If you really think Kamala Harris is going to solve climate change you're delusional.

Whoever will solve it, then the person with the best social competence, speaking abilities and promotional power would get the merit.

And the best placed individual is the POTUS whoever he/she might be.

Not sure. When I think of the assembly line, I remember Henry Ford, not the president at the time. Airplanes, the Wright brothers, discovery of DNA, Crick and Watson, etc. So there are counter examples, but I think you have a point that politicians do get to spin the message and take credit for things.

Presidents dither around for four years but unless they screw an intern or start a reasonably large war, noone will remember them a decade later.

> the person with the best social competence, speaking abilities and promotional power

I freely admit to being biased on this point, but this doesn’t read like a description of Kamala Harris.

I think I'm still confused - as of today (5/11/21), who do you think is doing more to solve climate change. VP Harris or E. Musk ?

This sort of comedy does not go over well here.

No one person solves climate change. Climate change is solved by multiple industries 100000s of researchers, engineers, business people and politicians all working on different aspects. Giving the credit to one person (who has yet to do anything is beyond delusional).

Dislike Musk if you want, but Tesla clearly was successful in convincing the world EV were better and that increase the speed of transition to EVs. That is likely more then the waste majority of people ever did for reducing CO2.

> Also Musk will not make much money from SpaceX because like everything he's involved in the margins are terrible (molecules and atoms don't make money).

SpaceX is making amazing margin on rocket launches. They want make much money from launch because its a pretty small market.

We don't yet know anything about margins for Starlink, but your claim that it won make much money is quite bold and against most analyst opinion.

> His net worth has balooned because of his ability to sell an ever improving vision of the future and constantly moving the goalposts, but solving climate change is becoming a crowded trade socially speaking.

Tesla stock isn't where it is because they are 'solving climate change' but because how large the company is, how fast they are growing, what their automotive margin are and the many future prospects they have.

Jesus, this post makes me want to vote for Donald Trump.

Respectfully, and sorry to HN readers for prolonging this thread, but curiosity compels me to ask , were u being ironic? or why would such drivel make you want vote to for the one person I cannot bring myself to name.

Exactly.

Then Trump would get the glory...regardless the glory of solving climate change and landing on Mars will go to the person who has the best ability to promote their role in such feat.

Musk looks tough on twitter, but he can't speak and his social incompetence shows a lot.

The POTUS (whoever he/she is) and the first person on Mars (whoever he/she is) would outframe him just like JFK and Neil Armstron outframed whoever was the guy running NASA at the time.

He'd be left with a very low margin business , more probably heavily in the red, like the Apollo program was.