4 ms·

> government-funded company Has Tesla received taxpayer subsidies for anything in the last year or two other than customer incentives to buy zero emission vehi

> government-funded company Has Tesla received taxpayer subsidies for anything in the last year or two other than customer incentives to buy zero emission vehicles?

toomuchtodo 7y ago
No. Also, they paid back their government loan 10 years early, with interest. Compare this to GM (TARP bailout and BK proceedings) and Ford, who we lost $10 billion on as taxpayers. Tesla has a lot to complain about, but they’re not the failure the rest of the US auto industry is. Ford may not make it through this.
- bumby 7y ago
  Ford was not bailed out. I think you’re thinking of Chrysler
  - toomuchtodo 7y ago
    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22542185 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22542185 https://www.treasury.gov/initiatives/financial-stability/TARP-Programs/automotive-programs/pages/default.aspx https://www.treasury.gov/initiatives/financial-stability/TAR... https://www.forbes.com/sites/joannmuller/2016/09/21/trump-should-be-asking-will-ford-pay-off-its-government-loan-before-moving-small-cars-to-mexico/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/joannmuller/2016/09/21/trump-sh... > Ford likes to say it “didn’t take the money” because unlike General Motors and Chrysler, it didn’t require a taxpayer bailout to survive the 2008-2009 credit crisis. But don’t forget: Ford tapped into a different pool of government money set aside for the auto industry during those desperate times. (And those low-cost funds were critical to Ford’s survival because no other funding sources were available.) > Hoping to create “thousands of green jobs” in the U.S. and reduce the nation’s dependence on foreign oil, the DOE under the Bush Administration established the $25 billion loan program in 2007 to encourage development of advanced technology vehicles that would burn less fuel and, importantly, be manufactured in the U.S. Congress funded the program in 2009, after President Obama took office. > Ford applied for and received $5.9 billion in June 2009 (the same month GM filed for bankruptcy) to help pay for investments in more fuel-efficient engines, hybrids and electric cars and also to convert two truck plants to production of cars. Ford is cancelling all their cars except trucks and the Mustang. They took a bailout that wasn’t a bailout in name only.
    - bumby 7y ago
      Those are different mechanisms with different purposes. If that’s the bar to be considered a bailout, Tesla was bailed out as well. Whether or not they met the conditions of the loan is a different story. And while technically true that the mustang is the remaining US car, it obfuscates the fact that the name is being more of a brand moniker than a model, and will include plans for an electric version of the “mustang” https://www.energy.gov/lpo/tesla https://www.energy.gov/lpo/tesla https://www.ford.com/suvs/mach-e/2021/ https://www.ford.com/suvs/mach-e/2021/
      - toomuchtodo 7y ago
        It’s disingenuous for you to argue it was a bailout for Tesla when they have something to show for it (over a million EVs sold, 400k/year of manufacturing capacity, a Supercharger network) and Ford has zero, and Tesla paid their loan back while Ford did not.
        bumby 7y ago
        You missed the point. I don’t consider either a bailout. They were investments to spur a particular industrial goal. If Ford doesn’t meet the intent, I just hope the government was smart enough in the way they formed the contract
        grecy 7y ago
        If you consider them both the same kind of "investments" I propose you invest in me in the same way the government did with Ford. i.e. give me money, and I won't ever give it back. At the same you I'll invest in you in the same way the government did with Tesla. i.e I give you money, and you pay it back 10 years early with interest. I wholeheartedly accept this deal. Do you? Why not?
        bumby 7y ago
        I didn’t say it was a good deal. Unfortunately, the government gets hosed all they time by poorly formed contracts. The government also plans on a certain percentage of these investments not to work out. I’m no more happy about it than you, but the original comment was merely a correction that Ford was not part of the TARP bailout. With that being said, the link by the other poster says Ford will repay by 2022
lmeyerov 7y ago
That's a myopic view of the largely tax-payer enabled Tesla/SpaceX/SolarCity conglomorate. I don't expect a company largely bootstrapped by massive US gov program awards & free passes+subsidies to give equity to the gov despite the massive capital investment, but backroom calls to circumvent public health policy is somewhere between "far below baseline expectations" and "evil". I'm happy we have real civic-level project funding for people who get results, and private citizens reaping massive profits from them. In fact, I think the real genius of Musk & Thiel is to be self-enriching versions of FDR, and the DC prime etc. mess has forced their need. But that doesn't excuse evil - there are real lives involved,.
- manicdee 7y ago
  How do you feel about GM keeping factories open? Or Boeing?
  - lmeyerov 7y ago
    I -- and governments -- are for skeleton crews keeping most factories open to avoid machine breakdown, and essential businesses at whatever they can do safely. Consumer car companies, casinos, and other special interests don't make sense to me beyond the obvious answer of "knowing corruption" and "institutionalized malignant ignorance."
    - xkjkls 7y ago
      The Alameda county order only allows for construction of replacement parts, which can be obviously argued is necessary. People need cars to get to work; people like doctors and nurses and grocery store clerks on the front lines of this pandemic. A shortage of replacement parts for their cars would only make it harder for them to fight this.
      - manicdee 7y ago
        Anticipate an amendment to the health order to clarify one way or another.

> government-funded company Has Tesla received taxpayer subsidies for anything in the last year or two other than customer incentives to buy zero emission vehicles?

toomuchtodo 7y ago

No. Also, they paid back their government loan 10 years early, with interest. Compare this to GM (TARP bailout and BK proceedings) and Ford, who we lost $10 billion on as taxpayers. Tesla has a lot to complain about, but they’re not the failure the rest of the US auto industry is. Ford may not make it through this.

bumby 7y ago
Ford was not bailed out. I think you’re thinking of Chrysler
- toomuchtodo 7y ago
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22542185 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22542185 https://www.treasury.gov/initiatives/financial-stability/TARP-Programs/automotive-programs/pages/default.aspx https://www.treasury.gov/initiatives/financial-stability/TAR... https://www.forbes.com/sites/joannmuller/2016/09/21/trump-should-be-asking-will-ford-pay-off-its-government-loan-before-moving-small-cars-to-mexico/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/joannmuller/2016/09/21/trump-sh... > Ford likes to say it “didn’t take the money” because unlike General Motors and Chrysler, it didn’t require a taxpayer bailout to survive the 2008-2009 credit crisis. But don’t forget: Ford tapped into a different pool of government money set aside for the auto industry during those desperate times. (And those low-cost funds were critical to Ford’s survival because no other funding sources were available.) > Hoping to create “thousands of green jobs” in the U.S. and reduce the nation’s dependence on foreign oil, the DOE under the Bush Administration established the $25 billion loan program in 2007 to encourage development of advanced technology vehicles that would burn less fuel and, importantly, be manufactured in the U.S. Congress funded the program in 2009, after President Obama took office. > Ford applied for and received $5.9 billion in June 2009 (the same month GM filed for bankruptcy) to help pay for investments in more fuel-efficient engines, hybrids and electric cars and also to convert two truck plants to production of cars. Ford is cancelling all their cars except trucks and the Mustang. They took a bailout that wasn’t a bailout in name only.
  - bumby 7y ago
    Those are different mechanisms with different purposes. If that’s the bar to be considered a bailout, Tesla was bailed out as well. Whether or not they met the conditions of the loan is a different story. And while technically true that the mustang is the remaining US car, it obfuscates the fact that the name is being more of a brand moniker than a model, and will include plans for an electric version of the “mustang” https://www.energy.gov/lpo/tesla https://www.energy.gov/lpo/tesla https://www.ford.com/suvs/mach-e/2021/ https://www.ford.com/suvs/mach-e/2021/
    - toomuchtodo 7y ago
      It’s disingenuous for you to argue it was a bailout for Tesla when they have something to show for it (over a million EVs sold, 400k/year of manufacturing capacity, a Supercharger network) and Ford has zero, and Tesla paid their loan back while Ford did not.
      - bumby 7y ago
        You missed the point. I don’t consider either a bailout. They were investments to spur a particular industrial goal. If Ford doesn’t meet the intent, I just hope the government was smart enough in the way they formed the contract
        grecy 7y ago
        If you consider them both the same kind of "investments" I propose you invest in me in the same way the government did with Ford. i.e. give me money, and I won't ever give it back. At the same you I'll invest in you in the same way the government did with Tesla. i.e I give you money, and you pay it back 10 years early with interest. I wholeheartedly accept this deal. Do you? Why not?
        bumby 7y ago
        I didn’t say it was a good deal. Unfortunately, the government gets hosed all they time by poorly formed contracts. The government also plans on a certain percentage of these investments not to work out. I’m no more happy about it than you, but the original comment was merely a correction that Ford was not part of the TARP bailout. With that being said, the link by the other poster says Ford will repay by 2022

lmeyerov 7y ago

That's a myopic view of the largely tax-payer enabled Tesla/SpaceX/SolarCity conglomorate. I don't expect a company largely bootstrapped by massive US gov program awards & free passes+subsidies to give equity to the gov despite the massive capital investment, but backroom calls to circumvent public health policy is somewhere between "far below baseline expectations" and "evil". I'm happy we have real civic-level project funding for people who get results, and private citizens reaping massive profits from them. In fact, I think the real genius of Musk & Thiel is to be self-enriching versions of FDR, and the DC prime etc. mess has forced their need. But that doesn't excuse evil - there are real lives involved,.

manicdee 7y ago
How do you feel about GM keeping factories open? Or Boeing?
- lmeyerov 7y ago
  I -- and governments -- are for skeleton crews keeping most factories open to avoid machine breakdown, and essential businesses at whatever they can do safely. Consumer car companies, casinos, and other special interests don't make sense to me beyond the obvious answer of "knowing corruption" and "institutionalized malignant ignorance."
  - xkjkls 7y ago
    The Alameda county order only allows for construction of replacement parts, which can be obviously argued is necessary. People need cars to get to work; people like doctors and nurses and grocery store clerks on the front lines of this pandemic. A shortage of replacement parts for their cars would only make it harder for them to fight this.
    - manicdee 7y ago
      Anticipate an amendment to the health order to clarify one way or another.