Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Will Trump and Musk ultimately clash?

Will Trump and Musk ultimately clash?

President-elect Donald Trump and Elon Musk talk ring side during the UFC 309 event at Madison Square Garden on November 16, 2024.

Getty Images / Chris Unger

In June of 2017, Elon Musk, the Chief Executive Officer of Tesla, abruptly left the White House advisory council on manufacturing after U.S. President Donald Trump said he would withdraw the United States from the Paris climate accord.

Despite the pleas from many U.S. allies and corporate leaders, Trump went ahead and withdrew at the start of his first term as President.


President Biden wasted no time rejoining the Paris Agreement on his very first day in office, January 20, 2021, and officially became a party to the agreement one month later.

And now four years later, once again Trump has decided to withdraw the U.S. from the climate treaty as he signed a withdrawal from the Paris climate treaty on his first day in office, including a letter to the United Nations explaining the reasons for the withdrawal.

It is interesting to note that there are no public comments from one of his strongest allies, Elon Musk, on the withdrawal from the accords.

This is somewhat surprising given that Musk strongly believes in global warming. For many years he has consistently voiced his concerns about climate change and its impact on humanity, and has stated that “climate change is the biggest threat that humanity faces this century, second only to artificial intelligence.” He has also repeatedly emphasized the importance of transitioning to sustainable energy to combat this crisis.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

As the leader of Tesla, Musk's long commitment to sustainability is well known given Tesla’s focus on electric vehicles and clean energy, plus his funding initiatives like the XPRIZE Carbon Removal program.

Furthermore, Musk believes that the transition to sustainable energy needs to happen as quickly as possible, emphasizing that the world needs to move away from fossil fuels and transition to renewable energy sources urgently to mitigate the effects of climate change.

In contrast, Donald Trump has made several remarks about global warming referring to climate change as a "hoax" and has questioned the scientific consensus on the issue. On many occasions, Trump has criticized climate policies, emphasizing economic growth and energy independence over concerns of climate change.

This is in stark contrast to Musk, who has also highlighted the economic opportunities that come with transitioning to renewable energy and his belief in prioritizing sustainability. His stance remains clear: addressing climate change is not just an environmental necessity but also an economic opportunity.

Whether their differing viewpoints on climate change will surface into public disagreement remains to be seen. Musk certainly isn’t adverse to expressing his opinion, as he did two days after Trump was inaugurated when he voiced doubts about President Trump’s newly announced infrastructure plan for AI, claiming technology companies behind the effort do not yet have the $500 billion needed to finance the project. On his platform X, he wrote “They don’t actually have the money.”

Will the two ultimately clash?

That remains to be seen, but Trump has a history of turning on former supporters when things don’t go his way, so it will be interesting to see how the power dynamics work out in this relationship.

Both men are extremely calculating, and perhaps their mutual interests and the benefits of working together will overcome their differences on certain key policies. Or perhaps ego, trust, or fear of losing control, or just differences in vision and strategies, will destroy the relationship.

Only time will tell.

David Nevins is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.

Read More

Dictionary definition of tariff
Would replacing the income tax with higher tariffs help ‘struggling Americans’?
Devonyu/Getty Images

Could Trump’s tariffs have unintended consequences that hurt America?

The first few weeks of the Trump administration have been head-spinning. President Trump and his team were well-prepared to launch their policy agenda, signing over 50 executive orders, the most in a president's first month in more than 40 years. A major focus has been economic policy, first with immigration raids, which were quickly followed by announcements of tariffs on imports from America’s biggest trade partners.

The tariff announcements have followed a meandering and confusing course. President Trump announced the first tariffs on February 1, but within 24 hours, he suspended the tariffs on Mexico and Canada in favor of “negotiations.” Mexico and Canada agreed to enforce their borders better to stop migrants and fentanyl imports, which the Trump administration called a victory. Despite the triumphalist rhetoric, the enforcement measures were substantially the same as what both countries were already planning to do.

Keep ReadingShow less
From Silicon Valley to Capitol Hill: The Ascendancy of Indian Americans

The flag of India.

Canva Images

From Silicon Valley to Capitol Hill: The Ascendancy of Indian Americans

In the intricate landscape of global geopolitics, the ascendancy of Indian Americans stands as a quiet yet transformative force—a phenomenon that demands serious consideration. While traditional paradigms of power focus on military might or economic clout, the strategic leverage wielded by this diaspora is rewriting the rules of global influence. India’s economic trajectory reflects its ambitions on the global stage. Contributing 4% to global GDP today, the nation is poised to become the world’s third $10 trillion economy within two decades. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) predicts India will account for 18% of total global growth by decade’s end, a rise that challenges established economic hierarchies.

Trade data between India and the United States reflects the growing interdependence: In 2020, U.S. imports to India stood at $51.3 billion. This figure grew to $80.1 billion in 2024, alongside a trade deficit swelling from $24.2 billion to $41.5 billion. This trade expansion is mirrored by Indian-American professionals dominating key sectors of the U.S. economy. With a median household income of $119,000, Indian Americans outperform national averages and hold influential roles across corporate and governmental institutions. CEOs of global giants like Microsoft, Google, and Citibank exemplify this trend, along with leadership roles in companies like Apple, Intel, and Dell.

Keep ReadingShow less
Tariffs: Not a tax, and not free money

United States trade cargo container hanging against clouds background

Getty Images//Iskandar Zulkarnean

Tariffs: Not a tax, and not free money

During the recent election season, there was much talk of Trump’s plan to lay tariffs on the importation of foreign goods. Pundits, politicians, and journalists to the left of center consistently referred to them as a tax on the American people. Many of those to the right of center, especially those of the MAGA contingent, seemed to imply they are a pain-free way for the federal government to raise money.

Some correctly said that the country essentially ran on tariffs in its early history. Alexander Hamilton, the first Treasury Secretary and arguably the godfather of our initial financial system, successfully proposed and implemented a tariff system with two goals in mind. Fund the young American government and protect young American businesses against competition from established foreign companies. The second bill signed by President George Washington was a broad tariff bill.

Keep ReadingShow less
H-1B Visas, Cultural Failures, Weapons of Economic War

Illustrative picture showing application for USA H1B visa

Getty Images//Stock Photo

H-1B Visas, Cultural Failures, Weapons of Economic War

Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy both came out recently in favor of expanding the H-1B visa program. This program allows large corporations to claim they cannot find adequate skilled talent (engineers for example) and sponsor a foreign worker to enter the United States to fill the required role.

The program itself is rife with abuse and inevitably and negatively affects American citizens by adding to the supply of talent and inevitably decreasing the price of such talent (wages).

Keep ReadingShow less