World Blog by humble servant.Report: Beneficiaries of Elon Musk’s Companies and the Obstructionist Actions of Select Politicians

Report: Beneficiaries of Elon Musk’s Companies and the Obstructionist Actions of Select Politicians

Section 1: Overview of Elon Musk’s Companies and Employment

Elon Musk is the driving force behind several high-profile companies, each contributing to his wealth and influence. These include Tesla (electric vehicles), SpaceX (aerospace), Neuralink (neurotechnology), The Boring Company (infrastructure), and X Corp (social media). Below is an estimate of employment based on publicly available data as of early 2025:

Tesla: Approximately 140,000 employees globally (based on reports from 2023 with growth trends continuing into 2025).

SpaceX: Around 13,000 employees (per 2023 estimates, with expansion for Starlink and government contracts).

Neuralink: Roughly 300-400 employees (small-scale, research-focused company).

The Boring Company: Estimated at 200-300 employees (smaller operation with limited public data).

X Corp: Approximately 1,500 employees (post-2022 layoffs from Twitter’s original 7,500).

Total Estimated Employees: ~155,000–160,000 worldwide. This figure is an approximation, as exact numbers fluctuate and are not fully disclosed in real-time. These employees—engineers, factory workers, programmers, and administrators—benefit from salaries, benefits, and, in some cases, stock options, particularly at Tesla, a publicly traded company.

Section 2: Stock Ownership Breakdown

Tesla is the only Musk company currently listed on a public stock exchange (NASDAQ: TSLA), making stock ownership data partially accessible:

Employee Stock Ownership: Tesla offers stock options and restricted stock units (RSUs) to many employees, especially senior staff and engineers. Exact numbers are proprietary, but it’s estimated that thousands of Tesla’s 140,000 employees hold some stock, ranging from small fractions to significant stakes for long-term or high-ranking staff. In 2023, Musk noted that Tesla’s broad-based stock option program has created “thousands of millionaires” among employees, though no precise count exists.

Musk’s Ownership: Musk owns approximately 13% of Tesla (around 411 million shares as of late 2024), valued at over $100 billion depending on stock price fluctuations.

Institutional Investors: Major shareholders include Vanguard, BlackRock, and State Street, collectively holding over 30% of Tesla stock.

Section 3: State Pension Funds Holding Tesla Stock

State pension funds invest in Tesla as part of diversified portfolios. While a comprehensive list of all 50 states’ holdings isn’t publicly aggregated in real-time, here’s a sample based on available data up to 2025:

California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS): Holds millions of Tesla shares, valued at over $1 billion as of mid-2024.

New York State Common Retirement Fund: Owns approximately 700,000 shares, worth hundreds of millions.

Florida Retirement System: Invested in Tesla, with holdings in the tens of millions.

Texas Teachers Retirement System: Holds Tesla stock, though exact figures are less detailed publicly.

These funds benefit Tesla’s stock price stability and, in turn, profit from its growth, supporting retirees in these states. Governors and legislators indirectly oversee these funds, yet some—like Tim Walz (Minnesota)—criticize Musk while their state pensions may hold Tesla stock, creating a potential disconnect.

Section 4: Political Figures as Obstructionists and Self-Seeking Hypocrites

The following politicians—Tim Walz, Jasmine Crockett, Bernie Sanders, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC)—have publicly opposed Musk, his companies, or his influence in the Trump administration’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Their actions demonstrate obstructionism, self-interest, and a rejection of constituents’ apparent support for Musk’s vision, as evidenced by Tesla’s market success and Trump’s 2024 election win.

Tim Walz (Governor of Minnesota):

Actions: Walz, the 2024 Democratic VP nominee, has attacked Musk as an “un-elected, South African nepo-baby” and mocked Tesla’s stock declines in March 2025, suggesting owners remove Tesla logos with “dental floss.” He frames Musk as a threat to democracy via DOGE’s federal cuts.

Critique: Minnesota’s state pension fund likely holds Tesla stock (common among large states), benefiting retirees. Walz’s rhetoric ignores this, prioritizing political points over economic reality. His loss in 2024 reflects voter rejection, yet he persists in “whaling like a lunatic,” blind to constituents’ reliance on Musk-driven innovation.

Jasmine Crockett (U.S. Representative, Texas):

Actions: Crockett, a vocal Trump critic, told Musk to “f*** off” in February 2025 when asked about DOGE’s federal job cuts. She’s targeted Musk’s influence as undemocratic.

Critique: Texas hosts Tesla’s Gigafactory, employing thousands and boosting the economy. Crockett’s hostility undermines her constituents’ jobs and Texas pension funds’ Tesla holdings. Her crude outburst reflects self-seeking grandstanding, not governance, sustained by the celebrity culture she decries.

Bernie Sanders (Senator, Vermont):

Actions: Sanders has criticized Musk’s wealth and DOGE, highlighting Pentagon audit failures while defending Social Security against Musk’s “Ponzi scheme” label in March 2025.

Critique: Vermont’s pension funds likely include Tesla, yet Sanders rails against billionaires, ignoring how their success funds his state’s retirees. His obstructionism—opposing efficiency cuts—clings to a rejected socialist agenda, proving his hatred of capitalist innovation over America’s prosperity.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC, U.S. Representative, New York):

Actions: AOC called Musk a “leech on the public” in March 2025, attacking his Social Security stance and DOGE’s influence, alleging he seeks tax cuts at the expense of the elderly and disabled.

Critique: New York’s pension fund, a major Tesla investor, supports her constituents, yet AOC’s vitriol dismisses this benefit. Her “whaling” against billionaires—while thriving in a media-driven celebrity system—exposes hypocrisy and a refusal to govern for a public that embraces Musk’s vision.

Section 5: Evidence of Hatred for America and Blindness to Constituents

These figures’ actions suggest an unwillingness to adapt to a post-2024 electorate that backed Trump and, by extension, Musk’s role. Their “hatred” manifests as:

Rejection of Voter Will: Trump’s win and Musk’s popularity (despite a 54% unfavorable rating per Pew, February 2025) indicate public tolerance for his influence. Their resistance is noise against a settled mandate.

Economic Sabotage: Attacking Musk risks destabilizing jobs and pension gains, hurting the very people they claim to represent.

Hypocritical Corruption: Their celebrity-fueled platforms—sustained by the same elite systems they decry—mirror the billionaires they oppose, blinding them to their own contradictions.

Section 6: Summary of Disregard for Their Own States

These politicians exhibit a flagrant disregard for their own states, elevating their personal status above the needs of their people—an indictment of their unpatriotic hatred for the country and a total rejection of tales of the past they cling to:

Tim Walz: Minnesota’s economic stability owes much to investments like Tesla stock in its pension funds, yet Walz spits on this lifeline, mocking Musk as if his governorship trumps the retirees’ security. His antiquated tales of class warfare—rejected by voters in 2024—prove he despises America’s forward momentum.

Jasmine Crockett: Texas thrives with Tesla’s Gigafactory, a jewel of jobs and innovation, but Crockett’s venom toward Musk betrays her district’s prosperity for cheap applause. Her status as a loudmouth outweighs her state’s gains, exposing an unpatriotic rejection of America’s industrial resurgence.

Bernie Sanders: Vermont’s modest pensioners rely on Tesla’s success, yet Sanders’ crusade against wealth dismisses their needs for his socialist sermonizing. His stale tales of a bygone era—shattered by the electorate—mark him as a hater of America’s capitalist backbone.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: New York’s financial might, bolstered by Tesla investments, supports her constituents, but AOC’s attacks on Musk prioritize her celebrity over their welfare. Her obsession with outdated populist myths—repudiated by the people—reveals a deep-seated contempt for the nation’s chosen path.

Their disregard is not mere oversight; it’s a deliberate choice to hollow out their states’ futures for self-aggrandizement. They wield their titles as shields, not swords for the public good, proving their hatred for an America that has moved beyond their irrelevant fables.

Section 7: What They Fight For—Rejected Noise of the Ignorant

Their causes—expanded government, anti-billionaire rhetoric, and resistance to efficiency—lack substance:

No High Ground: They offer no viable alternative to Musk’s cuts, just defense of a bloated bureaucracy voters distrust (72% support DOGE, per Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, February 2025).

Ignorant Noise: Their loud opposition, devoid of constructive policy, is drowned out by constituents’ embrace of Musk’s tangible results (e.g., Tesla’s market cap exceeding $1 trillion).

Conclusion

Musk’s companies employ over 150,000 people and enrich countless shareholders, including state pension funds, while figures like Walz, Crockett, Sanders, and AOC obstruct progress for self-seeking gain. Their “whaling” against a hollow billionaire caricature—while ignoring their own reliance on corruption and celebrity—proves they hate America’s chosen path, governing not for the people but against their will. The people have spoken, and these obstructionists remain deaf, their status-driven disdain a final indictment of their unpatriotic irrelevance.