The decision of the buyer is: I have $150,000 or $200,000, which I want to spend on a car. And then there is the mentioned peer group of cars there, and apparently (if you look at the raw sale numbers), people with $150,000 or $200,000 at hand to spend on a car decide for a Tesla S more often than any other car in the same price range, making the Tesla S the most sold car in that price range. And apparently, it's quite easy to resell a used Tesla S.
You can make what you want out of it. But that's just the facts.
2) All that's being up 20% is stock markets. It has only indirectly to do with economy. Stock markets are bets on the future of publicly traded companies. Those are purely speculative. They are not productivity, exports, disposable income, or gross domestic product, which normally measure economic health.
1 kg of fossil fuel (coal, diesel, whatever) has between 30 and 45 MJ of energy. Coal has about 30 MJ/kg, gasoil about 45 MJ/kg.
If you want to pull 45 MJ of energy from an electric power outlet at 32 Ampere/110 V, it will take you about 150 seconds. Burning 1 liter of gasoil is much faster given the right burner.
It seems having a Breitbart account should be a reason not to let people into the U.S., if you want to avoid to import terrorism.
But that's quite different than just crying "We've been lied too! It never happened!". If you have serious doubts, that's fine. State the doubts, state which specific claims you find doubtful, state, how to investigate the claims and which result would you convince that the claims are actually true. Everything else is just denial, as Henri Poincaré rightfully said: "To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection."
And then Ptolemy's geocentric model put Sun and Moon in a special group, because differently than the other planets, they never change direction in the sky, which the others do. Thus, the trajectories of Sun and Moon were easy, while the other planets needed cycles and epicycles to describe. This was one of the reasons, Nicolaus Copernicus came up with the heliocentric model, because then it made sense why Sun and Moon were "circular" wanderers, while the other planets were "epicyclic" wanderers, So, Sun and Moon were no longer considered planets, a position already shaky in the Ptolemian model. But it added Earth as a new planet. Copernicus' system didn't come up with good predictions of the planetary positions though, thus it wasn't widely accepted and even considered heretic by the Catholic Church. Johannes Kepler improved on the predictive power of the Copernican system, but Ptolemy's model was so finely tuned by now that it still was preferred for practical reasons. Galileo Galilei's discovery of the Iovian Moons gave credibility to the Keplerian model, but for navigational and other purposes, Ptolemy was still more exact. And it created a new class of celestial bodies: Suddenly, there wasn't one Moon, there were several moons out there. From a classical point of view, all moons were planets too: no fixed positions within the stellar constellations. At the end of the 17th century, Isaac Newtons Theory of Gravity gave a better model, Ole Roemer's discovery of the Speed of Light added some clues, and finally, the heliocentric model was better at predicting planetary (and lunar) positions than Ptolemy. But then a flood of new discoveries of celestial bodies clouded the view again: Uranus, Ceres and finally Neptune were discovered, and then all the other asteroids circling the Sun between Mars and Jupiter. Somehow the size of the Earth moon was used as a cut-off: Everything larger than the Moon circling the Sun was considered a planet, everything else an asteroid (which literally means "star like"). It was as arbitrary as anything else, but the Moon was close by and well studied, so for practical purposes, it made sense.
When Pluto was discovered, it became planetary status, because at first, its size could not be determined from direct observation, only because of the brightness (15 mag), it was at first considered to be Earth sized. So it got the planetary status. Later there were better pictures with larger resolution, and the estimated size shrank down to ~2500 km in diameter, and in the same way, the estimated reflectiveness (albedo) increased, so in the 1980ies, Pluto was considered a "dirty snowball", consisting mainly of water ice mixed with planetary rock. Thus the cut-off point "Moon size" was crossed, and doubts about Pluto's nature as a planet arised. It was speculated that it was a former Neptune moon losing its orbit. And when the next transneptunian objects were discovered, like Eris, with about the same size than Pluto, the whole "what is a planet" question became virulent. Simple enumeration as in "The planets are those nine celestial objects we call Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune and Pluto" didn't work anymore, and a meaningful definition which included Pluto, but not too many other newly discovered objects, wasn't readily available.
"We learn from history that we learn nothing from history." -- George Bernard Shaw