[ivraatiems]

> At the end of the day, is he making the world a better place?

With rare exception, I don't subscribe to the idea of "key men" in general, and especially not in this case. Even if I did, I don't think that Musk is acting in a way that makes him an asset.

I agree that Tesla, for instance, is doing good and important work. However, I think attributing Tesla's success, and net impact on the world to Musk alone is unsupported by evidence. That's because aside from initial investment/PR, and sufficient cult of personality to inspire people to work for him at the start, I don't see what Elon Musk is contributing to the company's work at this point. In fact, I see him as a liability and I think Tesla would be better off without him.

Candidly, I also believe that if Musk was less driven by his own ego, as he appears to be, he'd see that and step aside.

[kitsunesoba]

I would say that his contribution to Tesla is mostly a sense of urgency and direction. Certainly some more “normal” CEO could come in and make the company more profitable, but it’d come with steep cost: the company would also become very stagnant and very boring. That’d be great for Wall Street but it’d bum me out pretty badly.

[_ph_]

Of course, the success of Tesla isn't based on Musk alone. There are thousands of Tesla employees contributing to it. Be it in engineering or production. However, Musk is the glue which ties all of this together. He set the direction, contributed quite a lot of his personal money in the beginning and is at the steering wheel.

[londons_explore]

I think there is another way to make this comparison:

If Musk did not exist, and Tesla as a company did not exist, then all the engineers, expertise, effort, and capital that is currently with Tesla would be placed elsewhere.

Would all those people and resources do more good with all the other companies?