> Not sure if you read the rest of my comment, but I'm saying it wasn't a negative thing that he tried to get the project canceled and it seems like he was right about how it was going to go.
That's specious reasoning at best. It's absurd how you try to depict a Robber Baron move as a simplistic fiscally responsible stance. It's even sillier once you realize the only reason Elon Musk did his best to sabotage the program was because he believed it would be a success and thus a threat to his bottom line.
I really do not understand this corporate worship nonsense, specially when dealing with this specific corporation.
> That's specious reasoning [...] the only reason Elon Musk did his best to sabotage the program was because he believed it would be a success and thus a threat to his bottom line.
The only specious reasoning I'm seeing here is the weird assumption that one high speed rail line in California would meaningfully suppress Tesla car sales. It's competing with air travel, not car ownership.
It's ridiculous enough to suggest that it would suppress the sale of cars generally. It's especially ridiculous to suggest that it would suppress sales of Tesla vehicles. It's a 760 mile round trip between SF and LA — not an issue for an EV if you're doing it occasionally. But someone buying a new car for the specific purpose of driving this route simply wouldn't consider an EV.
That's specious reasoning at best. It's absurd how you try to depict a Robber Baron move as a simplistic fiscally responsible stance. It's even sillier once you realize the only reason Elon Musk did his best to sabotage the program was because he believed it would be a success and thus a threat to his bottom line.
I really do not understand this corporate worship nonsense, specially when dealing with this specific corporation.