Hacker News Reader

Comment by throw310822 | Hacker News Reader

Seems far-fetched that Musk would try to derail one single railway construction project to benefit his cars and industry- the impact of that project on his economic interests seems too small and indirect.

But I can imagine Musk being outraged at the idea of spending an enormous amount of money to build a project that is already old and uninspiring by the current standards. And it's not like Musk's perception of how public administrations waste money by applying the same old schemes again and again is entirely naive and wrong- he revolutionised the world's space industry based on those perceptions. He probably wanted to say "hey, with some imagination and research you can build something new and better for less".

View on HN

Everything I've seen from Musk makes me believe that he wants to win, on his terms, full stop. The undermining of public will to invest in public transportation is real. A functioning subway and rail system in LA would dramatically cut down on the number of cars on the roads, which would be reflected in fewer cars sold. This fairly straightforward and logical: Musk loses if there are more trains built.

He also didn't try to build something better; he floated an idea for something worse. Transportation doesn't need some "new technology" to solve the problems of moving people around; trains have existed for a very long time now.

> he wants to win, on his terms

He wants full control over transportation and communication infrastructure. It's really just that simple. Doesn't matter what it cost, profit (for shareholders at least) has never been the primary goal.

> A functioning subway and rail system in LA would dramatically cut down on the number of cars on the roads, which would be reflected in fewer cars sold. This fairly straightforward and logical: Musk loses if there are more trains built.

You're honestly saying that reduced cars, and therefore Tesla sales in one city in one country is going to hurt Tesla/Musk?

Do you realize the Tesla Model Y is now the second best selling vehicle across the entire US, and the best selling car in the entire world? [1]

One city in one country is insignificant at best.

[1] https://www.theverge.com/2023/5/26/23738581/tesla-model-y-ev...

Is it? California's population is roughly the same as all of Canada's.

> A functioning subway and rail system in LA

> California's population

Goalposts go in the ground. They stay fixed in place.

Yes, it is. Do you think that everyone who would ride the train can afford a Tesla or any other new car? Of course not

As soon as traffic becomes reasonable because of extensive public transportation...people will go back to using cars.

Really the only perk of public transport is not having to deal with traffic and parking. But as soon as traffic and parking are not an issue, people will always prefer cars.

I mean, I'd love it if everyone took the train to work. Then I could zip right in using my own comfy car and park right next to my job.

> As soon as traffic becomes reasonable because of extensive public transportation...

City councils can start doing the inverse of what they’ve been doing. Traffic increases, so roads are widened, more parking is created, leading to more cars, and traffic increases.

As traffic decreases, roads can be changed to reduce the focus on cars, and increase the focus on other forms of transport / pedestrians / additional commerce, which then serves to discourage further traffic because … there’s nowhere to create more space for cars anymore.

See various European major cities (e.g. London, or less so, Madrid) for examples of this happening in real time.

You can’t zip in and park next to work if there’s only a single lane of one way traffic permitted on each road, and there’s only 100 parking spaces within a 5 min walk of your office (and about 10,000 people working in that area)

Exactly this. In London they have even reduced the number of car parks new apartment buildings are allocated. One place I looked at only had ~20 parks for ~80 flats. They can only do this because there’s a great public transport system in place.

Have you ever lived in a city or country with a well-functioning public transportation network? It doesn't sound like it. In such a context, the only reasons 99% of people prefer cars / vans is: 1) cost, 2) if you need to transport big stuff, 3) if you need the flexibility

2) and 3) are only true for a small subset of people, e.g. for handymen or people who transport stuff regularly

1) cost is the big one, and currently a big reason that trains are sometimes more expensive than cars, at least in Germany, is subsidies and external costs. Also, that people underestimate what owning and operating a car costs, and just compare the train ticket price to the gas price for a specific trip.

Is it farfetched though?

What is more farfetches: 1) trying to derail a project that might hurt your interests 2) getting into an argument with some cave divers that are trying to rescue some kids and call them pedophiles 3) jeopardizing everyone's safety by testing experimental tech on the public roads. I could go on

1) seems perfectly reasonable to me and it's not unique to Musk. Happens all the time.

Car companies most certainly have a history of killing public transit. They convinced cities to rip up street car networks so they could sell buses and tires, cheapening the experience and ultimately resulting in more private cars.

>Seems far-fetched that Musk would try to derail one single railway construction project to benefit his cars and industry- the impact of that project on his economic interests seems too small and indirect.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_consp...

> But I can imagine Musk being outraged at the idea of spending an enormous amount of money to build a project that is already old and uninspiring by the current standards.

The thing about the current standards is they demonstrably work, whereas vactrains have been the epitome of “nice idea, won’t work” for over a century (there were quite serious engineering studies in the 70s and they did not end well). And the US probably shouldn’t be trying to run before it can walk here; its first real high-speed line (Accela hardly counts) should probably use proven tech.

> Musk told me that the idea originated out of his hatred for California’s proposed high-speed rail system. … He insisted the Hyperloop would cost about $6 billion to $10 billion, go faster than a plane, and let people drive their cars onto a pod and drive out into a new city. At the time, it seemed that Musk had dished out the Hyperloop proposal just to make the public and legislators rethink the high-speed train. He didn’t actually intend to build the thing. … With any luck, the high-speed rail would be canceled. Musk said as much to me during a series of e-mails and phone calls leading up to the announcement.

Did you read the linked article?

Yeah. He proposed an alternative idea that would cost ten times less and would be much faster. And said from the start he would not build it himself. I don't see where it contradicts what I wrote.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com