I don't think it's the case that discussing X means people are afraid to discuss Y. No cover up, bias, or suspicion needed to explain why that's not mentioned explicitly every time other companies are subsidized. :)

I didn’t say anything about people being afraid to discuss anything. But a search on this site for discussion on subsidies to other companies than Tesla would probably get much less results.

I mean we need safe reliable planes more than we need teslas cars.

Boeing hasn't repeatedly shat on subsidies and said they're self-made while pocketing massive government benefits.

It seems perfectly reasonable to me to want a subsidy abolished and also use it while it exists. Presumably they want it abolished for everyone not just themselves.

If you compare these subsidies with the total revenues and profits of Tesla over the last 15 years, you should reach an interesting conclusion.

I looked it up and $2.8B is just 3 weeks of the company's revenue. Or two months of their gross profit. Or 3 months of their net income. Remarkable.