Impressive, he has passion, vision and determination, he is truly a great entrepreneur, maybe the boldest of these times.
I do not consider significant reliance on the state for funding the mark of a great entrepreneur. Musk has a bold vision, and the tenacity to execute on it, and that is commendable. But not without significant aid.
I think maybe your bar is set too high.
Our government distributes enough risk to me already, while letting the pseudo entrepreneurs keep all the upside. That's the reason all those credit default swaps made by Goldman Sachs and others were paid for by the taxpayer.
"48 companies that have received more than $100 million in state grants since 2007." http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/12/01/us/government-...
In U.S. budget-ese, you describe costs over a 10 year span, so that's a "$5 trillon tax hike".
The point being that the EV subsidy is small potatoes. I still think it's a bad idea. Tax the gas. Let producers and consumers figure out how to use less, and let governments figure out how to compensate for the regressiveness of the tax.
EDIT: Also, you can't just give it all back. As long as emissions continue at something near current levels, you have to spend it on amelioration. It doesn't just become a slush fund.
Transporting stuff doesn't need to use all that much oil. Neither does growing.
The very worst case, of course, is any who find themselves paying higher prices but unable for whatever reason to access the stipend.
I'd say as much of it as we can, equally per-capita.
> Some poor people drive a lot.
And either they will change their behavior, or be hurt less than if we didn't give the money back. As people generally change their behavior they will likely have more options, as demand rises for alternative modes of transportation (and for goods and services that involve burning less gas) leading to greater economies of scale.
> Some poor people don't drive at all.
But they still buy goods that were shipped by burning gas. Even so, they'll benefit more than others, but I don't think that's a problem.
> Also, you can't just give it all back. As long as emissions continue at something near current levels, you have to spend it on amelioration. It doesn't just become a slush fund.
We can certainly talk about taking a piece for amelioration, but I don't think paying that out of the general fund is unrealistic; it's what we'd be doing otherwise, and it'll be way cheaper if people have adjusted their behavior to reflect the true costs of their actions.
Governments are the source of all wealth.
Subsidies, tax breaks, issuing debts, give aways (pork), purchases, loans, war profiteering, patents, etc.
Everything.
Government even protects people's property rights.
Without governments, there is no wealth.
Personally, I'm quite proud that the US Govt is funding alternate energy, electric transportation, and space exploration. Many of the past investments have worked out quite well. I'm bullish about these investments too.
I have to disagree on that. Governments are the arbiter of most wealth, via taxation, subsidies, spending, the court system, etc. "Wealth" comes from production, transformation, and trade. I've taken a tree and nurtured it so that it produces fruit. The world is now one fruit-producing tree wealthier. I trade fruit with my neighbor for wool, because I value some quantity of wool higher than I value some quantity of fruit, and my neighbor values the fruit more than the wool. We are now each wealthier for trading something we have in excess for something we do not have.
The government then takes some of my fruit to feed the soldiers defending my land. Government's role in the economy is mandatory trade for the benefit of the society as a whole. I must provide fruit to the soldiers whether I want to or not. Sometimes there is a net gain through these trades (see space exploration, for example). Other times the gain from this trade is disputed (see California's high speed rail project).
Tesla is a recipient of government subsidy, but you pretty much have to operate in the auto market. Everybody else (big auto companies, big oil) are the recipients of massive subsidies too.