3 ms·

A) Compare that number to the amount that defense contractors receive for not even delivering anything. The Tesla car works. B) Compare that number with the

by jbooth 17y ago

A) Compare that number to the amount that defense contractors receive for not even delivering anything. The Tesla car works. B) Compare that number with the inflation-adjusted amount that the government has put into other research ventures. Like, say, THE INTERNET. C) Tesla says that it is now profitable http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/08/07/tesla-says-it-is-now-profitable-ships-109-roadsters-in-july/ http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/08/07/tesla-says-it-is-now-pr.... What's your problem with better technology here?

plutus 17y ago
My problem is that taxpayers have the most at risk with this company, but get none of the upside. There is a huge difference between government funding for basic research, and government funding to bring a privately owned product to market. Even worse, since Daimler is a Tesla shareholder, U.S. taxpayers are underwriting tech that is partially owned by a foreign competitor.
- jbooth 17y ago
  The department of energy routinely gives low-interest loans to interesting energy startups because there's a compelling national interest in renewable energy. So, yeah, we're on the hook for 500m. But we just spent a trillion in Iraq. And when we hit peak oil and hit a point of total supply inelasticity for energy, we're really gonna be up a creek. There are literally thousands of companies that get these loans. I invested in one called Beacon Power, they build electrical grid stabilizers based on flywheels -- suck in excess power during supply peaks, then spit it back out if everyone turns on their AC units at once. Great idea. Helps the whole economy if they succeed, not just them. So the dept of energy took the long view and threw them a few million dollars as a loan. All in all, this stuff adds up to way less than 1% of domestic federal spending -- which itself is less than 1/6 of the total federal budget. If a few of them pan out and we reduce our dependence on foreign oil, then it's a win.

by jbooth 17y ago

plutus 17y ago

My problem is that taxpayers have the most at risk with this company, but get none of the upside. There is a huge difference between government funding for basic research, and government funding to bring a privately owned product to market. Even worse, since Daimler is a Tesla shareholder, U.S. taxpayers are underwriting tech that is partially owned by a foreign competitor.

jbooth 17y ago
The department of energy routinely gives low-interest loans to interesting energy startups because there's a compelling national interest in renewable energy. So, yeah, we're on the hook for 500m. But we just spent a trillion in Iraq. And when we hit peak oil and hit a point of total supply inelasticity for energy, we're really gonna be up a creek. There are literally thousands of companies that get these loans. I invested in one called Beacon Power, they build electrical grid stabilizers based on flywheels -- suck in excess power during supply peaks, then spit it back out if everyone turns on their AC units at once. Great idea. Helps the whole economy if they succeed, not just them. So the dept of energy took the long view and threw them a few million dollars as a loan. All in all, this stuff adds up to way less than 1% of domestic federal spending -- which itself is less than 1/6 of the total federal budget. If a few of them pan out and we reduce our dependence on foreign oil, then it's a win.