NC Renegades

I asked Grok:

If Musk was stripped of his US citizenship and deported, what would be the impact on the US economy and its technological base. Assume all Musk enterprises would be shut down in the US.

Answer:

If Elon Musk were stripped of his U.S. citizenship, deported, and all his enterprises (Tesla, SpaceX, X Corp, Neuralink, The Boring Company, and xAI) were shut down in the U.S., the impact on the U.S. economy and technological base would be profound and multifaceted. Below, I analyze the potential consequences, drawing on available data and reasonable assumptions about the roles of Musk’s companies. The analysis considers direct economic effects (jobs, GDP, contracts), technological impacts (innovation, leadership), and broader ripple effects, while addressing the hypothetical nature of the scenario.Economic ImpactsMusk’s companies are significant contributors to the U.S. economy through employment, investment, and government contracts. Shutting them down would cause immediate and long-term economic disruptions.

1. Job Losses:
   • Tesla: Employs approximately 140,000 workers globally, with over 70,000 in the U.S. (based on its Fremont, California factory, Gigafactory Nevada, and other facilities). A U.S. shutdown would eliminate these jobs, affecting manufacturing, engineering, and administrative roles.
   • SpaceX: Employs around 13,000 workers, primarily in the U.S. (Hawthorne, California; Boca Chica, Texas; and other sites). These are high-skill jobs in aerospace, engineering, and R&D.
   • Other Companies: X Corp (1,500 employees), Neuralink (300–400), The Boring Company (200–300), and xAI (100–200) employ fewer people but contribute to tech ecosystems in California, Texas, and elsewhere. Total U.S. job losses could exceed 80,000–100,000.
   • Indirect Jobs: Suppliers, contractors, and service industries tied to these companies (e.g., Tesla’s supply chain, SpaceX’s launch support) could lose hundreds of thousands of additional jobs. For example, Tesla’s U.S. supply chain supports an estimated 500,000 indirect jobs.
2. GDP and Economic Output:
   • Tesla: Generated $81.5 billion in revenue in 2023, with a significant portion from U.S. operations (Fremont factory, Nevada Gigafactory). Its market cap is around $1 trillion (2025), reflecting its economic influence. A shutdown could reduce U.S. GDP by tens of billions annually, with ripple effects on consumer spending and tax revenue.
   • SpaceX: Valued at $350 billion (2024), SpaceX contributes through government contracts ($22.5 billion since 2003) and commercial launches. Its Starlink division supports internet infrastructure, with billions in potential federal contracts. A shutdown would disrupt these revenue streams and related economic activity.
   • Total Impact: The combined direct economic output of Musk’s companies likely exceeds $100 billion annually. Including indirect effects (supply chains, local economies), the GDP hit could range from $200–$300 billion in the first year, with long-term losses depending on replacement industries.
3. Government Contracts and Subsidies:
   • Musk’s companies have received $38 billion in government contracts, loans, subsidies, and tax credits over 20 years, including $22.5 billion for SpaceX and $15.7 billion for Tesla. SpaceX’s contracts with NASA ($15 billion) and the Department of Defense (e.g., $1.8 billion classified contract) are critical for U.S. space and defense capabilities.
   • A shutdown would cancel these contracts, forcing agencies to seek costlier or less developed alternatives (e.g., Boeing, Lockheed Martin), increasing federal spending by billions and delaying programs like Artemis (lunar landings) and ISS operations.
4. Stock Market and Investor Confidence:
   • Tesla’s $1 trillion market cap and SpaceX’s $350 billion valuation (private shares) are significant components of U.S. tech and industrial sectors. A shutdown would crash Tesla’s stock, potentially triggering a broader market sell-off in tech and EV sectors. Investor confidence in U.S. innovation could wane, reducing capital inflows.
   • X posts suggest a “global tech and economic earthquake” if Musk’s companies were targeted, reflecting sentiment about market volatility.

Technological Impacts:

Musk’s companies are leaders in electric vehicles (EVs), space exploration, AI, neurotechnology, and infrastructure. Their closure would stall U.S. technological advancement and cede ground to global competitors, particularly China.

1. Electric Vehicles and Clean Energy (Tesla):
   • Tesla produces over 50% of U.S.-made EVs, with 1.8 million vehicles delivered globally in 2023. Its innovations (battery tech, autonomous driving) drive the EV sector. A shutdown would:
     • Cripple U.S. EV leadership, allowing Chinese competitors (BYD, NIO) to dominate globally. X posts warn that China could “conquer” EV markets if Tesla collapses.
     • Stall battery technology advancements, as Tesla’s Gigafactory Nevada and R&D are central to lithium-ion and 4680 cell development.
     • Undermine clean energy goals, as Tesla’s solar and energy storage (Megapack) contribute to grid decarbonization.
   • Competitors like GM and Ford lack Tesla’s scale and innovation pace, delaying U.S. progress toward EV adoption and emissions targets.
2. Space Exploration and National Security (SpaceX):
   • SpaceX is the only U.S. provider of crewed missions to the International Space Station (ISS) via Dragon spacecraft, with $15 billion in NASA contracts. It also supports Artemis lunar missions ($2 billion) and Pentagon spy satellite networks.
   • A shutdown would:
     • Strand U.S. astronauts on the ISS, as no other U.S. provider (e.g., Boeing’s Starliner) is fully operational.
     • Delay NASA’s moon landings, ceding space leadership to China’s lunar ambitions (e.g., Chang’e program).
     • Disrupt national security, as SpaceX’s Starlink supports Pentagon communications and Ukraine’s defense. Loss of Starlink’s 6,000+ satellites would weaken U.S. internet infrastructure and global connectivity.
   • Alternatives (United Launch Alliance, Blue Origin) lack SpaceX’s cost efficiency ($90 million per Falcon 9 launch vs. $200 million for competitors) and reusable rocket technology, increasing costs and delaying missions.
3. Artificial Intelligence and Neurotechnology (xAI, Neuralink):
   • xAI’s Grok and ongoing AI research position the U.S. in the global AI race. A shutdown would slow AI development, benefiting Chinese firms like Baidu.
   • Neuralink’s brain-computer interface tech is nascent but pioneering. Its closure would delay medical and human augmentation advancements, with no clear U.S. competitor.
   • X posts suggest Neuralink could “go to zero” without Musk, reflecting its early-stage reliance on his vision.
4. Infrastructure and Transportation (The Boring Company):
   • The Boring Company’s tunnel projects (e.g., Las Vegas Loop) aim to revolutionize urban transport. Its shutdown would have a smaller technological impact but halt innovation in high-speed tunneling, with no immediate U.S. replacement.
5. Global Competitiveness:
   • Musk’s companies have driven U.S. re-onshoring (e.g., Tesla’s American-made EVs, SpaceX’s satellite production). Their closure would shift manufacturing and innovation to countries like China or Canada, which X posts speculate could “swoop in” to host Musk’s ventures.
   • The U.S. would lose its edge in EVs, space, and AI, weakening its position in the Fourth Industrial Revolution.

Broader Ripple Effects:

1. Innovation Ecosystem:
   • Musk’s companies attract top talent and inspire startups. Their absence could trigger a “brain drain” of engineers and scientists, as X posts warn of declining American innovation.
   • Silicon Valley and Texas tech hubs (Austin, Boca Chica) would lose economic vitality, reducing venture capital and startup activity.
2. National Security and Geopolitics:
   • SpaceX’s role in Pentagon operations and Starlink’s support for allies (e.g., Ukraine) make it a geopolitical asset. A shutdown could embolden adversaries like China and Russia, who rely on state-backed space and tech firms.
   • Loss of Starlink would disrupt rural internet access, undermining a $42 billion federal broadband initiative.
3. Public Sentiment and Policy:
   • X posts reflect polarized views: some see Musk’s deportation as “economic suicide” due to his contributions, while others criticize his reliance on subsidies.
   • A shutdown could fuel debates over immigration policy, given Musk’s past immigration “gray area” (working on a J-1 visa without authorization in 1995). However, legal experts note denaturalization is unlikely absent fraud, and deportation would not automatically shutter his companies.

Mitigating Factors and Assumptions:

• Company Continuity: The scenario assumes a complete U.S. shutdown, which is unlikely. Tesla and SpaceX could relocate operations abroad (e.g., Canada, China), as speculated on X, preserving some global impact but removing U.S. benefits.
• Competitors: GM, Ford (EVs), Boeing, ULA (space), and Anthropic (AI) could fill gaps, but their slower innovation and higher costs would delay recovery by years.
• Musk’s Role: Musk’s personal leadership drives his companies’ pace. Without him, Tesla and SpaceX might stagnate, as seen in employee concerns about his absence.
• Government Action: The U.S. could nationalize or subsidize Musk’s companies to prevent collapse, though this contradicts the deportation premise.

Quantitative Summary:

• Job Losses: 80,000–100,000 direct, 500,000+ indirect.
• GDP Impact: $200–$300 billion initial loss.
• Contract Losses: $38 billion in canceled federal contracts, with $15 billion (NASA) and $1.8 billion (DOD) critical.
• Market Impact: Tesla’s $1 trillion valuation collapse, broader tech sector decline.
• Technological Lag: 5–10 years to regain EV, space, and AI leadership, assuming competitors scale up.

Conclusion:

The deportation of Elon Musk and the shutdown of his U.S. enterprises would devastate the U.S. economy and technological base. Immediate job losses, GDP contraction, and canceled contracts would be compounded by long-term losses in EV, space, and AI leadership, ceding ground to China and others. The U.S. would face a “global tech and economic earthquake,” as noted on X, with recovery taking decades due to the unique scale and pace of Musk’s companies. While competitors could eventually fill gaps, the absence of Musk’s innovation engine would weaken U.S. competitiveness and national security, making this a catastrophic self-inflicted wound.

From Grok:

Tesla has received an estimated $14.3 billion in government subsidies from 2007 to 2025, including federal loans, grants, tax credits, and state/local incentives. This excludes regulatory credits ($11.4 billion) and consumer EV tax credits, which indirectly benefit Tesla but are not direct subsidies. For comparison, posts on X and web sources cite figures ranging from $2.8 billion to $15.7 billion.

The estimated total federal income tax paid by Elon Musk from 2014 to 2024 is approximately $32.23 billion.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It seems that Trump cannot do simple math. The big, beautiful bill is not good for our country. Is this what people expected from this administration?

The solution is to submit individual bills to address spending, immigration, security and put the federal government back into its Constitutional box. Attacking the world’s richest man is an act of envy, narcissism and stupidity. Trump should acknowledge who his real enemies are and stop attacking people trying to help him and this country.

David DeGerolamo

h/t WRSA

I’ve caught grief from commenters on this site from time to time on my views and opinions on things; usually those of a spiritual nature. You see, I’m a heretic, by definition. Not a lemming or a sheep. I’m also not a coward. I tell it like I see it and do so in meat space as well as online. One doesn’t have to agree with me. One doesn’t have to like what I think, say, and write. One can even be offended. I don’t care. For, you see, I base my understanding about things on logic, study, experience, observation, and evidence. That combination results in “facts” as I understand them. It’s been said that the reason facts don’t change most people’s opinions is because most people don’t use facts to form their opinions. They use their opinions to form their “facts.” I’ve been wrong before and will be again, but I’m always willing to admit it when I am and will change my understanding based on additional verifiable input. I humbly recommend my model for those with closed minds regardless of the topic in view.

From Zerohedge: The Price of Truth

I don’t share my opinions because I “get away with it”—I don’t get away with anything. I’ve paid socially, professionally, and even financially. But I do it anyway because the alternative is spiritual death. The alternative is becoming someone who messages critics privately but never takes a public stand, someone who’s perpetually annoyed by others’ courage but never exercises their own.

The difference isn’t ability or privilege. It’s willingness. I’m open-minded and open-hearted. I can be convinced of anything—but show me, don’t tell me. I’m willing to be wrong, willing to change my mind when new information comes to light or I gain a different perspective on an idea, willing to defend ideas I believe in even when it’s uncomfortable.

There are a lot of us right now realizing that something isn’t right—that we’ve been lied to about everything. We’re trying to make sense of what we’re seeing, asking uncomfortable questions, connecting dots that don’t want to be connected. When we call that out, the last thing we need is people who haven’t done the work standing in our way, carrying water for the establishment forces that are manipulating them.

Most people could do the same thing if they chose to—they just don’t choose to because they’ve been trained to see conviction as dangerous and conformity as safe.

Continue reading …

Why are we allowing an unelected parliamentarian to dictate policy and the Senate’s power?