Indeed, Elon Musk made an effort to halt the California high-speed rail project, but failed, leading to the project pushing forward. The repercussions have been billions of taxpayer dollars funneled into a project that remains considerably far from completion. The budget has skyrocketed from a modest $9 billion to an eye-watering $128 billion. Adding insult to injury, the first phase isn't expected to kick off until 2030. Given the speed at which FSD is advancing, it's quite likely that it will be fully developed before this rail service even gets off the ground. Interestingly, the original 2008 target completion date for the rail project was 2020, but not a single mile of track had been laid by that time. As such, blaming Musk's efforts for the state of California's issues seems misplaced. One can't help but wonder if things might have been better off if his attempt to cancel the project had been successful.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/may/29/california-h...

> Indeed, Elon Musk made an effort to halt the California high-speed rail project (...) As such, blaming Musk's efforts for the state of California's issues seems misplaced.

Ok. So you agree Musk tried to sabotage California high-speed rail, but as he failed then... We should ignore it?

Not sure if you read the rest of my comment, but I'm saying it wasn't a negative thing that he tried to get the project canceled and it seems like he was right about how it was going to go. So maybe not ignore it, but praise that he tried to get it canceled?

- If someone bought a Tesla we can assume that they would have bought a fossil car if Tesla didn’t exist

- If Musk tried to sabotage something and he failed: his intent doesn’t matter

- But the project that he tried to sabotage probably should have failed anyway

— The Musk Prayer

> Not sure if you read the rest of my comment, but I'm saying it wasn't a negative thing that he tried to get the project canceled and it seems like he was right about how it was going to go.

That's specious reasoning at best. It's absurd how you try to depict a Robber Baron move as a simplistic fiscally responsible stance. It's even sillier once you realize the only reason Elon Musk did his best to sabotage the program was because he believed it would be a success and thus a threat to his bottom line.

I really do not understand this corporate worship nonsense, specially when dealing with this specific corporation.

> That's specious reasoning [...] the only reason Elon Musk did his best to sabotage the program was because he believed it would be a success and thus a threat to his bottom line.

The only specious reasoning I'm seeing here is the weird assumption that one high speed rail line in California would meaningfully suppress Tesla car sales. It's competing with air travel, not car ownership.

It's ridiculous enough to suggest that it would suppress the sale of cars generally. It's especially ridiculous to suggest that it would suppress sales of Tesla vehicles. It's a 760 mile round trip between SF and LA — not an issue for an EV if you're doing it occasionally. But someone buying a new car for the specific purpose of driving this route simply wouldn't consider an EV.

The idea that Hyperloop had any impact at all on public transit is just nonsense.

It had literally zero impact on California High-Speed Rail.