Is government support for a transition to green energy dead? Will Trump’s government end subsidies to green solutions while maintaining subsidies to big oil? Are you among those who believe that this is an existential issue? Democracy’s power is based on one person one vote. Whereas capitalism is based on number of shares owned. The more shares you own, (i.e. the more money you invest), the bigger/louder your voice. This has been a big part of our problem—that corporations are often louder than the demos (the people). But perhaps there a time when this isn’t a bad thing. Much of Tesla stock’s success came from thousands of people who strongly supported Elon’s vision for our country and the world. As the stock price climbed, institutional investors piled on. Tesla was able to leverage its valuation into yet more capital to further its vision of a sustainable future. I am long Tesla. My plan has always been to hold my shares until the company is strong and profitable, because I believe in Tesla’s vision and its strategy for making sustainable green energy a clear cut winner over carbon-based energy. Tesla’s success is important because they are on the cusp of proving that green energy solutions are the emerging financial winners. It now costs less to build new solar plants than coal or gas-fired plants. And after the initial capital investment, future profits are many many times greater. I would argue that proving this point—THAT GREEN ENERGY WILL BE A BIGGER WIN FOR INVESTORS THAN OIL EVER WAS—is the key to a sustainable future. It’s the investment class rather then government that will drive the change. Unfortunately, whatever good government could have done by way of subsidies and tax incentives, may well be disappearing, at least for the next 4-8 years. For these reasons I have decided to continue investing in Tesla, rather than just holding what I have. I’ll use a dollar cost average approach, putting in a fixed amount on a monthly basis. I’m hoping others will do the same thing, recognizing that if enough people felt the same way, they could have more impact on our future than by putting money into campaigns where, even when the people we like get elected, they remain relatively powerless to change our country quickly enough. Some might suggest that this is wrong. That TSLA’s appreciation should ONLY be based on its financial fundamentals. To them I say hogwash. Disruptive companies have never been primarily about fundamentals. Yes—they should be well managed, capable of using their capital to grow and sustain themselves. But disrupters are ALWAYS in a battle against the status quo, the established companies who do everything in their power to put their finger on the scale in order to maintain what they have and slow down progress. And a brief word for the shorts out there. For some, making more money is more important than anything. Good for you. It’s your right. But you know something? I think we each have one life to lead. When mine is over, I’d rather feel that I’ve made a difference, that I’ve stood for something, rather than just accumulated a bigger pile than the next guy. So have at it, but I’m betting that the people who believe in a sustainable future will, in the end, win. And if we don’t, all the money in the world won’t make much difference. So, for those of us who are fortunate enough to have the resources, even those of us who hate how corporations have usurped our democracy, I urge you to consider a possible exception. Let’s use the power of capitalism for a good cause.