News
‘Average Americans’ can’t afford EVs: Former White House official, others rip Buttigieg
The all-too-common myth that electric vehicles are not affordable to the average American is now being reignited by former Trump White House Communications Official Mercedes Schlapp, among others, who ripped Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg for suggesting that the answer to rising gas prices was to buy an electric car.
Sec. Buttigieg appeared on MSNBC on Sunday to suggest that American consumers can avoid soaring gas prices by purchasing an electric vehicle. Buttigieg said to Jonathan Capehart in an interview on “The Sunday Show” that EV owners will have a “$12,500 discount” thanks to the new EV incentive plan that was included in the House-passed “Build Back Better” plan from President Joe Biden. While only the Chevrolet Bolt EV will qualify for the full $12,500 amount, nearly every EV built in the United States will qualify for a $7,500 tax credit.
Buttigieg also went on to say that those in rural areas would be most likely to benefit from the purchase of an EV. “The people who stand to benefit most from owning an EV are often rural residents who have the most distances to drive, who burn the most gas, and underserved urban residents in areas where there are higher gas prices and lower-income,” Buttigieg claimed. “They would gain the most by having that vehicle. These are the very residents who have not always been connected to electric vehicles that are viewed as kind of a luxury item.”
Transportation Sec. Buttigieg: Buy an EV and ‘never worry about gas prices again’
However, not everyone was a fan of Buttigieg’s suggestion to transition to EVs. Former White House Director of Strategic Communications Mercedes Schlapp said that EVs are not widely affordable, and only people “in the world that Pete Buttigieg lives in” can afford them. “Average Americans struggling with record-high gas prices? Not so much,” she added.
“Let me assure you there is very little overlap between ‘families that can afford to buy a $50,000 electric car,” Amy Swearer of the Heritage Foundation said. “And ‘families that are worried about gas prices because an extra $50 a month is actually a week’s worth of groceries.’ Do you know what a lot of families could do with that extra $50 a month/$1300 a year?” Swearer added according to the New York Post.
Kelley Blue Book lists the average transaction price in October 2021 for a new vehicle at $46,036, with Tesla offering an average price of $54,560. It should be noted that Tesla has two Model 3 variants under the average $54,560 price. The Model Y’s Long Range variant is available for slightly more at $58,990. However, these prices are before factoring in federal incentives, gas savings, and money saved through lack of maintenance. If the minimum $7,500 EV tax credit were available right now, all but one of Tesla’s five mass-market vehicle variants would fall under the average cost of a Tesla vehicle. The Model 3’s Rear Wheel Drive and Long Range All-Wheel Drive configurations would cost less than the national average for a new car. Tesla vehicles would qualify for $8,000 in incentives: $7,500 for being built in the U.S. and an additional $500 for equipping a U.S.-made battery.
-
Now, if we factor in other vehicles in the United States, the Chevrolet Bolt, which has had production suspended until 2022 due to battery malfunctions, has several sub-$30,000 variants available. Ford’s Mustang Mach-E starts at $42,895 and can go as low as $35,395 after incentives. Three of Ford’s four Mach-E variants would fall under KBB’s $46,036 average price after incentives.
Unfortunately, politicians with widespread media coverage are able to spread misinformation regarding the price of electric vehicles. Many EVs are available on the market today are actually extremely affordable. Even if the price of an EV is slightly higher than a gas car, owners can expect savings through missed trips to the gas pump and a lack of oil changes. But, after all, we’ve learned that the White House, at nearly any time and under nearly any administration, has missed the mark regarding EVs, and it has not been uncommon for politicians to spread information that is not necessarily accurate.
I’d love to hear from you! If you have any comments, concerns, or questions, please email me at joey@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @KlenderJoey, or if you have news tips, you can email us at tips@teslarati.com.
In a new note to investors on Tuesday, Morgan Stanley analyst Andrew Percoco said that Tesla has one big financial question to answer for investors regarding its Robotaxi rollout, Full Self-Driving software, and Optimus.
Percoco said in the note that, for the most part, investors are still very positive about the direction the company is headed. However, there are some things the firm would like to see, and they have to do with financials.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Tesla bulls are more than convinced that the company’s Full Self-Driving software is proof it can develop physical AI. Financially, however, there are still some questions, especially on elevated spending, which CEO Elon Musk said would occur as the company works to roll out Robotaxi faster and continue developing its Optimus robot.
The latter two are where Tesla will have to prove progress to investors, as Percoco writes that both projects “will require clearer evidence that Robotaxi is scaling and more tangible Optimus proof points to support the ROI on elevated capex.”
Percoco said the second quarter earnings call did not change his long-term thesis of where Tesla is positioned in the AI race, which is out in front. However, there are concerns that weaker gross margins and higher R&D spend will stress financials, and that has “sharpened our (and investors’) focus on measurable progress across Robotaxi and Optimus.”
Additionally, Robotaxi still needs to be proven with more operation in existing cities while maintaining safety but improving how many rides it gives in any given time, he said. For Optimus, Percoco wrote that he is “still looking for evidence beyond commentary around SOP.”
-
Morgan Stanley put Percoco in charge of covering Tesla after long-time analyst Adam Jonas transitioned to the automotive side.
Currently, Morgan Stanley has a $415 price target on Tesla and a ‘Hold’ rating on the stock. It is trading at around $330 at the time of publication, which was 2:30 P.M. on the East Coast.
SpaceX’s massive investment in AI will make it a big winner, Argus Research said after the company’s successful earnings call last week.
The firm also upgraded shares to a Buy from Hold and set a $160 price target.
SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX) is currently recovering from its heavy AI infrastructure investments, as it spent nearly $16 billion in Q2 alone. The company did this primarily by monetizing high-demand GPU compute capacity at a much faster pace than traditional data center economics would suggest.
Company CFO Bret Johnsen said that SpaceX would be able to pay back anything on new deployments within a year.
There are plenty of ways the company can do this:
Leasing excess compute capacity through contracts
SpaceX has already built Colossus and Colossus II, largely for its own model training. However, much of that capacity is already rented out to third parties. It already has major deals with Anthropic, Google, and Reflection AI. These partnerships are adding billions per month to SpaceX’s spreadsheet.
-
High utilization driven by industry-wide scarcity
The demand for advanced AI training and inference capacity continues to exceed what is available for use. SpaceX can fill new racks quickly after they come online, so the capital deployed converts into revenue with minimal idle time.
Additionally, management and outside observers have described the new compute capital as behaving more like a cost-of-goods-sold than traditional multi-year capex, especially because of this rapid monetization pattern.
Capacity has already scaled from ~0.4 GW a year to 1.4 GW annually by the end of Q2. There are targets of more than 2 GW by year-end.
High incremental margins on the rental business once capacity is online
GPU cloud providers often operate at strong gross margins. SpaceX can monetize capacity that was already partially built or can be added efficiently. This means that incremental EBITDA margins on the rental revenue are usually high. This accelerates cash recovery relative to the gross capital outlay.
Parallel monetization of its own AI software and applications
Beyond pure infrastructure rental, SpaceX also generates revenue from Grok through subscriptions and usage, from X through ads, data, and other related services, enterprise APIs, and the planned integration of the Cursor coding tools acquisition.
These application layers ride on the same compute infrastructure and provide additional high-margin streams that could offset build-out costs. AI-segment revenue overall rose sharply to about $2.6 billion in Q2, according to Motley Fool. This was driven primarily by the infrastructure contracts, but the software side is also partially responsible.
Efficient, large-scale deployment and vertical integration advantages
SpaceX has emphasized the rapid construction of power and cooling infrastructure and favorable cost-per-megawatt economics relative to industry benchmarks in some disclosures.
-
Combined with its ability to scale capacity aggressively and the fact that many contracts start generating revenue within months of capacity coming online, the effective payback compresses dramatically compared with more conventional multi-year data-center projects.
SpaceX’s dominant near-term recovery path will turn the AI clusters into a hyperscale-style compute rental business for other leading AI companies while still using a portion for internal models.
Tesla headlights have caused a recall of over 20,000 of the company’s two most popular vehicles, the Model 3 and Model Y, due to the low-beam bulb exceeding the maximum allowed intensity according to federal standards.
Tesla initiated the recall with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) this morning, stating that the low-beam output “exceeds the maximum allowed intensity in the outer upper-right and outer upper-left areas of the 10U and 90U zone, as prescribed in FMVSS No. 108.”
Tesla sourced the impacted headlights from Marelli Automotive Lighting, a Mexico-based company. The recall impacts 2020-2023 Model Y vehicles and 2017-2023 Model 3 vehicles. It is estimated that every VIN in this recall is impacted by the defect.
🚨 Tesla is recalling 20,349 2020-23 Model Y vehicles and 2017-23 Model 3 vehicles due to an excessively bright headlamp low beam.
Currently, there is no remedy plan in place, as it is still being developed. pic.twitter.com/y34cIO2U0B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 11, 2026
Typically, Tesla would remedy recalls of this nature through an Over-the-Air software update, which has been a major focus of criticism by the company and its supporters because the NHTSA still refers to it as a “recall,” even though it requires no action by the vehicle owner. The fix is shipped over the internet and downloaded to the car.
-
However, there appears to be a potentially different solution for this problem. Tesla has not developed a remedy for this issue, so it could potentially be on the way. The big issue appears to be the fact that these recalled lamps are out of production, and this is an old body style for both vehicles. The headlights and front-end designs are completely different.
Tesla switched to another supplier when the affected headlight design was discontinued. It plans to begin notifying owners of their remedy options by September 15.
Tesla filed a petition protesting the recall to fix the vehicles’ headlight issue, but the NHTSA denied it. Now, Tesla will come up with a solution to fix it.
Tesla has one big financial question to answer for investors: Morgan Stanley
SpaceX AI investment gamble will make it a big winner, firm says
