
Getting Back to Work - xoxoy
https://www.tesla.com/blog/getting-back-work
======
dang
Three threads on this already:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23126517](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23126517)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23127552](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23127552)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23129216](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23129216)

Not sure this one is going any better. Celebrity frenzy multiplied by pandemic
rage is producing as wild a burn as we've seen on HN.

If you're about to comment here, could you please review
[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)
first and make sure what you're about to do is in keeping with the intended
spirit of this place? Note this one: " _Comments should get more thoughtful
and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive._ "

~~~
ydb
Thank you for being a diamond in the rough, Dan. Your tireless work keeping
Hacker News a safe haven for free thinkers and polite politic is essential
during times like these.

~~~
koheripbal
I think we need to do more in this space. As HackerNews had become more
popular, it has begun the inevitable transformation from a place of analysis
to a place of advocacy.

...which inevitably results in a drop in quality and substance and a rise in
partisanship.

HackerNews thrived for a long time by keeping under the radar, but what we
really need now is a new mechanic that rewards dispationate analytic content
and substance over partisanship meetoo content.

Behavioral guidelines and moderation don't work long term and don't scale.

~~~
dang
Concerns like this are perennial:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=926604](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=926604).
A couple years ago I gathered a bunch of links about the history of "HN
getting more political":
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17014869](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17014869).

That's not to say there isn't a decline, just that it's hard to discuss
objectively. The dominant factor in such perceptions is randomness; more
precisely, the streaks that occur in randomness that feel like they can't
possibly be random. That explains why people have been saying the same things
in identical language for so long. You could even make one of those guessing-
game sites out of such comments. For example: 2010 or 2020?

 _The community is full of ideologues to the point where the comments are most
often just predictable talking points being regurgitated ad nauseum. Everyone
talks about the intelligent conversation, and it does happen, but far more
times it’s just the same clichés repeated over and over._

(2010, of course, or the question wouldn't have made sense, but you see the
point.) A decade is a lifetime in internet dog years, so HN already has
survived these concerns long-term. If there is a downward trend, it's a slow
one. Some of the things we've done to stave it off
([https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...](https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=by%3Adang%20stave&sort=byDate&type=comment))
must have done something.

Other old threads:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=144390](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=144390)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=926604](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=926604)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1550898](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1550898)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1934367](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1934367)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4396747](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4396747)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6157485](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6157485)

~~~
koheripbal
This doesn't negate my point at all.

If I list all the 1990 articles warning about Global Warming, does that
somehow mean it's not a real and serious problem?

~~~
dang
If I argue the point using _that_ analogy, someone is bound to take it the
wrong way.

If people keep seeing signs of apocalypse for 30 years, they always say the
same things, the apocalypse never comes, and there's a simple alternative
explanation, that weakens the case for apocalypse, no? At a minimum the burden
is on 2020 to show how the same perception now is more objective than it was
in 2010, or 2008 for that matter, when people were also saying this. The
simple explanation is that internet users always perceive things this way.

------
firasd
I’d like to know what Tesla factory workers think. It’s seeming clear to me
from various polls that at most 20% of Americans think ‘oh everything is fine
let’s go back to work and school tomorrow.’ So opinions on social distancing
are not as polarized as you would think from the media.

~~~
duckMuppet
What they think is about as relevant as opinion polls from a misinformed
public. People largely have their mind made up about it about the covid
because it's more of a religion now than anything else.

Nevermind the numerous serology studies from multiple different countries
which show exposure to the virus is highly prevalent with most individuals
being asymptomatic. Nevermind the multiple recent studies in the U.S. which
show the same. Nevermind the numerous prison facilities, ships or other
confined areas which show it being highly contagious yet most asymptomatic.
Nevermind studies that show Unless you have multiple co morbidities, if you're
under 60 you probably at a greater risk of heart disease than the covid.
Nevermind that numerous studies site that transmission from children to adults
is low and risk to kids themselves has been pretty low.

No no.. Let's close the schools to keep the children safe. Let's close houses
of worship and other sociologically important places. Let's close small
businesses but let's keep big businesses open. Let's allow the ppl to continue
to take public transportation to their big box store as well. Let's
indiscriminately quarantine everyone, we most certainly can't have them going
to the beach or other outside areas where it's well known UV-C kills the virus
and transmission risk outdoors is tiny. Let's jail salon owners operating at
home and surfers in the ocean but let's release criminals for politically
relevant taking points. Let's make sure we don't quarantine or even test
anyone in nursing homes even though they are begging the NY governor to allow
it (gotta get to 100k somehow).

Yeh no. Every time i see someone outside exercising in mask and gloves i know
exactly how and why we get a 2 trillion dollar stimulus package that gives 86k
to politicians per month for childcare during this crisis. They're essentially
the droid army from clone wars series, just wearing masks.

I get why the govt is doing it. It's about power and control. I can say that i
never thought scientism would get such a hold on the people though. If i were
musk i would've already been gone from California. And if i were the governors
in Texas I'd perma-ban any emigrants from NY or CA.

~~~
marcinzm
The estimated fatality rate with everything taken into account is around 0.5%.
That's covering asymptomatic people, etc, etc. Assuming 200 million Americans
get infected the result is 1 million additional deaths. That's a lot.

~~~
mdorazio
Among what age group, though? Using an average morbidity across the entire
population is misleading. Everything I've read indicates that the morbidity
scales very highly with age so that it would be something like (making this up
here) 0.05% for people under 40, scaling up very quickly as you get to the
elderly population. The question then becomes can we effectively quarantine
at-risk groups instead of the entire population? I don't know the answer, but
I do know that continuing to pursue current policies until some indefinite
point in the future is untenable.

~~~
marcinzm
>but I do know that continuing to pursue current policies until some
indefinite point in the future is untenable.

Go strawman, go! California and NY both have plans for slowly reopening in the
comings weeks or months with various metrics guiding the timelines.

~~~
mdorazio
Serious question: can you show me the metrics for california with concrete
targets that will trigger reopening? The last plan I saw wasn't a plan at all,
it was just guidelines.

~~~
marcinzm
I don't see the difference between plan and guidelines from any practical
point of view.

There is a statewide timeline and counties can open slower/faster. There's a
list of criteria for counties to consider. This is a slide deck summarizing
things at a state level, it notes a variety of metrics that are being looked
at:

[https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Update-
on-...](https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Update-on-
California-Pandemic-Roadmap.pdf)

~~~
mdorazio
Here's a plan: when we get to X new cases per day, we will reopen. Here's a
guideline: we'll reopen when we think it's safe. The former has concrete goals
that you can measure against and take action on. The latter has no clarity
whatsoever. If I presented a project plan the way California has presented its
Covid reopening "plans" I would be fired.

~~~
marcinzm
Except "the population feeling safe" is the only metric that really matters.
Everything else is a proxy. If the population doesn't feel safe then they will
protest and not resume activities. The other metrics can be golden but if the
population disagree you will have trouble in a democracy.

------
babesh
This is the very best article I have read on the lockdown:
[https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/05/04/seattles-
leade...](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/05/04/seattles-leaders-let-
scientists-take-the-lead-new-yorks-did-not)

The positive is that Washington state acted early and the Bay Area followed
quickly which resulted in lower hospitalization and deaths. Tech’s quick move
to WFH probably helped slow the spread. This was driven by the Washington
state health officials who worked with Microsoft. Bay Area tech companies
quickly copied WFH.

The negative is that health officials manipulated the public like they were
children: “ Constantine told me, “Jeff recognized what he was asking for was
impractical. He said if we advised social distancing right away there would be
zero acceptance. And so the question was: What can we say today so that people
will be ready to hear what we need to say tomorrow?” In e-mails and phone
calls, the men began playing a game: What was the most extreme advice they
could give that people wouldn’t scoff at? Considering what would likely be
happening four days from then, what would they regret not having said?”

Since the initial lockdown, it’s been more of the same. Slogans have changed:
flatten the curve turns into prevent the health care system from being overrun
which turns into driven by data. Lockdowns get extended: May 4 turns into June
1st and maybe beyond.

Takeaways: 1\. Health care officials were right to initially lock down. 2\.
Health care officials and government don’t respect the public. 3\. This
dynamic is coming home to roost. 4\. Health care officials think this is going
to last a long time.

~~~
wwweston
The problem of getting a lay audience to understand policy based off of
specialized knowledge is non-trivial (as any engineer knows very well). "What
can we say today so that people will be ready to hear what we need to say
tomorrow?" sounds less like manipulation and more like acknowledging that
getting buy-in isn't merely a process of dumping factual knowledge, something
that seems pretty well borne out by the public conversation that's played out
over the last 2-3 months.

Some people do seem to feel like accepting social authority of any kind is too
parental, whether it's expertise or civil order. That may be more behaving
like children than being treated like them, though.

~~~
rapind
An obvious problem with the general populace understanding specialized
knowledge is that we need a trustworthy source to explain it.

Every major news outlet has become blatently partisan in recent years (many
long before). NYT eliminated their ombudsman years ago (3 years ago I think),
and television media has always been even worse. Is it really that surprising
when people don't trust what they hear and gravitate towards conspiracies and
bullshit?

The public has become hyper allergic to expertise. The repurcussions of this
is pretty scary.

------
otakucode
What I didn't see mentioned that concerns me (although I admit it might be a
concern born purely out of ignorance): No mention of whether employees would
be provided with a minimum of 2 weeks paid sick leave should they show
symptoms of COVID-19. Any employee who has a reasonable chance of becoming ill
with COVID-19 at their work, and who does not also have a minimum of 2 weeks
paid leave, should, by all logic I can think of, refuse to return to work. In
a situation with no paid sick leave or less than 2 weeks of paid sick leave,
the options are mostly reduced to 2: First, return to work, get sick, then get
fired for absence while off sick. Or, second, remain home and get fired for
absence while remaining healthy. I suppose there is the third options, the
danger-face economic kamikaze model that most Americans will likely be
expected to endure - go to work, hope you don't get sick, get sick anyway, get
fired for absence. Then you can't even file for unemployment. There is no
winning play.

~~~
markvdb
Fundamental flaws in US health care and worker protection exposed. That's what
this is.

Compare to the system in my native Belgium:

\- a month of 100% paid sick leave, paid by the employer

\- followed by five months 60% of wage in sick leave, paid by social security

\- protected from redundancy within this 6 month period

\- if made redundant afterwards while still ill after 6 months, obligation for
the employer to pay (significant) damages

\- 60% of last wage sick pay afterwards, capped to a generous maximum,
unlimited in time as long as the illness lasts, paid by social security

\- high quality healthcare regardless of employment status

\- jobless benefits when healthy without a job, unlimited in time, recently
made somewhat degressive

This makes for less of a power imbalance between employers and employees. Huge
short and medium term social stabiliser. Certainly not without its flaws, but
great to have in place during these times of severe economic crisis.

~~~
vekker
I'm happy to live in a country with such a strong social safety net as well,
compared to the US (even though I don't profit from it at all being young,
self-employed and unmarried...), but on the other hand I'm really concerned
about our future. Someone has to pay for this and it's not like the government
is encouraging people to roll up their sleeves and to learn some personal
responsibility, with all the benefits they're giving for not working.

~~~
tsimionescu
The thing is, people everywhere want to work, with extraordinarily few
exceptions. A government doesn't really need to incentivize work in general,
only some specific kinds of work which are underperformed.

~~~
BobbyJo
Citation? I find it funny that no matter how many times history, and even
contemporary events, have taught us otherwise, people still believe "People
don't need strong incentives to work!"

~~~
tsimionescu
You can look at employment rates in countries with generous social welfare and
unemployment benefits, and notice that the percentage of the population
sitting idle who are not sick is minuscule, and not significantly different
format the idle population in countries with weak unemployment benefits.

It is true that there are systematic exceptions - especially people born rich.

~~~
BobbyJo
Productivity in the US is considerably higher than most, if not all of those
countries, when you account for productivity per hour and hours worked:
[https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/v/s/www.forbes.c...](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/v/s/www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2019/02/05/where-
labor-productivity-is-highest-
infographic/amp/%3famp_js_v=0.1&usqp=mq331AQFKAGwASA%253D#ampf=)

Unemployment just tells you people have a job, and nothing about how much that
job is contributing to the collective resources.

~~~
markvdb
According to the OECD, productivity per hour worked [0] in Scandinavia,
Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxemburg, France, Germany, Austria and Switzerland
is comparable to the US, and in some cases significantly higher. All of these
countries have much more generous social safety nets.

P.S. The link you gave 404's here.

[0]
[https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=PDB_LV](https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=PDB_LV)

~~~
BobbyJo
The average hours worked are significantly less for those small upticks in
PPH. If you factor in hours worked, the US comes out far ahead of most if not
all.

------
theossuary
This reminds me of a piece of this:
[https://chomsky.info/19960413/](https://chomsky.info/19960413/)

Specifically, near the end

> Meaning, setting up a picture — it’s called anti-politics — the picture —
> but a very specific kind of anti-politics — you have to establish the image,
> you know, get into people’s heads, that the Government is the enemy- the
> Federal Government. State Governments are okay, because they can be sort of
> controlled by business anyway, so it doesn’t matter. But the Federal
> Government is sometimes a little too big to be pushed around, so it’s the
> enemy. And it cannot be, nobody can dream of the possibility, that the
> Government is of, by, and for the people. That’s impossible. It’s an enemy
> to be hated and feared.

While I don't necessarily disagree with it being the state's role to decide
when and how to open back up, it does have its drawbacks. Companies can and
(if Tesla is any indication) will use their influence with these states to
open back up. The only thing left giving them pause is public opinion.

~~~
csomar
Except that it's not the Federal or the State that's blocking Tesla. It's the
county. So this argument would play otherwise.

------
dvt
The full complaint is here: [https://www.scribd.com/document/460681532/Tesla-
v-Alameda-Co...](https://www.scribd.com/document/460681532/Tesla-v-Alameda-
County-Complaint-Copy#from_embed)

~~~
jeffbee
This is a pretty broad argument, that if there exists, somewhere, any
jurisdiction that would permit Tesla to operate their factory, but Alameda
County does not permit it, then the Equal Protection clause has been violated.

~~~
koheripbal
The initial claim is broad. ...but the application can be pretty narrow as
neighboring jurisdictions are allowing people back to work.

------
rayhendricks
I don’t see any mention of background testing of Tesla workers. Testing
everyone combined with guaranteed paid leave and a very strong statement from
executives on non-retaliation for actually taking the leave will be just about
the only way that they could re-open right now. Amazon is going to do this,
why can’t Tesla?

------
54351623
Bold move to extort public officials with threats to move a factory you're
attempting to fully automate and a few hundred white collar positions to a
state where your main bargaining chip is jobs when you possess less than 5%
market share, a vertical monopoly and a luxury product in a crashing market.
Excited to see how this one turns out.

~~~
samsonradu
Indeed, looking at the bigger picture I can't help seeing the absurdity of it.
For all the praising of Tesla cars, which might very well be founded, it's
just a freaking car in a market where demand fell off a cliff.

~~~
badRNG
I have to wonder if these actions by Musk are going to hurt the brand image of
Tesla.

Sure people buy the car because it has cool gimmick features and is electric,
but when you buy a car for $30k+ there's a reason you spent that kind of
money: the car is a form of self expression (whether one would like to admit
it or not.) When one buys a Tesla, it indicates that they are with the times,
both technologically and socially.

~~~
travisporter
I saved up for a used Tesla this year and have decided to hold off. I asked on
another HN thread whether musk believes in climate change and didn’t hear
anything. But to me, the covid tweets going against science makes me think he
doesn’t really care for a low carbon footprint. So I guess I don’t know now if
it is really a net carbon benefit to owning a Tesla versus another sedan over
the next five years.

~~~
badRNG
I think I've always found myself a little skeptical that "voting with the
pocketbook" can resolve climate change. It often seems to be a choice only
available to those wealthy enough to spend time considering the carbon effect
of the products they consume, and a way for wealthier people to flaunt their
luxury green products without appearing entirely self important.

For the majority of people who can't afford a $30k Tesla, they will simply buy
what they can afford and what will meet their needs.

~~~
travisporter
No I think it can. There’s so many green initiatives in companies and
divesting from coal. I’m not deluding myself that someone is looking at carbon
emissions of their supply chains meticulously but the sentiment is there,
which means something.

------
smileysteve
Having toured multiple car plants, and knowing Tesla is more automated than
many, I am of the belief that much of the line work can successfully happen at
social distances.

~~~
wegs
I think so too. My concern is about Tesla's leadership:

1) Elon Musk has made many comments downplaying COVID19, and

2) In photos (even in their Tesla Return-to-Work Playbook), the Leadership
Team doesn't wear face masks (only the low-level workers do).

The second issue is big. (1) They're clearly taking risks themselves (no PPE
would be okay for a selfie, but these are clearly professional photoshoots
with an AV team). (2) If leadership doesn't role-model safe behavior, you
can't expect everyone else to follow.

In abstract, I agree Tesla should be the poster child for safely re-opening.
In practice, if Laurie Shelby, their VP for health and safety, can't be
bothered to even wear a cloth face mask to a photoshoot on how to reopen
safely (I can't make this stuff up), I have serious reservations about Tesla
having the in-house expertise to run a COVID-safe shop.

There's also the possibility of blowback. If Tesla re-opens without proper
precautions -- and there's every indication they'll do that -- and those
improper precautions turn out to be insufficient, that will make it that much
harder for everyone else to reopen.

90% of safety is in attitudes, in being careful, and in being detail-oriented.
The exact same high-level precautions can be 100% safe if executed well, and
0% safe is executed for PR or CYA. It seems Tesla is doing the latter (which
is ironic, given their attention to detail everywhere else).

~~~
valachio
1). I believe that Musk is treating this as it should be. The problem is that
nearly everyone is over-reacting. A year from now, I believe that the world
will realize that this was one giant over-reaction.

2). Is there really a need to over-analyze a photo shoot like that? High
ranking officials usually don't wear masks (See Trump or Trudeau when they are
talking to the press).

~~~
maest
What new information do you think will become available in one year's time to
make it obvious that this was an over-reaction?

If it's about total number of deaths - we know that know and even if the
number is lower, it means the lockdown worked, no?

If it's, for example, new information becoming available about covid virality,
that will be irrelevant, as people have to make decisions now with the
information available now.

Re 2) it's expected and important for leadership to set the tone. Arguably
what Trump and Trudeau are doing (if what you say is true) is wrong.

------
yongjik
Bold move, threatening to destroy local jobs (if he doesn't get what he
wants), in one of the wealthiest economies in the world, when public
perception of "businesses putting profit in front of human lives" is hitting
an all-time low.

This is going to be entertaining.

~~~
anonytrary
That's not very fair, since I could make the exact same argument about the the
government's actions on this issue. Lockdowns didn't just threaten to destroy
jobs -- they _did_ destroy jobs. Calling out Elon Musk for making a decision
that would do the same provides no contrast.

On top of that, Elon Musk is trying hard to get his workers _back to work_. If
it means moving to a new state where workers are actually allowed and afforded
work, it would be a net gain for the workforce.

~~~
ra7
Let’s be real. All this drama by Elon Musk has very little to do with his
“concern” for workers. He just wants to resume production so the business can
resume. This is the same person that refused to shut down the factory and put
his workers’ health at risk. The motive behind his dangerous tweets and
tantrums is pretty clear for everyone to see.

~~~
cassalian
> The motive behind his dangerous tweets and tantrums is pretty clear for
> everyone to see.

Does his motive necessarily matter? Or more specifically, is his motive reason
enough to essentially spite him?

If Elon wanted to cure all disease in every single on of his workers (because
that would mean they would never take sick days, and thus produce more) does
that mean you would oppose the curing of disease in Elon's workers? After all,
Elon's motivations are purely selfish in this case as well

Now maybe you want to argue that curing disease in workers and allowing them
to work are two different things and don't match up at all. Are they though?
Jobs ensure quality healthcare, pay for the roof over your head, the food on
your table, the pain killers you take for your bad back, etc. A lot of being
'healthy' and having a job (in the US) are intimately related.

I'm sure there are plenty of holes in my example above that can be quibbled
over; however, my question still stands: is someone's motivation reason enough
to spite something that could be a net good? I do not think so.

You may wish to argue that "the workers don't want to go back to work, it's
worse for them to do so": are you one of these workers; do you know what the
consequences are of them not being able to work versus the consequences of
going into work?

~~~
ehnto
You've gone on a veritable expedition to make this argument, and somewhat
wrapped two ideas into one.

Someone's motivation is enough to lose respect for them, especially if it's
under the guise of something else. It's conniving to deceive in order to get
your way.

So lets say we consider the action a net good, we can totally support the
action, recognize the bad sides, and still lose respect for the person for the
way they have conducted themselves.

~~~
cassalian
Did I say that you could not lose respect for that person? I simply pointed
out that because a single person's motivations are selfish does not mean we
should work to spite that person.

If I have made the argument that we must respect Elon (or someone who's
motivations are selfish) that was not my intention and I will need to reflect
on how I present my ideas in the future.

> So lets say we consider the action a net good, we can totally support the
> action, recognize the bad sides, and still lose respect for the person for
> the way they have conducted themselves.

It seems to me like we agree!

------
awinder
Is there any reason to believe that taking temperature is going to effectively
curb virus transmissions? I would assume you’d be well into spreading by the
point you started running a fever.

------
jshen
I’ve been planning to get a Tesla, but I can’t buy one anymore. Between this
and all the crazy, and sometimes illegal, shit Elon says, I just cant do it.

~~~
nikkwong
Yeah, watching his attitude regarding the entire COVID situation on his recent
appearance of the Joe Rogan show really ended the lifelong bout of respect I
had for the man. He's paradoxically so brilliant yet so misinformed. His idea
that we should all just exit quarantine tomorrow because it's unconstitutional
is not only dangerous but also now seems to come from a place of selfishness
after this statement. Economists and epidemiologists are in agreement about
what the current plan of action should be in the US. Why does he think he
knows better?

Not only that, but these types of "normal people vs the evil government"
statements only add fuel to the trumpian narrative that corruption and
misinformation are everywhere; and all of our institutions are worthless. This
is such a consequential position to take and yet he seems to do it without
even thinking about the repercussions of his words. Shame on him!

~~~
tenpies
> He's paradoxically so brilliant yet so misinformed.

He's not very brilliant though. He may be good at his niche (although I'm not
sure what that is judging by the quality of Tesla vehicles), but if you are a
subject matter expert in a field that he pretends to know, it becomes very
obvious that his knowledge is extremely surface-level and the equivalent of "I
read Wikipedia on the plane".

Actually I think his brilliance is in convincing the eager Silicon Valley
masses that he's brilliant and that they should invest in his companies -
regardless of how poorly they continue to do.

~~~
Dumblydorr
I don't understand your dig on Tesla EVs. Do you not agree they are the best
EV on the market? I doubt Elon has had much to do with their quality, he's one
person and his companies pull great talent, it's all about his ability to
underpay great workers who want to build personal brands around his visionary
company missions. I'm not saying he's a great CEO, but he does pull great
talent for cheap.

~~~
michaelt
Best range? Absolutely. Least likely to try to upsell you to an ICE car? Sure.

Best build quality or after-sales service? ¯\\_(ツ)_/¯

------
propter_hoc
Suing the county, really? There's hundreds of thousands, probably millions of
businesses that have been shuttered by COVID-19, and yet, of course, who
should it be but the constant media circus that is Tesla--whose hit is
miniscule compared to the restaurants, hotels and other businesses that
actually can't earn revenue--that decides to publicly take it to the courts.

I truly hate to say this, but it really smacks of a solipsistic kind of
attitude: that Tesla's problems matter more than other companies', and that
anything that gets in its way, whether pandemics, short-sellers or lawmakers,
are just an irritant.

~~~
centimeter
Most businesses aren't in a position to sue the county. If Tesla sues and
wins, those other businesses will benefit as well. I'm not sure what you're
objecting to here.

~~~
louis_pasteur
If having the disease spread more widely among populations and more COVID
deaths translates as "benefit" to you then yes. Tesla is concerned about only
profits but what's profitable for the company may not be for people.

~~~
concordDance
I'd love to know what these plans to wipe out covid 19 are that everyone but
me seems to have been informed about. I must clearly have missed some big
news.

~~~
jmichelz
Here's a plan to wipe out covid 19 with a version that's proven to be safe.
[https://www.tillett.info/2020/04/05/a-solution-to-
covid-19/](https://www.tillett.info/2020/04/05/a-solution-to-covid-19/)

------
foob4r
Cancelling my Tesla pre-order - this is an abuse of workers (more blatant than
before).

~~~
koheripbal
Aside from being a meaningless anecdote, your claim is unproven. How are we
supposed to know that you really had an order?

Also, this comment is pure advocacy. We come here for analysis and depth.

~~~
foob4r
I see you've posted this at least once more:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23129942](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23129942)

Seems like you're just spamming without staying relevant to the topic here.

------
eplanit
Elon Musk is my new hero.

~~~
ydb
Pfft. Elon has always been my hero. :)

But on a more serious note, it is great that we are seeing thought leaders
counter-act the media propaganda frenzy regarding this situation. The "big
evil businessman" know best that our economy is on shaky ground, and that
continuing social distancing measures will immeasurably damage America's
position as a global power (and thus its citizens security and freedom) more
than a few tens of thousands of deaths will. I, for one, am proud to go back
to work. Staying at home isolated is merely fomenting unnecessary chaos and
social unrest.

~~~
throwaway4220
I am fortunate to be employed too, but I work in a closed space with little
contact with others. Unless you work in a meatpacking plant, hospital,
factory, or front-facing office, you may be taking on less risk than Tesla
workers.

In defense, Tesla did send an e-mail to the workers saying they could stay
home if they are at risk, which is hats off to them. Is it legally defensible
to use this if they get fired? I hope so.

Man, I really liked Elon, until he started downplaying and dismissing the risk
of COVID. It just didn't come from solid scientific reasoning in my view.
Taken out of context, this lawsuit would have had me in full support of Tesla.
But I now really have to question his motives behind employing people at
Tesla.

------
hyko
And so fades any chance that I’ll ever buy a Tesla vehicle. All this lunacy is
rotting the brand from the inside, and nobody has the power to stop it.
Especially galling because they were supposed to use technology to lead us to
a better world, but instead they seem to be unable to escape one man’s hubris.

~~~
tinus_hn
Have fun buying a car from a manufacturer that is not manufacturing, and be
sure to complain about Tesla threatening to boycott California while you
threaten to boycott their products!

~~~
hyko
I’m not boycotting Tesla. What I’m saying is that as a prospective customer I
am not reassured that the company won’t just try and pull a load of weird shit
on me in the future (either by imploding or screwing me over) and for that
reason I can’t commit to them. It’s a great pity because we have to recognise
they have essentially created the modern EV space, and I was actually looking
forward to adopting their tech.

~~~
tinus_hn
If you’re not boycotting them, why are you saying there’s no chance you’re
ever going to buy their products?

~~~
hyko
A boycott is when you avoid an organisation in protest at something; I am
exercising what I think is a rational consumer choice. I don’t believe that my
action (or inaction) will have any impact on Tesla, nor do I want or need it
to.

e.g. if you don’t like brand X Milk Chocolate and vow never to buy it, you’re
not boycotting brand X but rather just exercising your right as a consumer.

------
KKKKkkkk1
Charlie Munger on Elon Musk:

 _“I don’t want my personal life to be [around] a bunch of guys who are living
in a state of delusion, who happen occasionally to win big,” Munger told Daily
Journal’s shareholders. “I want the prudent person.”_

[https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/19/charlie-munger-ideal-hire-
wo...](https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/19/charlie-munger-ideal-hire-wouldnt-be-
someone-like-elon-musk.html)

~~~
LudwigNagasena
A guy who consistently founds or joins successful companies is not someone I
would call “who happen occasionally to win big”. He founded Zip2 that was
acquired by AltaVista, he joined PayPal that was acquired by eBay, he joined
Tesla, he founded SpaceX. His record is stellar.

Of course it is understandable that Berkshire Hathaway wouldn’t hire anyone
like Musk. They are as far from tech and VC as any investor could ever be. I
admire Buffet and Munger, but the guys are 90 years old, I honestly couldn’t
care less what they think about IT industry.

~~~
mkagenius
> I admire Buffet and Munger, but the guys are 90 years old,

Well, then you need to tell me your age, to know whether I should care about
what you have written above.

~~~
toomuchtodo
Not OP, but mid 30s and I’m getting a bit tired of folks who are out of touch
because of their age believing their past experience can extrapolate a future
they don’t understand (Buffett in particular has done a very poor job
understanding and investing in tech).

It’s terribly ironic that they think Musk is just lucky considering Munger and
Buffett were able to invest during one of the most prosperous times in
American history.

Admit you’re passed your prime and move on. Make way for innovators instead of
valuing reading a 10-K and preferring conservative companies you believe are
undervalued, or distressed companies you’re going to try to twist their arm
into a deal (as Buffett did during the GFC with banks).

~~~
PostOnce
We'll have to see how many tech companies survive the coming depression before
we can determine whether the long game at Berkshire is wrong or not :)

Indeed, we'll see if Tesla survives, not only the coincidental depression, but
also the multi-hundred-billion-dollar war chest being leveraged against them
by the other car companies with a century more experience each, more
connections, and broader reach.

It's a bit early to be calling the game is all.

~~~
rdgthree
Well said. I'm a huge fan of Elon and Tesla and am optimistic about their
future, but Munger's approach here is incredibly reasonable. I would love to
see Tesla succeed, but I also know that I'd hesitate quite a bit to bet
billions of dollars on their success.

------
lihaciudaniel
Shame, reminds me of ancient slavery or when the master exploits the slaves in
spite of the plaque.

------
mchusma
One important point in this discussion is that workers only have to return at
their own discretion. Since no worker is being forced to work, the argument is
best thought of as whether or not workers who chooses to work should be
allowed to do so given Tesla's plan.

They can also stay at home if they prefer, or seek other employment if they
want to work but find Tesla's safety plan unconvincing.

~~~
mushbino
Will workers still be eligible for unemployment insurance payments if they
choose not to go back after Tesla opens?

~~~
cjhopman
They won't, and that puts the lie to all these people saying it's no big deal
and they don't have to go to work if they don't want to.

------
foobar_
Is this like SARS or like flu ? SARS is no flu.

In the recent Joe Rogan podcast Elon Musk was talking about the need for more
accurate data. The scientific facts seem blurry at the moment.

Watching the dutch news, the next steps seem to be a number of restrictions on
the movements which seem sensible. Doctors have to deal with even more virues
and infections. What needs to happen is, how can people work efficiently with
protective gear. There is simply no other way to work otherwise, assuming this
is a serious infection.

The logical next steps would be to pass a law that forces each company to open
work if they can give safety equipment to everyone and provides insurance /
accurate assessments of the workers getting sick.

Cost cutting and avoiding liabilities is just pathetic at this point.

~~~
dralley
It's somewhere in between SARS and the Flu. Definitely much more deadly than
the Flu, definitely less deadly than SARS (but more contagious).

------
Animats
Missing the elephant in the room here. Musk is a druggie. He's known to use at
least marijuana and Ambien.[1] Sam Altman was worried about this back in 2017:

 _" There was Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk offering this tweet: "A little
red wine, vintage record, some Ambien ... and magic!" Naturally, not everyone
was moved positively by this apparent form of entertainment. Y Combinator
President Sam Altman, for example, worried: 'Ambien tweeting is a dangerous
game.'"_

[1] [https://www.cnet.com/news/elon-musks-strange-strange-
ambien-...](https://www.cnet.com/news/elon-musks-strange-strange-ambien-
tweet/)

~~~
inakarmacoma
Cannabis, and Ambien? Oh, the horrors.

~~~
KKKKkkkk1
Whether it's chemical induced or not, his behavior is erratic. I don't think
there's another CEO who isn't allowed to tweet without prior legal review.

~~~
holler
CEO of America :laugh:

