a lot of things which in my opinion (and many other peoples) are good (Tesla, SpaceX, OpenAI and so on). The Iron Man-personality which is used both to put him in pedestal or to bash him isn't something that he has created.
 
Good. Governments should subsidise businesses that are good for the planet.

1. There are questions about the viability of the Tesla model when it comes to solving the climate crisis.

2. It offers an alternative explanation as to why Musk might donate money, since his donation and presence on Trump's council certainly didn't stop Trump withdrawing from Paris and butchering the EPA itself .
 
Good. Governments should subsidise businesses that are good for the planet. I’m 100% in favour of that.


they shouldn't subsidize people whilst enabling them to gain twenty billion dollars. same as how bankers shouldn't have gotten massive bonuses after being bailed out by people whose homes were forclosed on.
 
1. There are questions about the viability of the Tesla model when it comes to solving the climate crisis.

Cars that don't use fossil petroleum are good though. Tesla isn't going to change the world by itself, but many other car manufacturers are following, and that might help with the climate change.

2. It offers an alternative explanation as to why Musk might donate money, since his donation and presence on Trump's council certainly didn't stop Trump withdrawing from Paris and butchering the EPA itself .

He left Trump's council the same day US left Paris agreement. Looks that he was genuine in his intention to change Trump's mind. He couldn't and left. Better than to not even try, I would say.
 
they shouldn't subsidize people whilst enabling them to gain twenty billion dollars. same as how bankers shouldn't have gotten massive bonuses after being bailed out by people whose homes were forclosed on.

You don’t like capitalism. We get that. But it’s the system in operation in the country you live right now.

I’m more than happy to see businesses that might help fight climate change getting prioritised by these subsidies.
 
You don’t like capitalism. We get that. But it’s the system in operation in the country you live right now. And I’m more than happy to see businesses that might help fight climate change getting prioritised by these subsidies.

I've got no problem with subsidizing said businesses. I do have a problem with one person making billions of dollars on the back of those subsidies while laying off workers and preventing them from unionizing.
 
Cars that don't use fossil petroleum are good though. Tesla isn't going to change the world by itself, but many other car manufacturers are following, and that might help with the climate change.

He left Trump's council the same day US left Paris agreement. Looks that he was genuine in his intention to change Trump's mind. He couldn't and left. Better than to not even try, I would say.

About the first point - I read somewhere that the life cycle analysis for electric cars isn't that great. They still need fossil fuels for the power they use, and their manufacture itself requires more emissions than regular cars.
The thing is, to me it says a lot that the US govt which has been so lethargic and reactionary on climate change will still subsidise Tesla. I think it's because the other ways, the more fundamental, important, consequential ways, of reducing emissions, are direct attacks on multiple rich industries (coal, oil, gas, pipelines, shipping, power plants, distribution). That is why, for example, there are massive regulations and (effectively) bans in many states for home-owned solar PV panels. However, electric cars are the one solution that does no/little damage to existing industries (beneficial to power production and distribution, and neutral for the others while electricity is still fossil fuel-based).
Electric cars should be the cherry on top of a climate solution rather than the part where the govts sink their money. The money should be going in huge amounts to large solar and wind farms and (if possible) nuclear reactors, massive development of public transport

@Pogue Mahone answering you too.

It's good that he left after Paris but...I don't see how anyone could sincerely believe that the GOP wasn't going to tear it up. They did it earlier (Bush/Kyoto), they promised during the campaign that they would do it (Trump and every other candidate), and they made the appointments indicating that they would do it (Pruitt, Tillerson).
 
Making shit overpriced cars and launching them into space isn't going to save the world
So the validation of the viability of electric vehicles which sparked other makers to do the same is not positive for the world ? The validation of cheap (compared to what the government was paying before that) space platform is not positive for the world? But no, let's hate him because he is a billionaire.
 
What the actual actual actual feck.


What a shit.

What the hell.

People who think he has genuine intentions to help the people in any way are incredibly naive. He's literally like every other businessman, with the sole motive of piling up as much cash as he can, just a bit cleverer as he's able to disguise that behind his so called planet saving innovations.
 
I've got no problem with subsidizing said businesses. I do have a problem with one person making billions of dollars on the back of those subsidies while laying off workers and preventing them from unionizing.
I wonder what their counter argument is to this point.
 
About the first point - I read somewhere that the life cycle analysis for electric cars isn't that great. They still need fossil fuels for the power they use, and their manufacture itself requires more emissions than regular cars.
The thing is, to me it says a lot that the US govt which has been so lethargic and reactionary on climate change will still subsidise Tesla. I think it's because the other ways, the more fundamental, important, consequential ways, of reducing emissions, are direct attacks on multiple rich industries (coal, oil, gas, pipelines, shipping, power plants, distribution). That is why, for example, there are massive regulations and (effectively) bans in many states for home-owned solar PV panels. However, electric cars are the one solution that does no/little damage to existing industries (beneficial to power production and distribution, and neutral for the others while electricity is still fossil fuel-based).
Electric cars should be the cherry on top of a climate solution rather than the part where the govts sink their money. The money should be going in huge amounts to large solar and wind farms and (if possible) nuclear reactors, massive development of public transport

That is a good point you're making, but isn't Musk also investing on solar energy? And while now electric cars use energy that isn't necessary clean, it is something that we need to move on anyway. Oil is limited, we need alternatives. Cars so far have been using only oil, now that isn't the case.
 
I would say he can achieve both. He’s certainly had a massive positive influence on the car industry; accelerating a shift away from fossil fuel dependence. Which is a big deal for people like me who worry about climate change.

I know neither of you will ever agree with me about this. Ho hum.

These article certainly affected (depressed) me a lot, wonder if it will change your mind:
https://www.newstatesman.com/2013/10/science-says-revolt
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-cant-change-economic-system-our-number-is-up

This article explained to me why there is a potentially unsolvable conflict between profits and survival (if you apply its thinking to the climate crisis)
Schooling, medical treatment, housing, retirement, leisure, child care, subsistence itself, but most importantly, wage-labor: these were to be gradually removed from the sphere of market pressure, transformed from goods requiring money, or articles bought and sold on the basis of supply and demand, into social rights and objects of democratic decision.

This, at least, was the maximal social-democratic program — and in certain times and places in the postwar era its achievements were dramatic.

But the social democratic solution is unstable — and this is where the Marxist conception comes in, with its stress on pursuit of profit as the motor of the capitalist system. There’s a fundamental contradiction between accepting that capitalists’ pursuit of profit will be the motor of the system, and believing you can systematically tame and repress it through policies and regulations. In the classical Marxist account, the contradiction is straightforwardly economic: policies that reduce profit rates too much will lead to underinvestment and economic crisis. But the contradiction can also be political: profit-hungry capitalists will use their social power to obstruct the necessary policies. How can you have a system driven by individuals maximizing their profit cash-flows and still expect to maintain the profit-repressing norms, rules, laws, and regulations necessary to uphold the common welfare?
 
:lol: at all the hate towards Elon Musk..

I guess all of you calling him a piece of shit are perfect in all aspects of life.
 
:lol: at all the hate towards Elon Musk..

I guess all of you calling him a piece of shit are perfect in all aspects of life.
For all my flaws, I'm a better person than the man claiming one of the cave rescuers is a paedophile.
 
:lol: at all the hate towards Elon Musk..

I guess all of you calling him a piece of shit are perfect in all aspects of life.

At least the rest of us give 100% of our billions to the proletariat, where its truly needed.
 
For all my flaws, I'm a better person than the man claiming one of the cave rescuers is a paedophile.
I'm just waiting for someone claiming he's more intelligent than him.

It's a real shame some people can't appreciate brilliant minds just because they made a lot of money.
 
One day I hope to have such a brilliant mind that, because I'm a thin skinned rich tosser who has surrounded himself with sycophantic wankers, I feel compelled to lash out at someone for daring to cast doubt on my unparalleled genius by accusing them of sexually abusing children.
 
jaj3akvrf4a11.png


very stable genius