Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

California officials reject subsidies for SpaceX over Tesla spat

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 90 posts

Re: California officials reject subsidies for SpaceX over Tesla spat

#21

Post by throwaway45783 »

msandford wrote: post #4
new_realist wrote: post #2

Contrary to what Tesla told Alameda County, the Tesla factory is (illegally) in full production, producing cars sitting on Pier 80 for export to Europe and China. https://tslaq.org/letter-from-the-saf-to-alameda-county-offi... That’s not an essential activity; it’s just greedily risking California lives to serve luxury car consumers abroad. I’m not surprised that California is none too happy with Elon.

So are we going to ban all cars now? Average automobile deaths are ~30k per year. They're non essential. Let's all stop driving. "do whatever it takes to save lives"

That's a whataboutism. And actually driving is essential if you live on the west coast. And we should be doing everything we can to make it so that it's not essential, but it turns out that's a deeply political issue.

Re: California officials reject subsidies for SpaceX over Tesla spat

#22

Post by new_realist »

throwaway45783 wrote: post #21
msandford wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So are we going to ban all cars now? Average automobile deaths are ~30k per year. They're non essential. Let's all stop driving. "do whatever it takes to save lives"

That's a whataboutism. And actually driving is essential if you live on the west coast. And we should be doing everything we can to make it so that it's not essential, but it turns out that's a deeply political issue.

These cars are not being made for California, but for China. Tesla has adequate inventory for sale in the US.

Re: California officials reject subsidies for SpaceX over Tesla spat

#23

Post by burrows »

all2well wrote: post #8
briandear wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it greedy for a worker to want to feed their family? Serious question.

Call me crazy, but I don't think people should be threatened with starvation if they don't work

Ok, you’re crazy.

Me: Who produces the food if no one works?

You: Food producers are essential workers so food production is unaffected.

Me: How do people outside the food industry pay for the food without working?

You: They don’t. The government taxes future productive efforts of other people to buy the food.

Me: But I don’t want the government to take my future dollars and give them away.

You: Too bad chump.

Re: California officials reject subsidies for SpaceX over Tesla spat

#24

Post by new_realist »

Nightshaxx wrote: post #14
koolba wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The illegal act is arbitrarily shutting down the ability to earn a livelihood. When these cases make their way through the courts I’m thinking they’re going to side with the Musks, not the Newsoms.

Why shut down jobs if they can be safely done with social distancing? Preventing someone from being to exercise their freedoms and feed their family when they aren't harming others is just illogical panic.

The factory was scheduled to reopen in a week, but Elon had to start earlier, before negotiations had completed. I suspect there was a requirement or two by the county he didn’t like.

Re: California officials reject subsidies for SpaceX over Tesla spat

#25

Post by rajangdavis »

msandford wrote: post #4
new_realist wrote: post #2

Contrary to what Tesla told Alameda County, the Tesla factory is (illegally) in full production, producing cars sitting on Pier 80 for export to Europe and China. https://tslaq.org/letter-from-the-saf-to-alameda-county-offi... That’s not an essential activity; it’s just greedily risking California lives to serve luxury car consumers abroad. I’m not surprised that California is none too happy with Elon.

So are we going to ban all cars now? Average automobile deaths are ~30k per year. They're non essential. Let's all stop driving. "do whatever it takes to save lives"

That's not taking the argument in good faith. Car accidents aren't infectious and furthermore, we don't see 30k deaths in the span of 2 months.

I think Musk could have fared better working with the government to make it feasible to work in the Tesla factories and limit exposure and provide a model for other businesses. Instead he just went ahead and has no guarantee that his employees won't be exposed.

Re: California officials reject subsidies for SpaceX over Tesla spat

#26

Post by all2well »

burrows wrote: post #23
all2well wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Call me crazy, but I don't think people should be threatened with starvation if they don't work

Ok, you’re crazy. Me: Who produces the food if no one works? You: Food producers are essential workers so food production is unaffected. Me: How do people outside the food industry pay for the food without working? You: They don’t. The government taxes future productive efforts of other people to buy the food. Me: But I don’t want the government to take my future dollars and give them away. You: Too bad chump.

A better answer, from your perspective, would probably be that private charity and food banks deal with this problem already, right?

Re: California officials reject subsidies for SpaceX over Tesla spat

#27

Post by augustt »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #18
vulcan01 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is assuming that Musk is a rational person...

I actually quite enjoy when he’s exuberant, makes it more interesting. Boring leaders are boring. In this example, Tesla and SpaceX have created at least tens of thousands of jobs in the state (Tesla indicates 50k+ if you include supplier related jobs), and California might be cutting off its nose to spite its face over $600k. That’s a very California thing to do, and if Musk loses his shit over that, it’d be a very…

That kind of thinking got us #45. Some things are more important than entertainment.

Re: California officials reject subsidies for SpaceX over Tesla spat

#28

Post by TylerE »

koolba wrote: post #7
new_realist wrote: post #2

Contrary to what Tesla told Alameda County, the Tesla factory is (illegally) in full production, producing cars sitting on Pier 80 for export to Europe and China. https://tslaq.org/letter-from-the-saf-to-alameda-county-offi... That’s not an essential activity; it’s just greedily risking California lives to serve luxury car consumers abroad. I’m not surprised that California is none too happy with Elon.

The illegal act is arbitrarily shutting down the ability to earn a livelihood. When these cases make their way through the courts I’m thinking they’re going to side with the Musks, not the Newsoms.

I would hardly call it an arbitrary shutdown. Pandemic, ya know.

Re: California officials reject subsidies for SpaceX over Tesla spat

#29

Post by [deleted] »

augustt wrote: post #27
toomuchtodo wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually quite enjoy when he’s exuberant, makes it more interesting. Boring leaders are boring. In this example, Tesla and SpaceX have created at least tens of thousands of jobs in the state (Tesla indicates 50k+ if you include supplier related jobs), and California might be cutting off its nose to spite its face over $600k. That’s a very California thing to do, and if Musk loses his shit over that, it’d be a very…

That kind of thinking got us #45. Some things are more important than entertainment.

[deleted]

Re: California officials reject subsidies for SpaceX over Tesla spat

#30

Post by protomyth »

new_realist wrote: post #15
msandford wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So are we going to ban all cars now? Average automobile deaths are ~30k per year. They're non essential. Let's all stop driving. "do whatever it takes to save lives"

COVID deaths are near 90K in the US (so far).

[deleted - I didn't mean anything like the reply]
Post reply on HN