8Mo

@stefan_21 That's right, but if you want to get capital-intensive innovations off the ground these days, you usually need state support! But this should be paid back over time, if possible. China, the USA and the like are big players when it comes to state aid. You can't compete with your own equity.

•

Stefan21@stefan_21

8Mo

@GordonGekko83 I am aware that some companies are dependent on this. Nevertheless, I think it is wrong to use tax revenue to capitalize a startup whose success is uncertain.
Normally, such a start-up develops a relatively inexpensive prototype and if this turns out to be promising, banks are certainly willing to grant loans.

I still find it quite funny that Germany is suddenly playing the moralizer here with the state quota we have and rejecting something like this😂

•

Peter@Meister_Peter

8Mo

I completely disagree that state aid is right and important. After all, the state can pursue other interests than companies and banks that are looking for short-term returns. Here the state must even be able to work against market mechanisms. If it works, there will be no lack of investors, but to get there the investor (state) needs to pave the way. Otherwise it would be the end for all basic research. After all, we all want a future that we determine ourselves and not one that the market dictates.

•

Enrique@Dividenden_Monteur

8Mo

@stefan_21 They need help because the product is complete nonsense. This will never, never, never, never, never (a thousand times "never") be a profitable business. Never. They might be able to sell a few of these things (if they ever fly at all) to sheikhs as toys - it will never, never, never, never, never, never become a real means of transportation. A thousand times never.

They're all idiots.

•

Stefan21@stefan_21

8Mo

@Meister_Peter A self-determined future is created precisely through the decisions and actions of individuals on the market and not through the central planning of a state.

If you look at the great inventions of mankind, you will see that most of them were created by entrepreneurs and inventors who encountered problems and developed solutions to them - not through central planning by the state, which believes it knows better what people need.

It is entrepreneurs who are able to recognize problems and offer solutions that people are happy to pay for because they meet their needs. The market allows only the best ideas to be implemented - that is the real process of self-determination.

A state, on the other hand, is not a good entrepreneur. It spends other people's money, which is often particularly loose. At the same time, it lacks the decentralized information and knowledge needed to make the best decisions. This is where the crucial difference becomes apparent: while the market operates dynamically thanks to countless players and information, the state lacks this knowledge and agility.

In addition, it is often overlooked that state intervention generates opportunity costs. What else could have been created with the resources used? And what happens if a company develops a product thanks to state subsidies, while another entrepreneur with a better idea and without state support does not get a chance? The issue here is the distortion of competition and the question of whether the state is even in a position to make such decisions objectively and for the good of society.

••

Royal_TS@Royal_TS

8Mo

@Meister_Peter 👍 stimmt

••

8Mo

They have their legal domicile in the Netherlands and a share listing in the USA
That's right, there was no promotion.

•

JCM@TheStoic

8Mo

I generally find the whole discussion far-fetched. Since when is it the state's job to support a start-up? If the company is oh-so-innovative and has good prospects, then there should be enough financial backers to get involved or invest.

I think there are a lot of problems in our country, especially in the economic sector, where I could regularly get upset about the government, but here I am really happy that there is no state aid...

•

8Mo

@FEAR Basically, you're right. Let them go on "The Lion's Den"!😜👍

••

8Mo

The battle is won, but not the war. In the end, Söder will fall, and they will still get 50 million from Bavaria. If that happens, I'll vote for the Animal Protection Party at the next election. Or The Party. Definitely not the CSU.

•

Alpalaka@Alpalaka

8Mo

Clear the ring for @Charmin

•

Dividende > Zinsen@GoDividend

8Mo

@Alpalaka Yes it is! (see below)

•

8Mo

You mean a Dutch company with a stock exchange listing in the usa? -> why don't they ask the Netherlands or the USA for state aid? Stand behind the decision

•

PunktPunktKommaStrich@PunktPunktKommaStrich

8Mo

Well, I don't know if the article was from here or from the net, it was calculated that the flight times were not correct and that the consumption per head was much too high, which would be another grave where money could or can be sunk economically and from a profitable point of view.

Even found :

https://getqu.in/9BWJbg/ https://getqu.in/9BWJbg/

•

C_Montgomery_Burns@C_Montgomery_Burns

8Mo

Just fine! The business model is highly controversial. So why risk taxpayers' money here?

•

8Mo

@capital_captain_391 I'm talking about the principle here! Whether it would have been worth it now $LILM is certainly debatable, but what innovations has the FRG already driven against the wall, where we were pioneers and then "lost" everything!

••

8Mo

@GordonGekko83 To discuss the principle, however, I would look for another example than a company that has been controversial for years and which, in the opinion of probably most independent experts in the field (apart from Frank Thelen and Markus Söder), has little chance of success.

•

8Mo

@randomdude And, as a matter of principle: Lillium has very strong investors. Why should the state step in if they no longer believe in the company?

•

8Mo

@randomdude Do you know another current example? Just because of the topicality. As already mentioned, yes, Lillium is controversial.

••

Daniel Lugo@Daniel_Lugo

8Mo

@GordonGekko83 "on principle" 😅 is that why taxpayers' money is being wasted?

••

8Mo

@GordonGekko83 At $TSLA in Brandenburg, the calculation seems to have worked out. The same applies to the chip coloring plants in the Dresden area.

••

8Mo

@randomdude But that's two different things - it's about established companies and other strategic directions of the state.

••

Tenbagger2024@Tenbagger2024

8Mo

@GordonGekko83 That's true, of course.
State VC funding has always been difficult and particularly controversial.

••

Brody@Brody

8Mo

In Germany, over 3% of GDP is invested in research and development every year. We Germans now perhaps have a more critical view of our own innovative strength than the actual perception abroad reflects.
If the state aid had been approved, next year we would no longer be discussing cycle paths in Peru at every opportunity, but air cabs in Saudi Arabia.

•

8Mo

I also don't understand why there is no investor from the private sector.
Or Airbus gets involved.
Why should the taxpayer always have to pay for this?

•