Don't know about Tesla, but SpaceX is currently saving the American government billions through providing cheaper resupplies to the ISS than any competitors have done. And the cost continues to drop and now involves the American Air Force as well, who have switched to SpaceX for defense based satellite launches. The initial investment from NASA into SpaceX has been returned countless times over to the tax payers and will only continue further.
A SpaceX Falcon 9 launch costs $80m, whilst the equivalent launch from the United Launch Alliance costs $400. Every launch SpaceX does for the US Government saves them approximately $320m. NASA also stated that the development costs of a Falcon 9 launch vehicle, if done by NASA, would be around $4bn. So you could add that to the money that Musk has saved the Space Agency. NASA has paid SpaceX around $500m, but as a service provider as part of the Commercial Resupply and Commercial Crew programs. This is no different to any agency paying for a service - a service which SpaceX provides at a much lower cost than any other launch provider.
And if we're going to talk about subsidies, the level that Musk gets is but a fraction of what big oil gets, and not even a scratch on the bailout that GM got. Tesla repaid a government loan, whilst GM did not and granted their bosses bonuses. So if you want to play the anti-subsidy card, then by all means go for it (and I'll back you up on it), but play it fair and apply it to everyone, not just people you don't like.
The largest claim anyone has ever made that Musk gets of American money is $4.9bn. This claim is a lie, as $500m of this (for example) is the CRS and CC projects for NASA, which is a service agreement. It is not a gift. So it's actually, at worst, $4.2bn. However, even if you add up all the money that has been "given" to Musk, it is still outweighed by the saving that SpaceX provides the US Government through cut price launches. And the military is REALLY ramping up launches now days.
To put this in perspective, the NFL has been subsidised to the tune of $4.7bn. So someone can service the entire governments space launch needs for the same money that some sportsmen can carry a ball around. Man, one of these seems like a rip off and I'm not sure it was the one that was intended.
I'm not going to apologise for going off topic to reply to some of the completely fake claims that are made either. It's crazy how little people know about politics, but seem to be experts as someone makes a product they don't like.
Last edited:
