3 ms·

> regulatory credits Why is it that all of Musk's companies rely on government support in some significant way?

xyzzyz 6y ago
> government support I wouldn’t exactly call tax credits “government support”. They are, no doubt, very beneficial to Tesla, and other recipients of these tax credits. They aren’t support though: it’s the rest of the companies that are more burdened by the taxes.
sawjet 6y ago
the government wanted to buy something and they have the means to sell it to them. How is that reliance on government support?
akmiller 6y ago
I suggest you don't look at the oil companies and traditional auto manufacturers if you think this is just an Elon Musk thing!
ar_lan 6y ago
Tax credits aren't really government support (it's not like the government is paying them anything). It's more akin to a discount, if anything - we support the work you do so we won't penalize you further with taxes, because your work can provide a net good.
- xkjkls 6y ago
  If you can sell your tax credits, they are equivalent.
  - perl4ever 6y ago
    It's a question of how you frame it, but that doesn't mean all ways are equally valid in every context. A pound of apples and a pound of lead may amount to the same thing for a counterweight, but that doesn't mean they are equally good for a pie.
valuearb 6y ago
Hmm, Zip2? PayPal? OpenAI? Neurallink? Oh, you mean Tesla and SpaceX. SpaceX got a commercial contract from NASA to greatly reduce NASAs costs of delivering cargo to the ISS, and fully delivered, saving NASA billions. SpaceX would not have been able to build Falcon 9 without it, or likely survive. Then NASA gave SpaceX and Boeing contracts to fly crew members to the ISS, and SpaceX delivered well ahead of Boeing, and for billions less. Finally NASA has given SpaceX small contracts to gain access to new SpaceX technologies such as in-orbit refueling, which would save NASA tens of billions if it was ever allowed to use it. And we provide tax credits to zero emission vehicles to make up for allowing ICE engines to omit CO2 indiscriminately. A better solution would be a limited market in carbon emissions, but most of the coal state politicians would lose their jobs if that passed.

> government support I wouldn’t exactly call tax credits “government support”. They are, no doubt, very beneficial to Tesla, and other recipients of these tax credits. They aren’t support though: it’s the rest of the companies that are more burdened by the taxes.

sawjet 6y ago

the government wanted to buy something and they have the means to sell it to them. How is that reliance on government support?

akmiller 6y ago

I suggest you don't look at the oil companies and traditional auto manufacturers if you think this is just an Elon Musk thing!

ar_lan 6y ago

Tax credits aren't really government support (it's not like the government is paying them anything). It's more akin to a discount, if anything - we support the work you do so we won't penalize you further with taxes, because your work can provide a net good.

xkjkls 6y ago
If you can sell your tax credits, they are equivalent.
- perl4ever 6y ago
  It's a question of how you frame it, but that doesn't mean all ways are equally valid in every context. A pound of apples and a pound of lead may amount to the same thing for a counterweight, but that doesn't mean they are equally good for a pie.

valuearb 6y ago

Hmm, Zip2? PayPal? OpenAI? Neurallink? Oh, you mean Tesla and SpaceX. SpaceX got a commercial contract from NASA to greatly reduce NASAs costs of delivering cargo to the ISS, and fully delivered, saving NASA billions. SpaceX would not have been able to build Falcon 9 without it, or likely survive. Then NASA gave SpaceX and Boeing contracts to fly crew members to the ISS, and SpaceX delivered well ahead of Boeing, and for billions less. Finally NASA has given SpaceX small contracts to gain access to new SpaceX technologies such as in-orbit refueling, which would save NASA tens of billions if it was ever allowed to use it. And we provide tax credits to zero emission vehicles to make up for allowing ICE engines to omit CO2 indiscriminately. A better solution would be a limited market in carbon emissions, but most of the coal state politicians would lose their jobs if that passed.