I asked AI what is the effect of Trump #47 on the climate? Ans. below:
In his second term as the 47th President, Donald Trump has moved aggressively to reverse U.S. climate progress by prioritizing fossil fuel production and dismantling federal environmental oversight.
Key effects on the climate and policy include:
Withdrawal from International Agreements: On January 27, 2026, the U.S. officially withdrew from the Paris Agreement for the second time. Additionally, the administration has announced departures from over 60 international bodies, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Increased Carbon Emissions: Projections suggest that the administration's rollbacks could lead to an additional 4 billion metric tons of CO2-equivalent emissions by 2030 compared to previous trajectories.
Dismantling Regulatory Foundations: The EPA is currently working to repeal the 2009 Endangerment Finding, which is the legal basis for nearly all federal greenhouse gas regulations.
Expansion of Fossil Fuels: Under the mantra "drill, baby, drill," the administration has fast-tracked deep-sea mining, reopened Alaskan refuges for oil development, and granted roughly $40 billion in new subsidies to the fossil fuel industry.
Stalling Clean Energy: Federal support for wind and solar has been slashed, including the elimination of the $7,500 electric vehicle tax credit and nearly $13 billion in green energy funding.
Information and Data Gaps: The administration has removed past National Climate Assessments from federal sites, deleted climate science webpages, and cut funding for climate research programs, creating significant gaps in global climate tracking.
While federal action has stalled, market forces and state-led initiatives—particularly in California and Texas—continue to drive some growth in renewable capacity despite federal headwinds.
At the same time, more than two dozen U.S. states and municipalities (including California, Hawaii, and Massachusetts) are suing major oil companies like ExxonMobil, Shell, BP, and Chevron. They allege decades of deception regarding climate risks and are seeking damages for local harms like flooding and wildfires.
Supreme Court Victories: In early 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court declined multiple requests from oil companies to block these suits or move them to federal courts. This allows several high-profile cases, such as Honolulu's lawsuit, to finally move toward trials expected in 2026.
Novel Legal Theories: New types of suits are emerging, such as Michigan's January 2026 federal antitrust lawsuit, which accuses oil majors of acting as a "cartel" to suppress renewable energy and electric vehicle competition.
Michigan attorney general sues oil industry over allegations of collusion against electric vehicles and renewable energy
Dana Nessel is pursuing a novel antitrust suit against major oil companies and a trade group. By: Alex Guillén, Politico.Jan. 23.
NYT Jan 27. "Michigan’s filing came despite significant opposition from the Trump administration, which argued the lawsuits were an attack on a critical industry. In April, the Justice Department sued Michigan and Hawaii in an unusual effort to pre-emptively block them from filing climate lawsuits.
"Hawaii filed its suit the next day. The Justice Department’s lawsuit against the state is pending."
Many thanks, Daniel! However, isn't the reason the oil/gas/coal industries are booming as the climate collapses the simple but rarely mentioned fact that, if there were NO DEMAND for fossil fuels, then the suppliers will go broke and stop supplying the fuel driving global heating and climate collapse? We have met the enemy at the gates and he/she is/are us, right?
As I type, WTI Crude (Mar′26) is $65.74. That's up about $7 in the past week. On Friday, precious metals dropped at the same time re Warsh announcement.
The prinicipal beneficiary is Putin. The entire Russian economy is based on fossil fuel prices.
". In April, the Justice Department sued Michigan and Hawaii in an unusual effort to pre-emptively block them from filing climate lawsuits."
In which venue was the suit filed? Considering it involves two states, common sense says the District Court of D.C. District court Judges are chosen to preside by an algorithm. Who wrote the algorithm..
It is like votes, if votes are tabulated by an algorithm, then who writes the algorithm
Software is not neutral.
This should (emphasis should) take years to reach SCOTUS, any guesses how the Unholy High Six will rule?, I ask facetiously)
I assume that vote counters are basically similar to machines I used to use to tabulate surveys. If there is an X in the box it is tabulated. If there is more than one X for an item it is rejected for manual data entry. The machine is programmed according to the geography of the answer sheet - a 0 or a 1. No algorithms, just basic beancount arithmetic. The process is lightning fast, like those cash sorters in banks - ftftftftft.
I don't know how individual machines work, but from what I have read, the problem occurs, not on the voting machine, though I have heard of votes being changed at the machine, but at the tabulators, the point where all votes are tabulated and reported...to the media.
No one I have noticed have paid attention to or even questioned, why presidential candidates claim victory or concede, just hours after votes are cast.
It is the media that is calling the election. Kamala conceded while votes were being counted, on Nov 6 at 4 pm, because the media called the election.
It isn't the votes, it is Karnacki, that is calling the election.
Anyway the problem is the taqbulation centers, that's where the algorithm is monkeyed with.
The Michigan state case has not been removed to Federal Court...yet. I haven't looked at the pleadings but I bet they're removal actions.
The other cases have been ongoing....I don't keep track but the California case is probably ripe for trial.
Most of these are state cases. With repect to Exxon, the Rockefellers have been asking them to diversify for many years -- all which they've lost so far.
On January 13, 2025, SCOTUS declined to hear an appeal from major oil companies (including Sunoco, Shell, Chevron, ExxonMobil, and BP), allowing a Honolulu lawsuit alleging climate deception to proceed in state court. The suit seeks to hold companies liable for damages related to climate change impacts, such as sea-level rise and severe storms.
I wasn't asking about the cases filed by Michigan and Hawai, I was asking a bout the case filed by Pam Bondi against Michigan and Hawaii, the way the response was written it sounds like they are the the same case, otherwise if Bondi files two separate cases, she could get two separate outcomes and also double the case load, which is time, and personnel, money is obviously not a constraint.
As regards the Jan 23,25 ruiing by SCOTUS, seems like they finally realized that they live on the same planet, but don't have billion dollar bunkers, in which to retire when the shit hits the fan.
Oil company exec's can't help but commit suicide, just like the capitalist that sells the rope to hang himself.. Their forward vision is limited to the next quarterly P&E. But isn't that human nature?
LIKE I SAID PROBABLY REMOVAL ACTIONS. Doesn't mean they get it.
Your Google is probably disfunctionall.
Removal is the statutory process by which a defendant moves a case originally filed in state court to the federal district court that has geographical jurisdiction over the state court's location.
General Requirements
Original Jurisdiction: A case can generally only be removed if the federal district court would have had "original jurisdiction" to hear the case if it had been filed there initially.
Who Can Remove: Only a defendant can initiate removal. A plaintiff cannot remove their own case, even if a counterclaim is filed against them that involves federal law.
Unanimity Rule: In civil cases involving multiple defendants, all properly joined and served defendants must consent to or join in the removal.
Primary Grounds for Removal
Federal Question Jurisdiction: Claims based on the U.S. Constitution or federal laws (e.g., Civil Rights Act, federal subsidies disputes).
Diversity Jurisdiction: Cases between citizens of different states where the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.
Restriction: A case based solely on diversity cannot be removed if any defendant is a citizen of the state where the action was filed (the "Forum Defendant Rule").
Special Statutes: Specific laws allow removal for Federal Officers or Agencies (28 U.S.C. § 1442) and Members of the Armed Forces (28 U.S.C. § 1442a) for acts done under color of office.
Deadlines and Procedure
30-Day Limit: A defendant typically must file a Notice of Removal within 30 days of being served with the initial pleading or summons.
One-Year Cap: In cases based on diversity jurisdiction, removal is generally barred if more than one year has passed since the action commenced, unless bad faith by the plaintiff is shown.
Filing Process: The defendant must:
File a Notice of Removal in the federal district court.
Provide written notice to all adverse parties.
File a copy of the notice with the state court clerk to officially halt state proceedings.
Post-Removal: Remand
If the federal court finds that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction or that there was a procedural defect in the removal process, it may remand the case back to state court.
A motion to remand based on procedural defects must be made within 30 days of removal, but jurisdictional challenges can be raised at any time before final judgment.
+++++++++++
Behind the scenes, some of these defendants have shareholders, who may/may not hold management accountable.
Bondi supposedly represents the government, which has a regulatory obligation in several aspects. The Michigan case "sounds" in state antitrust law.
She's probably going to argue federal preemption, but have to be patient to see what they actually argiue.
Market forces. Trump supporters are conflicted over his acquiescence to fossil fuel and his attacks on alternative energy.
For many years, the face of "clean" if not solar energy was Elon Musk, Trump's largest benefactor in the last election cycle. Besides Tesla (which absorbed SolarCity in 2016 to form Tesla Energy), Musk’s primary, direct involvement in solar technology was through his backing of SolarCity, founded by his cousins. While SpaceX utilizes solar power for satellites and operations, it is not a commercial solar energy provider.
Although Musk looks like a sole proprietor, he's accountable to a board of trustees and to shareholders.
Key details regarding Musk's solar involvement:
SolarCity: Founded in 2006 with backing from Musk, this company was a major residential and commercial solar installer before being acquired by Tesla for approximately $2.6 billion.
Tesla Energy: This division now handles all former SolarCity operations, including the development of solar roofs and energy storage solutions like the Powerwall.
Zep Solar: Acquired by SolarCity prior to the Tesla merger, this company specialized in mounting systems for solar panels.
While Musk has investments in various tech sectors, no other current, independent, or,,,, major,,,, public enterprise under his direct control is actively engaged in the consumer solar technology market outside of Tesla Energy.
Based on reports from early 2025 following Donald Trump's inauguration for his second term, the primary company in Elon Musk’s portfolio that experienced significant, measurable declines in sales and market value is Tesla.
Sales Slump: Tesla experienced its worst quarterly sales performance since 2022 in the first quarter of 2025, with deliveries dropping by 13% compared to the previous year.
Global Declines: Sales dropped significantly in Europe (falling 28% in May 2025) and China (a 15% drop in May 2025), with the company losing its spot as the world's top EV maker to Chinese competitor BYD.
"Partisan Effect": Researchers and analysts attributed the slump to a "boycott" and "brand damage" caused by Musk’s political involvement, specifically his leadership of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and his close ties to Trump, which alienated key environmentally conscious, Democratic-leaning customers.
Market Value Loss: Following a feud with Trump in June 2025 regarding EV subsidies in a new tax bill, Tesla shares dropped 14%, wiping out $152 billion in market value in a single day.
Cybertruck Struggles: The Cybertruck failed to meet volume goals, and thousands remained unsold.
SpaceX & xAI: While Tesla bore the brunt of the consumer backlash, the broader "Musk-Trump" feud and subsequent tariff policies created volatility for his other ventures. SpaceX, which relies heavily on federal contracts, faced potential risks as the relationship between Musk and the Trump administration fluctuated.
X (formerly Twitter): The social media platform faced financial, and user, pressure amidst the shifting political landscape, with reports of AI startup xAI acquiring the company for $33 billion in a valuation move, while the platform itself dealt with declining advertising revenue.
In summary, the combination of a "protest effect" against Musk's political role and the removal of EV subsidies under the Trump administration caused Tesla to lose significant sales and market value in early 2025.
So...what should a shareholder do? Is Musk's support for Trump losing shareholder value?
Climate change is a Hoax! Here on the Florida barrier islands, somebody snuck around and changed everybody's thermometers to 26 degrees in the middle of the night. Preposterous joke. We have not had a drop that low in 16 years. Trump is such a kidder. Then there are all those hurricanes started by Jewish space lasers and those occasional wildfires too. Who thinks that building houses out of flimsy wood with flammable shingle roofs causes such destruction? You think we lost houses to floods just because they were built in floodplains? Ridiculous! Trump is a genius. He will figure out who is doing this and have his ICE Gestapo put them in prison.
I learned all this from MAGA posts on TS and X, so it must be true.
Thom, thank you for publishing this. It’s been really difficult living through these tumultuous times. For some groups more than others to be sure. When I was just out of high school a lifetime ago I instinctively knew that pumping oil from wells into the ground would become huge environmental problem. We called such wells then, earth leaches. Yet, I drove my internal combustion engine VW van, much like everyone else in their cars around SoCal back in the day and into the future. Scientists knew even then, certainly in the oil industry that air pollution was a problem. I remember when playing outdoors in sports how I felt physical pain in my lungs in light exercise. Big Problem. This was 1966. The smog in the LA basin was so thick you could not see the mountains just a few mikes away. But what happened, somehow between the lawmakers and the scientists seeing the problem, Catalytic Converters were invented, and the Desulfuruzer Units were designed, engineered, and installed in oil refineries, and that problem was solved. Hurrah for science and engineering innovation in the oil industry. And at the same time more or less…No Nukes!!!!! Yes! Next came more clean air laws and more efficient burning internal combustion engines, and create of clean fuels projects during the 1990’s, more successes for the environment and we the people.Yet, global warming had then become a thing. The climate scientists were learning about it. And by then, the handwriting was on the wall. And Al Gore put all in perspective for humanity. But, the sheer numbers of people on planet earth who used the fossil fuels was growing every year…..so science says…we can do this….wallah Electric vehicles! Solar Energy! And even more efficient internal fuels…we are making real progress. But I also remember T-Boone Pickens saying all the oil in the ground would soon be tapped out, maybe not much time left. But then the scientists again came up with fracking. Shake oil, ugh. Here we go again. Fie every step forward, we took several steps backward I guess you could say. While at the same time Solar technology was just also really making strides! I feel like we have a split personality society. And to be sure, the idiot in the White House and his R party today is not helping solve the energy problems we face today, but effectively monkey wrenching them. Good God help us all. Just what we do not need is Fascist Billionaire Punks in league with Masters of the Tech Universe pigs at the trough. God help us all. We need to take back our country to save the entire world. But in the words of Jerry Garcia, We will get by and we will survive.
The term "climate destabilization" is probably the term we should start using more. It signals the imbalance introduced by human activity and the disruption of systems which operate within the atmosphere. Climate chaos is also a great visual image. The authoritarian "solutions" referred to are the next threat on top of the destruction of habitats which are inevitable and already well-underway.
As you may know, although fossil fuels are a major contributer to global warming and other environmental degradation, they are not the primary cause. The number one cause is rarely mentioned, and although you may have written or talked about it, and I missed it.
The bads news is that very few people know about this. The good news is that once informed, people can start doing things immediately every day that will have much more positive affect for our environment than anything involved in reducing fossil fuel consumption.
If you don't know what the number one cause is, please read the book or watch the documentary Cowspircy, and then use your platforms to inform others.
Supposedly Mark Twain said, "Between ignorance and stupidity, choose ignorance. It is curable." He somehow blamed Biden for last year's terrible Texas flood and also said that it was an unpredictable event that would happen once in a hundred years, clearly having no understanding of how statistics works. He moved the track of a hurricane with a Sharpie. And he told one of his casino executives who was training for an Ironman not to do it because you are born with only so many heartbeats, and if you exercise you will die sooner. This guy is a scientific illiterate who is too stupid or stubborn to learn anything that goes against his magical thinking. He is the center of his world and that is the end of it.
I asked AI what is the effect of Trump #47 on the climate? Ans. below:
In his second term as the 47th President, Donald Trump has moved aggressively to reverse U.S. climate progress by prioritizing fossil fuel production and dismantling federal environmental oversight.
Key effects on the climate and policy include:
Withdrawal from International Agreements: On January 27, 2026, the U.S. officially withdrew from the Paris Agreement for the second time. Additionally, the administration has announced departures from over 60 international bodies, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Increased Carbon Emissions: Projections suggest that the administration's rollbacks could lead to an additional 4 billion metric tons of CO2-equivalent emissions by 2030 compared to previous trajectories.
Dismantling Regulatory Foundations: The EPA is currently working to repeal the 2009 Endangerment Finding, which is the legal basis for nearly all federal greenhouse gas regulations.
Expansion of Fossil Fuels: Under the mantra "drill, baby, drill," the administration has fast-tracked deep-sea mining, reopened Alaskan refuges for oil development, and granted roughly $40 billion in new subsidies to the fossil fuel industry.
Stalling Clean Energy: Federal support for wind and solar has been slashed, including the elimination of the $7,500 electric vehicle tax credit and nearly $13 billion in green energy funding.
Information and Data Gaps: The administration has removed past National Climate Assessments from federal sites, deleted climate science webpages, and cut funding for climate research programs, creating significant gaps in global climate tracking.
While federal action has stalled, market forces and state-led initiatives—particularly in California and Texas—continue to drive some growth in renewable capacity despite federal headwinds.
At the same time, more than two dozen U.S. states and municipalities (including California, Hawaii, and Massachusetts) are suing major oil companies like ExxonMobil, Shell, BP, and Chevron. They allege decades of deception regarding climate risks and are seeking damages for local harms like flooding and wildfires.
Supreme Court Victories: In early 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court declined multiple requests from oil companies to block these suits or move them to federal courts. This allows several high-profile cases, such as Honolulu's lawsuit, to finally move toward trials expected in 2026.
Novel Legal Theories: New types of suits are emerging, such as Michigan's January 2026 federal antitrust lawsuit, which accuses oil majors of acting as a "cartel" to suppress renewable energy and electric vehicle competition.
Michigan attorney general sues oil industry over allegations of collusion against electric vehicles and renewable energy
Dana Nessel is pursuing a novel antitrust suit against major oil companies and a trade group. By: Alex Guillén, Politico.Jan. 23.
NYT Jan 27. "Michigan’s filing came despite significant opposition from the Trump administration, which argued the lawsuits were an attack on a critical industry. In April, the Justice Department sued Michigan and Hawaii in an unusual effort to pre-emptively block them from filing climate lawsuits.
"Hawaii filed its suit the next day. The Justice Department’s lawsuit against the state is pending."
Many thanks, Daniel! However, isn't the reason the oil/gas/coal industries are booming as the climate collapses the simple but rarely mentioned fact that, if there were NO DEMAND for fossil fuels, then the suppliers will go broke and stop supplying the fuel driving global heating and climate collapse? We have met the enemy at the gates and he/she is/are us, right?
Good to hear from you, Doc.
The corollary to this is my usual rant how we've been undermined by OPEC since 1973. Make that our "allies" the Saudis. Once upon a time, this was. a bi-partisan issue. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Oil_Producing_and_Exporting_Cartels_Act
As I type, WTI Crude (Mar′26) is $65.74. That's up about $7 in the past week. On Friday, precious metals dropped at the same time re Warsh announcement.
The prinicipal beneficiary is Putin. The entire Russian economy is based on fossil fuel prices.
". In April, the Justice Department sued Michigan and Hawaii in an unusual effort to pre-emptively block them from filing climate lawsuits."
In which venue was the suit filed? Considering it involves two states, common sense says the District Court of D.C. District court Judges are chosen to preside by an algorithm. Who wrote the algorithm..
It is like votes, if votes are tabulated by an algorithm, then who writes the algorithm
Software is not neutral.
This should (emphasis should) take years to reach SCOTUS, any guesses how the Unholy High Six will rule?, I ask facetiously)
I assume that vote counters are basically similar to machines I used to use to tabulate surveys. If there is an X in the box it is tabulated. If there is more than one X for an item it is rejected for manual data entry. The machine is programmed according to the geography of the answer sheet - a 0 or a 1. No algorithms, just basic beancount arithmetic. The process is lightning fast, like those cash sorters in banks - ftftftftft.
I don't know how individual machines work, but from what I have read, the problem occurs, not on the voting machine, though I have heard of votes being changed at the machine, but at the tabulators, the point where all votes are tabulated and reported...to the media.
No one I have noticed have paid attention to or even questioned, why presidential candidates claim victory or concede, just hours after votes are cast.
It is the media that is calling the election. Kamala conceded while votes were being counted, on Nov 6 at 4 pm, because the media called the election.
It isn't the votes, it is Karnacki, that is calling the election.
Anyway the problem is the taqbulation centers, that's where the algorithm is monkeyed with.
Hacking the vote is easier than you think: https://alumni.umich.edu/michigan-alum/hacking-the-vote/
The Michigan state case has not been removed to Federal Court...yet. I haven't looked at the pleadings but I bet they're removal actions.
The other cases have been ongoing....I don't keep track but the California case is probably ripe for trial.
Most of these are state cases. With repect to Exxon, the Rockefellers have been asking them to diversify for many years -- all which they've lost so far.
On January 13, 2025, SCOTUS declined to hear an appeal from major oil companies (including Sunoco, Shell, Chevron, ExxonMobil, and BP), allowing a Honolulu lawsuit alleging climate deception to proceed in state court. The suit seeks to hold companies liable for damages related to climate change impacts, such as sea-level rise and severe storms.
I take that as a victory.
I wasn't asking about the cases filed by Michigan and Hawai, I was asking a bout the case filed by Pam Bondi against Michigan and Hawaii, the way the response was written it sounds like they are the the same case, otherwise if Bondi files two separate cases, she could get two separate outcomes and also double the case load, which is time, and personnel, money is obviously not a constraint.
As regards the Jan 23,25 ruiing by SCOTUS, seems like they finally realized that they live on the same planet, but don't have billion dollar bunkers, in which to retire when the shit hits the fan.
Oil company exec's can't help but commit suicide, just like the capitalist that sells the rope to hang himself.. Their forward vision is limited to the next quarterly P&E. But isn't that human nature?
LIKE I SAID PROBABLY REMOVAL ACTIONS. Doesn't mean they get it.
Your Google is probably disfunctionall.
Removal is the statutory process by which a defendant moves a case originally filed in state court to the federal district court that has geographical jurisdiction over the state court's location.
General Requirements
Original Jurisdiction: A case can generally only be removed if the federal district court would have had "original jurisdiction" to hear the case if it had been filed there initially.
Who Can Remove: Only a defendant can initiate removal. A plaintiff cannot remove their own case, even if a counterclaim is filed against them that involves federal law.
Unanimity Rule: In civil cases involving multiple defendants, all properly joined and served defendants must consent to or join in the removal.
Primary Grounds for Removal
Federal Question Jurisdiction: Claims based on the U.S. Constitution or federal laws (e.g., Civil Rights Act, federal subsidies disputes).
Diversity Jurisdiction: Cases between citizens of different states where the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.
Restriction: A case based solely on diversity cannot be removed if any defendant is a citizen of the state where the action was filed (the "Forum Defendant Rule").
Special Statutes: Specific laws allow removal for Federal Officers or Agencies (28 U.S.C. § 1442) and Members of the Armed Forces (28 U.S.C. § 1442a) for acts done under color of office.
Deadlines and Procedure
30-Day Limit: A defendant typically must file a Notice of Removal within 30 days of being served with the initial pleading or summons.
One-Year Cap: In cases based on diversity jurisdiction, removal is generally barred if more than one year has passed since the action commenced, unless bad faith by the plaintiff is shown.
Filing Process: The defendant must:
File a Notice of Removal in the federal district court.
Provide written notice to all adverse parties.
File a copy of the notice with the state court clerk to officially halt state proceedings.
Post-Removal: Remand
If the federal court finds that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction or that there was a procedural defect in the removal process, it may remand the case back to state court.
A motion to remand based on procedural defects must be made within 30 days of removal, but jurisdictional challenges can be raised at any time before final judgment.
+++++++++++
Behind the scenes, some of these defendants have shareholders, who may/may not hold management accountable.
Bondi supposedly represents the government, which has a regulatory obligation in several aspects. The Michigan case "sounds" in state antitrust law.
She's probably going to argue federal preemption, but have to be patient to see what they actually argiue.
She probably alreadyt lost in Hawaii.
Market forces. Trump supporters are conflicted over his acquiescence to fossil fuel and his attacks on alternative energy.
For many years, the face of "clean" if not solar energy was Elon Musk, Trump's largest benefactor in the last election cycle. Besides Tesla (which absorbed SolarCity in 2016 to form Tesla Energy), Musk’s primary, direct involvement in solar technology was through his backing of SolarCity, founded by his cousins. While SpaceX utilizes solar power for satellites and operations, it is not a commercial solar energy provider.
Although Musk looks like a sole proprietor, he's accountable to a board of trustees and to shareholders.
Key details regarding Musk's solar involvement:
SolarCity: Founded in 2006 with backing from Musk, this company was a major residential and commercial solar installer before being acquired by Tesla for approximately $2.6 billion.
Tesla Energy: This division now handles all former SolarCity operations, including the development of solar roofs and energy storage solutions like the Powerwall.
Zep Solar: Acquired by SolarCity prior to the Tesla merger, this company specialized in mounting systems for solar panels.
While Musk has investments in various tech sectors, no other current, independent, or,,,, major,,,, public enterprise under his direct control is actively engaged in the consumer solar technology market outside of Tesla Energy.
Based on reports from early 2025 following Donald Trump's inauguration for his second term, the primary company in Elon Musk’s portfolio that experienced significant, measurable declines in sales and market value is Tesla.
Sales Slump: Tesla experienced its worst quarterly sales performance since 2022 in the first quarter of 2025, with deliveries dropping by 13% compared to the previous year.
Global Declines: Sales dropped significantly in Europe (falling 28% in May 2025) and China (a 15% drop in May 2025), with the company losing its spot as the world's top EV maker to Chinese competitor BYD.
"Partisan Effect": Researchers and analysts attributed the slump to a "boycott" and "brand damage" caused by Musk’s political involvement, specifically his leadership of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and his close ties to Trump, which alienated key environmentally conscious, Democratic-leaning customers.
Market Value Loss: Following a feud with Trump in June 2025 regarding EV subsidies in a new tax bill, Tesla shares dropped 14%, wiping out $152 billion in market value in a single day.
Cybertruck Struggles: The Cybertruck failed to meet volume goals, and thousands remained unsold.
SpaceX & xAI: While Tesla bore the brunt of the consumer backlash, the broader "Musk-Trump" feud and subsequent tariff policies created volatility for his other ventures. SpaceX, which relies heavily on federal contracts, faced potential risks as the relationship between Musk and the Trump administration fluctuated.
X (formerly Twitter): The social media platform faced financial, and user, pressure amidst the shifting political landscape, with reports of AI startup xAI acquiring the company for $33 billion in a valuation move, while the platform itself dealt with declining advertising revenue.
In summary, the combination of a "protest effect" against Musk's political role and the removal of EV subsidies under the Trump administration caused Tesla to lose significant sales and market value in early 2025.
So...what should a shareholder do? Is Musk's support for Trump losing shareholder value?
Climate change is a Hoax! Here on the Florida barrier islands, somebody snuck around and changed everybody's thermometers to 26 degrees in the middle of the night. Preposterous joke. We have not had a drop that low in 16 years. Trump is such a kidder. Then there are all those hurricanes started by Jewish space lasers and those occasional wildfires too. Who thinks that building houses out of flimsy wood with flammable shingle roofs causes such destruction? You think we lost houses to floods just because they were built in floodplains? Ridiculous! Trump is a genius. He will figure out who is doing this and have his ICE Gestapo put them in prison.
I learned all this from MAGA posts on TS and X, so it must be true.
39 here. However, water temperature in the gulfstream in 75.
Thom, thank you for publishing this. It’s been really difficult living through these tumultuous times. For some groups more than others to be sure. When I was just out of high school a lifetime ago I instinctively knew that pumping oil from wells into the ground would become huge environmental problem. We called such wells then, earth leaches. Yet, I drove my internal combustion engine VW van, much like everyone else in their cars around SoCal back in the day and into the future. Scientists knew even then, certainly in the oil industry that air pollution was a problem. I remember when playing outdoors in sports how I felt physical pain in my lungs in light exercise. Big Problem. This was 1966. The smog in the LA basin was so thick you could not see the mountains just a few mikes away. But what happened, somehow between the lawmakers and the scientists seeing the problem, Catalytic Converters were invented, and the Desulfuruzer Units were designed, engineered, and installed in oil refineries, and that problem was solved. Hurrah for science and engineering innovation in the oil industry. And at the same time more or less…No Nukes!!!!! Yes! Next came more clean air laws and more efficient burning internal combustion engines, and create of clean fuels projects during the 1990’s, more successes for the environment and we the people.Yet, global warming had then become a thing. The climate scientists were learning about it. And by then, the handwriting was on the wall. And Al Gore put all in perspective for humanity. But, the sheer numbers of people on planet earth who used the fossil fuels was growing every year…..so science says…we can do this….wallah Electric vehicles! Solar Energy! And even more efficient internal fuels…we are making real progress. But I also remember T-Boone Pickens saying all the oil in the ground would soon be tapped out, maybe not much time left. But then the scientists again came up with fracking. Shake oil, ugh. Here we go again. Fie every step forward, we took several steps backward I guess you could say. While at the same time Solar technology was just also really making strides! I feel like we have a split personality society. And to be sure, the idiot in the White House and his R party today is not helping solve the energy problems we face today, but effectively monkey wrenching them. Good God help us all. Just what we do not need is Fascist Billionaire Punks in league with Masters of the Tech Universe pigs at the trough. God help us all. We need to take back our country to save the entire world. But in the words of Jerry Garcia, We will get by and we will survive.
The term "climate destabilization" is probably the term we should start using more. It signals the imbalance introduced by human activity and the disruption of systems which operate within the atmosphere. Climate chaos is also a great visual image. The authoritarian "solutions" referred to are the next threat on top of the destruction of habitats which are inevitable and already well-underway.
Thom,
As you may know, although fossil fuels are a major contributer to global warming and other environmental degradation, they are not the primary cause. The number one cause is rarely mentioned, and although you may have written or talked about it, and I missed it.
The bads news is that very few people know about this. The good news is that once informed, people can start doing things immediately every day that will have much more positive affect for our environment than anything involved in reducing fossil fuel consumption.
If you don't know what the number one cause is, please read the book or watch the documentary Cowspircy, and then use your platforms to inform others.
Thank you.
Supposedly Mark Twain said, "Between ignorance and stupidity, choose ignorance. It is curable." He somehow blamed Biden for last year's terrible Texas flood and also said that it was an unpredictable event that would happen once in a hundred years, clearly having no understanding of how statistics works. He moved the track of a hurricane with a Sharpie. And he told one of his casino executives who was training for an Ironman not to do it because you are born with only so many heartbeats, and if you exercise you will die sooner. This guy is a scientific illiterate who is too stupid or stubborn to learn anything that goes against his magical thinking. He is the center of his world and that is the end of it.