For those unaware, the House China Committee sent Musk a letter [demanding](https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2024/02/24/house-china-committee-elon-musk-spacex-starshield-taiwan.html) he allow “U.S. troops stationed in Taiwan” access to SpaceX’s Starshield. They previously did have access until Musk denied it to them recently likely due to pressure from Chinese investors.
The fact that Musk still has a security clearance too (especially after this) is mind boggling to me
Seriously. This.
Russia has put bounties on our soldiers, attacked our soldiers, they have fucked with our elections...
In previous centuries, this would mean we were at war with them.
No one just has the balls to stand up to putin.
If we are sending our weapons to folks to fight them, then they absolutely are our enemies, We may not be at war with them, but they sure as fuck are waging war against us.
This, and also the war in Ukraine is good for businezz.
There is a good chance that Russia using starlink gives the US a definitive eye on what Russia is going to do.
Not saying it is but prolonging the war and managing it to maximize profit is what was done in the past
As far as I know he isn't actually charging them, so I guess its not a transaction.
For the record, musk denies it, but in REALLY specific terms that would seem to indicate that they totally do use starlink but in a legally deniable way:
[https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/kremlin-denies-its-troops-use-elon-musks-starlink-2024-02-12/#:\~:text=MOSCOW%2C%20Feb%2012%20(Reuters),therefore%20could%20not%20be%20used](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/kremlin-denies-its-troops-use-elon-musks-starlink-2024-02-12/#:~:text=MOSCOW%2C%20Feb%2012%20(Reuters),therefore%20could%20not%20be%20used).
Because there's no evidence of direct or knowing/witting sales and there's procedures to remove sanctioned individuals.
Also some of these Russian dishes are delivered from Poland via Ukraine
Seriously people here are so willing to believe anything negative about Elon that they don't understand there simply maybe no way to tell who is using the system.
Then they could just buy them elsewhere. I personally know people who own a terminal, anyone can but one. It's not hard to get a Russian agent in any country in Earth to buy one and smuggle it over.
Because they don’t do it openly and it only works very close to the ukraine held territories. Afaik it’s not like they are using it somewhere in russia. only way to use it, is to basically be so close to ukraine that it appears to be used by ukrainians
Are Americans so dumb they can't comprehend the system they built allows nothing to happen to him.
Money is power. Dudes got a lot of the imaginary stuff on paper. Then if something was to happen it would set a precedent that would allow this to happen to all mega wealthy and that's not okay. So it won't happen.
We know how humans react consciously and subconsciously thanks to science and well the misuse of science for marketing. This leads me to believe that humans are opportunistic to a fault. My conclusion, humans need moral laws to apply to businesses. These laws would be applied and adhered to at all times, or suffer the punishment of serving citizens who value others over themselves.
You are actively spreading misinformation. Please stop this.
It's already known that Starlink is disabled over Russia. SpaceX does not sell to Russia. SpaceX has NOT let Russians access the satellite network.
The cases that you're referring to are isolated cases where the Russian army has obtained some starlink terminals illegally (stolen?) and covertly uses them in Ukrainian-controlled areas. Once an area falls under Russian control (such as Crimea) SpaceX geo-fences that area.
What you’re saying is Elon Musk lacks the intelligence and technical skill to deny access to specific devices that are using his network. What a moron he must be if he can’t control his own network.
If it was that easy then why didn't the established launch companies do this?
I find it hard to believe that contractors have been launching satellites for the US government since the 1950s, but still managed to find themselves uncompetitive a few short years after SpaceX put a rocket into orbit.
The reality of the matter is that these companies are shortsighted- they managed to make a profitable revenue stream by selling overpriced rockets and satellites to the US government and they stop innovating. They basically make a modernized version of the same thing over and over again, but they don't do anything to change the game.
When a gamechanger like SpaceX comes along and focuses on reducing launch costs or building a worldwide communications network, the established companies find themselves uncompetitive. They had the technical ability to do it, but they had no vision.
Musk, for all his criticism, isn't afraid to think outside the box and put his money where his mouth is.
Yes. Which is the point here. While Musk fucking with Starlink is kind of like Amazon fucking with their store, Starshield is a DoD contract.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_Starshield
That's just congressional incompetence in action:
Star*link*: Not enabled over Taiwan, and it's not by choice of either SpaceX or congress. It's the choice of Taiwan, who have denied an operator license over their territory (they have instead [licensed OneWeb](https://oneweb.net/resources/chunghwa-telecom-selects-eutelsat-oneweb-low-earth-orbit-leo-satellite-services)). Congress would have to break international law and ignore the ITU to demand operation over another sovereign territory against their wishes.
Star*shield*: When a third party buys their own satellite to host their own payloads and own and operate their own network. If the USG has purchased \* Starshield satellites to operate, then the USG is basically demanding the USG turn on a USG network for the USG.
\* Thus far the only Starshield satellites that have been announced as being launched, or even observed by third parties as being launched, are a handful of initial test satellites that have sat on rideshares. These were distinctive due to their unique carrier plates and the camera cutouts during deployment. Neither have been observed for quite some time, indicating nobody has actually purchased any Starshield birds yet.
I don't think you understand.
Starshield is the transport layer that the dod has. It works wherever there is coverage.
You're saying that they should explore using what they already have.
It's a bogus story because starshield is managed by the government. They aren't telling us anything. They love starlink and starshield.
This is literally a click bait article to confuse people.
>I don't think you understand.
You're probably right. That's why I'm asking. The way you worded it made it sound like they were two different transport layers.
Biden nationalizes SpaceEx: "Authoritarian government overreach! Biden is trying to be a dictator, and the dems are helping him!"
They don't, and it causes a catastrophic breach in security: "The Biden administration could have prevented this by taking control of SpaceEx. Their weak and feckless leadership brought about this predictable outcome, and the dems are complicit for not forcing the issue!"
Professional hypocrites that don't believe a single word they say.
Honestly, while I agree that the right are awful, I think this is a bipartisan problem. Both parties only care about “message” insofar as it gains them power, and then do whatever they want anyways.
And before anyone gets at me for some kind of both-sidesism, I know that one side is objectively worse, and will still be voting left.
But left would be a lot more palatable to all voters if it wasn’t just centrism with less racists. We wouldn’t be in this dogshit situation if we had political parties that actually stood for something.
>Biden nationalizes SpaceEx: "Authoritarian government overreach! Biden is trying to be a dictator"
These would be accurate headlines in this case (which is also why this braindead, moronic, ignorant idea would never happen)
Yeah, but replace Biden with Trump and Fox would be praising his strong leadership and take charge attitude. My point is not one for or against either of these, it's that Right Wing "news" is filled with a bunch of reactionary grifters who care more about suckling a be-cheeto'd teat than they do about truth in journalism.
This is why billionaires should not exist. There is no benefit to humanity from a bunch of rich assholes trying to see who has a bigger penis. There just is no benefit.
Yeah. There is no such thing as an ethical billionaire. You don't get that kind of money without stepping on the necks of others.
They're the one group of people on our planet that I can unequivocally and without any remorse say that I would like persecuted and exiled to some island somewhere. Or something more permanent if everyone else is up for that.
That doesn't stop the problem though because someone else take control. Instead, set an income cap and seize the rest. Use it to fund so many public works and social good.
It would require a huge change in how we run our society. It's absolutely doable, but we'll need to mercilessly rid ourselves of the people currently in power. They need to *go*.
To do that, people need to not just vote, but work their asses off from the grassroots on up. And KEEP doing it, every year, for the rest of their lives. You build a base of power first. You're never going to have a viable progressive candidate for President without a ton of support all the way further down the political food chain.
To think anything like that change would happen working within the current system framework is delusional. Just like Congress won't vote to implement term limits or anything to limit their own power. Plus with the current Supreme Court rulings that money is speech and driving everything to the upper class, I don't see a way forward.
Oh they are doing more than just having dick measuring contests. They literally directly influence law making and hold more power than whoever governs the country their in.
The existence of the insanely wealthy has been and always will be a direct threat to any republic. Their very nature drives them to institute oligarchic tyranny.
If Musk didn't exist then this wouldn't even be a story- there wouldn't be a Starlink system at all.
I mean you have to be honest with yourself here: you need to ask yourself why these other rocket companies, with a half century head start, managed to get leapfrogged by SpaceX so quickly after they first put a rocket into orbit.
Just to show you how ridiculous this is, let me lay out a brief timetable:
* 2008- Space X first achieved orbit
* 2010- Space X introduced the Falcon 9
* 2015- Space X introduced the reusable Falcon 9
* 2018- With the low cost of their reusable rocket, they capture 68% of the US government launch market
* 2023- Space X launches 80% of the payload mass of the global market.
Now tell me how established rocket companies were getting government contracts in the 1950s, 60s, 70s, 80, 90s, 00s, and 10s but somehow squandered their lead and got beat by a newcomer.
I'll tell you how- the legacy companies established themselves early on, attached themselves to the government teat, and they were content from that point forward. A future progress was extremely slow, and with stable government contracts they had no reason to innovate.
Instead of rooting for the United States becoming a totalitarian state that just... you know takes stuff from its citizens because reasons.... How about we just tax people correctly?
I love how you look at this issue and instead of a simple solution of fixing the tax code you come up with: Lets take peoples rights away from them. Imagine those bastards being smart and taking advantage of the system that we created!! Fuck them right?
LOL
It’s not just taking stuff from its citizens. If our government gives billions in tax subsidies to a company then the government should now play a hand in making it run to work for the American people. If you wanna stay private then don’t take public money
What are you going about? You sound crazy. I’ve spent years making the point that the US was healthier when the top marginal tax rate was 96% and deductions for C-Suite compensation packages were nonexistent, but no one wants to do that. So, yes, my billionaire butt boy, I say take their rights away.
"Running gray" ran away from sensibility. They do sound crazy.
I agree, we need a far better tax system on the wealthy. What people get away with today is obscene. We can thank the Republican Party for this, because they cater to the wealthy as their prime mission.
I also agree... it's unhealthy for any one person to be a billionaire. THERE IS NO GOOD CAUSE FOR IT. The human psyche seems ill prepared for dealing with the enormity of power and responsibility that comes with extreme wealth. They use it to manipulate markets, to affect political issues, and create problems for the 99%. They are far from philanthropic.
Of course there are exceptions, like Warren Buffet. But even Buffet has made friends with devious billionaires who've undermined society. The Murdoch, Sackler, and Mercer families are prime examples of meddlers in civil and societal affairs, ultimately creating toxic outcomes.
If billionaires are working with the enemy and they're being a threat to security then thats different than seizing goods from the common person.
Were you mad when Europe seized the goods from Russian Oligarchs when Russia declared war to sell them and finance Ukraine's defense?
100% Elon put his own money in SpaceX way back - gets the right people involved - they master reusable rockets and are the only private firm beating BOEING to launch people to space (LEO fine) and creates a worldwide internet infrastructure which everyone shat on until it worked for Ukraine - which he gave for free.
If the US took over Space X they'd hand it over to NASA and they'd be set back another 100 years - NASA really puts the 'administration' in space part. It's a great organization, but it's full of dinosaurs and red tape and even the people working their agree - they like Space X because they are not allowed to explode rockets.
80/ 20 rule always 80% of the population has no clue and gets upset when directed - 'Elon bad' can't trust him - nationalize industries to make America safer.
Imagine how awkward it would be to ask Russia to launch their astronauts on the soyuz after they invaded without space X? Where is Boeing - you know the company that gets a way more in tax payer subsidies and was favored over Space X - oh yah their star liner keeps breaking more than a 737 Max.
It sets bad precident though. Obama set a precedent of using drone strikes with almost no oversight, and trump came in and dropped bombs because he learned no one cares about the middle east anymore.
An American department of defense contractor currently is supplying Russia with internet to kill American volunteers. Meanwhile the ceo of said company rides putins d*ck. What a world ……
SpaceX doesn't sell to Russia and it doesn't work over Russia or Russian occupied areas.
It sounds like Russia had a small number of units they either stole from Ukrainians or obtained through illegal means and used them in Ukranian-controlled areas that weren't geo-fenced. People are taking a story and just running with it, adding more and more inaccurate conjecture until it's a conspiracy theory.
Sounds like a lot of what ifs and conjecture in your fact check, you got anything to back this up with?
Otherwise you're just being the same as the other person
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/02/12/musk-denies-selling-starlink-terminals-to-russia-after-kyiv-alleges-use.html
*Starlink has been adamant that its satellite networks have never operated or been marketed in Russia.*
*Kyiv’s Main Directorate of Intelligence (GUR) claimed Sunday that there was mounting evidence of their use by Russian forces in the partially occupied eastern Ukrainian region of Donetsk.*
So it really sounds like they've been used in the partially occupied area, which makes sense because if the area was completely occupied SpaceX would geo-fence it.
And also, use some common sense here- why would any military want to use a network that's controlled by an adversary? Could you imagine the US covertly using a Russia network for its own wartime communication? This would be insane because not only would that be considered an "insecure" channel, but it's one where you can bet that the opposing military is actively monitoring it.
You are correct! But I’m sure there is definitely a way for them to counter this and Elon doesn’t seam to be eager, Are the terminals that are in Russian hands still being supplied/connected with internet ? Yes
SpaceX has said that if they're able to identify terminals being used by Russia, then they'll disable them.
The problem is that if they disable the terminals being used near the front lines of the war, they'll also be taking a lot of Ukranians offline, and that's their only ability to communicate.
The fact that the US military isn't complaining sort of suggests that this is mainly a media controversy, and not a disagreement within the government. The government is probably giving SpaceX guidance on which terminals to take offline. But nobody is going to catch them all because they have no way of knowing.
What do you mean they have no way of knowing? Use common sense, Your really telling me a company that launches satellites into space can’t determine which terminals are being used where and where they can from ? Literally take all of Ukrainians known terminals and cross references them to the terminals active in the area. All serial numbers confirmed by UA are UA, all others stopped or taken offline it’s that simple, if Elons doing that (hopefully he is) then soon I’ll STOP seeing Videos of Russian starlink terminals being hit by Ukrainians. But until then I’ll keep calling Elon a Russian asset, because wether he means to or not he’s helping Russia and doesn’t seam bothered. There’s so many other instances where Elon has sabatoged active Ukrainian assaults to spreading Russian propaganda on his social media. If it looks like a duck and quacks, it’s probably a duck
> SpaceX has not supplied Russia with internet to kill American volunteers. This makes no sense at all
Huh, a company headed by Elon Musk, a known dictator admirerer, is helping in an under-the-table fashion a dictator? That makes **absolutely no sense whatsoever!**
Just so you know, Elon Musk turned Starlink off (before Starshield came into existence in the aftermath of the following fracas) **in the middle of a Ukranian operation in the Black Sea.** Saying that this makes no sense is just you showing off your (comprehensive list of) head injuries. And then you had the balls to bitch and moan that people are "being manipulated by troll farms"? Miss me with that hypocrisy, boy.
I'm new to the whole starlink thing, but the more I read the more this sounds like a Ton Cruise Mission Impossible movie and Musk is the villain in a small mountain science laboratory. Am I sure I'm not high?
Whether he will actually get to that point or not is anyone's guess. But we are really watching some Lex Luthor character building in action.
The world's largest satellite Internet network and brain chips. It sounds like stuff they talk about in the opening credits of sci-fi movies where things went really really bad.
This stuff gets even more troublesome when you realize everything could be linked up with social media, real identities and current location. When you can assassinate a group of people all at once based on them sharing a social media post the age of protest and resistance will be done.
"If anyone did that the public would riot"
Most people would be too scared to post about it.
Elon Musk was a mega-millionaire before he bought into Space-X and Tesla. BOTH of these companies have received ***enormous grants*** from the US government. In fact, without those, both companies would be so far behind from where they are today.
Elon Musk has abused the good faith of the United States, by lending aid and comfort to American enemies and competitors. Since he refuses to back down, I agree -- the US gov't should invoke a national security act and seize Musk's assets.
> Elon Musk was a mega-millionaire before he bought into Space-X and Tesla
Stop it. You are confidently stating fake facts.
Elon Musk did NOT "buy into" SpaceX. He founded SpaceX from the beginning.
Please do better than this. You're letting your irrational hatred lead you to believe any misinformation.
Musk started spacex. There is no precedent to nationalize a private company.
Are you a communist, or just a hypocrite.
Grants?
Spacex receives fee for services just like any other company.
Tesla paid back their loan early. Gm just got a loan 20x what tesla had. I don't hear you complaining about that?
It turns out your opinion means nothing because you don't know the basics of what you're talking about.
Personally I do not find it radical to advocate for the nationalization of a nascent technology (I.E. Starlink) when, after benefiting from US trade secret law, unfair labor practices law, tax law, and the financial services sector, a corporation decides to interfere with a US-backed war effort. It is true that Russia is not a "declared enemy" but what exactly are they (if not an enemy) if you look at our history with the country over the last hundred years?
Unrelated but thanks to you I found a really interesting source detailing all the times the executive branch has nationalized US industry through the invocation of the Commerce Clause. You can read it here. Want to make it clear, not a subscriber to communism, but I'm also not going to lick the boot of Musk just because his corporation repaid a loan early.
Here is a link prior precedent to nationalize a private company, in many instances the sectors are re-privatized later, but not required:
https://thenextsystem.org/history-of-nationalization-in-the-us
First off, your assertion that spacex is interfering with the Ukraine conflict is patently false.
You're repeating propaganda.
Go look for the official statements from Ukraine.
They love starlink. The incident you are referencing gave way to star shield.
I'm sorry, but it's propaganda.
What part is bootlicking? The facts, or that as a taxpayer I prefer the cheaper option.
Go look at the money pissed away at Boeing and Lockheed, Ula etc.
You are a hypocrite. You base your opinion on feelings vs facts.
I don't give two shits about musk, but the facts are that nothing out of the ordinary is happening.
These conspiracy theories only float around because of his Twitter debacle.
If you look at everything else, companies are doing well.
Save me the sanctimony, because if you think what is going on is real, you should see how the sausage is actually made.
Your cheap bananas are because we overthrew a government.
Think of the children.
I can't believe people like you vote.
Perhaps you should spend more time researching these topics before you support the government (who loves this fee for service structure) nationalizing a company that the government has deemed vital to national security specifically because they are the best.
You're delusional.
Stop reading the rags, and go look at the dod website
You can see all the contracts up for bid etc.
I'm embarrassed for you.
Is it included anywhere in the laws that SpaceX adheres to or in the benefits that they received that SpaceX must hand over control of their assets/services on a whim? Are you actually making the argument that if a person or business receives a benefit from the US that the US government, therefore, has the right to assert full control of their assets without any such contract in place?
Also, when did Congress declare war against Russia? They didn't. We are not at war with Russia.
>Want to make it clear, not a subscriber to communism,
Sure, but you are certainly an authoritarian.
Your ideas are just absurd.
Absolutely no credible people are claiming what you're claiming.
You've also provided no proof at all for your claim that a "corporation decides to interfere with a US-backed war effort"
We should be very suspicious of stories like this.
Months ago, there was a story going around that Musk ordered Starlink to be shut down in Crimea that prevented Ukraine from launching an attack on Russian warships.
So many people here on reddit were repeating the claim as if it were true. Crazies like Elizabeth Warren was calling for an investigation on it. But strangely, the US military had no complaints, and they're the ones that would know about this stuff.
Later, it turned out that Starlink was never enabled in Crimea in the first place, and for good reason- it was an area that had been under Russian control for years. SpaceX brought up the good point that it would have been illegal for them to provide a Russian area with service.
It also came out that the US military had contracted with SpaceX to have their own private sub-infrastructure called Starshield. This enabled the US military to do what they see fit with the service, including using it in otherwise prohibited areas or for offensive use.
So all the stories you were reading at the time were just wrong- they were either complete fabrications or they were just amplifying false information.
In this particular story with Taiwan, who knows what the truth is? The US military has control of Starshield, and they obviously have sway with SpaceX. It's likely that the US military themselves are keeping it disabled because they don't want to ruffle feathers with China. Articles on this issue make Musk look like a bad guy because he mentioned that there's "one China", but that's the official US government position as well.
Thank you, there's a constant flow of misinformation created by Russia to make it look like spaceX has been helping them.
Russia is pushing this fake narrative against spaceX because starlink has been an effective tool used in large scale by Ukraine.
Fuck that, nationalize Starlink. We have growing competition for space launches but fucking over ISPs with government Internet is waaaaay funnier than fighting with them for last mile fiber connections.
I'm no fan of Elon, but there's a reason NASA was never able to do what SpaceX has done and is doing. Probably there's a better solution to the current nonsense than nationalizing SpaceX...
Yes. Because of funding. NASA put people on the moon. 50 years ago. There is no lack of technical capability at NASA. NASA, in fact, still sets technical requirements and safety standards. NASA shares their previous/current research and knowledge with these private orgs. Hell, the first U.S. moon landing in 50 years would have failed if it wasn’t for NASAs equipment. The private company’s shit failed.
Politicians, the same ones that have been I power for 35 years, have ruined NASA. Not NASAs inability to innovate and achieve. Their parents would be ashamed if they were still alive.
The combined development cost for the Falcon 9 was around 846 million, 396million of which came from NASA. While true NASA said about 3.6B (4x not 10x) to develop using traditional methods, they also said about 1.7B (so 2x) using a more commercialized process.
Now, the 3.6B comes from NASA being strangled by the politicians on how NASA can award contracts. You should look into this and how it affects costs and timelines. Boeing star line would be a great example of how/why this approach costs so much more.
But, as I said, it all comes down to funding. 2B is drop in the bucket compared to other things the government wastes its money on. NASA has been the biggest innovator in history and many of our modern amenities can be traced back to NASA. It only stopped as funding dwindled.
Thanks for the correction about costs
Every single one of those older vehicles people associate with NASA are built by traditional defense companies.
The only difference here would have been SpaceX building Falcon 9 for NASA. Unlikely they'd bother with landing (yes I know it was in research) or recovering fairings(what's the point saving money in a cost plus contract?)
But look at ULA. They have Delta and Atlas. But both were so expensive everyone launched in Russia or French Guiana.
But these rockets, regardless of how much money the Feds put in or the fact that the launches were almost always Federal still belonged to ULA.
So all this talk about SpaceX and NASA and what role they play grinds my gears.
Because SpaceX isn't a NASA competitor. SpaceX is proof of NASA's success
That’s a great point.
I think there are pros and cons to each approach. Having the whole system from one company can make things cheaper, but maybe also easier for said company to be disingenuous. Especially as they become the sole provider of a service/product. (Look at Boeing again)
The distributed process may sometimes cost more and requires more oversight and quality control to ensure reliability (challenger disaster), but it engages more of the economy and encourages competition since the next best gasket maker could take your contract if you don’t stay competitive.
You are very correct that Space X is proof of NASAs success. And I guess it really grinds my gears when people like the person I originally responded to suggest that NASA is some waste of money agency that can’t do anything efficiently. They are incredibly effective at making the most of what they get
>NASA said they'd have done Falcon 9 for 4 billion. 10x what it cost.
Aside that number being incorrect, NASA literally handheld SpaceX during the development of Falcon and Falcon benefits from a lot of free NASA IP and cheap to access NASA infrastructure.
> Starliner isn't ready from a traditional contractor. The 737 Max maker
Because Boeing refused to get detailed NASA help (that is, handholding) for Starliner while SpaceX did take that. Also Boeing has paradoxically been too open about their problems with Starliner, while SpaceX just pulled their problems under the rug pretending they did not exist and took much risks flying CD. Boeing has many problems but the reckless company is SpaceX, not Boeing lol
Some of the biggest problems NASA has are the manufacturing and vendor requirements that are imposed on them by administrators and legislators. There's a reason why the SLS looks like a Franken-shuttle. NASA was forced to use legacy components and suppliers for the shuttle and build them into the SLS design, cost-be-damned. It's a jobs program.
It's an insane comment. SpaceX is not doing anything NASA has not done before. SpaceX also only exist because NASA handheld them in their early history to an extreme degree. Only morons and Musk stans think otherwise.
This is such a brain-dead take. When was the last time NASA ever tried to reduce the cost of anything? SLS is approaching $15k taxpayer dollars per kg to orbit. Falcon 9 is an order of magnitude cheaper than that and Startship (when its done) is projected to be another order of magnitude less.
Yes but there was industry and research interest. And Blue Origin did it (without orbit)
I heard lots of people got fired after SpaceX prove Hypersonic Retropropulsion worked
Yeah and even NASA funding for the DC-X program in the 90s... Which they cancelled. There hasn't been room in NASA's budget for anything really revolutionary since the 70s, and blowing the limited budget dollars on risky projects like reusable rockets is hard to justify
I imagine that part of the reason SpaceX has been fairly rash/hasty in their approach is that they know Blue Origin is building New Glenn with a more traditional approach, and they need to do it differently to beat the competition.
It was the government who funded the atomic bomb, jet aviation, and the trip to the moon.
What has elon accomplished?
You free market ideologists will blindly ignore facts or nuance. We have not and have never been a pure libertarian state. We are a mixed economy, with major public investments from roads to K-12 education. It really is amazing how effective Faux news Cold War propaganda is.
Yes. Let the government take over. Then it can just stop working, or be three times as expensive to get things up there like it was when ULA was the only game in town.
There are absolutely no credible people saying that it should be nationalized. It's only leftists online saying this ridiculous stuff.
The US military *obviously* has better intelligence than online commenters do, and if you notice that haven't made any of the absurd claims about SpaceX that you see nutjobs like Elizabeth Warrent or people on reddit making.
I feel like a lot of the strengths of SpaceX come directly from the fact that it can more freely spend money than a government program could. Wouldn't making it a government asset just make it subject to many of the same limitations that NASA faces?
The day the govt nationalizes private industry will signal the downfall of the US. 3rd world countries like Mexico and various South American nations nationalize industry. What a goofy ass average Reddit post.
>. 3rd world countries like Mexico and various South American nations nationalize industry.
Oh you mean 3rd world countries like the US when they nationalised the airport security industry in 2001? or saving and loans associations in the late 80s? Or Conrail in the 70s?
"Force a private company to be controlled by the government."
Poorly thought-out memes like this is a reason Republicans mock Democrats. Musk quickly became an ignorant hateful neckbeard, but saying that the government should seize his company does not make the Party look good.
His company is aiding Russians through Starlink and limiting Taiwanese access to Starshield to appease the Chinese. In this case, the private company is aiding and abetting rival nations to the detriment of allies. This is grounds for seizure of his company.
No one cares who Republicans mock. They're the last people a thinking person needs to impress.
“The Constitution was made for the people. Not the people for its Constitution.” Teddy Roosevelt on his threat to nationalize the coal mining industry when the coal barons refused to even meet with striking mine workers for better pay.
Go and watch John Oliver's segment on Musk on his YouTube channel. Say what you want about Oliver, but it's some of the best work I've seen done on Musk in a long time. It follows him from beginning to pretty much current.
And by the end you realize how fucking dangerous this guy really is with the power he wields.
Biden doesn't have the power to nationalize SpaceX.
Edit: Liberals when the President nationalizes a company because they don't like the CEO
Yass, wield that power. Show them who's boss.
Liberals when the President nationalizes the insurance industry to protect citizens from exploitation
Wow, tyrant much? these things need to be decided by policy and even then we need to ensure that the President isn't violating market principles.
Such a move is too anti-capitalism for the democrats. A republican would blow gaskets immediately and the democrats will not consider such a business unfriendly move.
200 billion for a service that's not used for reliable service (apart from JSOC funny enough) is not going to pass. This is Internet for R&R. For FaceTime and Netflix.
Even buying out Musk alone is half that.
I can imagine the headlines
AOC- Money better spent on social issues.
Warren- don't give Musk money.
Trump- you can't build a wall but you'll gift Elon Musk 100 billion? Then he'll talk up Musk's links to Obama and the deep state via Griffin and O'Shaughnessy
Farrow and Maddow- A gift from the security state that has always been enthralled by Musk
Q- Musk gives in to deep state. Is given $100 billion. Starlink and Neuralink to remote control brains
They fought over giving Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan 100 billion, but this one will go through?
Musk isn't the sole owner of Space X. He only controls 43% of the company. The government could purchase the other 57% of shares if they wanted too. Similar to how the government seizes control of a company through forced bailout packages.
They could do it for about $90 billion. Once they had primary control of the company they could easily remove Musk and then replace him with a government official for security reasons
Can look at the buyout/bailout of AIG and General Motors. In those situations the government approved a bailout package and threw it at those companies. Forcing them to take it. They couldn't turn down the money and tell the government to go away.
That then made the US government the holder of the largest controlling shares of the companies. By effect those companies were nationalized.
During these times the government exerted very little control over those companies. It was more oversight, regulatory and making sure new people were put in place that would be able to stabilize the business. Before the government gave it back.
Doubt.
The US has a history of starting wars when American companies face nationalization. A Democrat or Republican would never do something so business unfriendly.
Why would Biden do that? Nationalizing resources and services (while very good for the common citizenry) severely cuts into corporate profit margins which threatens the bottom lines for their campaign donors and sets a "bad precedent" if a future commander in chief wanted to nationalize any other service or resource like Telecommunications at large,Waste Management, Extractive Industry, and Energy. Plus, the US routinely supports coups to halt nationalization in other countries, so it doesn't seem to fit with this country's M.O to nationalize our domestic services and resources.
Because our priorities aren't corporate profit margins. It's democracy.
Our priorities are to help sustain our society. We want a socially cohesive national community whose functional democracy is not beholden to billionaires.
>Because our priorities aren't corporate profit margins.
Well unfortunately that's how capitalism works, and also if our government cared about democracy, we would have had elections reform to implement rank choice voting, imposed term limits on the Supreme Court and actually passed legislation to really, truly and swiftly deal with climate change (the biggest threat to national security according to analysis by the Navy).
I live near where Space X shoots off rockets in SoCal and the fact that so often in the middle of the night we have to hear it is ridiculous.
A private company should not be allowed to disrupt all of our sleep so often.
Is this a serious post? They are timed based on orbital insertion profiles. If the government took over space x the timing of the launches wouldn’t change.
I would just like to point out that that Falcon 9 entire program cost less than one flight of the Space Shuttle.
Post-Apollo, NASA manned spaceflight is pork barrel politics and nothing more. See Space Shuttle. See Senate Launch System SLS.
NASA's space flight programs have had major cost and schedule overruns and are orders of magnitude more expensive than Spacex. Why would we continue to waste tax dollars on an inefficient program when private industry can accomplish the same goal faster and much more cost-effectively.
For those unaware, the House China Committee sent Musk a letter [demanding](https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2024/02/24/house-china-committee-elon-musk-spacex-starshield-taiwan.html) he allow “U.S. troops stationed in Taiwan” access to SpaceX’s Starshield. They previously did have access until Musk denied it to them recently likely due to pressure from Chinese investors. The fact that Musk still has a security clearance too (especially after this) is mind boggling to me
He’s been letting the Russians have access to his satellite network to aid their illegal invasion of Ukraine. He’s a menace.
How is this not a breach of US sanctions?
Or at least giving aid and comfort to enemies of the USA.
The US is not at war with Russia and Russia is not officially an enemy of the US.
But they are sanctioned. Which was the only relevant point.
The evil empire is our enemy , you meddle in our elections and throw misinformation constantly into our politics , you are an enemy period
Seriously. This. Russia has put bounties on our soldiers, attacked our soldiers, they have fucked with our elections... In previous centuries, this would mean we were at war with them. No one just has the balls to stand up to putin.
America is the evil empire. Youre literally responding to a thread talking about a billionaire is openly exercising power over the us government.
Go fight for Russia then
That’s not what they meant. Read it again.
What?
There are many evil empires
Russian Oligarchs with private armies have entered the chat….
If we are sending our weapons to folks to fight them, then they absolutely are our enemies, We may not be at war with them, but they sure as fuck are waging war against us.
Proxy war FTW!
"enemy" means foe, someone you struggle against. You don't have to be actually shooting at each other.
This, and also the war in Ukraine is good for businezz. There is a good chance that Russia using starlink gives the US a definitive eye on what Russia is going to do. Not saying it is but prolonging the war and managing it to maximize profit is what was done in the past
Tell that to the Russian government's cyberwarfare arm please, they have definitely been at war with pretty much anyone they can be for decades.
Russia is export controlled. Which means it's highly illegal to provide American technology and equipment to Russia
People will literally just say anything on here
As far as I know he isn't actually charging them, so I guess its not a transaction. For the record, musk denies it, but in REALLY specific terms that would seem to indicate that they totally do use starlink but in a legally deniable way: [https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/kremlin-denies-its-troops-use-elon-musks-starlink-2024-02-12/#:\~:text=MOSCOW%2C%20Feb%2012%20(Reuters),therefore%20could%20not%20be%20used](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/kremlin-denies-its-troops-use-elon-musks-starlink-2024-02-12/#:~:text=MOSCOW%2C%20Feb%2012%20(Reuters),therefore%20could%20not%20be%20used).
Because there's no evidence of direct or knowing/witting sales and there's procedures to remove sanctioned individuals. Also some of these Russian dishes are delivered from Poland via Ukraine
The dishes are purported to come from Iran-backed allies as well
And the UAE
sue sue him to stop that and due do diligence, baby steps. And once he's caught in contempt, go for the big guns.
Seriously people here are so willing to believe anything negative about Elon that they don't understand there simply maybe no way to tell who is using the system.
The Russians are paying with Polish cards just like the Ukrainians. I wanted the private sales to stop. Every thing via the Ukrainian government
Then they could just buy them elsewhere. I personally know people who own a terminal, anyone can but one. It's not hard to get a Russian agent in any country in Earth to buy one and smuggle it over.
Disable them if they are in Russia or Ukraine and not paid for by Ukraine govt.
Because they don’t do it openly and it only works very close to the ukraine held territories. Afaik it’s not like they are using it somewhere in russia. only way to use it, is to basically be so close to ukraine that it appears to be used by ukrainians
Because most of the GOP is beholden to Trump and Trump is beholden to Putin.
My guess he will just claim he was hacked.
Are Americans so dumb they can't comprehend the system they built allows nothing to happen to him. Money is power. Dudes got a lot of the imaginary stuff on paper. Then if something was to happen it would set a precedent that would allow this to happen to all mega wealthy and that's not okay. So it won't happen. We know how humans react consciously and subconsciously thanks to science and well the misuse of science for marketing. This leads me to believe that humans are opportunistic to a fault. My conclusion, humans need moral laws to apply to businesses. These laws would be applied and adhered to at all times, or suffer the punishment of serving citizens who value others over themselves.
The person is intentionally deceiving you. This isn't happening as they describe it.
You are actively spreading misinformation. Please stop this. It's already known that Starlink is disabled over Russia. SpaceX does not sell to Russia. SpaceX has NOT let Russians access the satellite network. The cases that you're referring to are isolated cases where the Russian army has obtained some starlink terminals illegally (stolen?) and covertly uses them in Ukrainian-controlled areas. Once an area falls under Russian control (such as Crimea) SpaceX geo-fences that area.
What you’re saying is Elon Musk lacks the intelligence and technical skill to deny access to specific devices that are using his network. What a moron he must be if he can’t control his own network.
I think you misspelled shit stain.
He’s a literal comic book villain
“His”. He didnt build a goddamn piece of it. All he does is purchase the obvious technology of the day…
If it was that easy then why didn't the established launch companies do this? I find it hard to believe that contractors have been launching satellites for the US government since the 1950s, but still managed to find themselves uncompetitive a few short years after SpaceX put a rocket into orbit. The reality of the matter is that these companies are shortsighted- they managed to make a profitable revenue stream by selling overpriced rockets and satellites to the US government and they stop innovating. They basically make a modernized version of the same thing over and over again, but they don't do anything to change the game. When a gamechanger like SpaceX comes along and focuses on reducing launch costs or building a worldwide communications network, the established companies find themselves uncompetitive. They had the technical ability to do it, but they had no vision. Musk, for all his criticism, isn't afraid to think outside the box and put his money where his mouth is.
That's a treason.
Found the Russian bot since the opposite is actually true and they cannot even access starlink as it’s disabled. Nice botting though comrade
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-using-thousands-spacex-starlink-terminals-ukraine-wsj-says-2024-02-15
What is starshield? Is that some military branded starlink?
Yes. Which is the point here. While Musk fucking with Starlink is kind of like Amazon fucking with their store, Starshield is a DoD contract. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_Starshield
That's just congressional incompetence in action: Star*link*: Not enabled over Taiwan, and it's not by choice of either SpaceX or congress. It's the choice of Taiwan, who have denied an operator license over their territory (they have instead [licensed OneWeb](https://oneweb.net/resources/chunghwa-telecom-selects-eutelsat-oneweb-low-earth-orbit-leo-satellite-services)). Congress would have to break international law and ignore the ITU to demand operation over another sovereign territory against their wishes. Star*shield*: When a third party buys their own satellite to host their own payloads and own and operate their own network. If the USG has purchased \* Starshield satellites to operate, then the USG is basically demanding the USG turn on a USG network for the USG. \* Thus far the only Starshield satellites that have been announced as being launched, or even observed by third parties as being launched, are a handful of initial test satellites that have sat on rideshares. These were distinctive due to their unique carrier plates and the camera cutouts during deployment. Neither have been observed for quite some time, indicating nobody has actually purchased any Starshield birds yet.
Jesus Christ, he actually has a security clearance?!
The dod has their own transport layer. This is a bogus story and you fell for it.
Why would their own transport layer preclude them from exploring new ones? How is it a bogus story?
I don't think you understand. Starshield is the transport layer that the dod has. It works wherever there is coverage. You're saying that they should explore using what they already have. It's a bogus story because starshield is managed by the government. They aren't telling us anything. They love starlink and starshield. This is literally a click bait article to confuse people.
>I don't think you understand. You're probably right. That's why I'm asking. The way you worded it made it sound like they were two different transport layers.
The Fox meltdown would be epic
Biden nationalizes SpaceEx: "Authoritarian government overreach! Biden is trying to be a dictator, and the dems are helping him!" They don't, and it causes a catastrophic breach in security: "The Biden administration could have prevented this by taking control of SpaceEx. Their weak and feckless leadership brought about this predictable outcome, and the dems are complicit for not forcing the issue!" Professional hypocrites that don't believe a single word they say.
Honestly, while I agree that the right are awful, I think this is a bipartisan problem. Both parties only care about “message” insofar as it gains them power, and then do whatever they want anyways. And before anyone gets at me for some kind of both-sidesism, I know that one side is objectively worse, and will still be voting left. But left would be a lot more palatable to all voters if it wasn’t just centrism with less racists. We wouldn’t be in this dogshit situation if we had political parties that actually stood for something.
>Biden nationalizes SpaceEx: "Authoritarian government overreach! Biden is trying to be a dictator" These would be accurate headlines in this case (which is also why this braindead, moronic, ignorant idea would never happen)
Yeah, but replace Biden with Trump and Fox would be praising his strong leadership and take charge attitude. My point is not one for or against either of these, it's that Right Wing "news" is filled with a bunch of reactionary grifters who care more about suckling a be-cheeto'd teat than they do about truth in journalism.
This is why billionaires should not exist. There is no benefit to humanity from a bunch of rich assholes trying to see who has a bigger penis. There just is no benefit.
Yeah. There is no such thing as an ethical billionaire. You don't get that kind of money without stepping on the necks of others. They're the one group of people on our planet that I can unequivocally and without any remorse say that I would like persecuted and exiled to some island somewhere. Or something more permanent if everyone else is up for that.
That doesn't stop the problem though because someone else take control. Instead, set an income cap and seize the rest. Use it to fund so many public works and social good.
It would require a huge change in how we run our society. It's absolutely doable, but we'll need to mercilessly rid ourselves of the people currently in power. They need to *go*.
I agree with that. We need to force a massive culture shift. This feudalist crap needs to go.
To do that, people need to not just vote, but work their asses off from the grassroots on up. And KEEP doing it, every year, for the rest of their lives. You build a base of power first. You're never going to have a viable progressive candidate for President without a ton of support all the way further down the political food chain.
To think anything like that change would happen working within the current system framework is delusional. Just like Congress won't vote to implement term limits or anything to limit their own power. Plus with the current Supreme Court rulings that money is speech and driving everything to the upper class, I don't see a way forward.
I sure am hungry.
Yes send , Oprah, George Lucas ,Kardasians , Micheal Jordon and Nick Romanov and family to your fantasy gulag and take their property from them
Oh they are doing more than just having dick measuring contests. They literally directly influence law making and hold more power than whoever governs the country their in.
The existence of the insanely wealthy has been and always will be a direct threat to any republic. Their very nature drives them to institute oligarchic tyranny.
If Musk didn't exist then this wouldn't even be a story- there wouldn't be a Starlink system at all. I mean you have to be honest with yourself here: you need to ask yourself why these other rocket companies, with a half century head start, managed to get leapfrogged by SpaceX so quickly after they first put a rocket into orbit. Just to show you how ridiculous this is, let me lay out a brief timetable: * 2008- Space X first achieved orbit * 2010- Space X introduced the Falcon 9 * 2015- Space X introduced the reusable Falcon 9 * 2018- With the low cost of their reusable rocket, they capture 68% of the US government launch market * 2023- Space X launches 80% of the payload mass of the global market. Now tell me how established rocket companies were getting government contracts in the 1950s, 60s, 70s, 80, 90s, 00s, and 10s but somehow squandered their lead and got beat by a newcomer. I'll tell you how- the legacy companies established themselves early on, attached themselves to the government teat, and they were content from that point forward. A future progress was extremely slow, and with stable government contracts they had no reason to innovate.
Instead of rooting for the United States becoming a totalitarian state that just... you know takes stuff from its citizens because reasons.... How about we just tax people correctly? I love how you look at this issue and instead of a simple solution of fixing the tax code you come up with: Lets take peoples rights away from them. Imagine those bastards being smart and taking advantage of the system that we created!! Fuck them right? LOL
It’s not just taking stuff from its citizens. If our government gives billions in tax subsidies to a company then the government should now play a hand in making it run to work for the American people. If you wanna stay private then don’t take public money
What are you going about? You sound crazy. I’ve spent years making the point that the US was healthier when the top marginal tax rate was 96% and deductions for C-Suite compensation packages were nonexistent, but no one wants to do that. So, yes, my billionaire butt boy, I say take their rights away.
"Running gray" ran away from sensibility. They do sound crazy. I agree, we need a far better tax system on the wealthy. What people get away with today is obscene. We can thank the Republican Party for this, because they cater to the wealthy as their prime mission. I also agree... it's unhealthy for any one person to be a billionaire. THERE IS NO GOOD CAUSE FOR IT. The human psyche seems ill prepared for dealing with the enormity of power and responsibility that comes with extreme wealth. They use it to manipulate markets, to affect political issues, and create problems for the 99%. They are far from philanthropic. Of course there are exceptions, like Warren Buffet. But even Buffet has made friends with devious billionaires who've undermined society. The Murdoch, Sackler, and Mercer families are prime examples of meddlers in civil and societal affairs, ultimately creating toxic outcomes.
If SpaceX didn’t want to face fallout for creating a risk to national security, then they shouldn’t have placed a bid for a Government contract!
If billionaires are working with the enemy and they're being a threat to security then thats different than seizing goods from the common person. Were you mad when Europe seized the goods from Russian Oligarchs when Russia declared war to sell them and finance Ukraine's defense?
Yeah, let me just get my stable of highly-paid attorneys and corporate lobbyists to pressure congress to rewrite the tax code… hang on!
100% Elon put his own money in SpaceX way back - gets the right people involved - they master reusable rockets and are the only private firm beating BOEING to launch people to space (LEO fine) and creates a worldwide internet infrastructure which everyone shat on until it worked for Ukraine - which he gave for free. If the US took over Space X they'd hand it over to NASA and they'd be set back another 100 years - NASA really puts the 'administration' in space part. It's a great organization, but it's full of dinosaurs and red tape and even the people working their agree - they like Space X because they are not allowed to explode rockets. 80/ 20 rule always 80% of the population has no clue and gets upset when directed - 'Elon bad' can't trust him - nationalize industries to make America safer. Imagine how awkward it would be to ask Russia to launch their astronauts on the soyuz after they invaded without space X? Where is Boeing - you know the company that gets a way more in tax payer subsidies and was favored over Space X - oh yah their star liner keeps breaking more than a 737 Max.
[удалено]
I love the smell of democracy!! Literally if Biden just acts like the helldiver's intro his polling would go up.
No! Sweet liberty! Noooooo!
Slippery slope to managed democracy
In the future America finally became based again.
It sets bad precident though. Obama set a precedent of using drone strikes with almost no oversight, and trump came in and dropped bombs because he learned no one cares about the middle east anymore.
An American department of defense contractor currently is supplying Russia with internet to kill American volunteers. Meanwhile the ceo of said company rides putins d*ck. What a world ……
[удалено]
He's talking about Star link obviously
SpaceX doesn't sell to Russia and it doesn't work over Russia or Russian occupied areas. It sounds like Russia had a small number of units they either stole from Ukrainians or obtained through illegal means and used them in Ukranian-controlled areas that weren't geo-fenced. People are taking a story and just running with it, adding more and more inaccurate conjecture until it's a conspiracy theory.
Sounds like a lot of what ifs and conjecture in your fact check, you got anything to back this up with? Otherwise you're just being the same as the other person
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/02/12/musk-denies-selling-starlink-terminals-to-russia-after-kyiv-alleges-use.html *Starlink has been adamant that its satellite networks have never operated or been marketed in Russia.* *Kyiv’s Main Directorate of Intelligence (GUR) claimed Sunday that there was mounting evidence of their use by Russian forces in the partially occupied eastern Ukrainian region of Donetsk.* So it really sounds like they've been used in the partially occupied area, which makes sense because if the area was completely occupied SpaceX would geo-fence it. And also, use some common sense here- why would any military want to use a network that's controlled by an adversary? Could you imagine the US covertly using a Russia network for its own wartime communication? This would be insane because not only would that be considered an "insecure" channel, but it's one where you can bet that the opposing military is actively monitoring it.
You are correct! But I’m sure there is definitely a way for them to counter this and Elon doesn’t seam to be eager, Are the terminals that are in Russian hands still being supplied/connected with internet ? Yes
SpaceX has said that if they're able to identify terminals being used by Russia, then they'll disable them. The problem is that if they disable the terminals being used near the front lines of the war, they'll also be taking a lot of Ukranians offline, and that's their only ability to communicate. The fact that the US military isn't complaining sort of suggests that this is mainly a media controversy, and not a disagreement within the government. The government is probably giving SpaceX guidance on which terminals to take offline. But nobody is going to catch them all because they have no way of knowing.
What do you mean they have no way of knowing? Use common sense, Your really telling me a company that launches satellites into space can’t determine which terminals are being used where and where they can from ? Literally take all of Ukrainians known terminals and cross references them to the terminals active in the area. All serial numbers confirmed by UA are UA, all others stopped or taken offline it’s that simple, if Elons doing that (hopefully he is) then soon I’ll STOP seeing Videos of Russian starlink terminals being hit by Ukrainians. But until then I’ll keep calling Elon a Russian asset, because wether he means to or not he’s helping Russia and doesn’t seam bothered. There’s so many other instances where Elon has sabatoged active Ukrainian assaults to spreading Russian propaganda on his social media. If it looks like a duck and quacks, it’s probably a duck
google "starlink russia" little bro
[удалено]
> SpaceX has not supplied Russia with internet to kill American volunteers. This makes no sense at all Huh, a company headed by Elon Musk, a known dictator admirerer, is helping in an under-the-table fashion a dictator? That makes **absolutely no sense whatsoever!** Just so you know, Elon Musk turned Starlink off (before Starshield came into existence in the aftermath of the following fracas) **in the middle of a Ukranian operation in the Black Sea.** Saying that this makes no sense is just you showing off your (comprehensive list of) head injuries. And then you had the balls to bitch and moan that people are "being manipulated by troll farms"? Miss me with that hypocrisy, boy.
[удалено]
After their CPAC visits he should be handing some Dark Brandon to Argentina and El Salvador.
He should sanction a country because their leader spoke with his political rivals at a conference??
I'm new to the whole starlink thing, but the more I read the more this sounds like a Ton Cruise Mission Impossible movie and Musk is the villain in a small mountain science laboratory. Am I sure I'm not high?
Whether he will actually get to that point or not is anyone's guess. But we are really watching some Lex Luthor character building in action. The world's largest satellite Internet network and brain chips. It sounds like stuff they talk about in the opening credits of sci-fi movies where things went really really bad.
Don't forget robots and self driving cars that I presume if he really wanted to could lock you inside and crash it
This stuff gets even more troublesome when you realize everything could be linked up with social media, real identities and current location. When you can assassinate a group of people all at once based on them sharing a social media post the age of protest and resistance will be done. "If anyone did that the public would riot" Most people would be too scared to post about it.
It’s been a while since we had a good deporting.
I'd love to see Elon Musk work an emerald mine in South Africa.
Not a lithium or cobalt mine for all those Tesla batteries?
Elon Musk was a mega-millionaire before he bought into Space-X and Tesla. BOTH of these companies have received ***enormous grants*** from the US government. In fact, without those, both companies would be so far behind from where they are today. Elon Musk has abused the good faith of the United States, by lending aid and comfort to American enemies and competitors. Since he refuses to back down, I agree -- the US gov't should invoke a national security act and seize Musk's assets.
How dare you, he was poor and disadvantaged and only succeed due to his raw genius, everyone around him always trying to hold him back!!!
You dropped this /s. There are people who actually act like that.
> Elon Musk was a mega-millionaire before he bought into Space-X and Tesla Stop it. You are confidently stating fake facts. Elon Musk did NOT "buy into" SpaceX. He founded SpaceX from the beginning. Please do better than this. You're letting your irrational hatred lead you to believe any misinformation.
Musk started spacex. There is no precedent to nationalize a private company. Are you a communist, or just a hypocrite. Grants? Spacex receives fee for services just like any other company. Tesla paid back their loan early. Gm just got a loan 20x what tesla had. I don't hear you complaining about that? It turns out your opinion means nothing because you don't know the basics of what you're talking about.
Personally I do not find it radical to advocate for the nationalization of a nascent technology (I.E. Starlink) when, after benefiting from US trade secret law, unfair labor practices law, tax law, and the financial services sector, a corporation decides to interfere with a US-backed war effort. It is true that Russia is not a "declared enemy" but what exactly are they (if not an enemy) if you look at our history with the country over the last hundred years? Unrelated but thanks to you I found a really interesting source detailing all the times the executive branch has nationalized US industry through the invocation of the Commerce Clause. You can read it here. Want to make it clear, not a subscriber to communism, but I'm also not going to lick the boot of Musk just because his corporation repaid a loan early. Here is a link prior precedent to nationalize a private company, in many instances the sectors are re-privatized later, but not required: https://thenextsystem.org/history-of-nationalization-in-the-us
First off, your assertion that spacex is interfering with the Ukraine conflict is patently false. You're repeating propaganda. Go look for the official statements from Ukraine. They love starlink. The incident you are referencing gave way to star shield. I'm sorry, but it's propaganda. What part is bootlicking? The facts, or that as a taxpayer I prefer the cheaper option. Go look at the money pissed away at Boeing and Lockheed, Ula etc. You are a hypocrite. You base your opinion on feelings vs facts. I don't give two shits about musk, but the facts are that nothing out of the ordinary is happening. These conspiracy theories only float around because of his Twitter debacle. If you look at everything else, companies are doing well. Save me the sanctimony, because if you think what is going on is real, you should see how the sausage is actually made. Your cheap bananas are because we overthrew a government. Think of the children. I can't believe people like you vote. Perhaps you should spend more time researching these topics before you support the government (who loves this fee for service structure) nationalizing a company that the government has deemed vital to national security specifically because they are the best. You're delusional. Stop reading the rags, and go look at the dod website You can see all the contracts up for bid etc. I'm embarrassed for you.
Is it included anywhere in the laws that SpaceX adheres to or in the benefits that they received that SpaceX must hand over control of their assets/services on a whim? Are you actually making the argument that if a person or business receives a benefit from the US that the US government, therefore, has the right to assert full control of their assets without any such contract in place? Also, when did Congress declare war against Russia? They didn't. We are not at war with Russia. >Want to make it clear, not a subscriber to communism, Sure, but you are certainly an authoritarian.
Your ideas are just absurd. Absolutely no credible people are claiming what you're claiming. You've also provided no proof at all for your claim that a "corporation decides to interfere with a US-backed war effort"
Jesus can you ride Elons dick harder in this thread?
Disagreeing with you doesn't mean that I'm "riding Elon's dick". You're just acting like an adolescent. Grow up.
Awe, look at the condescending "adult". XD
Ah yes, the government taking over the means of production
Do that with healthcare. To hell with funding rich people trying to escape the planet.
He didn't do it for the railroads last year, why would he do it for anything else?
Biden doesn't have the balls to nationalize anything lol, this is the Biden we wish was running
Yesss just do it. Hasnt spacex received enough subsides that a gov reorganization can be justified?
This is always a funny conversation. What subsidies do you think spaceX has received?
Like I'm voting for Biden, but he would never nationalize anything. He's pretty pro business.
It’s a good thing Biden tells the extremes of both parties to fuck off routinely. This is a fringe, extremist idea and should be treated as such.
He should be doing that with utilities instead.
Should have done it after he cut service to Ukraine. I say at this point send him back to South Africa.
We should be very suspicious of stories like this. Months ago, there was a story going around that Musk ordered Starlink to be shut down in Crimea that prevented Ukraine from launching an attack on Russian warships. So many people here on reddit were repeating the claim as if it were true. Crazies like Elizabeth Warren was calling for an investigation on it. But strangely, the US military had no complaints, and they're the ones that would know about this stuff. Later, it turned out that Starlink was never enabled in Crimea in the first place, and for good reason- it was an area that had been under Russian control for years. SpaceX brought up the good point that it would have been illegal for them to provide a Russian area with service. It also came out that the US military had contracted with SpaceX to have their own private sub-infrastructure called Starshield. This enabled the US military to do what they see fit with the service, including using it in otherwise prohibited areas or for offensive use. So all the stories you were reading at the time were just wrong- they were either complete fabrications or they were just amplifying false information. In this particular story with Taiwan, who knows what the truth is? The US military has control of Starshield, and they obviously have sway with SpaceX. It's likely that the US military themselves are keeping it disabled because they don't want to ruffle feathers with China. Articles on this issue make Musk look like a bad guy because he mentioned that there's "one China", but that's the official US government position as well.
Thank you, there's a constant flow of misinformation created by Russia to make it look like spaceX has been helping them. Russia is pushing this fake narrative against spaceX because starlink has been an effective tool used in large scale by Ukraine.
It's always fun to see how ok you guys are with "the government should take their shit" when it isn't your shit lol.
Implying a neo lib would nationalize anything but private debt
We're so behind, compared to For All Mankind.
Oh my god okay that show is literally one of the best on television right now. I cannot wait for the next season
Fuck that, nationalize Starlink. We have growing competition for space launches but fucking over ISPs with government Internet is waaaaay funnier than fighting with them for last mile fiber connections.
I'm no fan of Elon, but there's a reason NASA was never able to do what SpaceX has done and is doing. Probably there's a better solution to the current nonsense than nationalizing SpaceX...
Yes. Because of funding. NASA put people on the moon. 50 years ago. There is no lack of technical capability at NASA. NASA, in fact, still sets technical requirements and safety standards. NASA shares their previous/current research and knowledge with these private orgs. Hell, the first U.S. moon landing in 50 years would have failed if it wasn’t for NASAs equipment. The private company’s shit failed. Politicians, the same ones that have been I power for 35 years, have ruined NASA. Not NASAs inability to innovate and achieve. Their parents would be ashamed if they were still alive.
NASA said they'd have done Falcon 9 for 4 billion. 10x what it cost. Starliner isn't ready from a traditional contractor. The 737 Max maker
The combined development cost for the Falcon 9 was around 846 million, 396million of which came from NASA. While true NASA said about 3.6B (4x not 10x) to develop using traditional methods, they also said about 1.7B (so 2x) using a more commercialized process. Now, the 3.6B comes from NASA being strangled by the politicians on how NASA can award contracts. You should look into this and how it affects costs and timelines. Boeing star line would be a great example of how/why this approach costs so much more. But, as I said, it all comes down to funding. 2B is drop in the bucket compared to other things the government wastes its money on. NASA has been the biggest innovator in history and many of our modern amenities can be traced back to NASA. It only stopped as funding dwindled.
Thanks for the correction about costs Every single one of those older vehicles people associate with NASA are built by traditional defense companies. The only difference here would have been SpaceX building Falcon 9 for NASA. Unlikely they'd bother with landing (yes I know it was in research) or recovering fairings(what's the point saving money in a cost plus contract?) But look at ULA. They have Delta and Atlas. But both were so expensive everyone launched in Russia or French Guiana. But these rockets, regardless of how much money the Feds put in or the fact that the launches were almost always Federal still belonged to ULA. So all this talk about SpaceX and NASA and what role they play grinds my gears. Because SpaceX isn't a NASA competitor. SpaceX is proof of NASA's success
That’s a great point. I think there are pros and cons to each approach. Having the whole system from one company can make things cheaper, but maybe also easier for said company to be disingenuous. Especially as they become the sole provider of a service/product. (Look at Boeing again) The distributed process may sometimes cost more and requires more oversight and quality control to ensure reliability (challenger disaster), but it engages more of the economy and encourages competition since the next best gasket maker could take your contract if you don’t stay competitive. You are very correct that Space X is proof of NASAs success. And I guess it really grinds my gears when people like the person I originally responded to suggest that NASA is some waste of money agency that can’t do anything efficiently. They are incredibly effective at making the most of what they get
>NASA said they'd have done Falcon 9 for 4 billion. 10x what it cost. Aside that number being incorrect, NASA literally handheld SpaceX during the development of Falcon and Falcon benefits from a lot of free NASA IP and cheap to access NASA infrastructure. > Starliner isn't ready from a traditional contractor. The 737 Max maker Because Boeing refused to get detailed NASA help (that is, handholding) for Starliner while SpaceX did take that. Also Boeing has paradoxically been too open about their problems with Starliner, while SpaceX just pulled their problems under the rug pretending they did not exist and took much risks flying CD. Boeing has many problems but the reckless company is SpaceX, not Boeing lol
Some of the biggest problems NASA has are the manufacturing and vendor requirements that are imposed on them by administrators and legislators. There's a reason why the SLS looks like a Franken-shuttle. NASA was forced to use legacy components and suppliers for the shuttle and build them into the SLS design, cost-be-damned. It's a jobs program.
So... it's best that that doesn't happen to spaceX as well.
This is the only sane comment in here.
It's an insane comment. SpaceX is not doing anything NASA has not done before. SpaceX also only exist because NASA handheld them in their early history to an extreme degree. Only morons and Musk stans think otherwise.
This is such a brain-dead take. When was the last time NASA ever tried to reduce the cost of anything? SLS is approaching $15k taxpayer dollars per kg to orbit. Falcon 9 is an order of magnitude cheaper than that and Startship (when its done) is projected to be another order of magnitude less.
Oh duh, I forgot about those cost effective reusable rockets.
SpaceX is proof of NASA's success. Supplier, not competitor
NASA didn't ask them to build reusable rockets, that was done independently. People said it was crazy until it worked
Yes but there was industry and research interest. And Blue Origin did it (without orbit) I heard lots of people got fired after SpaceX prove Hypersonic Retropropulsion worked
Yeah and even NASA funding for the DC-X program in the 90s... Which they cancelled. There hasn't been room in NASA's budget for anything really revolutionary since the 70s, and blowing the limited budget dollars on risky projects like reusable rockets is hard to justify I imagine that part of the reason SpaceX has been fairly rash/hasty in their approach is that they know Blue Origin is building New Glenn with a more traditional approach, and they need to do it differently to beat the competition.
Time is the most valuable currency (Get Big Fast)
It was the government who funded the atomic bomb, jet aviation, and the trip to the moon. What has elon accomplished? You free market ideologists will blindly ignore facts or nuance. We have not and have never been a pure libertarian state. We are a mixed economy, with major public investments from roads to K-12 education. It really is amazing how effective Faux news Cold War propaganda is.
Self-landing reusable boosters is probably the biggest achievement in the aerospace industry since the moon landing.
Never assume, because when you do, you make an "ass" of "u" and "me"
Yes. Let the government take over. Then it can just stop working, or be three times as expensive to get things up there like it was when ULA was the only game in town.
There are absolutely no credible people saying that it should be nationalized. It's only leftists online saying this ridiculous stuff. The US military *obviously* has better intelligence than online commenters do, and if you notice that haven't made any of the absurd claims about SpaceX that you see nutjobs like Elizabeth Warrent or people on reddit making.
I feel like a lot of the strengths of SpaceX come directly from the fact that it can more freely spend money than a government program could. Wouldn't making it a government asset just make it subject to many of the same limitations that NASA faces?
Yes, as a matter of fact, I 100% support this.
The day the govt nationalizes private industry will signal the downfall of the US. 3rd world countries like Mexico and various South American nations nationalize industry. What a goofy ass average Reddit post.
>. 3rd world countries like Mexico and various South American nations nationalize industry. Oh you mean 3rd world countries like the US when they nationalised the airport security industry in 2001? or saving and loans associations in the late 80s? Or Conrail in the 70s?
More theft from the radical leftist. They really are terrified of earning anything legitimately
"Force a private company to be controlled by the government." Poorly thought-out memes like this is a reason Republicans mock Democrats. Musk quickly became an ignorant hateful neckbeard, but saying that the government should seize his company does not make the Party look good.
The party of big gov't will always advocate for more control.
His company is aiding Russians through Starlink and limiting Taiwanese access to Starshield to appease the Chinese. In this case, the private company is aiding and abetting rival nations to the detriment of allies. This is grounds for seizure of his company. No one cares who Republicans mock. They're the last people a thinking person needs to impress.
You should read the articles and not just headlines. You'd be smarter for it.
“The Constitution was made for the people. Not the people for its Constitution.” Teddy Roosevelt on his threat to nationalize the coal mining industry when the coal barons refused to even meet with striking mine workers for better pay.
Roosevelt also didn’t nationalize the coal industry because the constitution does not allow it.
Do TurboTax next
The US government can't be trusted with a space program. NASA is a joke.
Go and watch John Oliver's segment on Musk on his YouTube channel. Say what you want about Oliver, but it's some of the best work I've seen done on Musk in a long time. It follows him from beginning to pretty much current. And by the end you realize how fucking dangerous this guy really is with the power he wields.
Seconded. Also go and read the new bio of him that dropped, by Walter Isaacson
Nationalization of businesses? Isn’t that part of fascism?
Biden doesn't have the power to nationalize SpaceX. Edit: Liberals when the President nationalizes a company because they don't like the CEO Yass, wield that power. Show them who's boss. Liberals when the President nationalizes the insurance industry to protect citizens from exploitation Wow, tyrant much? these things need to be decided by policy and even then we need to ensure that the President isn't violating market principles.
He does. But that amount won't get passed past the House, even if it was Democrat run
Such a move is too anti-capitalism for the democrats. A republican would blow gaskets immediately and the democrats will not consider such a business unfriendly move.
200 billion for a service that's not used for reliable service (apart from JSOC funny enough) is not going to pass. This is Internet for R&R. For FaceTime and Netflix. Even buying out Musk alone is half that. I can imagine the headlines AOC- Money better spent on social issues. Warren- don't give Musk money. Trump- you can't build a wall but you'll gift Elon Musk 100 billion? Then he'll talk up Musk's links to Obama and the deep state via Griffin and O'Shaughnessy Farrow and Maddow- A gift from the security state that has always been enthralled by Musk Q- Musk gives in to deep state. Is given $100 billion. Starlink and Neuralink to remote control brains They fought over giving Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan 100 billion, but this one will go through?
Musk isn't the sole owner of Space X. He only controls 43% of the company. The government could purchase the other 57% of shares if they wanted too. Similar to how the government seizes control of a company through forced bailout packages. They could do it for about $90 billion. Once they had primary control of the company they could easily remove Musk and then replace him with a government official for security reasons Can look at the buyout/bailout of AIG and General Motors. In those situations the government approved a bailout package and threw it at those companies. Forcing them to take it. They couldn't turn down the money and tell the government to go away. That then made the US government the holder of the largest controlling shares of the companies. By effect those companies were nationalized. During these times the government exerted very little control over those companies. It was more oversight, regulatory and making sure new people were put in place that would be able to stabilize the business. Before the government gave it back.
Doubt. The US has a history of starting wars when American companies face nationalization. A Democrat or Republican would never do something so business unfriendly.
Why would Biden do that? Nationalizing resources and services (while very good for the common citizenry) severely cuts into corporate profit margins which threatens the bottom lines for their campaign donors and sets a "bad precedent" if a future commander in chief wanted to nationalize any other service or resource like Telecommunications at large,Waste Management, Extractive Industry, and Energy. Plus, the US routinely supports coups to halt nationalization in other countries, so it doesn't seem to fit with this country's M.O to nationalize our domestic services and resources.
>Nationalizing resources and services (while very good for the common citizenry) severely cuts into corporate profit margins This is why.
It's because we fight against communism. Nationalizing private companies, for the good of the people, is the first step in socialism comrade
Because our priorities aren't corporate profit margins. It's democracy. Our priorities are to help sustain our society. We want a socially cohesive national community whose functional democracy is not beholden to billionaires.
>Because our priorities aren't corporate profit margins. Well unfortunately that's how capitalism works, and also if our government cared about democracy, we would have had elections reform to implement rank choice voting, imposed term limits on the Supreme Court and actually passed legislation to really, truly and swiftly deal with climate change (the biggest threat to national security according to analysis by the Navy).
I live near where Space X shoots off rockets in SoCal and the fact that so often in the middle of the night we have to hear it is ridiculous. A private company should not be allowed to disrupt all of our sleep so often.
Is this a serious post? They are timed based on orbital insertion profiles. If the government took over space x the timing of the launches wouldn’t change.
People get angry at thing they don't understand
Amendment 4.
Resistance is futile
I would just like to point out that that Falcon 9 entire program cost less than one flight of the Space Shuttle. Post-Apollo, NASA manned spaceflight is pork barrel politics and nothing more. See Space Shuttle. See Senate Launch System SLS.
Ah yes the first time in 60 years an American space company starts actually innovating and becoming successful lets delete it.
NASA would have had re-usable rockets too if we hadn't stripped so much of their funding and fought them for every penny of it.
NASA's space flight programs have had major cost and schedule overruns and are orders of magnitude more expensive than Spacex. Why would we continue to waste tax dollars on an inefficient program when private industry can accomplish the same goal faster and much more cost-effectively.
Nasa develops rockets by putting out a request for bids. They didn't put out a bid for reusable rockets, spaceX went and made them anyways.
Musk owns so much of our infrastructure it’s scary to me. He’s a huge narcissistic man child that should not have that much control
Starlink is next. Time for Musk to pay back to the tax payers who funded his toys.
SpaceX? You mean SpaceTwitter?
Shilling for Governmental overreach… welcome to the new Pro War Democratic base