5 ms·

Denny's doesn't make rockets or electric cars, just 24 hours of shitty breakfast food.

tosseraccount 11y ago
Denny's doesn't need government bailouts to stay open. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=elon%20musk%20survive%20on%20government%20subsidies&t=ffsb https://duckduckgo.com/?q=elon%20musk%20survive%20on%20gover... Los Angeles entrepreneur Elon Musk has built a multibillion-dollar fortune running companies that make electric cars, sell solar panels and launch rockets into space. And he's built those companies with the help of billions in government subsidies. http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-subsidies-20150531-story.html http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-subsidies-2015... Uncle Sam would have been better off investing in Denny's.
- ugh123 11y ago
  My stomach needs to be bailed out after eating at Denny's
- e40 11y ago
  Uncle Sam would have been better off investing in Denny's. I think that's an absurd statement. The upside for Denny's is not nearly as much as it is for the businesses that Musk is in.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
- oldmanjay 11y ago
  I can't tell if you're trying to say that only proven ideas deserve investment or something else. Care to clarify what your point is here?
  - tosseraccount 11y ago
    I think you're being a tad disingenuous. If Elon's ideas are so great, why does he need government subsidies? Wouldn't private investment be rushing to capture the returns from these so called "huge upsides"?
    - jblow 11y ago
      If regular gas cars are so great, why do they need government subsidies? Hell, if gas is so great, why does it need government subsidies? Do your research. Subsidies for traditional cars and for oil are massive and dwarf anything Tesla has ever gotten.
      - tosseraccount 11y ago
        Teslas sell for over $100K a pop. It's a rich man's toy. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/397162/tesla-and-its-subsidies-phil-kerpen http://www.nationalreview.com/article/397162/tesla-and-its-s... ... Every time a Tesla is sold, we witness a transfer of wealth to a rich hobbyist (most Teslas are their owners’ third or fourth car), while average Americans are on the hook for at least $30,000 in federal and state subsidies. Tesla is more a regulatory arbitrageur than an auto manufacturer. In its 2014 annual report, Tesla made clear that continued special tax benefits are critical to the company’s business plan: “Our growth depends in part on the availability and amounts of government subsidies and economic incentives.”
        zaroth 11y ago
        Technically I would not call it a transfer of wealth to the rich hobbyist. The subsidy doesn't go to the private buyer, it goes to Tesla. No one will buy the (now used) car for the full sticker price from the private buyer, but even if they did you are not allowed to claim the credit if the car was bought for resale. The buyer is not $30k richer after the transaction is complete. And when the subsidy no longer exists, the price will not simply be $30k higher, a significant portion of that lost income will be eaten by Tesla. (which is exactly what they are saying in their risk disclosure) As a country we have a strategic interest in having viable battery powered electric cars. You can personally not believe in it, but it is a stated-goal from the President on down. What's the best way for the government to help make that happen? A subsidy is the classic macro-economic tool, business loans are another. When we give Tesla $30k in government subsidies for each car they sell, we're simply telling Tesla we'll subsidize them more as they sell more. Rewarding market success is the right way to structure a subsidy if you want to encourage companies to make products that people actually want to buy. I'm sure you also know Tesla is burning through cash at an impressive clip, I think they burn about $50k each year per car they sell, and that's net of the sales price! That's not to say that gross margins for the car are negative, it's just to say that their reinvestment rate for R&D is set to '11'. That's partly supported by the early adopters, part investors, and part subsidy. But it is clear they are iterating fast on new technology, and as a bonus they are even putting their patents out for general use, and undoubtedly driving a stagnant and change-resistant industry forward. Finally, it's incorrect to claim that average Americans are on the hook for at least $30,000 in federal and state subsidies. That is looking at just one line on a very long invoice, and what we're actually interested in is the net effect. So we have a "rich hobbyist" paying $70k after-tax cash for a prototype electric vehicle. First, there's perhaps $10k - $15k in local excise taxes over the life of the car, which is a pretty nice bonus for the town. "Cars" as an asset class are taxed especially heavily, and as you say for many the Tesla is an extra car they wouldn't have bought otherwise, so that level of excise tax is not money the town would have seen otherwise. Second, there's increased employment and associated tax revenue from Tesla in general, including things like their battery factory. Maybe down at number 30, we have an extremely safe car that kills less people, which saves taxpayers money too. Somewhere on the list is a blue bird that 20 years down the line the tech has matured to the point where it is a major geopolitical factor in our dependence on foreign oil helping us disengage from the Middle East and potentially saving taxpayers a few Trillion. There are actually many ways you can start off handing out over $30k per vehicle but end up in the black!
- woah 11y ago
  To spur research and development of grand slam breakfasts?
  - Tiksi 11y ago
    I can't say I'd be opposed to this.
- hamitron 11y ago
  You're probably being a bit facetious here, but I'm not sure why you think investing in reusable rockets, highly efficient batteries, and renewable energy is less important than government investment in a 24 hour breakfast chain.
- jfoutz 11y ago
  I started going of on a tangent about tipped employee minimum wage and food subsidies, but realized that was dumb. Uncle Sam would be better off not buying rockets from Russia.
  - hirsin 11y ago
    Although I see what you mean, it's worth noting that Elon tried to do exactly that. http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-elon-musk-spacex/ http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-elon-musk-spacex/
knodi123 11y ago
their pancakes are better than I can figure out how to achieve. now if only they had real syrup...
- zaroth 11y ago
  It's all in the heat level and seasoning of the cooking surface. It definitely isn't the ingredients or technique, as those would tend to increase COGS :-)
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

Denny's doesn't need government bailouts to stay open. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=elon%20musk%20survive%20on%20government%20subsidies&t=ffsb https://duckduckgo.com/?q=elon%20musk%20survive%20on%20gover... Los Angeles entrepreneur Elon Musk has built a multibillion-dollar fortune running companies that make electric cars, sell solar panels and launch rockets into space. And he's built those companies with the help of billions in government subsidies. http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-subsidies-20150531-story.html http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-subsidies-2015... Uncle Sam would have been better off investing in Denny's.

ugh123 11y ago
My stomach needs to be bailed out after eating at Denny's
e40 11y ago
Uncle Sam would have been better off investing in Denny's. I think that's an absurd statement. The upside for Denny's is not nearly as much as it is for the businesses that Musk is in.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
oldmanjay 11y ago
I can't tell if you're trying to say that only proven ideas deserve investment or something else. Care to clarify what your point is here?
- tosseraccount 11y ago
  I think you're being a tad disingenuous. If Elon's ideas are so great, why does he need government subsidies? Wouldn't private investment be rushing to capture the returns from these so called "huge upsides"?
  - jblow 11y ago
    If regular gas cars are so great, why do they need government subsidies? Hell, if gas is so great, why does it need government subsidies? Do your research. Subsidies for traditional cars and for oil are massive and dwarf anything Tesla has ever gotten.
    - tosseraccount 11y ago
      Teslas sell for over $100K a pop. It's a rich man's toy. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/397162/tesla-and-its-subsidies-phil-kerpen http://www.nationalreview.com/article/397162/tesla-and-its-s... ... Every time a Tesla is sold, we witness a transfer of wealth to a rich hobbyist (most Teslas are their owners’ third or fourth car), while average Americans are on the hook for at least $30,000 in federal and state subsidies. Tesla is more a regulatory arbitrageur than an auto manufacturer. In its 2014 annual report, Tesla made clear that continued special tax benefits are critical to the company’s business plan: “Our growth depends in part on the availability and amounts of government subsidies and economic incentives.”
      - zaroth 11y ago
        Technically I would not call it a transfer of wealth to the rich hobbyist. The subsidy doesn't go to the private buyer, it goes to Tesla. No one will buy the (now used) car for the full sticker price from the private buyer, but even if they did you are not allowed to claim the credit if the car was bought for resale. The buyer is not $30k richer after the transaction is complete. And when the subsidy no longer exists, the price will not simply be $30k higher, a significant portion of that lost income will be eaten by Tesla. (which is exactly what they are saying in their risk disclosure) As a country we have a strategic interest in having viable battery powered electric cars. You can personally not believe in it, but it is a stated-goal from the President on down. What's the best way for the government to help make that happen? A subsidy is the classic macro-economic tool, business loans are another. When we give Tesla $30k in government subsidies for each car they sell, we're simply telling Tesla we'll subsidize them more as they sell more. Rewarding market success is the right way to structure a subsidy if you want to encourage companies to make products that people actually want to buy. I'm sure you also know Tesla is burning through cash at an impressive clip, I think they burn about $50k each year per car they sell, and that's net of the sales price! That's not to say that gross margins for the car are negative, it's just to say that their reinvestment rate for R&D is set to '11'. That's partly supported by the early adopters, part investors, and part subsidy. But it is clear they are iterating fast on new technology, and as a bonus they are even putting their patents out for general use, and undoubtedly driving a stagnant and change-resistant industry forward. Finally, it's incorrect to claim that average Americans are on the hook for at least $30,000 in federal and state subsidies. That is looking at just one line on a very long invoice, and what we're actually interested in is the net effect. So we have a "rich hobbyist" paying $70k after-tax cash for a prototype electric vehicle. First, there's perhaps $10k - $15k in local excise taxes over the life of the car, which is a pretty nice bonus for the town. "Cars" as an asset class are taxed especially heavily, and as you say for many the Tesla is an extra car they wouldn't have bought otherwise, so that level of excise tax is not money the town would have seen otherwise. Second, there's increased employment and associated tax revenue from Tesla in general, including things like their battery factory. Maybe down at number 30, we have an extremely safe car that kills less people, which saves taxpayers money too. Somewhere on the list is a blue bird that 20 years down the line the tech has matured to the point where it is a major geopolitical factor in our dependence on foreign oil helping us disengage from the Middle East and potentially saving taxpayers a few Trillion. There are actually many ways you can start off handing out over $30k per vehicle but end up in the black!
woah 11y ago
To spur research and development of grand slam breakfasts?
- Tiksi 11y ago
  I can't say I'd be opposed to this.
hamitron 11y ago
You're probably being a bit facetious here, but I'm not sure why you think investing in reusable rockets, highly efficient batteries, and renewable energy is less important than government investment in a 24 hour breakfast chain.
jfoutz 11y ago
I started going of on a tangent about tipped employee minimum wage and food subsidies, but realized that was dumb. Uncle Sam would be better off not buying rockets from Russia.
- hirsin 11y ago
  Although I see what you mean, it's worth noting that Elon tried to do exactly that. http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-elon-musk-spacex/ http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-elon-musk-spacex/

knodi123 11y ago

their pancakes are better than I can figure out how to achieve. now if only they had real syrup...

zaroth 11y ago
It's all in the heat level and seasoning of the cooking surface. It definitely isn't the ingredients or technique, as those would tend to increase COGS :-)

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]