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.”
“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.”
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.
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.
Teslas are the most made-in-USA vehicles
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 19, 2022
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.
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.
News
SpaceX tells the FCC that Starship Flight 14 is going to orbit
SpaceX filed with the FCC for Starship Flight 14, its first true orbital launch attempt.
SpaceX has asked the Federal Communications Commission for permission to fly Starlink terminals during Starship’s fourteenth flight test, and the filing lays out a genuine trip to orbit, something the program has never attempted.
Every Starship flight so far, including Flight 13’s successful splashdown in the Indian Ocean on July 24, has flown a suborbital arc that ends with the ship reentering the atmosphere within the same hour it launches. The FCC paperwork describes a mission profile built around an actual orbital insertion instead.
The payload is the other half of the story. Flight 13 carried 20 production Starlink V3 satellites, but because that mission never reached orbit, the satellites reentered along with the ship rather than joining the constellation, something Teslarati covered in detail after SpaceX released footage shot from one of those satellites as it drifted away from Starship in space. Flight 14 is designed to close that gap. If the orbital insertion holds, the roughly 20 V3 satellites onboard would separate into an operational orbit and could eventually go into service, each one rated for about 1 terabit per second of downlink capacity by SpaceX’s own account.
SpaceX announces new Starbase for ‘thousands of Starship launches annually’
Elon Musk first flagged the orbital attempt during SpaceX’s August 4 earnings call, the company’s first as a public entity following its June IPO under the ticker SPCX. He also floated catching the ship with the Starbase tower on the same flight, an idea he walked back on August 20, saying the catch attempt would more likely come “in a few months,” as Teslarati reported at the time. Flight 14 will instead target a splashdown for the ship in the Indian Ocean, the same recovery method used since Flight 12.
Hardware has been catching up to the ambition. Booster 21 completed a full 33-engine static fire on August 28, and Ship 41 finished its own six-engine test the week before. An airspace briefing circulated to pilots on August 20 listed September 15 as the target date, later than the end of August window Musk mentioned on the earnings call, though SpaceX has not confirmed a launch date publicly and Starship schedules routinely slip while hardware and FAA paperwork line up.
The FCC filing itself does not guarantee a launch date. It covers communications authority, and not flight readiness, considering SpaceX still needs Ship 41 fully stacked and cleared by the FAA before Flight 14 can fly. But the filing is a real marker of intent and it puts a specific regulatory process behind what had so far only been Musk’s word on the earnings call.
Tesla is set to launch Cybercab on Thursday at an event in Austin, Texas, which will officially bring the company’s first steering wheel-less and pedal-less vehicle to a limited number of consumers for the first time.
The event, which is invite-only, is still thin on details: we’ll be there, and it seems the event will be held at Gigafactory Texas, but the launch of this vehicle truly relies on it being operational outside of the factory and on public roads.
🚨 Close-Up look at Tesla Cybercab without steering wheel: pic.twitter.com/9TXCDeDCz7
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 3, 2026
Nevertheless, there are some big things to expect, and other things to temper expectations on. For what it’s worth, we believe this event could be perhaps the biggest indication that Tesla is ready to truly enter a new phase and chapter in its historic story.
Tesla Cybercab’s First Foray into the Public with Real-World Riders
Cybercab will likely hit the streets of Austin and the surrounding areas, likely in the established geofence that Tesla has expanded on for the past 14 months. Just yesterday, Tesla expanded it once again by 9 percent.
Tesla will put, for the first time, a vehicle without any manual controls on public roads, likely without any help from teleoperators. This is a truly groundbreaking development if it comes through in this fashion: it would be groundbreaking for Tesla to roll out a truly driverless ride-hailing vehicle.
Cybercab Has Already Been Unveiled
This is not an unveiling event. Cybercab has been released for nearly two years, as Tesla first showed it to the public on October 10, 2024.
FIRST LOOK: Tesla ‘Cybercab’ Robotaxi makes its global debut
While there is some small speculation that Tesla could release the Roadster at the event as a surprise, it seems more likely the focus will be on the Cybercab and the huge accomplishment that will come with releasing a vehicle with no manual controls.
There Will Be a Lot of Hype
What’s important to remember about the Cybercab event is that Tesla will continue to prioritize safety and the rollout will likely be slow, just as it has been with Robotaxi.
One of the biggest complaints about Robotaxi is vehicle population, and the fact that the wait for a ride, at least in some instances, has been longer than most want to admit.
It will take time for this project to truly scale. It will take time for Tesla to roll this out in a large fashion. The important thing to note is that they are doing it, and they’re doing it with a vehicle that is completely engineered and built internally. That’s something no other ride-hailing service can say.
Elon Musk recently restated a fact that still defines SpaceX’s origin story: if Falcon 1’s fourth launch had failed, the company would not exist. The comment answered a reminder that after three consecutive losses, SpaceX had money for only one more attempt.
On X, Peter Diamandis said that the present-day acknowledgement of SpaceX’s success does not discount the rough start the company had. “Almost nobody remembers that Elon’s first rocket failed three times, and there was money for exactly only one more attempt.”
Musk said, “If the 4th launch had failed, SpaceX would not exist.”
If the 4th launch had failed, SpaceX would not exist
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 30, 2026
In late 2008, the firm was nearly out of cash. Another failure would have ended payroll, closed the Hawthorne factory, and left the Falcon 9 and Dragon programs as unfinished drawings.
The first flight lifted off from Omelek Island on 24 March 2006. Thirty-three seconds later, a corroded aluminum fitting on a fuel line leaked. Kerosene ignited around the Merlin engine, control was lost, and the vehicle came apart. The small DARPA payload, FalconSAT-2, survived the short flight only to land on a storage shed near the pad. Investigators later traced the fitting to a materials mix-up that should never have reached the rocket.
Flight 2, on 21 March 2007, looked far better at first. The first stage burned cleanly and handed off to the Kestrel-powered upper stage. The vehicle crossed 100 kilometers and reached a peak of about 289 kilometers. Then propellant slosh in the second-stage tank started a circular coning motion that grew until the engine shut down. Telemetry faded as the stage tumbled, and SpaceX had reached space but not orbit. Over the next year, the team redesigned everything from the ground up, including tanks, baffles, and the new regeneratively cooled Merlin 1C.
That engine flew on Flight 3 on 2 August 2008. The first stage performed almost perfectly and reached 217 kilometers. After main-engine cutoff, leftover fuel in the cooling channels produced a faint residual thrust, roughly 10 pounds per square inch of chamber pressure. On a Texas test stand, the effect was invisible beneath ambient air pressure. In vacuum it was enough to push the spent first stage back into the second stage after separation. The stages collided, the upper stage spun, and the mission was lost. Musk later said a slightly longer delay before staging would have saved the flight.
Six weeks later, the team assembled Flight 4 from remaining parts and flew it on 28 September 2008 at 23:15 UTC. The payload was Ratsat, a 165-kilogram aluminum mass simulator built in-house. Staging was delayed so residual thrust could decay. The Kestrel ignited, the fairing split away, and nine and a half minutes after liftoff the vehicle was in orbit. After a coast, the second stage restarted, settling into a 621-by-643-kilometer path at 9.35 degrees inclination. Falcon 1 became the first privately developed liquid-fueled rocket to reach Earth orbit. Musk called the insertion “middle of the bull’s-eye.”
SpaceX restores a Falcon 1 rocket for 10th anniversary of first launch success
That success unlocked NASA’s Commercial Resupply Services award later that year. Without it, there would have been no Falcon 9, no reusable first stages, and no Dragon cargo or crew flights to the International Space Station. Launch prices would have remained far higher. Starlink’s constellation would not exist; broadband from low Earth orbit would still be a paper concept.
Ride-share markets, high launch cadence, and the current pace of lunar and Mars hardware would be years behind. Communications, Earth observation, and the cost of putting anything into space would look more like the 2000s than the 2020s.
One extra second of residual thrust in August 2008 would have written a different decade.
SpaceX tells the FCC that Starship Flight 14 is going to orbit
Tesla Cybercab Event: what to expect from Austin
