TL;DR
$400 million for “armored Teslas?” Sounds like another taxpayer-funded boondoggle dressed up as national security. Remember Enron? History doesn’t repeat, but it often rhymes.
Story
Another day, another potential fleecing of taxpayers. This time, it’s dressed up in shiny “Cybertruck” armor. The US State Department earmarking $400 million for “armored Teslas” reeks of the same hubris that fueled past financial disasters.
‣ Earmarking: Setting aside funds for a specific purpose. Often a playground for political maneuvering.
The alleged justification? Security. But let’s be real, this sounds more like a vanity project than a strategic necessity. Remember the “too big to fail” banks of 2008? Or Enron’s creative accounting? This echoes the same dangerous cocktail of overconfidence and opaque spending. It wouldn’t be a big surprise if there is a link between someone involved in deciding to spend $400m and someone at Tesla who benefits.
What’s the real cost? Beyond the dollar amount, it’s the erosion of public trust. When governments throw money at unproven tech—especially from companies with questionable track records—it sets a dangerous precedent. It’s like giving a kid a credit card with no limit – what could possibly go wrong?
‣ Unproven Tech: Technology that has not been fully tested, like the Tesla. Often used to justify exorbitant costs.
The potential victims? Taxpayers, of course. Their hard-earned money, funneled into a scheme that could easily become a multimillion dollar boondoggle. Just imagine what essential services could have been funded with that $400 million.
‣ Boondoggle: A wasteful project often disguised as something beneficial. Think of it as a fancy way to say “scam.”
Advice
Question everything, especially when it involves large sums of your money and “innovative” government spending. History is full of expensive mistakes dressed up as progress.