Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register
This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Neither of these seem to be reasonable concerns.

Evs are hot. Tesla is the market leader. They have competition but that's always the case. If anything they should be hiring more.
How does a manufacturer cut staff while growing 50% YOY?

It does seem that with no fuel price relief that every decent EV that can be made can be sold at a high price. So my conclusion is that Musk either thinks China will fall apart or the 4680 isn't scaling as hoped. Recession doesn't matter. Tesla sales are what matter to Tesla.
 
Neither of these seem to be reasonable concerns.

Evs are hot. Tesla is the market leader. They have competition but that's always the case. If anything they should be hiring more.
They are hiring more hourly workers; the cuts are neither to people making cars, battery packs, nor solar.
FUVYTb9WUAYSwI6.jpg
 
How does a manufacturer cut staff while growing 50% YOY?

It does seem that with no fuel price relief that every decent EV that can be made can be sold at a high price. So my conclusion is that Musk either thinks China will fall apart or the 4680 isn't scaling as hoped. Recession doesn't matter. Tesla sales are what matter to Tesla.

He said in an interview a few weeks ago that he sees a crunch in the tech sector coming because start up investment is way down. Emerging technology stocks are down because interest rates are going up and investors are freaking out. Some people who are overextended are cutting back to ensure they are still OK when interest rates go up, but the rest are lemmings freaking out because the lowest interest rates in more than a generation are going away and being replaced with something slightly higher.

Once the panic about the economy is over, investment will flow back into emerging tech. I think Elon is being a bit over reactive to what is a common phenomenon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JRP3 and FlatSix911

This will probably trigger a lot of people. White rich guy makes fun out of lbgtqia! How dare you! Ofc he is making fun of tech companies trying to virtue signal by changing their logo, an act with a very cost and very low impact. But it’s meme, he knows that Tesla also sends a fabulous car to the pride rallies and is also making fun of Tesla.
For what end and what purpose? To troll? To be clever? To get more likes and retweets? When does this man actually work anyway?
 
nah... latest demographics still show demand for $50k+ EVs to be disproportionally college educated, suburban residence, home ownership and household income above $100k+ ... not exactly where the GOP excelled voting share wise the last two times
You're confusing statistical likelihoods with individuals. You're implying that all "college educated, suburban residence, home ownership and household income above $100k" don't vote GOP, which just isn't true.
 
For those that think Elon has "changed". Nah, he's always been like this, he just didn't make it public until he could do it without negatively affecting his companies too much. Here are some more recent tweets reflecting his worldview:

View attachment 813726
View attachment 813727
He's so wrong on a first principles level about human population it's bizarre. The ecosystem is already not "fine". We aren't even close to reasonable technological solutions for negative human impacts with existing populations. Then add in a reasonable goal of improving standard of living, i.e. increased energy and resource consumption, for the majority of the planet, and we are still heading fast to an unsustainable tipping point, if we aren't already past it.
 
For those that think Elon has "changed". Nah, he's always been like this, he just didn't make it public until he could do it without negatively affecting his companies too much. Here are some more recent tweets reflecting his worldview:

View attachment 813726
View attachment 813727
how many CEOs do:

- publicly declare that they will vote for party X
- publicly declare that party Y stands for "division and hate" (meanwhile party X supporters stormed the Capitol)
- constantly post memes which are adored by party X and rail against perceived "wokeness"

not many. and it isn't good for business.
 
He's so wrong on a first principles level about human population it's bizarre. The ecosystem is already not "fine". We aren't even close to reasonable technological solutions for negative human impacts with existing populations. Then add in a reasonable goal of improving standard of living, i.e. increased energy and resource consumption, for the majority of the planet, and we are still heading fast to an unsustainable tipping point, if we aren't already past it.
The vast majority of the 1st world has much cleaner air, soil and water than 50 years ago despite a massive increase in population thanks to technological advancements in pollution control and energy production. First world populations are healthier and living longer than ever before. First world populations are largely stable if not shrinking.

The developing 3rd world are rightfully very busy clawing their way to 1st world living conditions and will burn alot of carbon to get there. World poverty rates have plummeted in the past 30 years thanks to plentiful and cheap energy which is a GREAT THING for billions and billions of human beings and worth some short term damage to our ecosystem IMHO.

I suspect in less than 50 years most of the 3rd world will reach 1st world living status, world poverty will continue to decline and the earth's population will stabilize.

We can't be complacent and need to continue to work for non-carbon energy sources, but I think our overall future is bright.
 
World poverty rates have plummeted in the past 30 years thanks to plentiful and cheap energy which is a GREAT THING for billions and billions of human beings and worth some short term damage to our ecosystem IMHO.
What if it's long term damage possibly making the earth hostile to human life? What's the long term effect of the micro plastics we are seeding the planet with, including our bodies? What's the long term effect of increased CO2 in the oceans and atmosphere? We have no idea what the long term effects of industrialization will have on the environment. Nothing will be improved by increasing the population the way Elon seems to want.
 
What if it's long term damage possibly making the earth hostile to human life? What's the long term effect of the micro plastics we are seeding the planet with, including our bodies? What's the long term effect of increased CO2 in the oceans and atmosphere? We have no idea what the long term effects of industrialization will have on the environment. Nothing will be improved by increasing the population the way Elon seems to want.
Elon does not want to increase the population. He is warning of a population collapse, that if it comes true, may weaken if not break civilization.

There are a lot of possible worries about the future. You can add on a nuclear war as well. But societal collapse due to declining population is also a real one.
 
But societal collapse due to declining population is also a real one.
Not remotely real in the foreseeable future. World population hasn't even leveled off let alone started to decline, and it would have to decline significantly to qualify as a "collapse". It's just another example of Elon being concerned about something entirely meaningless.
 
The vast majority of the 1st world has much cleaner air, soil and water than 50 years ago despite a massive increase in population thanks to technological advancements in pollution control and energy production. First world populations are healthier and living longer than ever before. First world populations are largely stable if not shrinking.

The developing 3rd world are rightfully very busy clawing their way to 1st world living conditions and will burn alot of carbon to get there. World poverty rates have plummeted in the past 30 years thanks to plentiful and cheap energy which is a GREAT THING for billions and billions of human beings and worth some short term damage to our ecosystem IMHO.

I suspect in less than 50 years most of the 3rd world will reach 1st world living status, world poverty will continue to decline and the earth's population will stabilize.

We can't be complacent and need to continue to work for non-carbon energy sources, but I think our overall future is bright.

The problems with population pressure is much worse than CO2 increases. If we could bring the developing world to developed status without increasing CO2, we would still be in trouble.

We are exhausting a lot of our farm land just trying to keep the poorest billion people in the world alive. The war in Ukraine is causing severe food insecurity for these people because Ukrainian grain is not making it to these countries.

The oceans are getting over fished by countries just trying to feed their people. Large factory ships now travel the oceans scooping up all fish in an area, leaving no breeding stock. Most of these ships are based in Asia. In the waters under the control of developed countries, the fisheries are managed and fish stocks are largely stable, but the coast guards of these countries are constantly chasing out factory fishing ships trying to poach fish.

We are currently stripping the world of natural resources to provide the richest ~2 billion with the things they want. If we expand that to the poorer 5 billion, there won't be enough resources to go around. I'm not just talking about oil, this applies to all agricultural products, all mined resources, and fresh water.

It is true that the world economy is based on an ever increasing population. It doesn't have to be. To manage a declining population we would have to change a number of social programs to still protect those who can't contribute to the economy, but keep many who are older and could participate in the economy.

Ultimately we would need to shutter facilities, and abandon towns as the population declined, but again that could be done in an orderly fashion.

Europe lost between 1/3 and 1/2 of its population due to the Black Death. There were a couple of generations of people who had severe PTSD from the experience and the shadow of it still exists in European countries and countries settled by Europeans. There were local collapses in some areas as populations died off, but Europe came roaring back from the experience and a number European countries ended up dominating the world on the back of the Renaissance that came from the population decline.

We just dodged a bullet that could have turned into the next Black Death. COVID was the worst disease outbreak we've seen in 100 years. Thanks to modern medicine we were able to keep the death toll more on par with the Spanish Flu, but it is a much more deadly disease than any flu.

It has now mutated into a much more contagious disease, but with milder symptoms. Pandemics usually go this route becoming more contagious and milder. But what if it had become more contagious and more deadly? The way it has mutated it could go that route, though past pandemic patterns say it probably won't.

A new disease could come along that is much more deadly and highly contagious. That could drop the world population quite suddenly like the Black Death did to Europe. The denser the population, the higher the risk for a pandemic virus evolving.

As the world gets more crowded, I think the odds of that happening go up. With more people traveling more extensively, a potential pandemic can spread very widely before most people realize it's there. That's what happened with COVID, it was in Europe before the world knew it existed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.