News
Tesla’s Elon Musk gets cursed-out by CA politician who’s backed by Chevron
Among the adverse reactions to Tesla and Elon Musk’s stance on the ongoing shutdown of the Fremont factory, the most drastic would have to come from CA Assemblywoman Lorena S. Gonzales. The politician opted to give her two cents on the unfolding series of events this past weekend, and they were interesting, to say the least.
Instead of providing a formal statement of support for Tesla like Fremont Mayor Lily Mei, or an argument about why the factory should not reopen yet like former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich, Gonzales decided to keep her points as succinct as possible. In a tweet, the CA assemblywoman simply posted a message declaring “F*ck Elon Musk.”
Gonzales would later add a couple more points in her initial “F*ck Elon Musk” message. In a series of follow up tweets, Gonzales accused Tesla of being a highly-subsidized company that has “always disregarded worker safety and well-being.” She also claimed that the company has “engaged in union busting” and that it “bullies public servants.”
The CA assemblywoman’s follow-up tweets contain usual talking points against the electric car maker. Accusations about worker safety, for example, mirror those of an alleged expose by Reveal magazine back in 2018, which Tesla has already responded to. Musk has also noted that Fremont employees are free to unionize, though organizations such as the UAW are not particularly popular among the plant’s workers considering the union’s failures during the facility’s days as the NUMMI plant.
Interestingly enough, a look at Gonzales’ page on politician-tracking platform VoteSmart shows that the CA assemblywoman lists Chevron, one of the world’s premier fossil fuel companies, as her third-biggest contributor for the 2020 cycle. A look at Gonzales’ fundings from top industries also reveals that she has received funds from the “Oil and Gas” segment.
There are many ways to express grievances against Musk and Tesla, though it is difficult to deny that Gonzales’ simple profanity-laden statement is a bit unusual for a government official. Off-the-cuff comments may be the trend nowadays with politics spilling over to online platforms, but it is still a bit off to see overtly aggressive posts such as “F*ck Elon Musk” coming from a CA assemblywoman. Such statements are common to the TSLAQ community and outspoken short-sellers, but one would expect an elected official to behave online differently.
Amidst the ongoing shutdown of the Fremont factory, Scott Haggerty, the county supervisor for the district in Alameda County, suggested to the New York Times that things would have been better had Musk not filed a lawsuit against the county. According to Haggerty, Tesla was poised to reopen the Fremont factory on May 18, but Musk wanted the factory to resume operations earlier. With Tesla filing a lawsuit against the county, Haggerty warned that things would likely be delayed further.
“We were working on a lot of policies and procedures to help operate that plant, and quite frankly, I think Tesla did a pretty good job, and that’s why I had it to the point where on May 18, Tesla would have opened. I know Elon knew that. But he wanted it this week.”
“It (the lawsuit) was only a threat, and as an elected official, I get threatened all the time. It does, at that point, slow down conversations between my contact at the plant and myself. He could have spent time enjoying his new baby and given me and my staff a couple more days, and his plant would have been open on May 18. Am I somewhat sympathetic with Tesla? Yes, I am. Am I sympathetic to the way Musk is treating people? No.” Haggerty said.
Other automakers in the United States are not on the same boat as Tesla. General Motors, Ford, and Fiat-Chrysler have stated that they will resume operations on May 18. Toyota intends to reopen its US plants on May 11. German automaker Mercedes-Benz has already resumed operations at its SUV plant in Alabama, as well as a van factory in South Carolina.
Tesla has officially launched public Robotaxi rides in Austin, Texas, without a Safety Monitor in the vehicle, marking the first time the company has removed anyone from the vehicle other than the rider.
The Safety Monitor has been present in Tesla Robotaxis in Austin since its launch last June, maintaining safety for passengers and other vehicles, and was placed in the passenger’s seat.
Tesla planned to remove the Safety Monitor at the end of 2025, but it was not quite ready to do so. Now, in January, riders are officially reporting that they are able to hail a ride from a Model Y Robotaxi without anyone in the vehicle:
I am in a robotaxi without safety monitor pic.twitter.com/fzHu385oIb
— TSLA99T (@Tsla99T) January 22, 2026
Tesla started testing this internally late last year and had several employees show that they were riding in the vehicle without anyone else there to intervene in case of an emergency.
Tesla has now expanded that program to the public. It is not active in the entire fleet, but there are a “few unsupervised vehicles mixed in with the broader robotaxi fleet with safety monitors,” Ashok Elluswamy said:
Robotaxi rides without any safety monitors are now publicly available in Austin.
Starting with a few unsupervised vehicles mixed in with the broader robotaxi fleet with safety monitors, and the ratio will increase over time. https://t.co/ShMpZjefwB
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) January 22, 2026
Tesla Robotaxi goes driverless as Musk confirms Safety Monitor removal testing
The Robotaxi program also operates in the California Bay Area, where the fleet is much larger, but Safety Monitors are placed in the driver’s seat and utilize Full Self-Driving, so it is essentially the same as an Uber driver using a Tesla with FSD.
In Austin, the removal of Safety Monitors marks a substantial achievement for Tesla moving forward. Now that it has enough confidence to remove Safety Monitors from Robotaxis altogether, there are nearly unlimited options for the company in terms of expansion.
While it is hoping to launch the ride-hailing service in more cities across the U.S. this year, this is a much larger development than expansion, at least for now, as it is the first time it is performing driverless rides in Robotaxi anywhere in the world for the public to enjoy.
Tesla has scheduled its Earnings Call for Q4 and Full Year 2025 for next Wednesday, January 28, at 5:30 p.m. EST, and investors are already preparing to get some answers from executives regarding a wide variety of topics.
The company accepts several questions from retail investors through the platform Say, which then allows shareholders to vote on the best questions.
Tesla does not answer anything regarding future product releases, but they are willing to shed light on current timelines, progress of certain projects, and other plans.
There are five questions that range over a variety of topics, including SpaceX, Full Self-Driving, Robotaxi, and Optimus, which are currently in the lead to be asked and potentially answered by Elon Musk and other Tesla executives:
- You once said: Loyalty deserves loyalty. Will long-term Tesla shareholders still be prioritized if SpaceX does an IPO?
- Our Take – With a lot of speculation regarding an incoming SpaceX IPO, Tesla investors, especially long-term ones, should be able to benefit from an early opportunity to purchase shares. This has been discussed endlessly over the past year, and we must be getting close to it.
- When is FSD going to be 100% unsupervised?
- Our Take – Musk said today that this is essentially a solved problem, and it could be available in the U.S. by the end of this year.
- What is the current bottleneck to increase Robotaxi deployment & personal use unsupervised FSD? The safety/performance of the most recent models or people to monitor robots, robotaxis, in-car, or remotely? Or something else?
- Our Take – The bottleneck seems to be based on data, which Musk said Tesla needs 10 billion miles of data to achieve unsupervised FSD. Once that happens, regulatory issues will be what hold things up from moving forward.
- Regarding Optimus, could you share the current number of units deployed in Tesla factories and actively performing production tasks? What specific roles or operations are they handling, and how has their integration impacted factory efficiency or output?
- Our Take – Optimus is going to have a larger role in factories moving forward, and later this year, they will have larger responsibilities.
- Can you please tie purchased FSD to our owner accounts vs. locked to the car? This will help us enjoy it in any Tesla we drive/buy and reward us for hanging in so long, some of us since 2017.
- Our Take – This is a good one and should get us some additional information on the FSD transfer plans and Subscription-only model that Tesla will adopt soon.
Tesla will have its Earnings Call on Wednesday, January 28.
Elon Musk shared an incredible detail about Tesla Cybercab’s potential efficiency, as the company has hinted in the past that it could be one of the most affordable vehicles to operate from a per-mile basis.
ARK Invest released a report recently that shed some light on the potential incremental cost per mile of various Robotaxis that will be available on the market in the coming years.
The Cybercab, which is detailed for the year 2030, has an exceptionally low cost of operation, which is something Tesla revealed when it unveiled the vehicle a year and a half ago at the “We, Robot” event in Los Angeles.
Musk said on numerous occasions that Tesla plans to hit the $0.20 cents per mile mark with the Cybercab, describing a “clear path” to achieving that figure and emphasizing it is the “full considered” cost, which would include energy, maintenance, cleaning, depreciation, and insurance.
Probably true
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 22, 2026
ARK’s report showed that the Cybercab would be roughly half the cost of the Waymo 6th Gen Robotaxi in 2030, as that would come in at around $0.40 per mile all in. Cybercab, at scale, would be at $0.20.
Credit: ARK Invest
This would be a dramatic decrease in the cost of operation for Tesla, and the savings would then be passed on to customers who choose to utilize the ride-sharing service for their own transportation needs.
The U.S. average cost of new vehicle ownership is about $0.77 per mile, according to AAA. Meanwhile, Uber and Lyft rideshares often cost between $1 and $4 per mile, while Waymo can cost between $0.60 and $1 or more per mile, according to some estimates.
Tesla’s engineering has been the true driver of these cost efficiencies, and its focus on creating a vehicle that is as cost-effective to operate as possible is truly going to pay off as the vehicle begins to scale. Tesla wants to get the Cybercab to about 5.5-6 miles per kWh, which has been discussed with prototypes.
Additionally, fewer parts due to the umboxed manufacturing process, a lower initial cost, and eliminating the need to pay humans for their labor would also contribute to a cheaper operational cost overall. While aspirational, all of the ingredients for this to be a real goal are there.
It may take some time as Tesla needs to hammer the manufacturing processes, and Musk has said there will be growing pains early. This week, he said regarding the early production efforts:
“…initial production is always very slow and follows an S-curve. The speed of production ramp is inversely proportionate to how many new parts and steps there are. For Cybercab and Optimus, almost everything is new, so the early production rate will be agonizingly slow, but eventually end up being insanely fast.”
BREAKING: Tesla launches public Robotaxi rides in Austin with no Safety Monitor
Tesla Earnings Call: Top 5 questions investors are asking
