AJ Inapi (Allan) Profile picture
Dec 6, 2024 12 tweets 5 min read Read on X
Did @elonmusk build his businesses off of government subsidies?

A thread 🧵 🧵 🧵 Image
1/ Zip2 Corporation (1995):
Government Subsidy: No direct subsidies are publicly known for Zip2. It was a software company providing business directories and maps for newspapers.
Loans: There's no record of government loans for Zip2. The company was sold to Compaq for $307 million in 1999.Image
2/ X.com/PayPal (1999):
Government Subsidy: X.com, which later merged into PayPal, did not rely on government subsidies to launch or scale.
Loans: No government loans were involved. Musk invested his Zip2 earnings into X.com. PayPal was sold to eBay for $1.5 billion in stock.Image
3/ SpaceX (2002):
Government Subsidy: SpaceX has benefited significantly from government contracts rather than direct subsidies. NASA's Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) and subsequent contracts provided pivotal funding.
Loans: SpaceX did not receive government loans for startup or scaling. They've saved the U.S. government money compared to traditional costs.Image
4/ Tesla, Inc. (2003):
Government Subsidy: Tesla has received multiple forms of government support, including:
A $465 million loan in 2010 from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) under the Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program.

Various state and local incentives, tax breaks, and credits for EV infrastructure and manufacturing.

Loans: The DOE loan was repaid in full with interest in May 2013, nine years ahead of schedule, making a profit for taxpayers.Image
5/ SolarCity (2006) - Acquired by Tesla in 2016:
Government Subsidy: SolarCity received substantial government support:
$750 million from New York state for building a solar panel plant.

$497.5 million in federal grants by 2015.

Loans: No specific government loans mentioned for SolarCity independently, but post-acquisition, any benefits would fall under Tesla's financial management.Image
6/ The Boring Company (2016):
Government Subsidy: Has received some local government contracts for infrastructure projects but no widespread or significant subsidies are publicized.

Loans: No known government loans for startup or scaling. Image
7/ Neuralink (2016):
Government Subsidy: Neuralink has not publicly disclosed receiving significant government subsidies. It's primarily venture-funded.

Loans: No known government loans. Image
8/ xAI (2023):
Government Subsidy: As a new entity, there are no reports of government subsidies at this stage.

Loans: No government loans have been disclosed. Image
9/ Elon Musk's approach to government assistance:
Musk has often been vocal about his disdain for government subsidies in principle but has pragmatically utilized them where available, especially in the early stages of his companies. His businesses, particularly Tesla and SpaceX, have leveraged government contracts and incentives to achieve scale and market penetration.
10/ Conclusion: - Musk's businesses have indeed benefited from government support, primarily through contracts, loans, and tax incentives. Tesla stands out for having repaid its DOE loan with interest, showcasing a unique case where taxpayer money was returned with a profit. His approach has been to use government assistance as a springboard while pushing for broader industry benefits like EV adoption and space commercialization.
Bonus: If you won't ever get to @elonmusk's level in your lifetime, please show some respect for the guy.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with AJ Inapi (Allan)

AJ Inapi (Allan) Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @aj_inapi

Feb 10
President Trump will NOT invade Iran or start another endless war.

Read this thread 🧵to find out why.

Most importantly repost this because the media will only fear monger Americans just to drive a certain narrative.

Study the map below and reference it as you read along... Image
Trump’s Dual Strategy - Military Choke Points + Economic Pressure to Contain Iran

1/ The U.S. is not planning a full‑scale invasion of Iran. What’s unfolding is a strategic containment plan that pairs military deterrence with economic pressure to isolate Tehran and let it collapse under its own weight.
2/ Military placement is purposeful - not invasion staging.

The U.S. is positioned at key energy and transit choke points critical to Iran’s leverage and revenue.

These choke points also weaken Moscow and Beijing’s regional ties.
Read 16 tweets
Feb 2
THREAD 🧵
Everyone keeps asking the wrong question.

“Why don’t Republicans just nuke the filibuster and pass the SAVE Act / Trump’s agenda?”

Because there is a misunderstanding of how power actually works in America.

Let’s break it down properly.

(Note I had to do some reading to understand the pros and cons - read the thread and let me know what you think)Image
1️⃣ What people get wrong about 2013 and 2017 Democrats in 2013 nuked the filibuster only for executive and lower-court nominees.
Republicans in 2017 extended that precedent only to Supreme Court nominees.
Both were about confirmations — not legislation.
That distinction matters more than anything else in this debate.
2️⃣ Killing the legislative filibuster is a one-way door Once it’s gone, any future Senate majority can pass laws with 50 votes.
That means: • Amnesty
• Federal election control
• DC & PR statehood
• Gun bans
• Court expansion
Republicans know this. That’s why they won’t trade permanent leverage for short-term wins.
Read 10 tweets
Jan 24, 2025
President Trump's Executive Orders combatting the GLOBALISTS Agenda!

A thread 🧵🧵🧵 Image
1. Withdrawal from the World Health Organization (WHO)

Trump has signed an executive order to withdraw U.S. funding from the WHO, which critics argue has been co-opted by globalist interests to push agendas not aligned with U.S. sovereignty or interests. This move is seen as a direct challenge to global health governance, reducing the influence of international bodies in American health policy.Image
2. Exit from the Paris Climate Agreement

By withdrawing from the Paris Accord, Trump has signaled a rejection of what he and his supporters view as an overreach by international organizations to dictate U.S. environmental policy. This action is perceived as thwarting globalist efforts to impose climate policies that could affect American industrial and economic competitiveness.Image
Read 9 tweets
Jan 2, 2025
What's Your Plan for the Next Four Years Under the Trump-Vance administration?

Here's How to Capitalize on New Policies - Snap into Action!"

🧵🧵🧵 Image
1/ Reduction in Regulatory Burdens

The Trump-Vance administration is expected to significantly cut regulations across various sectors, aiming to reduce the regulatory cost by at least $6,300 per year per American family as mentioned in Trump's campaign promises. This policy could streamline business operations, lowering compliance costs and speeding up market entry.

Opportunities:
Home-based Consulting Services: With fewer regulations, starting a consulting business in areas like compliance or business strategy could be easier. Startup cost: $500-$2,000. Diversify by offering services in multiple industries.

Local Food Trucks: Less regulation might simplify food service licensing. Startup cost: $10,000-$50,000. Scale by franchising or expanding to event catering.

Handmade Crafts Online Store: Start on platforms like Etsy with minimal regulatory oversight. Startup cost: $100-$1,000. Diversify product lines or collaborate with other artisans.

Freelance Services: Use platforms like Upwork for marketing, writing, or design. Startup cost: $0-$500. Scale by hiring other freelancers or specializing in niche services.

Mobile Car Detailing: Reduced regulations could ease zoning and environmental compliance. Startup cost: $1,000-$5,000. Expand by adding services or moving into auto repair.

Strategic Approach: Always stay updated with regulatory changes and ensure your business practices align with the new norms to prevent future compliance issues.
2/ Tax Cuts and Simplification
Proposals include lowering the corporate tax rate to 15% with conditions to keep manufacturing in the U.S., and potentially eliminating taxes on overtime wages, which could increase disposable income for both businesses and workers.

Opportunities:
Tax Preparation Services: With potential tax code changes, there's a demand for understanding new tax laws. Startup cost: $500-$3,000. Diversify into financial planning or bookkeeping.

Overtime Pay Workshops: Teach employees and small business owners about leveraging new tax benefits. Startup cost: $200-$1,000. Scale by offering online courses.

Local Manufacturing Workshops: Engage in or promote local production. Startup cost: $1,000-$5,000. Diversify by selling equipment or offering consultancy for manufacturing setups.

Affordable Housing Development: Lower taxes might encourage real estate investment. Startup cost: $5,000-$20,000. Scale by buying more properties or developing new ones.

Subscription Box Services: Capitalize on increased consumer spending, focusing on niche markets. Startup cost: $1,000-$3,000. Expand to include different themes or demographics.

Strategic Approach: Analyze how tax changes affect your business model and consumer behavior to maximize benefits.
Read 7 tweets
Dec 27, 2024
Here's a thread 🧵 🧵 🧵 on the H-1B visa, its history, usage implications, root causes and some solutions: Image
1/ History and Creation of the H-1B Visa

The H-1B visa was established through the Immigration Act of 1990, signed by President George H.W. Bush. This legislation aimed to address labor shortages in specialized fields by allowing U.S. employers to hire foreign workers for "specialty occupations" requiring at least a bachelor's degree or equivalent. The initial cap was set at 65,000 visas annually, but this was adjusted over the years due to demand:

1999-2000: The cap was temporarily increased to 115,000.
2001-2003: It was further increased to 195,000.
Post-2004: Returned to 65,000, with an additional 20,000 visas for U.S. advanced degree holders.

The rationale was to equip the U.S. with a workforce capable of advancing innovation, particularly in technology, science, and engineering sectors where there was a perceived domestic talent shortage. This is supported by data from the U.S. Department of Labor indicating that from 2007 to 2016, 60% of H-1B applications were for computer and mathematical occupations, highlighting the tech industry's significant influence on the visa's utilization.
2/ Overuse by Companies and Economic Implications

The overuse of H-1B visas often cited involves corporations, especially in the tech sector, using these visas not just for filling skill gaps but also as a means to reduce labor costs:

Wage Suppression: Critics argue that H-1B workers are sometimes paid less than their American counterparts, leading to downward pressure on salaries. A study from the National Foundation for American Policy suggests that H-1B holders constituted only 0.06% of the U.S. civilian labor force in 2009, yet their impact on wages in certain sectors has been significant.

Job Displacement: There's a perception that H-1B visas enable companies to replace American workers with cheaper foreign labor. While the Migration Policy Institute notes that H-1B visas did not always displace American workers, the program's structure can allow for such practices if not regulated properly.

Economic Growth: On the positive side, H-1B workers contribute to economic growth through innovation, with research suggesting that each H-1B visa holder can create several additional jobs in the U.S. economy.
Read 9 tweets
Dec 18, 2024
Here's the summary of Speaker Johnson's Continuing Resolution (CR) in a thread format: 🧵 🧵 🧵 Image
1/ Speaker Mike Johnson introduced a two-step "laddered" funding bill to avoid a government shutdown. This CR splits funding deadlines into mid-January 2024 for some agencies and early February 2024 for others, allowing time for detailed appropriations bills.
2/ The CR passed with bipartisan support, maintaining current spending levels without the deep cuts some conservatives wanted. However, it excluded spending reductions and conservative policy riders, leading to dissatisfaction among some GOP members, especially from the House Freedom Caucus.
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(