3 ms·
> “No government ownership? No public funding” And since everyone should play by the same rules, this would apply to SpaceX and Tesla too. Right?
by pavlov 2y ago
> “No government ownership? No public funding”
And since everyone should play by the same rules, this would apply to SpaceX and Tesla too. Right?
- Dalewyn 2y agoUnlike Intel, SpaceX and Tesla actually deliver (and then some) on government grants. I'm willing to give successful parties that hold their end of the deal more benefit of the doubt. All else being equal, nationalization is overall bad for commerce (see: USPS). But Intel? They got their fucking money and dropped the fucking ball. Fool me once? Shame on you. Not again, if Intel wants further public money then I as a taxpayer want my share of Intel as collateral for that money spent. No taxation without representation. TSMC can get away, for now: At least they are on track to open CHIPS-funded fabs soon. If they fail too, then no further funds without ownership too.
- bryanlarsen 2y agoWhy? The US government funds SpaceX by buying rocket launches. They buy a rocket launch and they get a rocket launch. You don't expect the government to get a share of Ford every time they buy an F-150 for the Forest Service, do you? And US subsidies to Tesla are consumer subsidies. Tesla doesn't get the money directly, but they definitely benefit indirectly. The important part is that Tesla only benefits if the consumer gets an EV. Tesla is not getting money for nothing, the quid pro quo is maintained.