Hacker News Reader

Comment by jdross | Hacker News Reader

He seems pretty much the same to me, honestly. Everything he is doing seems either to the benefit of the companies he is building, or personally weird but ultimately harmless.

Moving out of a state that won't let you run your business seems like a very savvy move for a person whose job is running a business and growing it as quickly as possible (which he would say is in order to accelerate the shift to a sustainable energy future, which you can agree with or not)

I'm genuinely confused by the animosity

View on HN

> I'm genuinely confused by the animosity

To me, it's because this stinks in the same way as Bezos playing cities off each other to extract concessions. He's even asking fans and shareholders to sue the county[1] and reach out to politicians[2]. A county has made a decision, presumably in good faith, in the interest of public health. You don't have to agree with their decision, but throwing your weight around as a billionaire to spite them for it is a bad look.

1: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1259165058426232832

2: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1259174414865719296

Edit: fixed reference link (thanks mft_).

>A county has made a decision, presumably in good faith, in the interest of public health.

This can be debated, right? I'm not sure what's the problem with the management of a company saying they're moving a headquarter because they believe they can better operate elsewhere, or asking other people who feel negatively impacted to consider a legal actions (unless you don't trust the legal system, but that's another matter I guess).

Of course it can. Is there evidence of bad faith on the county's part? I'm open to updating my beliefs.

It's not required. He's making a decision that business is best conducted elsewhere, as is his right.

Personally, I don't want to live in a country where unelected officials can unilaterally make decisions that shut down the economy and kill my business and life's work. I'd certainly have a lot to say about it

> Personally, I don't want to live in a country where unelected officials can unilaterally make decisions that shut down the economy and kill my business and life's work.

Same, but I also wouldn't want to live in a county whose officials are afraid to make decisions that are in the best interest of the people's health out of fear of the wrath of a billionaire and his followers.

If he wants to move the plant I have no problem with that, it's the way he's trying to use his position for outsized political pressure that I dislike.

When your company’s centered around moving faster and faster then you have to stop it can create all sorts of issues. He may see greater financial upside or even the only way to continue to be solvent to pivot to other manufacturing projects. Ie it’s easier to say you need funding for a new “Terrafactory” (or GF) than to say you need funding to keep the books out of the red for this month/quarter/etc.

As someone who genuinely appreciates what Elon is striving for and wants all of his projects to succeed, I hope he’ll succeed in building a new project soon in addition to keeping the California factory for reopening later on.

On the one hand, I’m grateful as Nevada sorely needs new industry outside of hospitality. Probably some benefit similar holds for Texas. Meanwhile LA and Cali have plenty of industry and corporations local to hardly notice Tesla leaving.

On the other hand I think society should have some safeguards and safety nets in place for once per century events such as a pandemic that shutters the economy. Surely if we had kept a preparation in place since 1918 we would have a much easier time weathering this storm. But instead society forgot all about these things. It wouldn’t have been easy of course given the shortsighted nature of politics.

> He's even asking fans and shareholders to sue the county[1]

Um, the tweet you referenced reads "Please voice your disagreement as strongly as possible with @AlamedaCounty".

Isn't this just asking people to, you know, contact their local politicians and voice their opinion? Like, how individual citizens with an opinion can do? There's nothing about suing anyone?

Sorry, I pasted the wrong link. This is the one I meant to link to: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1259165058426232832

Shareholder: [...] can shareholders file a class action lawsuit? [...]

Elon: Absolutely, please do! You should be allowed to recoup damages from the county.

Then let's be clear here too. He's not asking anyone to do anything, and he's not asking fans to sue anyone. He's agreeing with a shareholder's suggestion about a class action suit.

Not just agreeing, emphatically encouraging.

I guess it's a matter of semantics. If you ask if I want a coffee and I say "yes please", did I ask for coffee? I would say the answer is "yes", but I could understand a hyperliteral argument for "no".

I think it's dangerous and toxic in general for billionaires to threaten economic retribution when the government doesn't enact their preferred policies. I continue to think that here, even though I generally like this particular billionaire and agree with the policy position he's fighting for.

You do what must be done. If the government provided more support to businesses due to COVID shutdown, this wouldn’t have been necessary. This is a Federal government failure manifestation. Elon is trying to save his business he’s worked two decades on. I can’t fault him.

Airlines and Ford (pinnacles of responsible business operations /s) getting bailed out by the Fed through junk bond liquidity operations? Why not Tesla too?

It's even worse for billionaires to threaten economic retribution because the government didn't give them enough money.

I agree with Elon (from his latest interview with Joe Rogan) that billionaires get a lot of shit (which is why he’s going minimalist nomad supposedly, to deflect criticism by eliminating anything ostentatious in his life). Almost all of them deserve it, but Musk, Gates, and Buffett don’t (all for various yet obvious reasons). They are in a different class.

Arguably, we still want those billionaires to succeed, but we also want taxes paid and workers protected across the board. I don’t think that’s unreasonable, but complex problems and their solutions are hard to discuss at scale because of entrenched interests, sound bites, the twenty four hour news cycle, and people acting in bad faith.

> we still want those billionaires to succeed, but we also want taxes paid and workers protected across the board

We want taxes paid and workers protected, so we want tax-evading and union-busting billionaires to succeed.

No, we want better lives for ourselves and the people around us and coming after us.

Taxes and worker welfare are two tools we can deploy towards that goal. A company is a voluntary organizational tool, and when run as well as Tesla is, an extremely effective one at accomplishing a goal.

That's the federal government? Or is it all "The Government".

The United States Federal government by way of the CARES stimulus act, funded using Federal Reserve lending operations.

States don’t control the currency, nor have the budgets to backstop large cap firms in economic distress.

Look, he's clearly having a hissy fit, which isn't the best look for any CEO. But you saying "billionaire" here is pejorative and unnecessary.

How about "...for CEOs to threaten moving their economic operations to places where governments are more hospitable". Still dangerous and toxic?

The problem I see here really is that he has a lot of money. If billionaires get their way by threatening dire consequences, it creates the perception that rules and regulations are for sale to sufficiently high bidders, or even worse that billionaires can create company towns which must pass whatever regulations they want.

If the CEO of some 100 person company tweets out "screw you guys I'm moving to Texas", I think that's fine. Even if the state makes changes in response, nobody's going to think that his money alone was the deciding factor.

The reason his threat is credible is because he runs a large business which brings jobs and prosperity to the states that it operates in.

In this case, him being rich is irrelevant, as he’s not threatening to use his personal wealth.

> ultimately harmless

Like calling an innocent person a pedophile?

A court ruled that Elon did not defame the individual, and no damages were awarded. Sounds harmless despite being in extremely poor taste.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/12/06/unsworth-vs-musk-pedo-guy-de...

A court ruling in his favor doesn't make his behavior any less repugnant. I'm both a fan and a critic of Musk. If he had insulted me that way, I would break his nose. It's unacceptable.

I have found it helpful to not judge people on their worst days. We all make mistakes. I hope Elon finds humility with time, but if not, will still appreciate his contributions.

Did Musk apologize to that man when he was done having a bad day?

I don’t think that man apologized to Elon for telling him to shove his sub up his ass either (which is what kicked off the spat).

Yes, it was in response to that person telling Musk to shove his minisub up his ass.

When a public figure and billionaire publicly calls you a peodphile, that has a much greater negative impact on your life than if you hurt that billionaires feelings.

>that has a much greater negative impact on your life than if you hurt that billionaires feelings.

The said quote was given to CNN, not something that was said in private.

He's seems pretty much the same to me too, but that's only because I have personal experience with high-functioning narcissists, and I can spot a tiger king from a mile away.

Not to mention that California is in quite the financial pickle. Taxes in the near future are headed up for groups that politicians love to badmouth, e.g. corporations and the wealthy.

Things started to turn against him when he began to appear sympathetic to the American political Right and Trump in particular.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com