http://electrek.co/2015/05/30/opinion-times-article-on-musks...
Elon argues that the subsidies only make sense because they offset the much greater subsidies that the fossil fuel industry gets implicitly from negative externalities (to the tune of over 5 trillion): http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey/so/2015/new070215...
Some people still like to argue that Tesla is propped up by government help, but by this slide they put up in their shareholders meeting, that's clearly not the case:
The nice thing about subsidies is they create a cascade effect. Once one company is having success in alternative energy, older companies are forced to catch up. The oil companies and automotive companies have all been dragging their feet. Tesla has already forced auto companies to ramp up EV development.
Also, the government doesn't have to "pick winners." They can give the most money to Tesla, since they're clearly a better bet than an unproven startup, and still give money to new startups. Once a startup proves itself at the level Tesla has, it can get more money.
There are plenty of subsidies to go around. It seems like a few billion dollars is a bargain price to pay for accelerated development of alternative energy.
Tesla and SpaceX haven't been super dependent on government funds. But SolarCity definitely has.
Musk's real super power might be in getting free money. I suppose the phrase here is don't hate the player hate the game. But it still rubs me the wrong way. As unpopular as that opinion may be.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-subsidies-2015...