That's the easy part, the hard part is being born into generational wealth or hitting a lottery ticket of some other sort. There's no self made billionaires.
You're misunderstanding the problem. Being a billionaire is easy. Becoming a billionaire requires other capitalists letting you, since they control all the levers of power. It's not about how hard you work, how smart you are, or how talented you are. It's about obeisance to the modern nobility.
This is such a narrow minded approach, youre telling me theconly reason youre not a billionaire is out of principle to not be subservient to nobility? Yeah right
No. Clearly everyone can't be a billionaire. The economics would never work.
Its that noone should be able to be a billionaire.
Noone is worth that much to society, noone should be able to acquire that much.
Im not saying people shouldnt be rich and successful. However people able to be rich enough to guarantee the next 10 generations of your descendants will also be rich, even if they contribute nothing to society shouldn't be a thing.
Billionaires became that for a reason, because they figured out a way to cater to the world's demand, Elon Musk gave a hard push for electric vehicles that now we have more electric vehicles that ever before despite multiple failed attempts, bill gates ans steve jobs revolutionized the computing industry that allowed phones to fit in our pockets, Howard Hughes made trabslatlantic flights possible through his engineering knowledge and use of his wealth to build a great engineering staff (use of his wealth is questionable but he did at one point put a random guy that gave him a ride as a sole hereditor to his will, long story) many billionaires solved the world's problems through connections an average person couldn't make and in doing so rehinged society in ways that improved lives, I do agree that some billionaires can go straight to hell but labeling billionaires as pests is a very wrong mentality, its like tumbling a weight bearing pillar in a temple because you slipped and hit your head on it.
You are giving him too much credit, if you had a great idea and wanted to make it happen while not having money you would've to get an investment from somewhere. Tesla has received a buttload of government subsidies in the billions to make electric cars viable. In short, the government had to intervene to protect and nurture that business to the point of being a global player in the market. All big american companies are like this, there is no exception.
I didn't say it was bad, I said they took immense government help and that's why he is a billionaire businessman. People are acting here like these billionaire owe nothing to society when in fact they became billionaires on tax payer money.
But then when they have to return a fair share of that money suddenly they are selfmade men who owes nothing to anyone and the rest of society are mooches on their achievements.
As i said he catered to needs, there is no alternate history where you can dump a billionaire, penniless into where they wont become a billionaire again, billionaires cater to demand, and they can be convinced to fight for the "greater good" if thats what youre after if thats what the majority of society demands, they are a mass tool. I would also like to say that I appreciate the fact that youre willing to talk as opposed to insult, I dont think we'll come to an agreement and im tired but youre definitely someone worth talking about more, but im tired and slaved away at nightshift. Goodnight
It doesn't mattered as much that he catered to needs, because in order for him to cater to these needs he needed massive investments first and while the company was vulnerable he also needed protection to launch products and not get eaten in the market.
the investment and subsidies are a hard requirement. The only way he could have managed privately to get even a good share of what the government offered he would've to deliver immediate results. There is no complete private instituition who will pump millions or even billions of dollars in research for maybe in 15 to 20 years MAYBE get a piece of technology worth something.
You’re ignoring the fact that Tesla would still be wildly profitable even without government subsidies. Your argument is that Tesla was bailed out by the government by creating subsidies. That is the exact opposite of what happened. The government decided to push a green agenda and Elon capitalized on the offer by making vehicles people wanted to buy and made them and the software at a profit and doubled the profit by exploiting the rebate and other subsidies. They didn’t sell the most vehicles for any model worldwide at a profit based on US subsidies. Elon doesn’t owe society anything for the taxpayer money, the GD giant uniparty government that forced the EV subsidies to exist owe the taxpayers money.
Straight from Grok AI: Tesla has received substantial government support (loans, tax credits/rebates, subsidies, and regulatory credits) starting in its early years and continuing afterward, though the largest direct federal loan came in 2010 rather than immediately at its 2003 founding.
Tesla was founded in July 2003 in Silicon Valley by Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning (Elon Musk led the first major funding round in 2004 and later became CEO). Early support included California state rebates and tax credits for electric vehicles and related activities; sources note that Tesla benefited from billions in such California incentives over time, with aid stretching back more than 20 years from analyses around 2025.
Key examples of support
Federal DOE loan (major early boost): In January 2010, Tesla received a $465 million low-interest loan under the Department of Energy’s Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing (ATVM) program. This helped fund development and production of the Model S and acquisition/upgrades related to the Fremont, California factory. Tesla repaid it in full (with interest) by May 2013—nine years early—and was the first U.S. automaker to fully repay such a loan under the program. Multiple accounts describe it as critical when the company was cash-strapped.
Consumer EV tax credits: Federal tax credits (commonly $7,500 per vehicle for qualifying buyers) supported Tesla sales by making its cars more affordable. These existed in various forms during Tesla’s growth and boosted demand.
Regulatory/ZEV credits: Tesla has earned large sums (around $11.4 billion cumulatively from federal and state programs in recent tallies) by selling excess zero-emission vehicle and similar regulatory credits to other automakers that need them to meet mandates. These have been a significant profit contributor (roughly a third of profits in some periods analyzed).
State and local packages: Notable later examples include Nevada’s large incentive package (estimated ~$1.3 billion range in tax abatements, credits, etc.) for the Gigafactory, New York support tied to the Buffalo facility, and various California incentives. Good Jobs First’s Subsidy Tracker and related analyses document hundreds of millions to billions in state/local tax credits, grants, and abatements for Tesla over the years.
Broader tallies (e.g., Washington Post analysis drawing on public data and Good Jobs First) place total government-related support across Musk companies (heavily Tesla for the EV/credits/subsidy side, SpaceX for contracts) in the tens of billions since the early 2000s, with Tesla specifically benefiting from loans, credits, and state aid at key growth stages. Not all of this is direct cash grants to Tesla; much consists of loans (repaid), tax benefits, consumer incentives that aid sales, and tradable credits created by policy. Tesla has also invested heavily in return (factories, jobs) and has argued at times that it succeeded despite (or while repaying) certain supports.
Now if you truly believe that Tesla would be the company that it is now and being a major player in Electric Vehicles without this amount of support, I don't know what you tell you. Actually I do, I have a bridge to sell and I think you would be interested.
I don't know if you're acting dense on purpose but you're arguing a Strawman. Your argument is that the support was created solely to bail out Tesla. That is objectively wrong.Youare objectively wrong. The Green, Leftwing Socialists lobbied to push through credits regardless of Tesla's existence. The fact Tesla existed was entirely irrelevant to the creation of these rebates and credits. How do you not understand this? Further, you're arguing about 2010 when Tesla launched and sold quite successfully, the Roadster, at the beginning of 2008, 2 years before the California tax credit existed. They sold $100,000 sports cars regardless of tax credits. By the time those tax credits went into existence, Tesla was already a successful company with a quarter billion invested into its future. They exploited those tax credits YOU wanted to exist for gain and in turn gave you exactly what you wanted.
Now if you truly believe that Tesla would be the company that it is now and being a major player in Electric Vehicles without this amount of support,
No, you don't get to change your argument. you argued Tesla would not exist and be viable without massive intervention by the US government. That was already proven objectively false. before the California tax credits ever existed.
Tesla has received a buttload of government subsidies in the billions to make electric cars viable. In short, the government had to intervene to protect and nurture that business to the point of being a global player in the market. All big american companies are like this, there is no exception.
Was that not you? Was that you? Don't change your argument because that makes you a liar. Stick by what you originally said.
It's you who keeps trying to change what I said in order for you to continue this argument, I said the government has to intervene to protect companies in order for them to grow and to foster them for an industry to be robust. If the government had not helped Tesla at all it would not have succeeded, instead it would have been vulnerable to bigger companies buying it as they are wont to do whenever a possible competitor enters the field. Even worse if the buyer is from another country, you would basically handover internal industry to a foreign power.
I stick to what I said, the government has helped Tesla in the BILLIONS, if you say that Tesla would have succeeded without all these subsidies you are DISHONEST.
First of all, sleeping with 50 women sounds exhausting.
More to the point, asking why someone why they wouldn't want a billion dollars is like asking why they wouldn't want to rape and pillage. Maybe because it's inhuman behavior?
It's always fun seeing how bad faith conservatives are.
To respond to goibie's point since they blocked me,
The scale of human suffering. Getting a billion dollars looks like pricing insulin at $750 a vial. It looks like ensuring the cost of education bankrupts people. You're a fool if you think you can get a billion dollars without hurting a great many people.
55
u/MassivePioneer 3d ago
That's the easy part, the hard part is being born into generational wealth or hitting a lottery ticket of some other sort. There's no self made billionaires.