When you say "feature, not bug" I'm not sure if you're saying the feature is that traditional banks are bad at evaluating new tech, or if the feature is that Tesla would have not survived without a government loan. Either meaning is hard to connect to the rest of your comment.
I don't know what "Clinton's try" is, or really what fuel efficiency has to do with any of this, to be honest!
>the feature is that traditional banks are bad at evaluating new tech
Apples and oranges.
Traditional banks have a profit motivation. That's their only job.
Governments have a public health and well-being motivation. They try to achieve that at minimum cost.
It's wrongheaded to view government merely a "broken bank" in this scenario. It's actually that government is judged by totally different metrics, ones which they achieved very successfully.
>I don't know what "Clinton's try" is, or really what fuel efficiency has to do with any of this, to be honest!
Clinton's try for cleaner vehicles, of course. That was the previous attempt before Bush tried his ATVM loan program.
It's relevant because it shows the typical-case cost for government achieving (or more accurately, not achieving) their public health goals in this sector. It shows how the Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing Loan program was actually a fantastically cheap and successful policy program when compared to its peers.
I'm still not understanding the thrust of your comments. But if I had to guess, you think that 1) the loan programs were a good idea, and 2) that I think the loan programs were a bad idea.
I agree with 1, but disagree with 2. The loan programs for scaling new massive tech are wonderful and hugely accelerate tech development, IMHO. My only possible complaint is that there are not more failed loans, as I have a bigger risk tolerance.
When you say "feature, not bug" I'm not sure if you're saying the feature is that traditional banks are bad at evaluating new tech, or if the feature is that Tesla would have not survived without a government loan. Either meaning is hard to connect to the rest of your comment.
I don't know what "Clinton's try" is, or really what fuel efficiency has to do with any of this, to be honest!