re: Tesla’s raping of the American taxpayer is coming to an end

I don't think I'm misunderstanding the hate for Musk, I think your specific concerns are the exception here compared with general "frick the libs" sentiment

quote:

---

Whether the costs are indirectly passed down to the consumer via an import tax, through higher prices and less purchasing power, or direct costs in the firm of a tax, the final cost is all that matters. And at least the tax is a more transparent "screw you."

---

Incorrect, because with a subsidy we ALL are forced to pay towards whatever, whereas with a tariff only those who CHOOSE to buy said product pay the tariff. The rest of us aren't out any money.

A SIGNIFICANT difference.

quote:

---

Incorrect, because with a subsidy we ALL are forced to pay towards whatever, whereas with a tariff only those who CHOOSE to buy said product pay the tariff. The rest of us aren't out any money.

A SIGNIFICANT difference.

---

So it’s government redistribution of wealth toward a particular company/industry. Got it. I guess I could choose not to purchase steel or anything that uses it, otherwise the government is taking my money.

And because it’s a raw material for goods, companies here in the US all that use steel in their products all of the sudden have an increased cost to deal with. And then when counter tariffs are put up on completely unrelated exports of ours so other US businesses miss out on revenue and downsize. So not only would government be taking my money for redistribution as a steel consumer, other people are losing jobs because of counter tariffs on widgets.

M A G A
A
G
A

quote:

---

Incorrect, because with a subsidy we ALL are forced to pay towards whatever, whereas with a tariff only those who CHOOSE to buy said product pay the tariff. The rest of us aren't out any money.

---

The $7,500 federal tax credit is for the first 200,000 cars a company sells so that's that's 15 billion, over some number of years. And that just gets added to a 21 trillion and rising debt talent apparently nobody cares about and apparently far less important than I thought it was.

As for tarrifs, that's really dependent on what is getting taxed. If it's a specific product, then you're point is much more valid. But if it's an important material or resource, like the steel and aluminum tarrif then it's hard--maybe impossible--for anyone to avoid the costs.

And in the case of steel and aluminum, the government is specifically putting a tax on any downstream business that relies on steel or aluminum. It's not just giving a select few a benefit (like tax credits), it's specifically giving those other companies the opposite, an increase in costs and a disadvantage. Whereas subsidies give advantages, the disadvantage is in not getting the subsidy, which competitors may actually choose to pursue anyways. It's not specifically increasing costs on those companies like a tarrif.

So the slightly less than $81 billion the US invested in GM & Chrysler from 2009 until 2013-essentially nationalizing them-while losing approximately $10 billion in the process is somehow now forgotten about while we denigrate a company trying to compete with them that-STOP THE PRESSES-took government subsidies!

The interesting thing is that as of 2015, Musk’s companies had benefitted from approximately $4.9 billion in subsidies, which is 90% less than GM, over a third less than GMAC, and less than half of Chrysler.

That $4.9 billion figure also covers all of his businesses...not just Tesla. So if we are talking about automotive companies taking subsidies, Tesla’s a bream in a pond full of overweight, aging Great Whites.

He’s also done all of this against a huge amount of intense lobbying at every government level designed to prevent his company from selling and marketing its product on an even playing field to that of its competitors.

But don’t let me get in the way of this spin/narrative session.