4 ms·

Tesla got money from California (effectively) for selling no emissions credits to other car companies. Other companies could have made evs too, they were just a

Tesla got money from California (effectively) for selling no emissions credits to other car companies. Other companies could have made evs too, they were just against it, except Nissan which also benfitted for this with the leaf. The 7500 tax credits for buying large battery sized evs helped Tesla too, but people got credits for butingbmw i3, Nissan leaf, gm volt gm bolt. It served a purpose which was to help know kick off a new market and it's being deducted to half in 2019 based on sales over 200k cars. Only 2 us car companies didn't go bankrupt in the recession in in 2009, Ford and Tesla. Ford and Tesla both got govt loans to design evs, only Tesla had finished paying theirs back.

twblalock 8y ago
Tesla got almost $500 million from the Department of Energy. Yes, they paid it back, but that is not my point. My point is that Tesla would not have survived if it had not received that government money. Maybe its more meritorious to accept and repay a government loan than to be bailed out, but from the point of view of the taxpayer (and the free market) Tesla and GM both owe their survival to taxpayer money.
- Latteland 8y ago
  I believe it was a development loan, not a bailout. I don't understand why you point it out as underhanded. How would you compare Tesla to Chrysler and gm which really went bankrupt and had actual bailouts, not loans to develop new products in unexplored technical areas. GM got a more than $20b investment from the us government. I am glad we did save our auto industry in the us - but Tesla wasn't a bailout as I see it.
  - twblalock 8y ago
    I didn’t say Tesla was a bailout, and I didn’t say it was underhanded. I said that Tesla would not have survived without government money, and that is true.
    - resters 8y ago
      So you are arguing that without that capital Musk would not have been able to raise money from the private sector?
      - twblalock 8y ago
        Yes, definitely. It would have been a very hard sell at that time.
        resters 8y ago
        Perhaps, but if you consider that shortly after most of the automakers would go bankrupt, Musk would then have been in a very powerful position and would easily have been able to find private capital to help him extract the most useful 20% of value from some of the bankrupt companies for use by Tesla. Private investors did not want to invest in outdated infrastructure and overburdened pension programs, which is why the government bailout was "needed" in the first place. But if bankruptcy had been allowed to proceed, the best bits would have gone to the highest bidder, and Musk was well positioned to become the highest bidder.

twblalock 8y ago

Tesla got almost $500 million from the Department of Energy. Yes, they paid it back, but that is not my point. My point is that Tesla would not have survived if it had not received that government money. Maybe its more meritorious to accept and repay a government loan than to be bailed out, but from the point of view of the taxpayer (and the free market) Tesla and GM both owe their survival to taxpayer money.

Latteland 8y ago
I believe it was a development loan, not a bailout. I don't understand why you point it out as underhanded. How would you compare Tesla to Chrysler and gm which really went bankrupt and had actual bailouts, not loans to develop new products in unexplored technical areas. GM got a more than $20b investment from the us government. I am glad we did save our auto industry in the us - but Tesla wasn't a bailout as I see it.
- twblalock 8y ago
  I didn’t say Tesla was a bailout, and I didn’t say it was underhanded. I said that Tesla would not have survived without government money, and that is true.
  - resters 8y ago
    So you are arguing that without that capital Musk would not have been able to raise money from the private sector?
    - twblalock 8y ago
      Yes, definitely. It would have been a very hard sell at that time.
      - resters 8y ago
        Perhaps, but if you consider that shortly after most of the automakers would go bankrupt, Musk would then have been in a very powerful position and would easily have been able to find private capital to help him extract the most useful 20% of value from some of the bankrupt companies for use by Tesla. Private investors did not want to invest in outdated infrastructure and overburdened pension programs, which is why the government bailout was "needed" in the first place. But if bankruptcy had been allowed to proceed, the best bits would have gone to the highest bidder, and Musk was well positioned to become the highest bidder.