review.capitalismmagazine.comCapitalism Review

Arts Business Culture Education Philosophy Politics Sci-Tech Justice for Elon Musk: Tesla Asks Shareholders to Reapprove Elon’s $47B Stock Bonus Apr 19, 2024 | Business Earlier this year, a Delaware Court ruling in Tornetta v. Musk (which can be found as Annex I to this Proxy Statement ) struck down one of your votes and rescinded the pay package that an overwhelming majority of you voted to grant to our CEO, Elon Musk, in 2018. The Tornetta Court decided, years later, that the CEO pay package was not entirely fair” to the very same stockholders who voted to approve it — even though approximately 73% of all votes cast by our disinterested stockholders voted to approve it in 2018. Because the Delaware Court second-guessed your decision, Elon has not been paid for any of his work for Tesla for the past six years that has helped to generate significant growth and stockholder value. That strikes us — and the many stockholders from whom we already have heard — as fundamentally unfair, and inconsistent with the will of the stockholders who voted for it. The 2018 CEO pay package required Elon to deliver transformative and unprecedented growth to earn any compensation. It was a big risk, and many thought that the plan’s targets for benefits to stockholders were simply unachievable. But our company and our leaders have always had big dreams and it is fundamental to the entrepreneurial spirit of Tesla to take big risks for the chance at big rewards. This has led to the incredible innovation and progress — and economic gains — that we have achieved at Tesla. In 2018, we asked for unbelievable growth and accomplishments. Elon delivered: Tesla’s stockholders have benefited from unprecedented growth under Elon’s leadership and Tesla has met every single one of the 2018 CEO pay package’s targets. And — most importantly for the future of Tesla — the 2018 CEO pay package built in further incentives to benefit Tesla stockholders by requiring that Elon hold onto any shares he receives when he exercises his options for five years — which means he will continue to be driven to innovate and drive growth at Tesla because the value of his shares will depend on it! The Board stands behind this pay package. We believed in it in 2018, as we asked Elon to pursue remarkable goals to grow the company. You, as stockholders, also believed in it in 2018 when you overwhelmingly approved it. Time and results have only shown the wisdom of our judgment. We do not agree with what the Delaware Court decided, and we do not think that what the Delaware Court said is how corporate law should or does work. So we are coming to you now so you can help fix this issue — which is a matter of fundamental fairness and respect to our CEO. You have the chance to reinstate your vote and make it count. We are asking you to make your voice heard — once again — by voting to approve ratification of Elon’s 2018 compensation plan. – Notice of 2024 Annual Meeting of Stockholders Stossel: How the Law Protects Squatters Mar 29, 2024 | Politics If you find someone squatting in your house, it turns out that there’s often very little you can do to get them out. That’s why Flash Shelton started SquatterHunters.com , to help homeowners remove unwanted intruders. Antitrust: Defend Apple Against the DOJ Mar 29, 2024 | Poetry States Rights” Are Actually Delegated Powers Mar 28, 2024 | Politics There is no such thing as states rights”, the proper term to use is state powers. States have no rights but only powers delegated to them. Amendment X: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” You cannot delegate individual rights as they are unalienable , as stated in the Declaration of Independence. What governments have are powers. Observes Ayn Rand: [George Wallace] is not a defender of individual rights, but merely of states’ rights—which is far, far from being the same thing. When he denounces ‘ Big Government,’ it is not the unlimited, arbitrary power of the state that he is denouncing, but merely its centralization—and he seeks to place the same unlimited, arbitrary power in the hands of many little governments. The break-up of a big gang into a number of warring small gangs is not a return to a constitutional system nor to individual rights nor to law and order.” [The Presidential Candidates 1968,” The Objectivist, June 1968, 5] I do agree, in principle, to limit the federal government to its explicitly stated powers enumerated in the U.S. constitution, as the federal government has far overreached its powers. Decentralization (or centralization) in government is only good to the extent that it enables the protection of individual rights. What the right mix is of central vs decentralization in any given context is a practical matter. *** What of the American civil war? There’s no such thing as the right to fight a war for slavery, which is the custom” that the South was fighting for in the American Civil War. Law is not an end in itself. Objectively law does not exist in a vacuum, but has a purpose. Under Americanism, that purpose is stated in the Declaration of Independence: the protection of individual rights. So any state in the Union cannot legally fight a war that undermines the basis of law itself. Any republic which legally protects slavery is illegitimate to that extent. The civil war was the way this defect was remedied. Prior to the 13th amendment the North was working to legally limit slavery and its expansion so that the non-slave states free states” would eventually outnumber the slave states of the South. The South saw the writing on the wall. If the North was not gradually working against slavery, the South would have stayed in the Union. Florida Law Banning Social Media For Minors Violates Parental Rights Mar 28, 2024 | Politics Florida has passed a law , signed by Governor DeSantis, that bans anyone under 14 owning a social media account as of from January 2025. The bill states children that are 14 -15 years of age must have parental consent to create an account on sites like X, Instagram, and Facebook” A social media platform shall prohibit a minor who is 14 or 15 years of age from entering into a contract with a social media platform to become an account holder, unless the minor’s parent or guardian provides consent for the minor to become an account holder…” Apparently it will use anonymous age verification.” This bill should be overturned as it is a naked violation of parental rights. It is up to parents to determine what their child have or do not have access to. The state does have a role in going after child trafficking and exploitation which some claim is an issue on Instagram, but this bill is not the way to do it. Musk on Immigration Mar 27, 2024 | Politics Here is what I found: 1. Musk did not say illegal immigrants vote. I took what he said to mean that they are likely to vote if naturalized. (He may be wrong or right on this). 2. As an immigrant himself, Musk is for greatly expanding legal immigration. He is against border anarchy. Yeah, US immigration is completely backwards: trivial to enter illegally and nightmarishly difficult to enter legally! I strongly support increasing and expediting legal immigration. https://t.co/ZL2XDJCWIA — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 23, 2024 3. Some make the argument that immigrants who enter illegally because of the Biden administration are more apt to vote for Democrats (based on interviews with them). I agree, that whether they do vote or not is an empirical matter. 4. Thanks to Biden’s executive order, illegals count toward the census which determines house seat counts in Federal elections: Accordingly, the executive branch has always determined the population of each State, for purposes of congressional representation, without regard to whether its residents are in lawful immigration status.” "Accordingly, the executive...