5 ms·

To rephrase this: Did all students get A on the exam? Did all even try to learn to get good grade? No. And why should it matter. Ones who did put some effort in

by hb1742 13y ago

To rephrase this: Did all students get A on the exam? Did all even try to learn to get good grade? No. And why should it matter. Ones who did put some effort into learning got the loan. Others didn't. OMG HOW IS THAT FAIR? Yup, unfair indeed, lol.

eightyone 13y ago
There shouldn't even have been a loan in the first place. The government has no right to dole out taxpayer money in the form of loans to private companies.
bob13579 13y ago
How exactly did Tesla earn an "A" up to that point? Every small electric car manufacturer was losing money left and right. Two smaller startups got the loan (Tesla and Fisker) to survive, while the others didn't (Bright Automotive, etc.). The ones that didn't get the loans went out of business. The one that got the other $500 million loan went out of business (Fisker). Only Tesla survived by having one tiny profitable quarter (which was a low single digit profitable quarter where they sold 3000 cars to rich people).
- Confusion 13y ago
  > How exactly did Tesla earn an "A" up to that point? Business plan, business model, customer research, advances already made, further along, ... There are dozens of possible reasons to loan $500M to Tesla, but not to another company. There are dozens of possible reasons why you would loan $1000 to one friend, but not to another. Someone else wouldn't know those reasons, but if the friend complained about you being unfair, you would be quite miffed if someone went on the internet complaining how unfair you were, based on treating two people differently, without considering that maybe these people actually are different. These companies may be alike in trying to sell an electric car. That does not make them comparable for the purposes of giving them a loan.
  - bob13579 13y ago
    So the government is now a venture capitalist or investment bank and should be encouraged to pick winners and losers now? It's quite funny that these Tesla Roadsters are being bought by rich Americans, and being subsidized by average Americans, and yet there seems to be no outrage from those purportedly upset about inequality. The average American isn't benefiting by enriching billionaires and millionaires with their $100,000 roadsters.
    - scythe 13y ago
      >So the government is now a venture capitalist or investment bank and should be encouraged to pick winners and losers now? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_General_Theory_of_Employment,_Interest_and_Money http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_General_Theory_of_Employmen... We've come a long way since the 1930s, haven't we? Yes, the government can do these things, and -gasp- it works, on a small scale, under certain conditions (economic depression). The "$500m subsidy" to Tesla costs taxpayers zero after being repaid -- but represents a loan from the median taxpayer of about, oh, I dunno, seventy-five cents.
      - bob13579 13y ago
        The federal tax credit of $7,500, plus any state subsidies, for each Tesla sold doesn't ring a bell to you?
        scythe 13y ago
        I should perhaps note that that isn't a subsidy to Tesla: it applies to every electric car manufacturer. It's not relevant to the question, which is, "did Tesla succeed "unfairly" w.r.t. other makers?". It's also a red herring for your previous argument about inequality: "Both the Nissan Leaf electric vehicle and the Chevrolet Volt plug-in hybrid, launched in December 2010, are eligible for the maximum $7,500 tax credit." -- these are cheap vehicles. But yes, now that you've successfully moved the goalpost, I might have to revise my estimate of seventy-five cents.

by hb1742 13y ago

eightyone 13y ago

There shouldn't even have been a loan in the first place. The government has no right to dole out taxpayer money in the form of loans to private companies.

bob13579 13y ago

How exactly did Tesla earn an "A" up to that point? Every small electric car manufacturer was losing money left and right. Two smaller startups got the loan (Tesla and Fisker) to survive, while the others didn't (Bright Automotive, etc.). The ones that didn't get the loans went out of business. The one that got the other $500 million loan went out of business (Fisker). Only Tesla survived by having one tiny profitable quarter (which was a low single digit profitable quarter where they sold 3000 cars to rich people).

Confusion 13y ago
> How exactly did Tesla earn an "A" up to that point? Business plan, business model, customer research, advances already made, further along, ... There are dozens of possible reasons to loan $500M to Tesla, but not to another company. There are dozens of possible reasons why you would loan $1000 to one friend, but not to another. Someone else wouldn't know those reasons, but if the friend complained about you being unfair, you would be quite miffed if someone went on the internet complaining how unfair you were, based on treating two people differently, without considering that maybe these people actually are different. These companies may be alike in trying to sell an electric car. That does not make them comparable for the purposes of giving them a loan.
- bob13579 13y ago
  So the government is now a venture capitalist or investment bank and should be encouraged to pick winners and losers now? It's quite funny that these Tesla Roadsters are being bought by rich Americans, and being subsidized by average Americans, and yet there seems to be no outrage from those purportedly upset about inequality. The average American isn't benefiting by enriching billionaires and millionaires with their $100,000 roadsters.
  - scythe 13y ago
    >So the government is now a venture capitalist or investment bank and should be encouraged to pick winners and losers now? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_General_Theory_of_Employment,_Interest_and_Money http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_General_Theory_of_Employmen... We've come a long way since the 1930s, haven't we? Yes, the government can do these things, and -gasp- it works, on a small scale, under certain conditions (economic depression). The "$500m subsidy" to Tesla costs taxpayers zero after being repaid -- but represents a loan from the median taxpayer of about, oh, I dunno, seventy-five cents.
    - bob13579 13y ago
      The federal tax credit of $7,500, plus any state subsidies, for each Tesla sold doesn't ring a bell to you?
      - scythe 13y ago
        I should perhaps note that that isn't a subsidy to Tesla: it applies to every electric car manufacturer. It's not relevant to the question, which is, "did Tesla succeed "unfairly" w.r.t. other makers?". It's also a red herring for your previous argument about inequality: "Both the Nissan Leaf electric vehicle and the Chevrolet Volt plug-in hybrid, launched in December 2010, are eligible for the maximum $7,500 tax credit." -- these are cheap vehicles. But yes, now that you've successfully moved the goalpost, I might have to revise my estimate of seventy-five cents.