Lawmakers in New York state are moving to shut down Elon Musk’s Tesla dealerships in yet another blow to the billionaire CEO.

New York State Sen. Patricia Fahy and other lawmakers are fighting to remove a waiver that allows Tesla to operate five in-person dealerships in New York, instead forcing the company to sell their vehicles through dealer franchises, The New York Times reported Sunday.

“No matter what we do, we’ve got to take this from Elon Musk,” Fahy said in March when she first introduced the bill against Tesla. “He’s part of an effort to go backwards.”

She wants the company to relinquish its 5 licenses and instead distribute them to other EV manufacturers, such as Rivian, Scout Motors, and Lucid.

  • fake_meows@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    But to just revoke them as retaliation for musk’s unrelated bullshit doesn’t sit right with me.

    It should.

    Rules and laws come from our values. If a company isn’t moral or ethical, retaliation and consequences are exactly what needs to happen. And we should create new rules and laws to make sure they are forced out.

    You do not normalize Nazis.

    • oyo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      23 hours ago

      By publicly stating that this is revenge, they’ve opened themselves to all different kinds of legal pushback.

      • fake_meows@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        23 hours ago

        If Shitler isn’t angry and thinking of suing you for what you did to him, you’re openly doing things wrong. They precisely should state that it’s revenge so that he knows he can never prevail no matter if he wins in court. Like, the door must be closed for all time. It must be a clearly sent message that it is a personal sanction.

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          21 hours ago

          Revenge only plays their game, further devalues the rule of law and fair markets.

          Personally I like the compromise that any manufacturer without dealerships shouldn’t require them. Dealerships are some of the scammiest businesses we have but it’s unfair to allow a manufacturer to compete with a dealer when that manufacturer controls the market. But if there are no dealers why should one be required? Good riddance: they’re not a social good

    • LandedGentry@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      23 hours ago

      “The Trump administration has revoked the right to do business from Fairphone, Costco, etc. due to their spreading of dangerous WOKE ideology.”

      Again I want this to happen but the justification as it stands is without precedent and is flimsy as hell

      • fake_meows@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        23 hours ago

        Reverse cause and effect. Wake up. They are already dismantling DEI and citizenship and due process and the courts and on and on. Now it’s your move in response.

        They have gotten this far precisely because of the lack of spine in their opponents. They are absolutely leveraging tolerance and a rules based ordered retreat from people who don’t believe what they believe.

        If you aren’t a bigot, racist or Nazi, they expect passivism, banging on powerless law books and some nasty bumper stickers as a response.

        • LandedGentry@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          22 hours ago

          Dude there are so many better ways to attack Musk than risking terrible optics/precedent to close five Tesla dealerships.

          • fake_meows@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            22 hours ago

            But why do you want to attack Musk though?

            Are you mad because he cheats on his taxes or his wives? We should probably broadcast that our only problem is with his taxes. That would be a better way, right? Like, dont call him out morally, tolerate that and just look for a legal case?

            Do you see the problem?

            • LandedGentry@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              22 hours ago

              Because he’s a bigoted piece of shit dismantling our government and stealing info on US citizens to enrich himself as he needlessly persecutes marginalized groups with his rhetoric and actions.

              Flimsy attempts to shut down a few dealerships that will have little to no impact on his life does nothing to solve the above.

              • fake_meows@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                22 hours ago

                So how come you think it wouldn’t be a very good piece of public policy to be crystal clear and honest about that?

                Like why can’t the state say: “we are not subsidizing this business with taxpayer money any more, because of their ethics”?

                You can make a legal case against Tesla for accounting or SEC violations or tax fraud…but that’s not taking a moral stand.

                • LandedGentry@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  22 hours ago

                  Because that is not a legally protected reason like religious beliefs. He hasn’t been convicted of a crime, he hasn’t taken an explicitly anti-religious stance, etc.

                  Again, they should say “due to the growing concern of Tesla’s alleged fraudulent behavior with EV tax incentives/government subsidies both domestically and abroad, we are reassessing the status of currently operating Tesla dealerships” (or something to that effect). That is related to Tesla. It’s way more legitimate than a vague gesture to “he’s a piece of shit.” You can’t refuse to let people do business because they’re bigoted assholes. That’s the sad reality.

    • Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      24 hours ago

      You do not normalize Nazis.

      Take a look in the mirror - that’s literally what you’re doing here whether you realize it or not; you’re advocating for their methods of arbitrary punishment but giving it a pass because it’s your side doing it.

      As OC stated, “The shops haven’t done anything to warrant revoking their licenses and rat’s [Musk’s] activities are totally unrelated.”

      Also, like OC said, I agree with the sentiment but not with the method being used here.

      • fake_meows@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        23 hours ago

        As OC stated, “The shops haven’t done anything to warrant revoking their licenses and rat’s [Musk’s] activities are totally unrelated.”

        Yes, but see, I disagree. Musk’s activities are related. Sorry, but that’s a dumb opinion, I just can’t even see how anyone can believe that.

        But trying to slide that in as an assumed proposition is very important to your argument, because otherwise you are allowing an open Nazi to run a large business unchecked.

        I defend Musk’s God given right to be a Nazi, but I don’t think there shouldn’t be a consequence for it. A civilization is allowed to respond to this information.

        No, these two things are not morally equivalent. This is well studied, start here:

        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          21 hours ago

          Musk has done so many illegal and treasonous actions that we should be going after. Convict him, convict his minions, convict his pet judges and politicians, convict him again, make mango Mussolini go on record as pardoning him, over and over.

          There is no reason to also violate the rule of law to go after him out of spite, no reason to abuse law for personal revenge

          • fake_meows@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            21 hours ago

            He had 20+ open federal level investigations at the time of the national elections, and basically I believe his entry into national politics was most likely motivated as an attempt to circumvent the consequences. Getting embedded into government was his “get out of jail” card.

            It’s left to the individual states to push him out now. Just as a practical matter, the federal level is too corrupt to hold his companies to account.

        • Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          22 hours ago

          The paradox of tolerance doesn’t apply here, and you’re presenting it out of context. No one is saying we should tolerate Musk or his actions.

          A civilization is allowed to respond to this information.

          Yes, it is. We agree there. Where we disagree is how society responds. Refuse to do new business? Refuse to renew contracts/agreements? Sure. That’s fine. No argument from me, and I do the same thing. Hell, I still won’t fill up from BP because of how they tried to shirk responsibility for lubricating the Gulf of Mexico almost 20 years ago. That is to say I’m no stranger to “voting with my wallet” or “punishing” companies by refusing to do business with them.

          But to arbitrarily revoke agreements with local businesses or legislate against one particular individual when their actions are not directly related to the legislation being drafted is not how a healthy society should handle things. “But we’re clearly not a healthy society” is the response I always get when pointing out hypocritical takes. Well, society’s not going to get any better if both sides are down in the mud.

          What you’re basically saying with your argument is “A little fascism is okay when it’s my side doing it” and I say that is not okay.

          • fake_meows@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            22 hours ago

            That is to say I’m no stranger to “voting with my wallet”.

            “A little fascism is okay when it’s my side doing it” and I say that is not okay.

            You are DEEPLY confused.

            Fascism is literally the system of government where businesses and the state merge. So Tesla has received over $20B in direct government subsidies and the CEO is part of the federal government.

            There is no “free marketplace”, not any more.

            Voting with your wallet, like fascism is literally that. Literally. This is the mechanism.

            This is all going to have to change to get out of this deal. People seem to actually not even know what fascism even looks like.

            Just wow. You are parroting the exact ideology. This is the actual mechanism they use.

            Right now the state of NY is trying to revoke the special deal they gave Tesla’s dealers to extricate themselves (the governnent) from propping up his scam business. The state subsidizes his operation and they are merely trying to end that. That’s how it looks when you stop fascists – you cut ties between the businesses and the government.

    • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      22 hours ago

      If a company isn’t moral or ethical, retaliation and consequences are exactly what needs to happen. And we should create new rules and laws to make sure they are forced out.

      There is nothing moral or ethical about car dependency. This is not retaliation or consequences or evena new law. It’s the return of a subsidy for other car dealers. These dealers are complete garbage. Just as bad as Elon. Fuck cars.

      https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/05/rich-republicans-party-car-dealers-2024-desantis.html