Although I agree with the underlying assertion, namely that TSLA is over valued, the author somehow manages to avoid making a single credible argument in the en

Although I agree with the underlying assertion, namely that TSLA is over valued, the author somehow manages to avoid making a single credible argument in the entire article. I find it somehow ironic that she decries investors as being, "not interested in the things we need for long-term development" and that "While the masters of the universe play the odds, the rest of us are scrambling, trying to figure out how to slow down the looming ecological catastrophe" while deriding a company thats pushing the envelope of electric vehicles and battery production, two things critically needed to move away from fossil fuels. How is it possible for someone with a PhD to write an article about the market value of a company and not have a single sentence about the P/E ratio, cost of production or unit sales? "They demonstrate the absurdity of a system in which the value of companies rests as much (or more) on their ability to tell a good story as it does on their actual track record." Ummmm, what? What the heck is even the difference between "telling a good story" and a "track record"? A track record is just one ingredient that people use to try and project how a company will perform in the future, i.e. part of trying to "tell a good story." Im a hard-core leftist, socialist, and generally enjoy the commie rag that is the Jacobin. This article is trash and the author should be ashamed to have her name attached to such low effort nonsense.