General Discussion: 2018 Investor Roundtable

[Reciprocity]

Elon Musk on Twitter

anybody else feels like this is directed at trump again

You do realize that xi wasnt up there knocking down barriers because he really really wanted to right? His hand was forced. In part be Elon's tweet storm, but mostly because Trump was willing to go to war for what is right. Fair and reciprocal trade. Like it or not, Trump and Elon were right and it forced Xi's hand. Now let's see if there is some follow through.

No one wins in a trade war, but everyone can win with the peace. More us companies building factories in China will be good for Chinese workers and the rise of the Chinese middle class which will demand better products, higher quality of life and more freedom. This will all be better for the whole world if the soin to be largest economy in the world is open and more free.

 

[RobStark]

Corrected URL

neither works for me

 

[j0hn]

neither works for me

just remove the extra dot after www or visit elons twitter.

 

[bambam4171]

neither works for me

Does this work? Elon Musk on Twitter

Mod: Yes, and I corrected the older links. --ggr

 

[bambam4171]

You do realize that xi wasnt up there knocking down barriers because he really really wanted to right? His hand was forced. In part be Elon's tweet storm, but mostly because Trump was willing to go to war for what is right. Fair and reciprocal trade. Like it or not, Trump and Elon were right and it forced Xi's hand. Now let's see if there is some follow through.

Hate to admit it but the orange one did apparently really succeed in this case. Chapeau!

 

[sweter]

He's so short you can hardly see him...

Doug Kass explains on thestreet.com why he's shorting Tesla again today. It's reads like "I'm stupid; yes really stupid! You think that I'm stupid today? Let me illustrate how I've always been stupid!"

What a maroon!

I especially love the quote: "According to my notes, Tesla sold about 90,000 vehicles in 2017". Great source of information.

 

[jelloslug]

Not possible as these folks would either put the deck in backwards or drop them and put them in out of sequence. Maybe paper tape would be better?

That's a considerable leap in technology there. You may want to let that tech be vetted in the real world before you make the customers beta test it for GM.

 

[JRP3]

You put to much weight into what governments can control, which is very little. At the end of the day if consumers demand clean and green, companies will provide it. If consumers don't care, there is little the EPA can do to stop a company from polluting or moving operations where it's legal.

You must be kidding. Just look at the incentives in Norway and the massive uptake of EVs which resulted.

 

[Reciprocity]

You must be kidding. Just look at the incentives in Norway and the massive uptake of EVs which resulted.

Yes, if you heap on massive incentives the the government can have an impact. The US would go broke doing that.

 

[Yggdrasill]

Yes, if you heap on massive incentives the the government can have an impact. The US would go broke doing that.

The biggest factor in Norway isn't the incentives for the EVs - it's the disincentives for the ICE vehicles. The ICE vehicle registration tax can be tens of thousands of dollars, and gas is around 6.5 USD/USG with taxes.

The US could implement a similar system, and the tax revenue would increase massively. The negatives would include lower-income households needing to spend significantly more money on transportation, thus becoming poorer.

 

[Reciprocity]

The biggest factor in Norway isn't the incentives for the EVs - it's the disincentives for the ICE vehicles. The ICE vehicle registration tax can be tens of thousands of dollars, and gas is around 6.5 USD/USG with taxes.

The US could implement a similar system, and the tax revenue would increase massively. The negatives would include lower-income households needing to spend significantly more money on transportation, thus becoming poorer.

The problem with that in the US is that it would impact the poor more and they just cannot afford to pay more for transportation, which they require to get to work. We are a very large and diverse country, Norway is a very small and rich country with very little diversity. Its silly to compare the two.

 

[trentbridge]

Hate to admit it but the orange one did apparently really succeed in this case. Chapeau!

I disagree - it's a cunning move by the Chinese to give Trump an obvious win in an industry where the Chinese remain comfortable with their domestic market. The USA is never going to export that many vehicles to China even if the tariff is lower. Tesla could export another ten thousand Model S and X a year but that's a tiny drop in the ocean. It's great for Tesla but I think that China knew all along that the tariff of 25% was unsustainable so this concession is minimal. Getting a factory in Shanghai with no JV would be very important.

 

[JRP3]

Yes, if you heap on massive incentives the the government can have an impact. The US would go broke doing that.

No, not if structured properly.

 

[Yggdrasill]

The problem with that in the US is that it would impact the poor more and they just cannot afford to pay more for transportation, which they require to get to work. We are a very large and diverse country, Norway is a very small and rich country with very little diversity. Its silly to compare the two.

Like JRP3 says, it can be structured correctly. The US could have a 50% tax on new vehicles for the value of the car exceeding 30k USD, where the tax is weighted by MPG. Like 100 MPG(e) = 0% tax, 30 MPG = 50% tax.

Of course, I certainly don't think anything like this is likely to occur.

 

[Ovulation]

The China thing is very import, China is Teslas second biggest market, even with their ridiculous high import taxes. A trade war between China and the U.S with Tesla in the middle of it because Elon couldn't control his big mouth (looked like that the last few days) would have been very painful, especially for me alls a shareholder.

 

[Drax7]

Like JRP3 says, it can be structured correctly. The US could have a 50% tax on new vehicles for the value of the car exceeding 30k USD, where the tax is weighted by MPG. Like 100 MPG(e) = 0% tax, 30 MPG = 50% tax.

Of course, I certainly don't think anything like this is likely to occur.

Or just tax carbon as the master Elon suggested

 

[bambam4171]

The China thing is very import, China is Teslas second biggest market, even with their ridiculous high import taxes. A trade war between China and the U.S with Tesla in the middle of it because Elon couldn't control his big mouth (looked like that the last few days) would have been very painful, especially for me alls a shareholder.

Guess what: His "big mouth" saved you a ton of money then

 

[Yggdrasill]

Or just tax carbon as the master Elon suggested

Sure, but that would impact the lower income households.

You could have a carbon tax combined with stuff to help out lower income households (like in Norway). For instance a higher minimum wage, universal health care and free education.

 

[ValueAnalyst]

Similar to proposing to a woman, without remember her name:

ValueAnalyst on Twitter

and best reply ever:

xtrmmax on Twitter

 

[dc_h]

You do realize that xi wasnt up there knocking down barriers because he really really wanted to right? His hand was forced. In part be Elon's tweet storm, but mostly because Trump was willing to go to war for what is right. Fair and reciprocal trade. Like it or not, Trump and Elon were right and it forced Xi's hand. Now let's see if there is some follow through.

No one wins in a trade war, but everyone can win with the peace. More us companies building factories in China will be good for Chinese workers and the rise of the Chinese middle class which will demand better products, higher quality of life and more freedom. This will all be better for the whole world if the soin to be largest economy in the world is open and more free.

Hit disagree on regs and agree on this. I think there are some hidden costs that can be transferred to society (pollution is an obvious one) and that government, when done wisely, can help alleviate. This goes back to Locke and the point of consenting to government in the first place. if it can't provide some protections to make governed safer than ungoverned, there is loss of faith in the gov't. Obviously this is an issue for the general population in both parties these days. Having traveled in Europe a bit the last year, I am reminded of cause for some concerns regarding my consent. Our airports and roads and baseline education all seem inferior and not marginally. We don't seem to benchmark services and work towards best practices when building roads or trains or airports or school curriculum.
To be on track, EV subsidies of a few billion dollars can have more impact of securing our economy from oil disruption than 2 trillion in securing the middle east has had over the last 20 years. Space policy has 2 private companies offering to provide SLS services for 1% the cost and they are not acceptable either. Government can provide needed services, but to your point, we don't seem to choose effective paths as often as we could.