The EX30 electric SUV, a product of the Swedish luxury car brand Volvo, is a five-seater electric SUV with a 275-mile driving range and a five-second, zero to 60-mile-per-hour time, all at a competitive price of $35,000. The specs of the EX30 closely match the Tesla Model Y, except that the latter has more cargo room and has a cost before taxes and incentives of $42,990.

Volvo is one of the few carmakers in the U.S. that source their manufacturing in China, but the brand claims it still runs its own show and designs its cars in Sweden even though, since 2010, Volvo has been owned by Chinese automotive company Geely.

According to Climate Depot, the Volvo EX30 EV offers such competitive pricing in the U.S. due to several factors. Firstly, China has cheaper cost advantages and Volvo avoids U.S. tariffs due to its American manufacturing operations. Secondly, the dominance of China in the EV battery supply chain helps Chinese EVs undercut global competition. Lastly, Geely saves operational costs by sharing resources with Volvo and other brands it owns.

Furthermore, the price of the EX30 is expected to drop further if people lease it because of a loophole in the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022.

The law reinstated a $7,500 tax credit for EV buyers but excluded vehicles with components from countries considered economic or security threats, including China. However, the Internal Revenue Service has recently clarified that leased EVs qualify as commercial vehicles and are eligible for the subsidy without the restrictions related to components coming from China. In other words, this could make leasing an EX30 only $27,500.

China already dominating America’s EV market before selling its first car

In a 2023 Business Insider report, Alexa St. John wrote about how China is already dominating the American EV market even without selling a single car.

All this despite facing Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) lockdowns, economic uncertainties and the gradual phasing out of government EV subsidies. (Related: SUPPLY CHAIN WARNING: China flexes world domination muscle, restricts mineral exports vital for semiconductors and EV battery production.)

Chinese electric car companies like Geely, XPeng, Li Auto and Nio have gained significant traction in the global EV market, collectively capturing a 17 percent increase in market share in 2022, while non-Chinese automakers witnessed an 11 percent drop. Notably, BYD alone sold nearly 1.8 million EV batteries and plug-in hybrids in China in 2022, surpassing Tesla’s global sales figures.

The Chinese auto industry is now setting its sights on international expansion, with the U.S. as a prime target.

“What happens in China will not stay in China,” said Bill Russo, the CEO of advisory firm Automobility. “If you have that kind of supply chain, that kind of position on the chess board, then why wouldn’t you take that internationally?”

Chinese automakers possess several advantages in the U.S. market, especially with the lower cost of their vehicles compared to American brands.

And even if it fails to dominate the U.S. car market, its control over the global EV battery supply chain, including raw materials, processing, cell manufacturing and more, still gives China control over a majority of the production capacity in 2027. China has controlled about 75 percent of all battery cell manufacturing capacity and 90 percent of battery anode and electrolyte production since 2022. Since then, giant CATL, along with U.S. automakers GM and Tesla, have been dependent on China for their battery needs.

Even as the U.S. produces more mineral extraction here and the U.S. battery-making industry grows, much of these materials are still sent to China for processing.

Visit CommunistChina.news for stories related to China’s moves to dominate the global economy. Watch the video below that talks about the danger of America’s supply chain dependence on CCP.

This video is from the Chinese taking down EVIL CCP channel on Brighteon.com.

More related stories:

• Report suggests legacy automakers and EV manufacturers are “at risk of ties” to Uyghur FORCED LABOR in China.
• Saudi Arabia signs $5.6 billion deal with China to boost the kingdom’s EV industry.
• China enacts export restrictions on two crucial metals amid escalating trade war with US.
• Taiwan pushes back, won’t let US destroy semiconductor factories to prevent them from falling into Chinese hands.
• Experts: Semiconductor ban accelerates severing of US-China ties.

Sources include:

• ClimateDepot.com
• Tesla.com
• BusinessInsider.com
• Brighteon.com

The U.S. Department of Transportation is investigating Tesla’s December 2023 recall, which pulled more than 2 million vehicles from the road, to determine whether the company’s updates to its Autopilot driving systems were sufficient in preventing driver distractions. The department analyzed 956 crashes that were alleged to involve the automaker’s driver assistance technology.

The department’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration on April 26 posted documents to its website that suggest an additional 20 crashes occurred since Tesla’s recall, concerning investigators. The more than 2 million vehicles that Tesla recalled represent nearly all the vehicles that Tesla had sold at that point.

Tesla’s December 2023 recall affected all of its vehicles with Autopilot or driver assistance systems. This includes Tesla’s Model 3, Model X, Model S, and Model Y cars, as well as its Cybertruck. The Autopilot’s driver monitoring systems are supposed to detect the force from drivers’ hands on the steering wheel and send alerts when they are absent.

The safety administration asked the automaker to recall its vehicles after a two-year investigation into Tesla’s Autopilot system. Specifically, the agency probed multiple instances of Teslas crashing into roadside emergency vehicles while using the Autopilot systems.

The automaker said the “prominence and scope of the system’s controls may be insufficient to prevent driver misuse.”

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration on April 26 said its two-year investigation into Tesla’s Autopilot system was done to find any problems with the technology that “created an unreasonable risk” to driver and vehicle safety, and “involved extensive crash analysis, vehicle evaluations, and assessment of vehicle control authority and driver engagement technologies.”

The administration’s Office of Detects Investigation found 13 crashes that involved one or more fatalities and several others that caused serious injuries in which “foreseeable driver misuse” of the Autopilot system played a key role.

For owners of vehicles that use driver assistance technology, Tesla sent an online software update to increase driver warnings, including when a driver’s hands leave the steering wheel. The agency found 20 additional crashes after Tesla sent the update.

Tesla also stated that the solution requires the driver to opt in but allows the driver to reverse the fail-safe, according to the agency.

Autopilot Allegedly Kills Motorcyclist

A 2022 Tesla Model S using the Autopilot driving system was allegedly linked to a motorcyclist’s death in Seattle, Washington, on April 19.

The vehicle owner told a Washington State Patrol trooper after the crash that he was using the driver assistance technology while looking at his phone and driving the car.

“The next thing he knew there was a bang and the vehicle lurched forward as it accelerated and collided with the motorcycle in front of him,” the police officer wrote in the affidavit.

The trooper arrested the 56-year-old driver for investigation of vehicular homicide after the driver said he was using the Autopilot mode while operating the car inattentively and using his cell phone as it moved forward, “putting trust in the machine to drive for him,” according to the document.

Authorities found the motorcyclist, Jeffrey Nissen, 28, underneath the car, and he was pronounced dead at the scene.

However, authorities are still investigating the crash and have not verified whether the driver was using Autopilot at the time of the incident.

The federal agency probing Tesla said it was looking for defects in Autopilot’s driver monitoring system, which is supposed to alert drivers when their hands are no longer touching the steering wheel. Some experts have alleged that the monitoring system is defective and have also criticized its limitations during night driving.

Teslas have cameras to monitor drivers on the road, but they do not possess night vision capabilities, and Autopilot is still operable when the cameras are covered.

The initial investigation began in 2021 after 11 reports surfaced of Teslas striking parked emergency vehicles while using Autopilot. Between June 8, 2022, and April 25, the Autopilot system caused 467 crashes and 14 fatalities.

Tesla said that both of its driver assistance systems—Autopilot and the advanced “Full Self Driving”—cannot drive themselves, despite the choice of the name.

The latter technology was linked to 75 crashes and one death, according to the investigation.

Tesla’s CEO Elon Musk previously promised a fleet of robotaxis driven with “Full Self Driving” to create revenue for both the company and the vehicles’ owners, as they can operate as taxis when they’d normally be parked. The cars are still being tested and have faced years of delays after Mr. Musk said they would be ready by 2020.

The company says drivers must always be ready to take control of the wheel when using Autopilot or “Full Self Driving” and that they do not give the vehicle complete autonomous control.

Join the conversation about this article on The Liberty Daily Substack.

The Epoch Times has reached out to Tesla for comment. The Associated Press contributed to this report.

According to DW:

A US court has ordered Elon Musk’s Tesla Inc. to pay $1.5 million (€1.3 million) to settle a lawsuit that alleged the company disposed hazardous waste without following the proper regulations.

The investigation of violation of environmental laws by Tesla was initiated by the San Francisco district attorney’s office in 2018. It soon turned into a combined civil environmental case by 25 district attorneys from across California.

The prosecution alleged that Tesla violated the laws by improperly disposing used lead acid batteries, antifreeze, paint and electronic waste at its car service and energy centers throughout the US state.

“While electric vehicles may benefit the environment, the manufacturing and servicing of these vehicles still generates many harmful waste streams,” San Francisco District Attorney Brooke Jenkins said in a statement.

While the end result of not burning fossil fuels makes electric vehicles popular with some people, they generally have to willfully ignore the aspects of building and maintaining EVs in order to meet their desired levels of virtue signaling. From destructive lithium mining the the massive amounts of fossil fuels used to generate the electricity that EVs use, it’s apparent to those paying attention that they’re not nearly as “green” as the powers-that-be want us to think.

Add in Tesla’s sins and one might come to the conclusion that “green” activists pushing for electric vehicles may be doing more harm to the environment that proponents of gas-powered vehicles.

Image by Maurizio Pesce via Flickr, CC BY 2.0 DEED.

During an Oct. 6 interview with EpochTV’s “Crossroads” program, energy-related public policy analyst David Blackmon was asked whether Tesla’s Harris Ranch EV charging station in Coalinga, California, runs on diesel power.

“Yeah, in part,” Mr. Blackmon replied. “The San Francisco Chronicle did an exposé on it. They found that this charging station has 98 high-speed Tesla chargers. There’s a diesel-generating plant located behind the Shell station that’s adjacent to the chargers. And it’s providing power.

“People think, I guess they think the power comes from just the sky or something,” he said. “But something has to generate the electricity that enables those chargers to recharge those batteries. And Tesla operates this charging station and decided they needed that diesel generating plant, and they strategically located it behind the Shell station.”

Mr. Blackmon spent 40 years in the oil and gas industry. A senior contributor to Forbes magazine, he writes and comments frequently on energy issues.

Harris Ranch is one of Tesla’s first Supercharger stations. On its website, the Harris Ranch Resort describes the facility as “the world’s largest Tesla Supercharger station.”

When asked whether diesel-powered EV charging stations are common, Mr. Blackmon said that he had personally found one such station at a supermarket in Houston five or six years ago. A grocery store manager told him a diesel generator powered the charger.

“I went [and] looked at it, he took me out there to see it … Every time a car pulled up to recharge, that diesel generator came on and provided the power for it.”

Mr. Blackmon pointed out that the EV industry is going through “a lot of growing pains” and that proper infrastructure to support electric vehicles “just is not there.”

“Tesla’s way out in front of all these other carmakers in the EV space here in the United States, and is doing whatever it needs to do to ensure electricity goes to these chargers so that the drivers in California—it’s the biggest market for Tesla—and their automobiles, they want to make sure they can charge their cars as they’re driving through the Central Valley. And yeah, the diesel generators are doing the job.”

News outlet SFGate, which used to be part of the San Francisco Chronicle, did a story on the diesel-powered Harris Ranch EV charging station last month.

In 2021, Tesla claimed that all its Superchargers would be 100 percent powered by renewable energy by the end of that year. When the outlet contacted Tesla to comment on the Harris Ranch Supercharger’s use of diesel, the company didn’t respond.

At the Harris Ranch Resort, SFGate tried unsuccessfully to use the TezLab app, a free app that can track energy sources used at Tesla Superchargers. A TezLab spokesperson later told the outlet that the energy being used at Harris Ranch consists of a “mix of sources that are attached to the grid.”

“Nearly all Superchargers, homes, businesses, etc., in California are using those same sources of energy, unless they have their own dedicated solar or theoretical energy contracts.”

“Because of how grids work, it’s not really feasible to look at one charger and say, ‘Oh, I’d rather drive another 5 minutes to this one that uses a cleaner source of energy’ since they are very likely on the same grid.”

US Power Grid Challenge

In the interview, Mr. Blackmon was asked whether the power grid would be able to handle the electricity demand coming from increased EV use. During heat waves, California power officials issue alerts asking EV owners not to charge their vehicles in a bid to conserve power.

The power grid issue is a “huge problem,” he said. “And it’s much bigger than people know because right now, we have a crisis in [the] supply of electric transformers for our power grid.”

“Transformers are an integral part of every electricity project in America—around the world, really—and they’re in very short supply. It’s taking up to four years to source new supplies of these transformers. Inventories are very low.”

“And, you know, you can’t expand the grid if you don’t have the equipment to do it with. The federal government is not doing anything to solve this problem,” he said.

In March, IEEE Spectrum, a publication of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, published a report on EV transition, highlighting the transformer crisis in the context of the U.S. power grid.

Professor Deepak Divan, director of the Center for Distributed Energy at Georgia Tech, estimated that multiple L2 chargers on a single distribution transformer can cut its life from 30–40 years to just three years, according to the report. L2 chargers provide faster charging than the regular L1 chargers supplied to EV buyers at the time of purchase.

Upgrading transformers can be a headache for electric utilities. Costs of transformers have jumped to as much as $20,000 each, from $3,000 to $4,000. As larger transformers may be required to support EVs, many of the 180 million power poles in America would also have to be replaced, pushing up the cost further, the report said.

Some experts argue that the threat to transformers can be minimized by encouraging EV owners to charge during off-peak hours when there is less load on the electric grid. However, the report notes that off-peak charging “may not fully solve” the peak-load problem once EVs become widespread.

“Transformers are passively cooled devices” that are designed to be cooled at night, Mr. Divan said. “When you change the [power] consumption profile by adding several EVs using L2 chargers at night, that transformer is running hot.”

The risk that uncoordinated overnight charging may end up resulting in transformer failure is a cause for concern, especially during summer heat waves.

Utility firms are also staring at high costs to enable EV adoption.

“The rising number of EVs will test the local grid’s reliability at many of the 3,000 electric-distribution utilities in the United States, which themselves own more than 5.5 million miles of power lines. It is estimated that these utilities need $1 trillion in upgrades by 2035,” the report stated.

In addition, to achieve the desired level of reduction in greenhouse gases, fossil fuel energy will need to be replaced by renewable energy, which will add to the cost.

Improvements and replacements to the grid’s 8,000 power-generation units and 600,000 circuit miles of AC transmission lines, as well as 70,000 substations to support increased renewable energy and battery storage, are estimated to cost more than $2.5 trillion by 2035, it said.

In the interview, Mr. Blackmon also pointed to challenges that EV charging will face during disasters such as hurricanes when the power supply is disrupted.

“We’ve been very fortunate in this hurricane season, that we haven’t had a major storm like Hurricane Harvey—[which] comes through and shuts off power across a wide geographical area—this year, and hopefully, we’ll get through this season without that happening.”

“Because honestly, in some areas of the country, it might even be impossible to restore power within months if it gets knocked out, because of this transformer issue.”

Last April Musk announced that Twitter Inc. has been renamed to X Corp., he created a new Artificial Intelligence company known as X.AI and he partnered with eToro for stock and crypto exchange.

The media would have you believe that Elon Musk is an independent billionaire genius whose dream is to revolutionize banking. But this story is demonstrably false. The facts tell us that Elon Musk is a frontman for the same old same old. But because he says there are only two genders he has gained the trust of a radicalized people in a time of war, without ever having to explain his lies.

Musk says he grew up poor but his family was rich with emeralds and had a history of abuse and witchcraft. Telltale signs of multi-generational mind control.

Musk received tens of thousands of dollars from his parents to launch his first business venture. A digital phone book known as Zip2. Outside coders were hired to write the entire thing because Elon couldn’t code. Zip2 sold for millions and went nowhere. But Elon made 22 million dollars and with the help of the mainstream media, launched his new persona as a quirky pop-star genius. He then acquired x dot com and announced he would create an online bank known as X. He partnered with banking experts who all left the company after accusing Elon of lying to the media about the product. Which is all he did.

Elon Musk is believed to have co-founded PayPal. This is false. In 2000 Musk sold his failing x dot com business to Confinity, a company founded in 1998 by Peter Thiel and Max Levchin. All Musk reportedly did there was insist on changing the company’s name to X. He was forced out but somehow managed to get them to agree in writing to remove all references to ‘founders’ from the company website.

Musk made nearly two hundred million off the sale of PayPal, a company that he contributed nothing to, and then used that money along with the illusion of being a successful businessman co-founder to buy his way into Tesla.

Tesla Motors was founded in 2003 by Marc Tarpenning and Martin Eberhard, who developed the Tesla Roadster. When Tesla accepted millions from Elon, it came with the condition that he be named chairman of the company. Even though he only contributed money, Musk was unable to hide his anger that the media wasn’t giving him credit for Tesla Motors. And after forcing Eberhard out of the company he re-wrote their history to have himself listed as an original co-founder.

This obvious fake persona of a billionaire quirky genius has worked so well that few even question SpaceX. The official story is that Elon, who has absolutely no experience with rocket science, came up with the idea for SpaceX while traveling to Russia with the CIA’s Michael Griffin of In-Q-Tel. Shortly after this conversation, Griffin was made administrator of NASA where he launched the COTS program that privatized NASA’s rocket program. And awarded two-hundred and seventy-eight million dollars to SpaceX who had never made or flown any rockets. Musk then partnered with rocket engineer Tom Mueller, who went on to produce rocket technology that has clearly been developed for years in the private sectors of the military-industrial complex.

Elon’s companies have received billions in government subsidies over the last two decades. Money that was later spent on the purchase of Twitter. Where he immediately began the process of turning it into an everything app with its own banking system. Or rather, the ruling class cabal that pulls his strings is turning Twitter into an everything app with its own banking system. And that should be alarming. But he says there are only two genders, and families are good, and people love a hero.

They don’t need to chip you to control you. We already have iris scanners and palm scanners. A cashless society will do the job. And for many, Elon’s X will be preferable to Amazon’s palm scanners. The illusion of choice will make your financial enslavement less painful.

Video and transcript cross-posted from Greg’s Substack.

Tesla should create its own smartphone. Your information will never be collected. Would you use it?

Tesla should create its own smartphone. Your information will never be collected.

Would you use it?

— Elon Musk (Parody) (@ElonMuskAOC) July 13, 2023

This came from his “parody” account, but it’s actually his account. And to answer his question, yes, people would use it… but he already knew that. The cult-like following of Tesla and Musk is similar to the cult-like following of Apple and Steve Jobs over a decade ago.

There’s a fact about Elon Musk that surprisingly few seem to know. He has a reputation of being a flamboyant and carefree rich guy who has ideas and tosses them up on Twitter to see what people think. The reality is that he is meticulous and plans out every move. By the time it makes it to Twitter to get “feedback,” he has already made his decision.

Case-in-point: buying Twitter itself. He seemed to randomly hop on Twitter one day and ask what should be done about the company over hot-button topics like censorship. On cue, the masses called on him to buy it. A few days later, he announced that he’d bought just under 10% of the company making him the biggest individual stock holder.

That’s what we’re supposed to believe. What he didn’t mention is that he had initiated the purchase of those shares three weeks before getting “feedback” about whether he should consider buying it or not. He’s meticulous. He just pretends to be random and whimsical.

Rumors started in 2021 that Tesla was considering a smartphone. They reemerged in recent weeks with the supposed phone being called the “Tesla Pi 5G” or some variation.

Considering Musk is pushing forward with both artificial intelligence and his Neuralink brain interface project, the prospects of a smartphone seem to be in line with his masterplan. And while some will herald it because they think he’s a good steward, I’m not convinced. In fact, I’ve been leaning more and more toward thinking he’s a shill or even a ringleader of the Globalist Elite Cabal.

Think what you will about Elon Musk and his “whimsical” Tweets but I’m fairly certain a Tesla smartphone is already in development.

How it started:

Elon Musk started Tesla with a huge U.S. government welfare grant. He has taken taxpayers to the cleaners for his factories and for Starlink. He is a gigantic corporate welfare king masquerading as a capitalist businessman. -R

Musk (@elonmusk) started Tesla with a huge U.S. government welfare grant. He has taken taxpayers to the cleaners for his factories and for Starlink. He is a gigantic corporate welfare king masquerading as a capitalist businessman. -R

— Ralph Nader (@RalphNader) February 24, 2023

How it ended:

Ralph Nader, you are lying – shame on you! I personally provided almost all Tesla funding, based on my proceeds from PayPal, from Series A in 2004 until Series C in 2007. In late 2008, I gave Tesla the last money I had. It was that or the company would have died. We closed that funding round at 6pm on Christmas Eve. If we had not closed that round, Tesla would have gone bankrupt 2 days after Christmas. I gave my last money thinking Tesla would probably still die, not thinking that it would be lucrative. The first meaningful government funding Tesla received was in Q2 2010 from a loan under the vehicle efficiency lending program. Tesla paid back that loan early with interest. Taxpayers actually made a profit.

Ralph Nader, you are lying – shame on you! I personally provided almost all Tesla funding, based on my proceeds from PayPal, from Series A in 2004 until Series C in 2007.

In late 2008, I gave Tesla the last money I had. It was that or the company would have died. We closed that…

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 24, 2023

It’s time for the 88-year-old Nader to accept that he didn’t accomplish much of what he set out to do but at least he had some laughs along the way.

Speaking in a Twitter Spaces audio forum, Musk also assured investors Tesla hadn’t “skipped a beat on execution” since he took over Twitter. Twitter required an initial period of intense focus to get its “insane … costs under control” to stop it from going “flat bankrupt” next year, Musk said.

“I was still doing Tesla work during that time as well, by the way. And I think really Tesla has really not skipped a beat on execution,” he said. “The Tesla team is doing an incredible job across the board in execution.”

Tesla share prices fell further on Thursday over concerns about slowing demand for electric vehicles. Musk’s stock sales and focus on Twitter have also been blamed as a contributing factor, but Musk rejected this on Thursday, blaming the Federal Reserve’s interest rate increases.

‘Won’t Sell Stock’

Musk sold around 22 million Tesla shares between Dec. 12 and 14, valued at roughly $3.6 billion, according to a Securities and Exchange Commission filing. He has sold around $23 billion in Tesla shares since April, with much of the funds going toward his $44 billion acquisition of Twitter.

On Thursday, he promised not to sell any more stocks for the next two years.

“You have my commitment that I won’t sell stock until, I don’t know, probably two years from now. Definitely not next year under any circumstances and probably not the year thereafter,” Musk said.

Musk said he needed to sell some of his stock “to make sure, like, there’s powder dry … to account for a worst-case scenario.” The phrase “powder dry” means to always be prepared to take action yourself. Musk has previously made promises about not selling Tesla stock before subsequently selling it.

Less Focus on Twitter

Once he gets “the engine of engineering at Twitter” humming to ensure the social network can develop new features, Musk expects the social network to take up far less of his focus.

“In the grand scheme of things, the amount of cognitive load that Twitter represents is low. I mean, it is a much simpler problem than Tesla or SpaceX, obviously, by a hundred miles,” Musk said.

“I’d say it was a high cognitive load for about a month. At this point, it is a moderate cognitive load. A month from now, it’ll be, I think, low,” he continued.

“And if I look back and say, like: ‘What are actions I could have taken? Was there something that I failed to do at Tesla that could have been done and would have improved our execution?’ I literally can not think of a single thing.”

Musk noted that he hadn’t missed a single important meeting at Tesla since taking over Twitter, with both primarily based in the Bay Area of San Francisco.

‘Serious Recession’

The real issue is not how much time Musk might be putting into Twitter versus Tesla; according to the billionaire, it is the Federal Reserve’s “radical interest rate changes” pushing up the price of cars. Musk predicted a “serious recession” next year “comparable to 2009,” with decreasing demand for big-ticket items like vehicles.

With respect to global demand for vehicles, Musk said that interest rate rises push up the costs of both new and used cars, which he noted are mostly bought with leases and loans. He said a decrease in car demand, along with the Fed’s rate increases pushing up the cost of a car, creates a “double whammy.”

“So now you have structural demand, which is obviously going to be lower in a recession, and you’ve amplified the effect of cost of a car because they’re almost all bought with debt, so you get a double whammy, is what I’m saying,” he said.

Policymakers at the Federal Reserve voted at their last monetary policy meeting on Dec. 14 to hike the benchmark federal funds rate by 50 basis points to a target range of 4.25–4.5 percent, the highest level since late 2007. It was the seventh consecutive rise since March, totaling 425 basis points.

Fed Chair Jerome Powell said at a press conference after the meeting that the fight against inflation has a long way to go. Most officials expect rates to rise over 5 percent next year, which is more than originally predicted.

“I wouldn’t see us considering rate cuts until the committee is confident that inflation is moving down to 2 percent in a sustained way,” Powell said.

‘Hard Landing’

Musk rejected the idea that his political tweets are having an impact on Tesla share prices, contending that automotive demand is “problematic almost anywhere in the world” and “not everywhere cares about my political comments.”

“I really just don’t think this is a significant factor,” he said.

In Musk’s opinion, the U.S. economy is already in a period of deflation, and the Fed’s predictions are based on old data.

“The thing that I think most people don’t realize is how—I sound like a broken record on this—how big of an impact the Fed rate level is, at over 5 percent, if we are in a deflationary environment, which I think we are in,” he said.

“Objectively, we are,” he added.

Musk said it was “blowing my mind” that the Fed has raised rates to their current level, and said he believes that they are “dealing with old information.”

“The economy right now is like a car driving around on a cliffside road, and the Fed is driving it by looking out the rearview mirror,” he said. “In fact, it’s not even looking out the rearview mirror. It’s looking at a video taken out of the rearview mirror that’s like three months old. So obviously, this is not a good way to drive a car on a windy road.”

The Epoch Times has contacted the Federal Reserve for comment.

First, let’s look at the report. According to Fox Business:

General Motors will suspend advertising on Twitter as the social media giant continues to find its footing under the new ownership of Elon Musk.

“We are engaging with Twitter to understand the direction of the platform under their new ownership. As is normal course of business with a significant change in a media platform, we have temporarily paused our paid advertising. Our customer care interactions on Twitter will continue,” the carmaker told Fox Business.

The announcement came a day after Musk took ownership of the social media giant and immediately fired several top executives. In an effort to assure advertisers, Musk on Thursday said the platform would not be a “free-for-all hellscape” following the $44 billion acquisition.

“Twitter obviously cannot become a free-for-all hellscape, where anything can be said with no consequences!” Musk said in a lengthy statement titled “Dear Twitter Advertisers.” “In addition to adhering to our laws of the land, our platform must be warm and welcoming to all, where you can choose your desired experience according to your preferences.”

Some have worried about what, if any, regulations on hate speech would be imposed under the new ownership and how ads could be affected. Fox Business has reached out to Ford and Stellantis, the parent company of several car brands, including Fiat, Jeep and Dodge.

Whether or not one buys the excuse that it’s “normal course of business” to pause advertising after a change of ownership on a media platform, we should consider the other aspects of this move. Musk owns Tesla, a direct competitor of General Motors. On his first day, Musk announced he would be bringing in Tesla engineers to examine Twitter’s operations. While there may not be any intention by Musk to dive into his automotive competitors’ business, it’s prudent for General Motors to pause until they could verify his intentions.

If General Motors cancels their ads indefinitely, we can assume it’s due to corporate wokeness. The platform is almost certainly going to reach more eyeballs under Musk’s control and since it’s assumed it will be more “conservative-friendly,” the quality of the potential buyers General Motors could reach there will go up. If they turn their ads back on, we can assume they were truthful about simply pausing to understand Musk’s intentions. Stay tuned.

General Motors CEO Mary Barra and Tesla CEO Elon Musk have had some serious words for both imposter president Joe Biden and WEF chairman Klaus Schwab as well as others. It all has to do with debates over the Fourth Industrial Revolution related to energy storage. Battery storage of electricity and how fast electric vehicles (EVs) should become a standard as part of the World Economic Forum as part of WEF’s Global Battery Alliance.

The WEF is working to enact a Carbon 55 plan whereby they will legislate a 55% reduction in vehicle emissions by 2030 and achieve “carbon neutrality” by 2035.  It is to be noted that anybody awake in high school science class knows you do not get energy out without putting energy in with some expenditure of waste as a byproduct but Klaus Schwab must be betting none of us were awake in this part of science class.

But CEOs like Barra play the game to keep their companies profitable and remain on the map.  In a recent joint letter to Congress the CEOs of several major automakers, which included GM CEO Barra, they urging Congress to lift the Electric Vehicle (EV) tax credit cap.  GM, Ford, and Chrysler all pledge to invest more than $170 billion through 2030 in the development of future electric vehicle technology, production, and sales.

The automakers cited recent economic pressures such as supply chain constraints as increasing manufacturing costs and raising prices for consumers.

As these credits stand now, the current $7,500 tax credit is phased out once a manufacturer reaches 200,000 EV units sold. GM hit the cap this year already and is now ineligible for further customer tax credits. Tesla has hit this target cap as well. Toyota and Ford also expect their EV tax credits to expire by the end of the year 2022.

GM recently had its stocks slide in value by 8% in the week ending June and there are other signs of trouble on the horizon for all automakers.  Car sales for 2022 are now forecast to be down 17.3%, according to Cox Automotive. Cox revised down their 2022 sales forecast from 15.3 million vehicles to 14.4 million units which are actually below the 14.6 million sold in the Covid pandemic year of 2020.

American Politicians sticking their noses in things like business and industry is never a good thing as Senator Elizabeth Warren (D) (not a Native American) recently demonstrated real time.  She came out with a statement that read:

“Converting our public transportation to electric is one of the best ways we can create jobs, modernize our crumbling infrastructure, and fight the climate crisis.”

She then went on with a Tweet:

“General Motors just announced plans to lay off nearly 15,000 workers and shut down plants across the US. This is the same @GM that got a huge tax break from the #GOPTaxScam and spent $4.5 billion on stock buybacks last year. It’s shameful.”

CEO Barra responded in a general way with a press release:

“The actions we are taking today continue our transformation to be highly agile, reliant, and profitable while giving us the flexibility to invest in the future.”

She went on:

“We recognize the need to stay in front of changing market conditions and customer preferences to position our company for long-term success.”

The restructuring of GM is said to save 6 billion dollars a year annually with some of that money going to future EV research and development.

Warren then joined UAW protesters when GM announced plant closures.  Where Liz Warren is a proven unhinged progressive liberal out of touch with reality is the fact of the matter is GM CEO Barra recently came out publically stating GM cannot make trucks fast enough to satisfy market demand.  So, at a time when America’s Democrat politicians push automakers to move to EVs, the American public is stating they want the opposite, fuel-thirsty pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles.

In a case going back to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton when GM opened a plant in Uzbekistan Clinton offered a soundbite in 2011 of:

“It is a collaboration between Uzbek and American companies and it will serve as a symbol of our friendship and cooperation.”

The announcement came after the GM Foundation donated $684.455 in GM vehicles to the Clinton Foundation.  Mary Barra came on board GM in 2013 and exposed Clinton’s charade.

That same plant in Uzbekistan is now involved in a criminal investigation involving fraud, money laundering, and embezzlement.

Peter Flaherty who is CEO of the watchdog group National Legal and Policy Center said, “This episode is another example of the Clintons of how, if you do business with them, they will do something for you.”

So why would the Clintons be interested in Uzbekistan?

Turns out they are major producers of cotton, oil, and precious metals starting with gold!

Then we get into Elon Musk and Twitter. Musk and his non-UAW Tesla operations have been unfairly shunned and treated less than by the union-loving Democrats.

Elon Musk has been critical of Twitter for allowing disinformation on its platform when it favors the Democrats and going so far as to outright ban Republicans who try to call them out.

In the past I voted Democrat, because they were (mostly) the kindness party.

But they have become the party of division & hate, so I can no longer support them and will vote Republican.

Now, watch their dirty tricks campaign against me unfold …

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 18, 2022

Musk uses a specific example of a Tweet by Hillary Clinton that remains where she outright lied trying to frame President Donald Trump for impeachment:

“Computer scientists have apparently uncovered a covert server linking the Trump Organization to a Russian-based bank.”

Elon Musk @elonmusk recently revived that old Tweet by responding:

“You are absolutely correct.  That tweet is a Clinton campaign hoax for which their campaign lawyer is undergoing a criminal trial.”

Musk then referenced a BBC story where Michael Sussmann was accused of trying to bait the FBI to investigate the bogus claim of the Clinton campaign.

Elon Musk @elonmusk then piled on with:

“Sussmann himself admitted billing the Clinton Campaign to pay for him to present the Russia hoax to the FBI!  This is not even questioned by the defense.”

Musk has stated he donated money to the Clinton campaign and voted for her over Trump in 2016 and is now “doubly pissed off about those funds being used for lying.”

Musk has announced he has voted for Democrats in the past but will now vote for Republicans in the future.

Elon Musk has felt that his companies of Tesla and SpaceX have been improperly shunned by the Democrat politicians of Washington and that may have also led to his leaving the party.

An example occurred in this past month of May when Tesla, the world’s leading maker of electric vehicles, had been cut from Standard and Poor’s (S&P’s) Environmental Social & Governance (ESG) Index.  The index is said to be a device of globalists pushing climate change and carbon footprints to have control over business and industry in the free world.  created for environmentally conscious investors owing to flaws in its business conduct and, ironically, aspects of the company’s low-carbon strategy. The move inflamed Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who caviled, “ESG is a scam.”

Exxon is rated top ten best in world for environment, social & governance (ESG) by S&P 500, while Tesla didn’t make the list!

ESG is a scam. It has been weaponized by phony social justice warriors.

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 18, 2022

Musk has an above-average intellect and he may not be wrong.  The ESG system began from the UN in 2004.  The Internet offers this information:

“Who Cares Wins (WCW) was initiated by the UN Secretary General and UN Global Compact in 2004 in collaboration with the Swiss government. The initiative was endorsed by 23 financial institutions collectively representing more than US $6 trillion in assets.”

The problem many people in the free world have with the measure of carbon footprints and the ESG system is it neglects the most air polluting portion of the world, Asia, and specifically China.  The other issue with this initiative is a significant number of the population does not believe climate change is man-made.

Since Musk is the richest man in the western world at some 220 billion, he could be the one man to actually destroy the new socialist Democrat party of America.

Interestingly, when Tesla lost its ESG ranking in the ESG index, Tesla stock went down.  It is easy to see why Barra and Musk can get so angry when games are played behind their backs by globalists who know or care little about business and industry.

Barra always remains classy as Musk can get a little trashy.  This could explain America’s love for Elon Musk.

Standard and Poor’s offered a piss poor explanation why Tesla slid off the index list not worth printing here.

Copyright © 2022 by Mark S. Schwendau

Mark S. Schwendau is a retired technology professor who has always had a sideline in news editorial writing where his byline has been, “Bringing little known news to people who simply want to know the truth.”  He classifies himself as a Christian conservative who God cast to be a realist.  Mark is an award-winning educator who has published 7 books and numerous peer-reviewed trade journal articles some of which can be found on the Internet.  His father was a fireman/paramedic while his mother was a registered nurse.  He holds multiple degrees in technology education, industrial management, OSHA Safety, and Driver’s Education.  His personal website is www.IDrawIWrite.Tech.

Image by Fortune Live Media, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 via Flickr, and JD Lasica from Pleasanton, CA, US, CC BY 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons.