If you've ever wanted to travel in Indonesia/Singapore/China locations during the multi-month Haze/particulate issues, you would understand how this is a pretty invaluable technology.

I don't really have any lung issues (that I know of) - but if I forget to bring a mask, and walk for any distance, I start coughing and gagging after a while to clear my lungs.

It gets so bad, that at times people are not only told to stay indoors (where they hopefully have filtered air), but are in extreme cases, evacuated.

Can you imagine how wonderful having this mode of air-cleaning would be during those months if you had asthma (or young children?)

Is Tesla making cars for Indonesia, Singapore or China currently? Surely there are problem all over the planet but I don't see why American government must subsidize solving those problems.

GM, Ford, and Chrysler receive billions in subsidies. During the 2008 Auto crisis the US gave those three $70 billion to keep them afloat. The US subsidizes its car companies. It also spends tens of billions subsidizing Boeing, Intel, Lockheed-Martin, IBM, JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, and various airlines. Telsa, like many other companies, also receives subsidies. So what? There's nothing special going on here.

Ford's case was somewhat different from that of the other carmakers. They accepted some government loans, but not the cash for equity swap.

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/09/ford-motor-co-does-u-turn-o...

>During the 2008 Auto crisis the US gave those three $70 billion to keep them afloat.

Sold equity for it.

Why didn't they sell that equity to private buyers if it was so valuable? Oh wait, the companies were on the verge of bankruptcy so that equity was worthless. Gave is the right word here.

They should not have received it besides more Americans drive Ford,GM and Toyota than Tesla.

With all due respect, and I mean that seriously, I think that your focus on government subsidies is causing you to be overly negative on this feature. I was using Singapore/Indonesia/China as examples of places that I was either directly familiar with, or had recently read about. If it's really important to you, then you can replace those countries with "Heavily Smog impacted regions of the United States, Roads experiencing forest fires (very common), or an driving situation in which particulate matter is problematic for which the driver would like to reduce somewhat"

It's a great function for the home, and I think most drivers would be well served - and in the case of drivers with Asthma, or other ailments impacted by particulate pollution) critically served.

And they aren't. US government does not pay a dime for the marginal production of Tesla cars.

> precious resources and taxpapyer money

I guess you mean the cost to the environment to manufacture large HEPA filters and the government subsidies to Tesla.

In my mind the environmental cost of adding the feature is trivial compared to adding a gimmick to get rich people who like gadgets to purchase electric cars so that we can:

1. Use the high-end of the market to fuel the production of cheaper electric cars on the medium-low end

2. Ween ourselves off of fossil fuels

If the Tesla is for rich people I find it immoral to provide subsidies to it under any pretext. Helping conventional cars be more environment friendly might help poor people more.

Affordable electric cars are the end goal. The government is making an investment to get a beneficial market started. In the long run, this investment will likely have done considerably more good than if that money had been spent to increase direct aid to the poor.

Maybe to pander to the Chinese market? They've been having trouble with cancelled orders in China.

Definitely not a waste of money if it means that they can offload inventory...

I am referring to American taxpayers money. Poorest of poor in America is subsidizing these rich people gadgets at around $8k per unit. Why should we gift this money to China ?

If Chinese people want clean air let Chinese government fund it.

I assume that the cost of the parts are insignificant compared to the cost of R&D and manufacturing labour costs, which AFAIK are all on US soil. Even if a car is sold to a Chinese customer, the money they pay and the money the gov pays is creating more jobs that it would have otherwise (and also lining Musk's back pocket).

> Poorest of poor in America is subsidizing these rich people gadgets at around $8k per unit.

Okay, I'll bite - where's your evidence?

It amazes me that comments like this, more commonly seen in the comment sections on second-tier news sites, exist even on HN.

>exist even on HN

The fallacy is in believing the forums you participate in are, for some reason, not "second-tier".

What? Can you expand on that please?

Elon Musk's rich people's gadgets are heavily subsidized by American government (read average Americans). American government is paying around $8k per car to Musk.

A lot of this money seems to be wasted to adding swag to this car that gets Musk some positive PR if nothing else. It is stupid to point out that this might help China or some other polluted country, why should Americans pay for it ?

Very likely China will ban Tesla and some Chinese company would make similar cars only if Musk could ever make this does-not-run-200miles car.

I thought it was just a tax credit? That's very different than "American government is paying". It's more like, "American government admits that taxpayer has put money to a better purpose than American government would have."

Regardless of tn13's overall point, there's no economic difference between a tax credit and a subsidy AFAIK. It's just politically easier to grant the former.

I am having a hard time understanding your reference to China.

Yes, China is "into" electric personal transportation.

http://qz.com/137518/consumers-the-world-over-love-electric-...

Yes, China has 200 million electric bicycles. At that adoption rate, I would have expected 50 million electric vehicles on the road in the US.

But, the USA appears to be in love with the car. China has 128 cars/1000, USA has 809 cars/1000.

For a great many people, the electric bike would be a great transportation option -- cheap and clean. However, there is no way to compete with China in manufacturing these.

The only hope the USA has is Tesla.

For this reason, I would expect subsidies! USA manufacturing, possible exports, and a cleaner environment.

I personally use an electric bike, for which I received no government rebate... but, I don't have to pay for gasoline, or insurance, so I come out ahead anyway.

What if I don't believe a biological war is likely? Or, what if I would rather just "get it over with" in the event of a biological war?

Can I pay less for a Tesla which _lacks_ this level of filtration?