3 ms·

Which still doesn't solve the problem: the real issue is that Western companies are financialized to the max. That's why Elon repeatedly lies to get a stock bum

Which still doesn't solve the problem: the real issue is that Western companies are financialized to the max. That's why Elon repeatedly lies to get a stock bump. Also, why companies like Google, Boeing, and Intel allow product quality to degrade, as long as they can prop up stock price for the next quarter. So, tariffs won't solve anything. Which is why despite the Jones Act, China builds 200x more ships that the US. Or, hasn't Tesla received billions in government assistance? what about the major automakers that'd have crumbled around 2008 if not for the US gov. pouring rivers of cash into them? So, protectionism is only a band-aid: it doesn't change the fact that American businesses have developed a short-termist culture that only cares for the next quarter.

jeffreyrogers 2y ago
If you want long-term thinking then people have to be able to buy into stories about what's going to happen long-term. When Musk does that, you call it a lie. The benefit of financialization is that it provides cheaper access to capital, which should make long-term investment easier, not harder. America still has lots of capital intensive industries that are capable of thinking long-term. I don't think financialization has much to do with the strategic problems that many American companies face. At the same time that Intel was allowing product quality to degrade, Nvidia, a 30 year old company, was continuing to innovate.
- churchill 2y ago
  No, I don't have a personal axe to grind against Musk. I'm just pointing out his persistent, repeated lies. Being an engineer, he should be able to gauge their capabilities accordingly, or at least make those optimistic predictions closer to the finish line.
  - schiffern 2y ago
    "Lies" is pretty charged phrasing for what are explicitly declared as best-case timeline estimates, which the media then loves to (disingenuously) revise into "promises." The not-so-big management secret is that even if Musk took your advice and sandbagged his timelines, then the timelines still wouldn't be met. However it would move the actual time of completion further to the right! By using best-case predictions, things are actually getting done sooner. Call it the Applied Parkinson's Law. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson's_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson's_law
    - Dylan16807 2y ago
      https://motherfrunker.ca/fsd/ https://motherfrunker.ca/fsd/ A lot of these are promises, and most of the timelines are not "best case", they were clearly not going to happen. Even if it somehow gets things done faster, lying to your customers is not acceptable.
    - tweetle_beetle 2y ago
      They've been selling something which doesn't exist for years, as a fixed fee, or subscription. Most large companies end up walking a tightrope of getting away with as much as possible. But FSD can only be described as a lie, a euphemism if you're feeling generous [1]. It's a company worth unthinkable amounts of money. Most people would have less patience with a guy running a Patreon in his spare time who had claimed for years his supporters would have a product soon, let alone an organisation swimming in funding (Twitter debacle aside). [1] https://www.pocket-lint.com/is-tesla-fsd-worth-it/ https://www.pocket-lint.com/is-tesla-fsd-worth-it/
ninetyninenine 2y ago
If you think it’s just a short term ist culture you’re out of touch. People in China have a work ethic, capability, and intelligence that can eclipse the US.
BobaFloutist 2y ago
I was wondering what would happen if either 1 The feds told American car makers that they would release the tarrifs if they didn't release an electric car under $xx,xxx (15k? 20k?) in the next x years, or if 2. they made the tarrifs naturally diminish over time (from 10k to 9k to 8k) to give American companies a runway but slowly pressure them to improve their offerings. I'm far from a policy expert here. I just wish we could put some price pressure on them without entirely ceding the industry.
- churchill 2y ago
  I can see both policies you suggested working out fantastically, if followed through. Legacy American automakers would panic at first before they get to work. But, if these automakers can lobby for tariffs in the first place, why would they hobble themselves by giving these tariffs a deadline? They can simply maintain these tariffs till forever, effectively doubling the price of any car out of China. The US population is essentially a captive audience. Also, judging by America's antagonistic politics, any Party that opens the market to Chinese cars would be branded traitors & enemies of the working man and they'd likely do poorly in state and national elections.

jeffreyrogers 2y ago

If you want long-term thinking then people have to be able to buy into stories about what's going to happen long-term. When Musk does that, you call it a lie. The benefit of financialization is that it provides cheaper access to capital, which should make long-term investment easier, not harder. America still has lots of capital intensive industries that are capable of thinking long-term. I don't think financialization has much to do with the strategic problems that many American companies face. At the same time that Intel was allowing product quality to degrade, Nvidia, a 30 year old company, was continuing to innovate.

churchill 2y ago
No, I don't have a personal axe to grind against Musk. I'm just pointing out his persistent, repeated lies. Being an engineer, he should be able to gauge their capabilities accordingly, or at least make those optimistic predictions closer to the finish line.
- schiffern 2y ago
  "Lies" is pretty charged phrasing for what are explicitly declared as best-case timeline estimates, which the media then loves to (disingenuously) revise into "promises." The not-so-big management secret is that even if Musk took your advice and sandbagged his timelines, then the timelines still wouldn't be met. However it would move the actual time of completion further to the right! By using best-case predictions, things are actually getting done sooner. Call it the Applied Parkinson's Law. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson's_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson's_law
  - Dylan16807 2y ago
    https://motherfrunker.ca/fsd/ https://motherfrunker.ca/fsd/ A lot of these are promises, and most of the timelines are not "best case", they were clearly not going to happen. Even if it somehow gets things done faster, lying to your customers is not acceptable.
  - tweetle_beetle 2y ago
    They've been selling something which doesn't exist for years, as a fixed fee, or subscription. Most large companies end up walking a tightrope of getting away with as much as possible. But FSD can only be described as a lie, a euphemism if you're feeling generous [1]. It's a company worth unthinkable amounts of money. Most people would have less patience with a guy running a Patreon in his spare time who had claimed for years his supporters would have a product soon, let alone an organisation swimming in funding (Twitter debacle aside). [1] https://www.pocket-lint.com/is-tesla-fsd-worth-it/ https://www.pocket-lint.com/is-tesla-fsd-worth-it/

ninetyninenine 2y ago

If you think it’s just a short term ist culture you’re out of touch. People in China have a work ethic, capability, and intelligence that can eclipse the US.

BobaFloutist 2y ago

I was wondering what would happen if either 1 The feds told American car makers that they would release the tarrifs if they didn't release an electric car under $xx,xxx (15k? 20k?) in the next x years, or if 2. they made the tarrifs naturally diminish over time (from 10k to 9k to 8k) to give American companies a runway but slowly pressure them to improve their offerings. I'm far from a policy expert here. I just wish we could put some price pressure on them without entirely ceding the industry.

churchill 2y ago
I can see both policies you suggested working out fantastically, if followed through. Legacy American automakers would panic at first before they get to work. But, if these automakers can lobby for tariffs in the first place, why would they hobble themselves by giving these tariffs a deadline? They can simply maintain these tariffs till forever, effectively doubling the price of any car out of China. The US population is essentially a captive audience. Also, judging by America's antagonistic politics, any Party that opens the market to Chinese cars would be branded traitors & enemies of the working man and they'd likely do poorly in state and national elections.