Connect with us
Does GM Does GM

News

Opinion: GM’s $1B EV investment in Mexico is not what America needs

Credit: General Motors

Published

on

General Motors ‘(GM) decision to invest $1 billion for EVs in Mexico instead of the United States is not the “EV leadership” that America needs. President Biden heaped a lot of syrupy sweet praise on the automaker for “electrifying the automotive industry” although we all know it was Tesla and not GM.

The president also hyped up GM for creating only 4,000 American jobs (Tesla created over 100,000 jobs) and investing $7 billion.

GM’s $1 Billion Investment In Mexico

GM announced that it will produce its new Chevy Blazer EV in Mexico. Recently, the automaker unveiled the Chevy Blazer which will be available by Fall 2023. Earlier today, Reuters reported that GM will produce the 2024 Chevrolet Blazer EV at Ramos Arizpe in Mexico.

According to the article, GM will build the 2024 Chevrolet Blazer EV at a plant in Ramos Arizpe and that it will be ready to be sold in Mexico by the end of 2023.

The Detroit News reported that United Auto Workers Vice President, Terry Dittes, who is head of the union’s GM Department said that this was a slap in the face to UAW and the U.S. taxpayers.

“At a time when General Motors is asking for a significant investment by the U.S. government in subsidizing electric vehicles, this is a slap in the face for not only UAW members and their families but also for U.S. taxpayers and the American workforce.”

Advertisement
-

“General Motors automobiles made in Mexico are sold in the United States and should be made right here, employing American workers,” he added. “That is why our nation is investing in these companies. Taxpayer money should not go to companies that utilize labor outside the U.S. while benefiting from American government subsidies. This is not the America any of us signed on for. Frankly, it is unseemly.”

GM Made A Mockery Of President Biden

Last year and earlier this year, President Biden made a point to ignore Tesla’s contributions to the EV space in favor of GM.

During the State of the Union address, President Biden praised GM for investing $7 billion into EVs and for creating 4,000 new jobs in Michigan. What he didn’t mention were the over 100,000 jobs that Tesla created for Americans. He also didn’t acknowledge Tesla’s $10 billion investment in EVs either.

In fact, it took a viral petition that my friend, Gail Alfar, and I started to encourage President Biden to acknowledge Tesla’s leadership in the EV space.

President Biden Claimed GM Was The EV Leader

In November 2019, the U.S. President toured GM’s Factory Zero and said that GM: “electrified the entire automotive industry” under CEO Marry Barra’s leadership. He added that Mary Barra electrified the entire automotive industry. This is an outright lie.

“In the auto industry, Detroit is leading the world in electric vehicles. You know how critical it is? Mary, I remember talking to you way back in January about the need for America to lead in electric vehicles. I can remember your dramatic announcement that by 2035, GM would be 100% electric. You changed the whole story, Mary. You did, Mary. You electrified the entire automotive industry. I’m serious. You led, and it matters.”

Advertisement
-

EVs, Jobs, and Lies

The idea that GM is the EV leader and is providing the most jobs in America for EVs is laughable. yet this thought was pushed by the Biden administration while trying to suppress Tesla and its actual leadership of the industry.

This hurts Tesla’s American employees. And it makes our president look foolish. Especially now that GM is going to build its newest EV in Mexico. Although $1 billion isn’t as much as the $7 billion investment, it is still investing money for EVs in Mexico and not the U.S.

In her statement to The Detroit News, U.S. Representative Debbie Dingel emphasized that EVs must be built in the U.S. and that not one American dollar should support American jobs being shipped off to Mexico.

“Electric vehicles must be built here in America by the finest workforce in the world — the American workers. Not one American dollar should support our own jobs being shipped off to Mexico — especially when we have the workers and the technology to manufacture electric vehicles ourselves.”

“General Motors needs to reaffirm their commitment to working families now. I am focused on ensuring auto innovation and manufacturing stays in the hands of hard-working American people.”

Tesla Is The Most American-Made Vehicle

GM, in my opinion, is only making EVs because Tesla has proven that not only is it possible to mass produce them but that people want EVs. If this wasn’t the case, GM wouldn’t have crushed all of its EV1 vehicles.

Advertisement
-

If GM truly believed in EVs, there wouldn’t have been a need for Tesla to be founded. In addition to that, GM and these other automakers seem to only want to “beat Tesla.”

Tesla’s mission is completely different. Tesla is focused on accelerating the transition to sustainability.

 

I admit, I tweeted the above before coffee and forgot about it until Elon Musk replied to it. The point I was making was this: it’s not fair to Americans that GM is investing even one cent into Mexico especially since the U.S. President has been hyping it up as the job creator for the EV industry.

Advertisement
-

We all know Mexico has cheaper labor. And no offense to anyone in Mexico, but if you’re going to market yourself as an American company producing American-made EVs, then your EVs need to be American-made.

Elon Musk is right. Tesla is the most American-made vehicle. You can read more about that award here.

 

Johnna Crider is a Baton Rouge writer covering Tesla, Elon Musk, EVs, and clean energy & supports Tesla's mission. Johnna also interviewed Elon Musk and you can listen here

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Elon Musk breaks his silence on the Starlink impact to Ukraine drones

Musk says the US military and president set Starshield limits, not SpaceX, amid Ukraine complaints.

Published

on

By

Elon Musk says the speed limit cutting out Ukraine’s military Starlink terminals is not SpaceX’s decision. In a post on X Wednesday, Musk wrote that “Starshield systems are owned and controlled by the US government. Any limits on speed or usage are decided by the US military and ultimately POTUS.” He added that Starlink is a commercial service limited to civilian or defensive activities and “cannot be used for offensive military action, as doing so would be inappropriate for a commercial company.”

He was replying to Mykhailo Fedorov, Ukraine’s former defense minister, who had thanked Musk for restoring connectivity at speeds up to 160 km/h and said removing the Starshield limit entirely is “now critical for Ukraine’s defense.”

The complaint started Tuesday night, when Ukrainian officials said military terminals began losing service above roughly 100 mph. Presidential adviser Serhiy Beskrestnov said the defense forces got no warning and several missions were disrupted, as Teslarati reported earlier Wednesday. The 7th Rapid Reaction Corps told Reuters connections dropped for 10 to 20 seconds at speeds well below the limit, which made drones harder to control. Poland’s foreign minister, Radoslaw Sikorski, asked Musk on X whether he is “playing politics with your products again.”

Advertisement
-

That is why the Starlink and Starshield distinction matters. SpaceX introduced Starshield in 2022 as the government version of Starlink, with an initial focus on Earth observation, communications and hosted payloads. It won a Space Force contract in 2023 with a $70 million ceiling. In December 2024, the Pentagon moved Ukraine’s terminals onto Starshield, covering about 3,000 units across two contracts. Ukraine’s military connections therefore run through a service that Musk now says sits under Washington’s control.

SpaceX pitches subscription model for Trump’s Golden Dome

While Musk’s post describes who holds authority, it does not infer that anyone ordered the limit, and neither SpaceX nor the US government has confirmed who set it. Ukrainian officials have pointed to the timing, which follows President Trump’s push for an energy ceasefire and Musk’s Saturday post that “Zelensky has gone too far.” The BBC noted Trump denied threatening to restrict intelligence sharing with Kyiv, and no evidence has been presented that Washington requested the cap.

The episode also revives a promise from 2025. After Poland accused him of threatening Ukraine’s access, Musk said Starlink “will never turn off its terminals” and would not be used as a bargaining chip. Poland has since supplied more than 29,000 terminals to Ukraine. Teslarati also covered Kyiv’s search for Starlink alternatives in 2025, and the latest dispute gives that search new urgency.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Tesla opens the Q&A for its biggest earnings call yet

Tesla opens its Q3 earnings Q&A, and Cybercab, Robotaxi, Optimus and regulators loom over October 21.

Published

on

By

Tesla has opened its shareholder question portal for the Q3 2026 earnings call, with the Say Q&A page already listing questions. Investors have until 4:00 p.m. EDT on October 20 to submit and vote on what management should answer.

The call is set for Wednesday, October 21. Tesla will post results after the market closes, with a live webcast at 4:30 p.m. CT, or 5:30 p.m. ET, through its investor relations site.

Say ranks questions by the number of shares behind the votes, which gives institutional holders extra weight over the retail crowd.

Ahead of Q2, retail investors asked why Robotaxi growth had stalled, when Cybercab would start customer rides, and where the Optimus Gen 3 ramp stood, while an institutional holder asked how Tesla and SpaceX would split Terafab duties. Cybercab has since answered one of those. Tesla said last week it has 300 plus Cybercabs serving Austin, up eightfold in 30 days, with Dallas named as the next city. The questions now are likely to move from when to how fast.

There is also a regulatory question hanging over the call. NHTSA has demanded sworn answers on how the pedal free Cybercab was certified against federal safety standards, with responses due October 30, nine days after the call. Whether an analyst raises it live is unknown, but it is the kind of exposure that tends to find its way into a Q&A.

The numbers will not be the main draw. Tesla already reported 486,532 deliveries and 13.7 GWh of storage for the quarter. Consensus sits around 43 to 45 cents per share on roughly $27.8 billion in revenue, according to Zacks, after a Q2 report that missed on EPS. Goldman Sachs, which holds a Neutral rating and a $360 target, argues the outlook for Robotaxi, FSD and Optimus will matter more to the stock than the quarter itself.

Advertisement
-

The call also lands six days after the rescheduled Roadster event, which Tesla will stream on X on Thursday, October 15, at 7:55 p.m. CT. If the Roadster shows up with a production date or a SpaceX thruster package, expect it to climb the voting list before the deadline.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Ukraine says Starlink is cutting out its military drones as Poland calls out Elon Musk

Ukrainian officials allege SpaceX limited military Starlink speeds, disrupting drone missions; SpaceX has not commented.

Published

on

By

Credit: Mykhailo Fedorov/Twitter

Ukrainian officials are accusing SpaceX of placing a speed limit on the military version of Starlink that their forces use to fly drones, but SpaceX has not confirmed that any change was made. Presidential adviser Serhiy Beskrestnov said in a Telegram post on Wednesday that Starshield terminals have begun losing service when they move faster than about 100 miles per hour, according to a Reuters report. “Our defense forces did not receive a warning about this limitation, and this led to the disruption of several missions,” he wrote.

Ukraine’s 7th Rapid Reaction Corps told Reuters that connections dropped for 10 to 20 seconds at just 68 to 75 mph, which made the drones harder to control. Volunteer Serhiy Sternenko, citing military reports, said the dropouts are now starting at 37 to 43 mph. These accounts come from Ukrainian officials and military sources and have not been independently verified. Regular civilian terminals were reportedly not affected, according to EUalive.


SpaceX has not publicly commented or explained what, if anything, changed. Beskrestnov and other Ukrainian officials believe the issue is intentional and point to the timing. Washington has been pressing Kyiv to stop long range strikes on Russian oil refineries after President Trump called for an “energy ceasefire,” and Musk posted on Saturday that “Zelensky has gone too far.” EUalive noted that neither Ukrainian nor Polish officials have presented evidence that the limit was ordered by Washington or by SpaceX, so the link to politics remains an allegation. Other explanations, such as a technical or policy change affecting fast moving terminals, have not been ruled out.

Poland’s foreign minister, Radosław Sikorski, responded on X by quote tweeting a Kyiv Independent report and writing: “Hey, @elonmusk, big man, are you playing politics with your products again? As your European customers, we are watching you.” Poland is the largest funder of Ukraine’s Starlink service, having supplied more than 29,000 terminals and covering operating costs Sikorski has put at roughly $50 million a year. The wording echoes their 2025 clash, when Musk told Sikorski to “be quiet, small man.” At the time of writing, neither Musk nor SpaceX had responded to the claims.

The dispute sits on top of a long history. Musk confirmed in February 2022 that Starlink was active in Ukraine after a request from a Ukrainian minister. That October, SpaceX asked the Pentagon to share the bill and Musk said the cost was approaching $20 million a month, before he reversed course and said SpaceX would keep paying. In December 2024 the Pentagon moved some of those terminals onto the Starshield service, the government version now at the center of the complaints.

SpaceX has also changed how its network treats certain terminals in Ukraine before, and that time it was with Kyiv’s cooperation. In February, Ukrainian officials confirmed that terminals believed to be used by Russian troops were disabled after coordination with SpaceX, a step that Ukrainian commanders later said hurt Russian assaults. Whether anything similar is behind the latest reports is unclear, which is why Kyiv is asking for answers.

Ukraine is already looking at backups. Defense tech company Stetman is developing its own satellite system, UASAT-NANO, and officials in Europe have discussed alternatives to Starlink since early 2025, though none match its scale yet.

Continue Reading