4 ms·

I'm not sure why you're getting downvoted, but both Tesla and SpaceX only exist because of government policy. Strangely enough, I would argue that SpaceX proba

I'm not sure why you're getting downvoted, but both Tesla and SpaceX only exist because of government policy. Strangely enough, I would argue that SpaceX probably could have existed without government policy (but maybe not so soon). Tesla, OTOH, is completely a product of the government. Elon Musk himself said (before he turned into some strange version of libertarian), that it was government funds that allowed Tesla to survive right after the financial crisis. And for over a decade, Tesla's biggest money maker is ICE companies paying Tesla for renewable credits required by the government.

fastball 6y ago
I'm not sure "surviving because of the government" and being a "product of the government" are at all the same thing.
nickik 6y ago
> I'm not sure why you're getting downvoted, but both Tesla and SpaceX only exist because of government policy. This is not true. > Elon Musk himself said This is wrong. You are remembering this wrong, Musk has corrected this often. The reality is in 2008 SpaceX got saved by Daimler. Later they did get a DoE investment for Model S manufacturing but that did not save the company. They could have raised the money without the government but it would have been more difficult. > Tesla's biggest money maker This is again, wrong. In terms of total revenue its a small part. It is true that Tesla would make less profit without those credits but they would still be a hypergrowth company and would still be successful. Also, those credit system exist for all manufactures and there is an equal playing field.