By on August 4, 2016

Elon Musk + Tesla Model S Circa 2011

The dialogue from Tesla wasn’t all rainbows and puppies this week.

In oddly coordinated diatribes, CEO Elon Musk and his vice-president of business development took off the soft driving gloves and laid into their competition and the country’s regulators. The message? Put up, pay up, or shut up.

At a Michigan industry conference on Tuesday, Diarmuid O’Connell raked other automakers over the coals for not building enough electric cars. And the ones they do build? Nothing but “kitchen appliances,” he said, according to Forbes. Too small of a range, and to high a price, he added. That adds up to very few vehicles sold.

“The industry is not even trying,” O’Connell said.

O’Connell then slammed the Environmental Protection Agency and California Air Resources Board for not updating their regulations to force automakers to develop more zero emissions vehicles. (California law calls for 15 percent of its fleet to be ZEV by 2025, and automakers who fall short with their product line must buy credits to offset the thirsty fleets.)

Naturally, the rest of the industry picked up the glove and slapped back, arguing that consumers should drive the market, not regulators. “Fuel efficiency is important, but at a price people can afford,” said Wesley Lutz, a representative from the National Automobile Dealers Association.

Fast-forward one day, and Tesla’s CEO launched into a similar tirade during an earnings call. Musk wants CARB’s emissions credits program overhauled, because he feels the regulations aren’t spurring EV sales.

“The California Air Resources Board is being incredibly weak in its application of ZEV credits,” Musk said, according to Bloomberg. “The standards are pathetically low. They need to be increased. There’s massive lobbying by the big car companies from increasing the ZEV credit mandate, which they absolutely damn well should. CARB should damn well be ashamed of themselves.”

What’s going on here? Is this legitimate anger we’re seeing, or just grandstanding and PR? Some might say that Tesla’s soapbox is so high, it can’t see the 200-mile Chevrolet Bolt EV that will launch a year before Tesla’s first affordable electric, the Model 3. Other automakers, including Ford, Nissan and Hyundai, are also preparing 200-plus-mile EVs for launch within a couple of years.

It sounds like Tesla’s EV for the masses will have competition when it arrives. As it stands now, the cheapest Tesla is the newly downgraded Model S 60 that retails for $66,000 (before government incentives).

The EPA, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and CARB are in the midst of a review of their 2025 fuel economy targets. In a preliminary technical report, the agencies said automakers made great technological strides towards achieving the corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) goal of 54.5 miles per gallon. To reach the goal, the agencies claim only two to three percent of the country’s fleet would need to be electric by 2025.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

82 Comments on “Elon Musk and Top Tesla Exec Stage Angry Man Speaking Tour...”


  • avatar
    VoGo

    Most traditional ICE carmakers spend millions on lobbyists to get their way with the legislatures and regulators. What’s wrong with Musk speaking his mind and offering a counterpoint?

    Every successful CEO pushes for his company. Musk is just a lot more effective than Barra, mulletboy or sweaterguy.

  • avatar
    Pch101

    I think that you guys missed the Q2 earnings report. (I say that somewhat sarcastically, as there were no earnings.)

    Also, totally off topic, but California is on the cusp of formally legalizing lane splitting.

    • 0 avatar
      VoGo

      I was surprised TTAC didn’t report on TSLA Q2 earnings, as these articles tend to generate a lot of heat.

      I’ll come out and state the obvious: Financially, Tesla’s Q2 was a complete mess. More losses. Wider losses. S,G&A is absurdly high. They don’t even bother to break out Model S/X profitability out of sheer hubris. Disappointing.

      Tesla fans will point to the solid business fundamentals. They completed design on the Model 3 and appear to have ramped up Model S/X production successfully. All true, and the stock market was unphased as the stock traded slightly lower.

      Still, I really wish their CFO had more clout and could talk some sense into Musk.

      • 0 avatar
        mcs

        >> Still, I really wish their CFO had more clout and could talk some sense into Musk.

        I’ve got to agree with you there. I’m not happy with the Solar City merger – better left until post Model 3. On the technical side, I’m not happy with them going with Mobileyes monovision system.

        • 0 avatar
          VoGo

          The entire Solar City thing is a ridiculous side show. So is the dead ex-Navy Seal. And getting your picture taken with Amber Heard. And tweeting about your sleeping bag on the factory floor.

          Focus on gaining scale in electric cars. All day. Every day.

      • 0 avatar
        Pch101

        ” They don’t even bother to break out Model S/X profitability out of sheer hubris.”

        Well, nobody does that sort of thing. In any case, there are no profits to report.

        I’ve said this before: Tesla’s business does not scale. If it sells more cars, then it just loses more money.

        The auto business needs to scale in order to produce profit. Tesla is a manufacturing company that can only hope in the best case scenario to have low profit margins, not a tech company that can produce enormous profits once it hits a sweet spot. Combine that with high input costs, and that makes scale an issue.

        There is a reason why automotive startups are rare, and it isn’t because everyone else is a coward or an idiot.

      • 0 avatar

        I’m confused by these “solid business fundamentals.” Tesla lost $293 million in Q2. The last earnings peak was back in December of 2013 which was a loss of only 16 million. Since then it’s been all downhill. A highly accelerated downhill. Whatever it is they’re doing, it doesn’t look to be a solid strategy.

        If the go-shop thing doesn’t provide a new player, the Q3 losses and the foreseeable future quarterlies are going to make this latest earnings report look like the good old days.

        • 0 avatar
          VoGo

          WR
          I made a distinction between financial and business metrics. I made clear the financials and my opinion on them. I then discussed the business metrics and Tesla’s progress.

          You then confused business with financial metrics.

          I can only presume that if you and PCH are much smarter than the market which continues to value TSLA at $30B+.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            So the market never overvalues stock? That’s your rebuttal?

            Warren Buffett wouldn’t touch Tesla stock. Is he an idiot, too?

          • 0 avatar
            VoGo

            I don’t recall calling Warren Buffet an idiot. But its pretty obvious that the market values TSLA for something other than current profitability.

            My rebuttal is the same one I always give to doubters: Short the stock! Short the stock, earn big dollars and laugh all the way to the bank.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            I’m shocked that there was a dot-bomb at all. I mean, how could the dumb money ever possibly get anything wrong?

          • 0 avatar
            stuki

            The market’s assigning a high probability to Tesla being sufficiently PC to have a sugardaddy backstopping them.

            Musk’s just a bit frustrated with Sugardaddy right now, so he throws a tantrum. Until he gets what he wants.

            Now that virtually all outcomes are politically determined, it is likely wise business strategy to frame Tesla’s problems in terms of they-the-evil-virgin-mooslem-polluters vs us-the-innovative-fashionably-people-who-care-about-making-gaia-safe-for-quinoa. When in a childish world, act like a child etc…

          • 0 avatar
            JD23

            “I can only presume that if you and PCH are much smarter than the market which continues to value TSLA at $30B+.”

            You’re a staunch adherent to the Efficient Market Theory?

          • 0 avatar
            VoGo

            Stuki,
            I see that your first thought is about getting a sugardaddy.

            Project much?

    • 0 avatar
      orenwolf

      “Also, totally off topic, but California is on the cusp of formally legalizing lane splitting.”

      I;m somewhat surprised this took so long. in NorCal at least, everyone does this like it’s legal anyway.

  • avatar
    bikegoesbaa

    Please stop using “slammed” unless you are talking about actual WWE-style body slams.

    There are so many other words that are both more accurate and less trendy.

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    My opinion for Elon Musk is this.

    Elon Melon should only have the same level of socialised handouts that the other auto manufacturers receive.

    Elon is starting to show some desperation in his approach, highlighting his narcissism.

    I do think Tesla is a house of cards.

    Maybe Elon Melon can do a deal with the Scientologists to up his sales numbers, or just start his own religion based on himself and use the Tesla name for the religion.

    Call the belief Tesla-ism and the followers Telsa-ites.

  • avatar
    JimZ

    ““The California Air Resources Board is being incredibly weak in its application of ZEV credits,” Musk said, according to Bloomberg. “The standards are pathetically low. They need to be increased.”

    So I can sell more credits!

  • avatar
    orenwolf

    I don’t know about this credit thing, but I do know that Tesla is creating EVs that should be gaining it credits to swap, but hasn’t been able to. What I don’t know is why. I presume that’s part of what his rant is. The article cut off the end of his statement, but it basically was “[A]s a result, you can barely sell the ZEV credits for pennies on the dollar.”

    IMHO, If you’re going to pass a credit system for EVs, then it should be applied properly. Otherwise remove it. From what I can parse, Tesla’s asking CARB to enforce the rules already in place, not to create new ones. Seems fair to me, unless they’re going to be removed.

    • 0 avatar
      mdao

      There’s an oversupply of ZEV credits on the market compared to the number of credits that are needed for auto manufacturing to meet CARB compliance targets. This oversupply means that Tesla is sitting on a lot of worthless credits.

      Tesla wants to increase the percentage of ZEV vehicles CARB requires so that their ZEV credits are worth something again.

  • avatar
    NickS

    Even though I may agree with some of what those two say at the 60,000 foot level, the reality is that not everyone can afford a $60 grand car and someone needs to make cars for that segment and sell enough of them to make something out of the low margin. Let’s not even mention how you kinda want to have some black fonts in your financial statements.

    Someone get that overgrown child away from the mic and the tweeter.

  • avatar
    Kenmore

    Angwy Chipmunk is reinforcing my interest in the Bolt.

  • avatar
    VoGo

    Can TTAC use its vast influence with Hollywood to ensure that when the movie of Elon Musk’s life is made, that Seth McFarlane is cast in the lead?

  • avatar
    indi500fan

    Once again to the B&B:

    which makes a retail delivery first

    Model 3
    Elio
    Mitsu PHEV

  • avatar
    Kendahl

    Tesla complains that regulators aren’t forcing their competition to build more expensive electric vehicles. As Bark pointed out earlier today, people already have a hard time paying for cheaper gasoline powered models. Sounds like Tesla is pulling a Marie Antoinette. If you can’t afford a Model S, you shouldn’t have an automobile at all.

    • 0 avatar
      VoGo

      Tesla is literally moving heaven and earth to bring a cool electric car to market at the average cost of a new vehicle.

      Try supporting your anti-elitism with fact.

      • 0 avatar
        JimZ

        Chevy is going to beat them to it.

        unless the Bolt isn’t “cool,” where “cool” is defined as “is a Tesla.”

        • 0 avatar
          VoGo

          I’m sure GM will be as successful with the Bolt as they were with their previous attempts, such as:
          – EV1
          – hybrid Silverado
          – hybrid Vue
          – Cadillac ELR

          It’s great PR and all, but GM must have 60 vehicles in the US today, and I am stumped to call even one of them best in class or something I’d spend my own money on.

          For 40 years, Honda has OWNED them with the Accord. Try walking before you hurt yourself trying to sprint like Usain.

          • 0 avatar
            JimZ

            The EV1 was never a retail product, the ELR was a cynical ploy to recoup some of the Volt’s development costs with a way overpriced cadillac, the Silverado hybrid died because of the GM and Chrysler bankruptcy (the two-mode transmission was brilliant and had buy-in from Daimler and BMW, more than Tesla could come up with) and the Vue died with Saturn as a condition of the bankruptcy proceedings.

            so what’s your point?

          • 0 avatar
            VoGo

            My point is that mediocre just doesn’t cut it anymore. GM is a dog of a company with dog product. Whether it is the brand new Cruze (inferior to Civic) or brand new Malibu (inferior to Accord) or eons old Equinox (way inferior to CR-V), GM sells dogs.

            All the products you just defended died because they were mediocre.

            Why would any rational person think the Bolt will be any different? It’s designed, engineered, marketed and built by people with no reason to wake up in the morning, except to collect a mediocre paycheck.

          • 0 avatar
            mdao

            Unsurprisingly, you’ve failed to mention the Volt, which damn near matches Tesla’s total deliveries to date by itself.

            The “walking/running” analogy is far more applicable to Tesla. So far, they’ve discovered a) design’s the easy part, b) you can indeed sell luxury cars at a significant loss, and c) mass market manufacturing is a bitch.

            Realistically, Musk needs to can the “alien dreadnought” talk, poach a some manufacturing talent from the likes of GM, knuckle down and ensure that the Model 3 launch goes smoothly.

          • 0 avatar
            JimZ

            “Why would any rational person think the Bolt will be any different? It’s designed, engineered, marketed and built by people with no reason to wake up in the morning, except to collect a mediocre paycheck.”

            if you think that’s what goes on at the (not-Tesla) car companies, you are incredibly ignorant and I think are being deliberately insulting. You are on the outside looking in, and you’re trying to look in through an opaque wall. Stay in your lane and speak about things you *know* and don’t assume you know things you don’t.

    • 0 avatar
      brandloyalty

      People are having trouble affording new cars?

      Aren’t new car sales at record levels? How many of these cars have crank windows, no radio, one-speed windshield wipers, no a/c, no power door locks, etc. etc? How about the popularity of $50,000 pickups?

  • avatar
    Jerome10

    Jeez, the absurdity flowing from this guy’s mouth is really getting up there.

    So if I can boil it down…. the market doesn’t buy enough of HIS ridiculously expensive electric cars and his proposed solution is to legally force that to happen?

    Sorry, but what an A-Hole. You can’t make money? Quit trying to steal it from everyone else (and same goes to any regulators that might actually be listening to this piece of work). Maybe electric cars aren’t long for this world. Maybe you should have spent time and money elsewhere. Wah wah.

    NOTE: my feelings apply to any company and any lawmakers attempting the same regulatory garbage

    • 0 avatar
      VoGo

      Where was all this passion when TTAC ran articles about mainstream ICE carmakers spending millions on lobbyists?

      • 0 avatar
        TrailerTrash

        VoGo

        you keep mentioning the lobbyist for ICE. What exactly are they lobbying for?
        And is there some comparison for all the green lobbyist in Washington?
        You know…the green lobby is, as Trumps likes to say…Uuuuuge.
        Just wondering what the difference is.

        And, in comparison, the ICE is what basically drives the nation and the entire world. EVs have really no portion of this at all. EVs could leave, just disappear, and the world would not even notice they were gone.

        In the article above, most are reading it as anger from the government not taking action to either make their credits worth more…or force more people to purchase EVs.

        If I were Musk, I would be worried about the big guys coming out with more mass produced, cheaper to buy EVs than his company will ever be able to do.

        As t is right now, he is producing cars for the, I know you get upset with this, elite. His experiment right now is so outa reach of the everyday human it is a joke.

        • 0 avatar
          VoGo

          TT,
          The ICE lobbyists are lobbying for reductions in the CAFE targets. “Oh, it’s too hard for us!”

          Which is exactly what they said in the past about adding safety equipment, the previous CAFE targets and pollution reductions. All of which they met with no problem.

          I just don’t get why people throw such a fuss over a Tesla tweet when the ICE carmakers that they give their hard-earned money to are using it to lobby Congress and regulators to allow them to continue to get lousy gas mileage and continue America’s dependence on oil imports. Just weird to me.

          As far as Tesla being an elite brand, I see it as a valuable asset. It took Mercedes a century of brand building to be essentially where Tesla got in a decade with no advertising. Pretty amazing.

          • 0 avatar
            TrailerTrash

            Not sure the auto industry complained, as you are flat out claiming, about safety reg. The feds never forced auto breaking, back up cams, side warning…all of these are being put into car without any gov regs whatsoever.
            It s market driven.
            Yes, I suppose the gov, if left unchecked, would have us all driving tanks…but if the gov had its way, suicide would be contemplated as out lives would all be vanilla.
            But once again I ask you why you compare the EV to the ICE when there is ot even a measurable comparison when it comes to value to survival on the planet. EVs right now , no matter what you say or feel, are elitist dreams.
            And their source of energy comes from the same old place…coal and nuclear. Thinking any other green source can and will make a difference in powering even the smallest of cities is silly naive.

            IF you wanted to be honest about your man Musk, you would admit his last month has been hell. The purchase recently ws all about family and riches. NOT what a stock holder guardian would do.

        • 0 avatar
          shaker

          What I see is the new crop of EcoBoost and similar turbos that will tout higher CAFE numbers, but will drop MPG dramatically in real-world usage –

          The industry has found a new bait-and-switch that, along with the massive growth of CUV’s, will significantly increase actual gasoline usage in the U.S.

          Edit: Yes, very lightweight, small cars (like the Fiesta) can actually benefit from turbocharging a small motor – but they are the exception in a sea of huge CUV’s, SUV’s and pickups gaming the numbers.

          That, along with the new GDI particulate emissions are going to lead to new asthma cases, allergies and other breathing problems.

          Just think, millions of new turbocharged cars, negotiating stop-and-go traffic, with their “21st Century” powerplants doing the same thing that cars did in the 1960’s – drinking gasoline, generating heat and pollution and making life just a little worse than it was yesterday.

          Ahh, PROGRESS

          • 0 avatar
            derekson

            “That, along with the new GDI particulate emissions are going to lead to new asthma cases, allergies and other breathing problems.”

            VW is actually going to start installing particulate filters on GDI cars as part of their effort to resurrect their reputation. Presumably others will follow.

            http://www.digitaltrends.com/cars/vw-gasoline-particulate-filters-cut-soot/

          • 0 avatar
            shaker

            “particulate filters on GDI cars”

            As I said, “21st Century”. Equivalent of the manure bag for horses.

            I think the ICE has reached its zenith, and is headed downhill. Potentially worse MPG and pollution (if driven differently than the EPA test).

          • 0 avatar
            JimZ

            If you think what’s coming out of the tailpipes of a modern car bears *any* resemblance to what cars were spewing in the 1960s, you need your head checked.

          • 0 avatar
            shaker

            What I’m saying is that we are (with GDI and turbos and CUV’s) essentially starting to go backwards as far as efficiency and pollution are concerned, and in time, the facts will prove me right.

            No matter, gas is cheap, party like it’s 1999.

        • 0 avatar
          heavy handle

          TT,

          Lobbying figures are public and easily searchable. Alternative energy and environment come in around half of automotive manufacturers: 16m vs. 31m YTD. Oil and gas are at 60m YTD.

          Maybe you should start taking a closer look at the stuff “Trumps” tells you. He’s not known for fact-checking the numbers he pulls out of thin air.

  • avatar
    ydnas7

    Ok,I’ll let you in what is happening, on these 2 different schemes. CARB and CAFE. Firstly CARB

    Californian CARB ZEV is like Texas renewable electricity. The natural market supply is so high that the government program means squat all. In Texas, so much wind power was installed that the renewable energy targets are so far exceeded, that they are meaningless.

    Likewise in California, Tesla sold so many ZEVs that California CARB’s program is basically meaningless. CARB board members have actually stated that they are looking at limiting how many credits Tesla can sell, because the market is now so saturated that the credits are presumed nearly worthless. Honda (about the only automaker who buys credits from Tesla) has said it is stupid of the government to punish successful car companies (ie Tesla) for fulfilling the intent of the legislation.

    Basically California CARB is like Texas renewable electricity. The market has supplied so much anyway that the government targets are far exceeded, and thus meaningless. (Texas due to wind power, California due to Tesla)

    This was not CARBs intent. CARB’s bureaucrats/ academics wanted hydrogen cars. Tesla publicly calls them bull shit, fool cells. And has proceeded to knife the market.

  • avatar
    ydnas7

    now about CAFE

    CAFE was a surprising success for the federal bureaucrats and US automakers. Ford’s most popular version of its best selling F150 is actually CAFE 2024 compliant. Give it diesel and better energy recuperation (like suzuki) and it probably is good for CAFE 2030 if such a thing existed. European cars however, its a burden to them.

    I suspect Obama want to leave a post CAFE 2025 legacy, but its not hard to see a further cheap 25% improvement in fueleconomy beyond 2025 requirements without resorting to hybridization or electrification. both the automakers and the bureaucrats know that, so now its a bargaining step. Is there a new increase in fuel economy coming 75,100,109 mpg CAFE or stay at current 54.5mpg targets only.

  • avatar
    alexndr333

    As I near the end of my three-year lease on a Chevrolet Spark EV, I can promise anyone that this car is no appliance. With 130 hp and 400 ft-lbs of torque, it is a hoot to drive – fast in a straight line and sharp around the corners due to its very low center of gravity. I wouldn’t be at all surprised to know that O’Connell at Tesla has never driven a Spark EV or any other brand – he is spouting off with no knowledge.

  • avatar
    JD321

    The *Only^ way Tesla can survive is to get the political terrorists to regulate/legislate ICE vehicles off the roads. I can’t believe you public school goofs can’t figure this out.

    • 0 avatar
      orenwolf

      Speaking of public school, there’s no need to resort to name calling just because people disagree with your opinion, regardless of how “blindingly obvious” it is to you.

      At this point, either Tesla is going to generate billions in revenue with the model 3 or it won’t. It will turn a profit or it won’t. Speculation is fine, but unless you are prescient, there are no answers yet.

      For me personally, I’ve already said that if the bolt is compelling I will seriously consider one. I personally believe it will be too much of an appliance for me. Of course, I may well feel that way about the model 3 after I drive one. I just don’t know, I can only go by the existing models as a guess as to drivability. My investment thus far is minimal, and I’m happy to see how it turns out. But I firmly don’t believe there is “only” one option for Tesla to succeed, and that to be the death of IVE vehicles. Time will tell, public school or no.

      • 0 avatar
        VoGo

        I take pride in being a public school goof. I’m a man of the people, just blue collar vogo, that’s what they call me.

        But what I don’t understand is why ISIS would want ICE cars off the roads. Don’t they make their money off black market oil sales?

        Maybe JD321 with his high fallutin’ private school degree can educate us!

  • avatar
    Driver123

    Tesla needs to stop piling features into cars and rather work on price and reliability to convince masses to buy their cars. Early adopters already bought what they wanted and market for 60K+ cars is limited. Adding more features serves the same early adopters rather than masses. Get basics down: better seats, proper cupholders, storage space rather than designer doors without pockets, make nav that works without cell phone coverage, make sure software updates don’t break functionality – that kind of things.

    • 0 avatar
      orenwolf

      Thing is, for at least the foreseeable future, Tesla will sell every vehicle they can manufacture. Demand is far outstripping supply.

      The new 200 mile BEVs coming may change that, we’ll see.

  • avatar
    jthorner

    Tesla wouldn’t exist without EV mandates and taxpayer funded subsidies and loans. Of course they want more of both.

    Just another whinger.

  • avatar
    Russycle

    “In oddly coordinated diatribes, CEO Elon Musk and his vice-president of business development…”

    Right….it’s so incredibly odd for a CEO and VP to coordinate their messaging. Only a super-villain like Musk could think of that.

  • avatar
    stingray65

    I’ve done some peer reviewed research on the green car market, and BMW probably loses at least $20,000 on each i3 they sell. The only green car that likely earns a profit is the Prius, but that is with about 40%+ of total green car market share and even then the profit is still very small compared to what they make on similarly priced Camry. BMW and Toyota can afford to sell low/no profit green cars because they make good money on their regular cars, CUVs, and trucks and can therefore subsidize their green compliance vehicles. Tesla manages to lose money on a relatively high volume high priced car, even though they receive vast subsidies from various state and federal government programs. And VoGo – the California Zero Emission mandate is a subsidy because it uses government coercive power to force zero-emission production or buy credits from Tesla – thus California forces the shareholders of GM, Ford, etc. to subsidize Tesla shareholders – which is a subsidy. As the 2nd quarter Tesla results show, however, the current subsidies are not enough to generate profits – so Elon is asking for more subsidies as he has for every one of his business ventures except PayPal.

    • 0 avatar
      orenwolf

      “And VoGo – the California Zero Emission mandate is a subsidy because it uses government coercive power to force zero-emission production or buy credits from Tesla – thus California forces the shareholders of GM, Ford, etc. to subsidize Tesla shareholders – which is a subsidy.”

      Sure, but it’s not a government subsidy then, It isn’t taxpayer dollars paying Tesla, it’s private dollars. Otherwise you’re basically saying any government mandated feature (let’s say, seatbelts), is a subsidy, mandated by the government, to seatbelt manufacturers by the shareholders of car companies. While perhaps true in the technical sense, I don’t think people would look at airbags or seatbelts or, say, roadways as subsidies to the airbag, seatbelt, or asphalt industries.

      • 0 avatar
        stingray65

        Orenwolf – your analogy is somewhat wrong because the seatbelt makers are not competitors to the car makers – they are suppliers. But in either case it is a subsidy because the transfer would likely not happen without the mandate. Mandates are not necessarily bad policy, but they are certainly subsidies to the companies/industries that get more business because of them.

    • 0 avatar
      Pch101

      In the old days, government would pass laws that imposed specific limits on everyone. Those who failed to comply would pay fines to the government. Those who kept it legal got no credit for going above and beyond the call of duty.

      These days, the government sets industry targets and allows the producers to figure out for themselves what it’s worth to follow the rules. Those who obey the rules and then some can sell off the excess to those who don’t.

      That isn’t a subsidy. That’s the market setting the price for compliance with the law. The alternative would be for government inspectors to go back to the old way, looking for violations and issuing fixed penalties that were more arbitrary.

  • avatar
    JD321

    The political terrorists are not going to continue their fatwa against the ICE automobile until after the slaves vote for their Masters in November. The circus barker Musk wants them to step up the pace in order for Tesla to survive. It’s that simple…Only stupid people don’t understand this.

    • 0 avatar
      shaker

      “Only stupid people don’t understand this.”

      Since I drive a Volt, I will proudly wear a medal that reads: “Half-Stupid”.

    • 0 avatar
      VoGo

      A JD321-to-English dictionary of common terms:

      – political terrorist = someone with opinions different from my own
      – fatwa = posts
      – slaves = voters
      – the Masters = leaders of the political party I do not support
      – circus barker = CEO
      – stupid people = everyone not friends with me, i.e., everyone

  • avatar
    JD23

    JD321 and I are not the same person.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Polka King: You couldn’t pay me to drive a car with a hostile, malevolent facial expression. I expect pushback...
  • RHD: Kia will be making small SUVs in Colorado and Hyundai’s factories will be in Arizona and New Mexico. Dodge...
  • Arthur Dailey: Old age pension plans have been proven to have greatly reduced the number of seniors living in...
  • Luke42: So the churchgoers all get Coronavirus, and the atheists go back to school when it’s all over?...
  • Luke42: The Sienna headlights have adjusters on them that you can use to aim the lights so that they point below the...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Timothy Cain
  • Matthew Guy
  • Ronnie Schreiber
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Chris Tonn
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth