The Orphan That Killed Tesla

CC™ VideoSpective

CREDITS - NewEra MEDIA

Barbarians at the gate - How America mortgaged its future on the altar of MAGA

CC™ Editor’s Review

By Editor-in-Chief

The administration of Donald J. Trump has predicated its policies on ‘cleaning the swamp’. 

Here are the facts:

1) 8 of Trump’s cabinet picks donated almost half-a-billion dollars to his (Trump’s) re-election campaign. While the influence of large campaign donors on policy making is a recurring concern across administrations, the scale of these donations with regard to the incoming Trump administration, raises valid concerns about cronyism and how these relationships might shape policymaking. 

2) Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)

The establishment of the DOGE with figures like Elon Musk (and Vivek Ramaswamy at the onset), underscores broader concerns about potential conflicts of interest. Tesla’s historical receipt of government funds to innovate in clean energy contrasts with any policy that undermines competitors like Rivian. Canceling Biden-era funding for Rivian, as Ramaswamy had intimated, could:

•Stifle competition in the EV market, undermining innovation.

•Harm Georgia’s economy if the promised 8,000 jobs fail to materialize.

•Reinforce perceptions of favoritism, potentially benefiting Tesla.

3) Regulation Rollbacks

A loosening of regulatory oversight, particularly in critical sectors like healthcare and aviation, could indeed have far-reaching consequences. Historical examples suggest that deregulation:

•May increase corporate profits but often at the expense of public safety or service quality.

•Risks weakening consumer protections, as seen in sectors like banking and energy following similar moves in the past.

4)  Broader Implications

My concern (and that of many well-meaning folks) is about how concentrated wealth and political influence can blur the lines between public service and personal gain. While Trump’s policies have long championed deregulation as a driver of economic growth, the balance between efficiency and accountability will ultimately define public perception of his governance.

Policy Implications for the EV Industry as a result of the possible actions of DOGE and the impact of deregulation, using the Healthcare and Aviation industries as test cases:

Policy Implications for the EV Industry

The competition between Tesla and newer players like Rivian is central to understanding the potential effects of DOGE’s decisions. Here are the key points:

1. Market Competition and Innovation

•Favoritism Risks: If Rivian loses the $6 billion promised by the Biden administration while Tesla continues benefiting from previous subsidies, the playing field could tilt significantly in Tesla’s favor. This reduces competition, which is vital for innovation and cost reduction in the EV market.

•Job Loss and Economic Impact: The proposed Rivian factory in Georgia would generate around 8,000 jobs, directly boosting the local economy. Its cancellation could harm not only the state’s workforce but also U.S. efforts to expand domestic EV manufacturing capacity.

2. Global Leadership in EVs

•Policies favoring one company over others may hinder the U.S.’s ability to compete globally, especially with countries like China, which dominates the EV supply chain and production. A diverse domestic EV ecosystem is critical to achieving energy independence and global competitiveness.

3. Public Perception and Policy Credibility

•Rolling back Rivian’s funding while Tesla remains dominant could spark accusations of bias or corruption, undermining public trust in government energy policies.

Impact of Deregulation

Deregulation in sectors like healthcare and aviation often has mixed results, with both short-term gains for businesses and long-term risks for consumers and workers.

1. Healthcare

•Impact on Safety Standards: Deregulation could loosen controls on drug approvals, hospital standards, and medical device quality. While this might accelerate innovation and reduce costs for companies, it risks patient safety if oversight is weakened.

•Access and Affordability: If deregulation leads to the consolidation of insurance companies or healthcare providers, patients may face fewer options and higher prices in the long run.

2. Aviation

•Safety Concerns: The aviation industry is highly regulated to ensure passenger safety. Reduced oversight could increase the risk of accidents or mechanical failures, as was seen in the aftermath of deregulation in the 1980s. We have already seen that with the tragic air mishaps in Washington D.C. and Philadelphia. 

•Cost vs. Quality Trade-offs: While deregulation might lower ticket prices, it often comes at the cost of service quality (e.g., reduced legroom, increased fees, or overbooked flights).

With no guard rails in place for the incoming Trump administration, balancing efficiency and oversight will be a tall order as Trump will not be favorably disposed to the concept of independent watchdogs. 

Furthermore, policies that support fair competition, especially in the EV industry, through the encouragement of a diverse marketplace that engenders innovation across multiple players, will be abandoned for archaic and authoritarian policies that promote favoritism and stifle competition.

The basic premise for the creation of DOGE was to promote  transparency around funding and policy decisions. It was supposed to help rebuild trust and reduce perceptions of corruption.

Under Trump, with Musk as the main anchor, realizing that aforementioned noble premise will be at best, an illusion. 

America and Americans are in for a long and painful ride.