From a different perspextive - look at the market cap of all of the other companies on trump's advisory council and then compare to tesla's. Then look at the way Elon is handling himself and compare to others. In a strange way - Elon is showing to a bigger audience that he is a giant amongst men in terms of character and leadership. One of the ways tesla's market will go up is when main stream institutional investors start investing in tesla (demand driver). There are certain ways that will happen (tesla gets into S&P 500, continues to grow financially, and marketplace accepts Elon musk as a bankable leader vs a crazy entrepreneur)
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
From what I've seen those are a handful of people trying to grandstand, and they are either not well thought out or aren't really "core" supporters. They are going to buy ICE vehicles instead of Tesla's, so are obviously not really committed to the overall mission.
re wdolson's
It may be a deeper game - very few people, and no sane ones, will argue that he isn't capable of and hasn't a history of so doing - or possibly Mr Musk is one of those rare persons who goes out of his way to say nice things about people.
-
It may be a deeper game - very few people, and no sane ones, will argue that he isn't capable of and hasn't a history of so doing - or possibly Mr Musk is one of those rare persons who goes out of his way to say nice things about people.
callmesam
Member
Tillerson was the ONLY US oil/gas executive supporting a carbon tax. He may be the only Cabinet level appointment that spoke out on climate change prior to his nomination. A carbon tax is the fastest mechanism for transitioning to sustainable energy. Elon is a "first principles" thinker and to have an ally for a carbon tax, one that you supported early, is strategically important.
I'm not a particular fan of Elon being in the advisory group. If Trump starts with increasing taxes / barriers on trade Tesla becomes an easy, high-visible target for other countries especially since Tesla's supply chain is >90% US.
Plus with that high US content Tesla's association with Trump may be seen as a large negative from an ex-US consumer perspective.
Finally I don't think Trump will do much to help Tesla. The administration doesn't seem to think much of climate change or environmental protections. My guess is that we will see a lowering of CAFE standards and removal of as much renewable support as possible. In my opinion the best case is that tesla doesn't become a domestic target for the administration (as it has been a clear target in many republican controlled states) and spaceX gets substantial support
Plus with that high US content Tesla's association with Trump may be seen as a large negative from an ex-US consumer perspective.
Finally I don't think Trump will do much to help Tesla. The administration doesn't seem to think much of climate change or environmental protections. My guess is that we will see a lowering of CAFE standards and removal of as much renewable support as possible. In my opinion the best case is that tesla doesn't become a domestic target for the administration (as it has been a clear target in many republican controlled states) and spaceX gets substantial support
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
That could happen even if Elon were not involved with Trump. If Trump actually cares about free trade and helping US businesses what could be better than him pushing for removal of the Tesla sales bans in many states? Removing trade inequalities within the country should be a priority for him.
I look at Elon on Trumps council from a pragmatic point of view
what is Elon's long term goal (keep yer eyes on the prize)
1) Mars (while Elon is alive so he can go, safely)
2) colonies on Mars (self sustaining)
2a) colonization of solar system and sentient planetoid(s) such as "Of course I still love you"
2b) conciousness uploads anyone?
3) --->> 40+ BFR's to make a "space conveyor belt to ferry people and supplies to Mars" (and back)
4) getting -->>very serious money to finance above<--
5) not pissing off your financiers until you have the serious coin to do so
6) as an aside, read, "The man who sold the moon" about Delos D. Harriman
7) Elon is NOT a con man like Delos D., but similar goals
8) you have no idea the happy dances done when we saw "grasshopper" land and we knew, finally
what is Elon's long term goal (keep yer eyes on the prize)
1) Mars (while Elon is alive so he can go, safely)
2) colonies on Mars (self sustaining)
2a) colonization of solar system and sentient planetoid(s) such as "Of course I still love you"
2b) conciousness uploads anyone?
3) --->> 40+ BFR's to make a "space conveyor belt to ferry people and supplies to Mars" (and back)
4) getting -->>very serious money to finance above<--
5) not pissing off your financiers until you have the serious coin to do so
6) as an aside, read, "The man who sold the moon" about Delos D. Harriman
7) Elon is NOT a con man like Delos D., but similar goals
8) you have no idea the happy dances done when we saw "grasshopper" land and we knew, finally
To add color to this, I am pretty sure that three non-US domiciled majors - their CEOs and overall corporate position - are supportive of a carbon tax: Royal Dutch/Shell, BP and Total. Please understand I don't view them Pollyannishly; also, it is important to keep in mind the world-wide nature of esp. the large companies in the energy industry: for each of those, their United States' business interest is utterly vital to their corporate well-being, just as what occurs outside the US is critical to XOM, CHV and the other giants who happened to be so-called US corporations.
As for my own nefariousnessmenthoodship, I continue in my reasonably successful efforts to inoculate the Big Oil Fish in the Small Alaskan Pond of their desires to own Teslas....
It will be interesting to see how the POTUS handles expansion of Tesla overseas.
If Tesla is not 'exporting jobs/closing US factories' will the administration oppose such overseas expansion?
He had repeated this many times so therefore I would say no he would not oppose this. He even said it makes no senses to send parts all around the world and then back into the US. Coincidentally exactly what Elon concluded too. Trump won't be oppose to opening bigger factory near larger market like China if demand is there. His main issue is US company opening factory in other country to make products for the US. Trump wants fair trade and fair competition for US companies.
IMO Trump is not bad for the country, I am in the same camp as Peter Thiel on my view of trump. Whether I like the person or not, his policies are generally good for our economy and country IMO. Unfortunately, due to the political agendas of the few that control mainstream press outlets, the perception of his policies usually come off looking really bad, and the headlines on these perceptions the press pushes to is make people think the world is about to end. That in itself (the mass media messing with our perception of reality) is the worst thing about having Trump as president, and unfortunately Elon has to also take that perception burden on himself too for what he believes is the greater good of being on the councils, and I 110% agree and stand behind him.
Ah, we can go by Trump's own public statements and twitter feed, as well as those around him including his appointments. Blaming the media is quite disingenuous. Maybe if this was before people could make audio recordings, what you said is true. People are quite upset about what he says and what he's done. Now, in terms of warping public perception, the non-mainstream media has been honing its skills at twisted representation of Obama for years. to get to the bottom of that, you have to look at where people get their news... and the market share of those outlets.
Last edited:
as a person you may not like him
by the tone of his tweets or how he talks, but his overall POLICIES are what I think are what is most important to pay attention to and trying to help shape them as he makes them
Into laws, which Elon understands. I agree with Elon that he should be in Trump's ear as much as possible for this, others here may not.
Last edited:
I disagree with this on 5 separate and distinct levels (for what it's worth)
my opinion
- Trump(Bannon) policies ARE detrimental to both the US and the world at large
- Trump behavior/character are equally detrimental - It's not about like or dislike - Displayed character attributes of leadership are even more important than policy imo - otherwise an argument that media created perception is influential also fails.
- 'Mainstream' media is now largely controlled by (large)corporate interests, and regardless, includes ALL political coalitions; including Breitbart, which is now beyond mainstream influencing perception, but directly commanding the very policies under discussion.
- IMO Elon is spending enormous prioritized efforts on these councils precisely because the Trump policies need corrective action, not because they are 'good for our country' without his effort. And I'm somehow dubious he was influenced in this belief by 'mainstream' media
- Elon's decision to spend this energy/time capital were made precisely because the Trump policies ARE detrimental without it - and specifically not limited to simply global warming - humans to Mars objectives.
To wit his latest demanded counsil prioritization to discuss Immigration-Travel ban as first priority of latest meeting. A specific Trump/Bannon policy that he believes is detrimental to humanity/country/company objectives-interests
Elon is there specifically because of Trump policy and Trump behavior, not the other way around- IMO
I applaude his fearless, tenacious, pragmatic, strong charactered leadership and exemplary behavior;
PRECISLEY in the face of EXACTLY the opposite
Well done EM...
I appreciate your viewpoint and we can at least agree that Elon should be there.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Actually I think most of us agree with that part. If Trump's policies were reasonable and good for the country Elon would not need to be involved. In other words it's good that Elon is involved, it's bad that he needs to be.
So you are saying if Hillary won you wouldn't want Elon to be part of her advisory councils for policy making if she asked him?
Last edited:
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Correct because her policies would be more inline with Elon's and his time could be better spent elsewhere. Obvious example, Elon would not be needing to deal with Trump's ill conceived border and immigration policy right now, yet here we are.
I think that's a fair and interestingly provocative question, even if it seems you were being mischievous in raising it.
So, I'll rise to the perceived bait and spit it out:
No, under the current circumstances of a horrifically polarized society in the US, my druthers would be for Mr Musk not to be party to a hypothetical Clinton advisory council, as follows -
So, I'll rise to the perceived bait and spit it out:
No, under the current circumstances of a horrifically polarized society in the US, my druthers would be for Mr Musk not to be party to a hypothetical Clinton advisory council, as follows -
- a fair number of the positions he advocates would more naturally be associated with others in a Clinton retinue
- he would be less likely to have to watch his back, as it were, with respect to ventures like SpaceX, than likely is the case with today's administration
- his - and any others' - association with Clinton would more readily condemn him - and his goals - in the uncritical thinking of those who despise Clinton. That he in fact does have an association with this administration is a powerful albeit not omnipotent means to jostle that faction - a worthy result.
- he more fluently could achieve his desired goals under a Clinton administration than currently is the case, so he would not have to divert precious time, mental energy and various forms of fire control than at present is the case
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
