By Chris Isidore | CNN

New York – No single business leader has supported former President Donald Trump's candidacy greater than Elon Musk. But after Trump won back the presidency in Tuesday's election, there are each positives and negatives ahead for the billionaire and his business empire.

According to Federal Election Commission filings, Musk has to date donated nearly $119 million to a political motion committee he set as much as support Trump. He has appeared with Trump at rallies and conducted a fawning interview with him on X, his social media platform.

“He has put a lot into it here. He jumped into the deep end this election,” said Daniel Ives, technology analyst at Wedbush Securities.

By early Wednesday, investors were already betting that Trump's victory would even be a win for Musk's largest public holding, Tesla (TSLA), causing shares of its electric vehicle maker to instantly jump 13% at market open and end regular trading up nearly 15%. This increased the worth of the 411 million Tesla shares that Musk fully owns by greater than $15 billion, a 12,761% return on the $119 million he donated to Trump. It was a two-year high for Tesla shares, which have struggled recently and were up just 1% for the yr through Tuesday's close.

But a Trump victory also poses risks for Tesla.

Much of Musk's enormous net value is as a consequence of the federal government support his corporations like Tesla and SpaceX have received through the years. Even if Vice President Kamala Harris had won, much of that cash would have continued to flow. But even when some government support for electric vehicles is cut or eliminated now, as is prone to occur after Trump's victory, Musk's fortunes will still remain intact. In fact, Tesla may gain advantage if government support for electric vehicles ends.

What a Trump victory means for Tesla

Musk posted quite a few tweets He celebrated Trump's victory on his social media platform X late Tuesday and early Wednesday.

“The people of America gave @realDonaldTrump a crystal clear mandate for change tonight,” he wrote in certainly one of them.

Trump has openly opposed electric vehicles, saying they’re too expensive, have limited range and would destroy jobs and the American auto industry. But what might appear to be the most important blow to Tesla from one other Trump presidency — a cut, if not an end, to federal support for electric vehicles — won’t be so bad for Tesla and Musk.

But other policy areas which might be at the middle of Trump's plans could also result in major problems.

Trump has vowed to finish what he calls “Biden's EV mandate,” although there is no such thing as a such mandate and it’s unclear what he’s referring to.

But under Biden, there was significant government support for constructing and buying electric vehicles, including billions of dollars in loans to encourage automakers to take a position in factories to construct electric vehicles and batteries within the United States, support for charging stations and a federal tax credit $7,500 for a lot of electric vehicle automotive buyers.

Many industry experts consider Trump will end these programs. Trump could direct the Treasury Department to vary the principles that determine when automotive buyers are eligible for the tax credit, which might significantly limit the tax credit's availability. Or, if Trump has a Republican-controlled Congress, he could pass a law to eliminate the credit entirely.

But Musk has said he isn't apprehensive concerning the end of the tax credit because Tesla sees it as a boon to legacy automakers' efforts to maneuver into the electrical vehicle market and produce more competition.

“Take away the subsidies. “It will only help Tesla,” Musk said posted on X in July.

Due to increasing competition, Tesla's global sales fell 2% in the primary nine months of this yr in comparison with last yr. Sales and profits improved within the third quarter, even though it was the primary time in the corporate's history that there was such a decline.

Self-driving vehicle policies could change

CFRA Research analyst Garrett Nelson agreed.

“In our view, Tesla and CEO Elon Musk may be the biggest winners from the election results, and we believe Trump's victory will help accelerate regulatory approval of the company's autonomous driving technology,” he said in a note to clients and raised its suggestion on Tesla shares from “Hold” to “Buy.” He raised his 12-month price goal on the stock by $110 to $375 per share.

So far, the corporate's existing driver assistance features, often known as Autopilot and Full Self-Driving (FSD), are under investigation by federal safety regulators after a series of accidents involving the technology. This research could slow the approval of true self-driving Tesla cars on the roads, despite Musk's widely controversial claims that Teslas with FSD are already safer than human-driven cars.

“Under Trump, these investigations could slowly disappear,” Ives said.

All federal support for electric vehicles is unlikely to vanish in Trump's next administration. Aside from the customer tax credit, much of the tax money spent to support electric vehicle adoption is available in the shape of presidency loans to automakers and their suppliers to construct plants in southern “red” states. It's unlikely that Trump would need to cut that support and the promise of jobs in those states, even in the event that they would ultimately provide competition to Musk and Tesla.

Traditional automakers say they may move forward with plans to construct and sell more electric vehicles in the longer term. They say electric vehicles are the longer term of the industry, although adoption rates have slowed recently.

“It's not a strategy where we're going to obstruct the presidential election or the next one and the next one and see what we can do with the EPA,” Ford CEO Jim Farley told investors in July. “The only way we think it's sustainable is to make money from small electric vehicles. And that’s our bet.”

Automakers are pushing to sell more electric vehicles so corporations can meet increasingly stringent environmental regulations within the United States, Europe and Asia. Even if Trump gets the EPA to vary emissions rules here, automakers will still have an incentive to proceed constructing electric vehicles to satisfy regulations elsewhere or to satisfy stricter environmental regulations in lots of U.S. states, including California, which has its own stricter ones has emissions regulations that many other states follow.

Industry experts don't expect growth in electric vehicle sales to stop even when Trump changes emissions regulations, partly as a consequence of growing consumer demand.

“We could see a much slower adoption of electric vehicles (with a change in regulations),” said Jeff Schuster, global head of automotive at GlobalData, an industry consultant. “But with all the investments, we are unlikely to see a reversal.”

Trump's China policy could harm Tesla

The greater problem for Tesla with Trump's victory is that it could lead on to a different trade war with China, Ives said, given the importance of its Shanghai factory to its global sales and profits.

With Trump's victory, “he's going to be much tougher on China, and then the negatives could outweigh the positives for Tesla,” Ives said. “Over 40% of deliveries come from the Chinese market. Tesla would be caught in the crossfire.”

And it may be an issue for Tesla if Trump taps Musk He is predicted to steer his administration's efforts to scale back so-called government waste, because the two mentioned through the campaign.

Whatever the end result of those efforts, and whether or not Musk has a proper or informal government role in Trump's latest administration, the last item Tesla investors need to see is Musk becoming much more distracted from his time as Tesla boss said Ives.

“It's more time away from Tesla while wanting to pay more attention to Tesla,” Ives said.

Less impact on SpaceX and X

Musk's other major company, SpaceX, likely wouldn’t have had a significantly different relationship with the federal government regardless of who’s elected. Its important competitor is Boeing have serious problems with spacecraft commissioned by NASA to hold astronauts to and from the International Space Station.

And Musk's ownership of X has been widely criticized, especially by Democrats, for spreading misinformation. But it has not been halted or hindered by government motion under Biden, and the brand new Trump administration is unlikely to take motion on it either. And given the financial losses since purchasing the corporate, it now represents a comparatively small portion of Musk's total net value.

The CNN Wire
& © 2024 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery company. All rights reserved.

Lincoln Riley is the fourth-highest paid coach in college football. based on the USA Today database. It's pretty secure to assume that USC is in the highest 10 – and doubtless closer to the highest 5 – in assistant coaching salaries.

In theory, the return on investment for the sort of pay ought to be in the highest 10 results. It is the third yr of Riley's term. His squad. His employees. His program. His vision. This probably seems like a broken record, but Riley simply isn't living as much as the investment USC made in him.

That's been clear for just a few weeks, but it surely ought to be clear to everyone now after the Trojans suffered a disastrous 29-28 loss to Maryland on Saturday night.

USC (3-4, 1-4 Big Ten) is nice enough to play in every game. The Trojans held a fourth-quarter lead in each of their losses. All of those games were winnable.

But USC keeps faltering. This time, with two minutes left, Maryland blocked Michael Lantz's 41-yard field goal attempt. The Trojans didn't block properly up front and as an alternative of taking a 31-22 lead in the ultimate stages of the sport, USC needed to send its defense back onto the sphere. Less than a minute later, Maryland scored the go-ahead touchdown. The offense made it past midfield but couldn't get into field goal range.

Final. pic.twitter.com/FV5InVZSg2

— USC Football (@uscfb) October 19, 2024

Riley was then asked why USC had trouble ending games.

“I don’t know,” he said.

It doesn't matter what Riley says. What's vital is that he finds solutions for every thing his team can't manage on the sphere. So far he hasn't done that.

And there lies the issue. Week after week, the USC defense fails to get a four-down stop when it absolutely must. It's the offense that falters at a critical moment when it has the chance to destroy the sport. It's the special teams that make an enormous mistake at a vital point.

This team just finds ways to lose games.

“We were a team that was good enough to win every game, but we weren't good enough to separate ourselves,” Riley told reporters after the loss, “and if you put yourself in those moments, you will make it.” You must make just a few plays to beat someone. Especially on the go. You must make that field goal or make that fourth-down tackle or make that catch or throw or block or whatever since it’s not going to be handed to you.”

I do know what the recruiting rankings suggest. I do know where USC ranks the 247Sports Team Talent Composite. And I do know the Trojans have more talent than Minnesota and Maryland. But I also know that USC isn't talented enough to face out from its opponents. Not where it matters – within the trenches – and never in the best way Riley describes above. And even when this team is more talented than the Golden Gophers or Terrapins, the proven fact that it may possibly make sloppy mistakes and get away with it isn't as crucial.

Riley's had three years to construct this roster. It's as much as him if the Trojans aren't talented enough at once. The speak about how he can't do it wave a magic wand should probably stop. There isn't much reason to imagine USC shall be significantly more talented in yr 4. The Trojans' 2025 recruiting class is ranked in the highest 10 nationally, but counting on true freshmen is silly.

Remember, next yr's schedule includes road games at Notre Dame and Oregon, in addition to a house game against Michigan.

If USC manages to significantly improve its roster, it can still have to deal with the difficulty of attention to detail. That’s what was missing during Riley’s tenure. Be it Mario Williams, who didn’t catch a vital kickoff against Tulane within the Cotton Bowl two years ago, or John Humphrey and Kamari Ramsey, who didn’t tackle Michigan running back Kalel Mullings – from a 15-yard shot -winning 63-yard run that set the Wolverines' game-winning rating – in September or the missed block on Lantz's field goal attempt on Saturday night.

Coaches often say, “You either coach it or allow it to happen.” Mistakes like which might be a mirrored image of the top coach, identical to all those close misses. USC has blown 14-point leads in each of the last two weeks. Riley lost 12 games as coach of the Trojans. His teams have blown a 14-point lead in five games.

Sure, every one will be explained in a vacuum, but these losses have change into a pattern. One that can’t be explained away.

“We do a lot of the heavy lifting of winning games against good teams,” Riley said, “but the inability to do it — it wears on you.”

At 3-4, USC has fallen below .500 for the primary time in Riley's tenure. He must make some structural changes to the best way he runs this system. Of course, there shall be some who demand he be fired, but unless those demands include something like $80 million, that's not realistic.

So Riley and USC will likely be on this together for some time. The Trojans coach cannot compromise on the execution of this system. He is 11-11 because the 2022 regular season. Whatever he does, it doesn't work. This style of consideration will likely happen once the offseason is over. But why wasn't this done last offseason, after a disastrous 7-5 regular season?

The culture appears to be higher than last season, but that shall be tested in the subsequent few weeks.

The Trojans couldn't have looked more disinterested within the rivalry game against UCLA last season. So Riley has to prove that he can motivate this team.

It's the top of October and USC already has nothing to supply but pride. This is just not where things ought to be in yr three.

CAPITOLA – Stacy Souza works primarily from her home in Capitola's Jewel Box neighborhood, only a minute or two from the Cliff Drive commentary deck, which overlooks the town's iconic — albeit recovering — wharf and the majestic Pacific Ocean, continuously swaying backwards and forwards with various intensity.

To prevent any appearance of cabin fever, Souza takes her eight-year-old German Shepherd, Otto, for no less than one walk a day through the cliff area.

“There are a lot of bikers, joggers and dog owners like me,” Souza told the Sentinel during a recent late-morning outing. “We all have our community. It's like, 'Hi, how are you?' We know different people and we wave.”

But Souza and her fellow panorama lovers may sooner or later have to seek out a brand new route – identical to the numerous cars that clog the streets every single day during rush hour.

Parts of the large coastal cliffs – city authorities estimate their height at 12 to 18 meters – are constantly eroding and ending up within the sea. City planners consider that those responsible must take motion to stop a destructive landslide scenario that will not be a matter of whether it can occur, but when.

“Nobody is going to spend money on it,” Capitola Public Works Director Jessica Kahn said in a report presented to the Capitola City Council last month. “But it's definitely something that's going to happen in the future.”

Kahn said the bluff is currently eroding at a rate of about 6 inches per yr, although large storm events can speed up that pace. Most recently, a series of atmospheric river storms and tidal surges within the winter of 2023 caused significant erosion, particularly at the bottom of the bluff beneath two parking lots at either end of the road. The storms also damaged an old 10-foot-high soil nail retaining wall near the highest of the bluff that was inbuilt 1997.

In addition, if a seismic event were to tear off a big a part of the cliff, this is able to not only pose a danger to pedestrians and motorists, but could also affect larger parts of the population because essential infrastructure facilities similar to sewage and water pipes laid within the slope can be destroyed.

In light of recent events, the town has accomplished a comprehensive current condition report as a part of its Cliff Drive Resiliency Project, which analyzes a 900-foot section of the road and bluff. The city has already received grants to get the project underway, however the City Council must determine which direction it desires to go.

“We are not only repairing the erosion, but we are also looking into implementing a comprehensive coastal protection project for this section of road,” Kahn said.

Options on the table

After the 2023 storms, the town secured $9.25 million in everlasting restoration funds from the Federal Highway Administration and contributed one other $1.25 million as a neighborhood grant, in accordance with Kahn. However, those federal funds should not available ceaselessly and the project have to be ready for a construction funding application by September of next yr. The California Coastal Commission has also contributed $500,000 toward a project.

“The project will likely cost more, but the total cost will not be known until a final plan is in place,” Kahn recently wrote to the Sentinel, adding that the town continues to hunt additional funding opportunities.

The path ahead of us takes three routes: protect, adapt, retreat.

The approach to orderly withdrawal, which was utilized in a recent Employee reportis easy. It means taking no motion while outages proceed to occur on the cliff, potentially resulting in the closure of Cliff Drive and diversion from the locally designated emergency route.

Option 2 gives the town time to make short-term adjustments, similar to repairing the eroded sea caves at the bottom of the cliff, while long-term measures, similar to potentially converting Cliff Drive to a one-way street heading west, are considered.

But it was the third – and most costly – option that received probably the most vocal support in council. Although the small print of the ultimate project have yet to be worked out, the aim is to preserve the road in its current state and supply improved facilities for cycles and pedestrians. This could include constructing a brand new wall with anchors anchored deep into the center of the cliff, rock face protections and creating recent lookout points and improved coastal access.

Capitola Deputy Mayor Yvette Brooks said throughout the meeting that the “protect” option makes probably the most sense to her, assuming funding efforts are successful.

“We know there have been several natural disasters,” Brooks said. “We see the impacts and we know we have to do something.”

Councillor Joe Clarke felt that this selection was far superior to all others.

“We need to protect it as best as we can,” Clarke said. “Option 3 seems to me to be by far the best.”

Kahn added that the town held a town hall meeting on the situation in February within the Jewel Box neighborhood, attended by about 20 people. The overwhelming feedback from that group, she said, was that “if it's affordable and feasible, the city should do something about the erosion on that bluff.”

Robert Stevens, a representative of CSW/ST2, which was hired by the town last October to supply design services, added that his team had a “very productive meeting” in regards to the various options with the Coastal Commission, which must approve the project.

“I think there is a way forward,” he said.

Expert comments

“Because of the nature of the rock and the nature of the fractures, it’s just difficult to protect this area,” Griggs told the Sentinel.

The cliffs, which extend about three miles from Pleasure Point right down to New Brighton State Beach, are composed primarily of Purisma bedrock, which is geologically relatively young at 2 to 4 million years old and rests on a soft layer of mudstone.

The Purisma is understood for its jagged structure – like a broken windshield – that might be undermined by crashing waves or, perhaps more critically, by rainwater from the neighborhood seeping into the cracks. And with climate models pointing to more extreme periods of dry summers and rainy winters, the erosion process could speed up.

Although Griggs will not be entirely convinced, based on his own local knowledge and historical photographs, that motion must be taken to guard the cliff yet, he agrees that the concrete armoured wall, as might be seen at Pleasure Point, is the “simplest” solution.

But in the long term – and he admitted that there are different definitions of this – there is no such thing as a easy answer.

“Sea levels will continue to rise, storms will continue to occur, and we will not be able to hold the fort everywhere,” Griggs said. “There may be places that we believe are worth protecting.”

Kahn said there are opportunities for public involvement within the resilience project, including a yet-to-be-launched online survey and a pop-up booth on the Sunday Art on the Beach event on July 21 in Capitola Village. More intensive outreach will begin once the council officially selects a preferred plan, she added.

Meanwhile, Souza, who was unaware of the town's efforts, will proceed to walk the scenic spot every day and hopes to proceed doing so for years to come back.

“It's a world-class view,” she said. “I don't see why we shouldn't protect it.”

Originally published: July 10, 2024 at 5:38 am

Starting in July 2024, California will grow to be the primary state to impose a fee Excise tax about weapons and ammunition. The recent tax – a 11% tax on every sale – is levied along with federal excise taxes 10% and 11% for firearms, respectively and the California sales tax of 6%.

The National Rifle Association has characterised California Gun Violence Prevention and School Safety Act as an affront to the structure. But the response from the gun lobby and firearms manufacturers could point to something else: the impact the measure geared toward reducing gun violence could have on sales.

As a Professor who studies Given the economics of violence and illicit trafficking on the University of San Diego's Kroc School of Peace Studies, I feel this law could have essential implications.

One technique to take into consideration that is to match state firearms tax policy with alcohol and tobacco tax policy. It's not for nothing that all of them appear within the name of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, also referred to as ATF.

What alcohol, tobacco and firearms have in common

This agency, a part of the Ministry of Justice, is tasked with doing this American communities safer. The ATF focuses on these products because, although legal, they could cause significant harm to society – for instance, in the shape of drunk driving or cancer-causing addiction. They even have a typical history: everyone was associated with criminal organizations that wish to take advantage of illegal markets.

Alcohol and tobacco products are subsequently generally subject to state excise tax. This policy is known as “Pigouvian tax“, named after the twentieth century British economist Arthur Pigou. By making a selected product costlier, such a tax causes people to purchase less of it, thereby reducing the damage to society while generating tax revenue that the federal government can theoretically use to offset the resulting damage.

California e.g. B. prescribes an excise tax of $2.87 on every pack of cigarettes. This tax is higher than the national average but much lower than The New York tax is $5.35. California also imposed one Excise tax on e-cigarettes of 12.5% ​​in 2021.

Of the three ATF product families, firearms are exempt from the California excise tax. Until now.

The cost of gun violence

Anti-gun advocates have long called for the firearms industry to present up the special treatment it enjoys given the harm guns cause. The national rate of firearm homicides in 2021 was 4.5 per 100,000 people. This is eight times higher than in Canada and 77 times higher than in Germany. This signifies that 13,000 people lose their lives within the United States yearly

Besides, almost 25,000 Americans die by firearm suicide per 12 months. This implies a rate of 8.1 per 100,000 per 12 months, exceeds Canada's by greater than 4 times. Over and beyond, more persons are suffering non-fatal injuries from firearms than death from firearms.

Deaths and injuries brought on by firearms aren’t only tragic – also they are expensive. An economist estimated the benefit-cost ratio The U.S. firearms industry share was about 0.65 in 2009. This signifies that for each 65 cents the industry generates for the economy, it costs $1.

And this blanket calculation is likely to be an underestimate. This included the price of deadly gun violence within the United States, but was not included within the estimate non-fatal injuriesor the price of firearm damage incurred outside the United States with firearms sold within the United States.

Mexico pays a high price for the US arms trade

America was called the world's gun shop. No country knows this higher than Mexico. The USA roughly endured it 45,000 gun deaths in 2019, while in the remaining of the world together there have been 200,000. Mexico, which shares an extended, porous border with the United States, contributed 34,000 to this horrible sum.

Mexico's government estimates that 70% to 90% of traceable weapons utilized in crimes seized within the country come from the United States. Other examples abound. For example, weapons sold within the USA Fuel gang violence in a lawless Haiti.

No investor would support such an industry in the event that they were forced to bear the total cost to society. Still, gun sales within the United States have increased increased tenfold within the last 20 years to about 20 million weapons per 12 months, although they are actually deadlier and costlier.

What alcohol, tobacco and firearms would not have in common

There is just not a single state within the United States that taxes firearms as heavily as alcohol and tobacco. I feel guns should probably be taxed greater than each. Because unlike alcohol and tobacco – consumer products that disappear once they're used – firearms are here to remain. They accumulate and might proceed to incur costs long after the initial sale.

Starting in July, California will tax firearms at roughly the identical rate as alcohol content. However, the state would need to impose a further excise tax of 26% to match the actual tax on tobacco.

It's unclear how the brand new tax will affect gun violence. In theory, the tax needs to be highly effective. In 2023 some Colleagues and I modeled He studied the US firearms market and located that for each 1% increase in price, demand falls by 2.6%. This signifies that the market is more likely to be very sensitive to tax increases.

Based on these estimates, one other Colleague recently appreciated that California's excise tax would cut back gun sales by 30% to 44%. If applied statewide, the tax could generate a further $1.5 billion to $1.9 billion in state revenue.

One potential problem will come from surrounding states: It's already easy transport illegally Guns purchased in Nevada, where laws are more lax, to the Golden State.

However, there may be evidence that California's strict guidelines aren’t being neutralized by its neighbors.

When the federal ban on assault weapons expired in 2004, making it much easier to buy AR and AK rifles across much of the United States, gun homicides across the border in Mexico skyrocketed. Two Studies The exception was the Mexican state of Baja California, right on the border with California, which had maintained its statewide ban on assault weapons.

Gun seizures in Mexico show all 4 U.S. states bordering Mexico are ranked The five most vital government sources of weapons sold within the United States in Mexico. But California contributes 75% lower than its population and proximity suggest.

So California laws already seem like making a difference in reducing gun violence. I consider the excise tax could do much more. Other states battling the increasing tide of weapons will probably be watching closely.