416
submitted 1 year ago by USAONE@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

How the U.S. government came to rely on the tech billionaire—and is now struggling to rein him in.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] chakan2@lemmy.world 214 points 1 year ago

That's easy...the US needs to asset imminent domain on starlink. You don't fucking blackmail the government.

[-] uphillbothways@kbin.social 119 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

And SpaceX as a whole. It's entirely government funded anyway. Should have kept that money in NASA where it belonged. Fortunately, there's an easy way to put it all right back.

(Also, archive link of top article here: https://archive.is/H6rzo )

[-] citycat@lemm.ee 92 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

not entirely government funded, but enough that, if they withdraw funding, it would totally collapse.

the entire argument that “private companies do it cheaper” is mostly because they cut corners, skirt regulations, and screw over employees to do business on the cheap. then, we find out there may be massive security breaches like, oh, chatting with Putin and god knows who else...

[-] keeb420@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago

Part of the problem is nasa seems to be very risk adverse now. Letting private companies take the risk is one way to get around that. I'm just glad we don't have to depend on russia to get to space or the iss.

[-] CoderKat@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

Don't forget potentially underpay people. I don't believe that's happening for SpaceX specifically, but it does for many other competitors to government jobs. Government jobs aren't necessarily super high pay, but they usually have solid pay with excellent benefits, pension, and work/life balance.

So when jobs move from the public to private sector, it often comes at the cost of employees. And in some extreme cases, employees are paid so little that they have to rely on government benefits to get by, which is extremely dumb. That's subsidizing the private sector.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (25 replies)
[-] jonne@infosec.pub 33 points 1 year ago

Or they should've never left this to the private sector if there was going to be a strategic component to it. Now they're at the mercy of an unstable foreign national, who is himself beholden to a bunch of foreign investors.

[-] demlet@lemmy.world 38 points 1 year ago

Turns out unregulated capitalism might be slightly at odds with democracy.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] kmkz_ninja@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago

You don't fucking blackmail the government.

Tell that to scientology.

[-] PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

Lol no kidding.

[-] DessertStorms@kbin.social 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You don’t fucking blackmail the government

lol, only he obviously is, so....
And I guarantee he was long before starlink - the riches man on earth doesn't get that way and stay that way without owning at least a handful of politicians (and now his own media outlet of which he has absolute control and millions of existing followers ready to worship his every word).

I genuinely don't understand how anyone can still look at anything this man does and think it's benign, or worse, clueless..

[-] iltoroargento@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 1 year ago

With the rich, never attribute to stupidity what you can attribute to malice.

[-] iforgotmyinstance@lemmy.world 92 points 1 year ago

Time to revoke any clearances he has and refuse to renew any contracts with the government.

[-] droans@lemmy.world 48 points 1 year ago

You know, it seems like something like this should be illegal. Maybe name it something like the Logan Act.

[-] Wodge@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

Great name! I, too, enjoy some Wolverine.

[-] BeMoreCareful@lemdro.id 81 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

On the phone, Musk said that he was looking at his laptop and could see “the entire war unfolding” through a map of Starlink activity. “This was, like, three minutes before he said, ‘Well, I had this great conversation with Putin,’ ” the senior defense official told me. “And we were, like, ‘Oh, dear, this is not good.’ ”

It's like the Elon India Tea Company. Strange to think we've got so many individuals that rival any sort of elected officials and that our government is becoming aware of this. Elon in particular seems to have the US over several barrels, space, battlefield communications, recharge stations, and now Twitter and AI possibly from the bottom of a k hole.

Wild, also: I forget how good the New Yorker is. That whole article was fascinating. I feel like I learned a lot and it was interesting.

[-] kitonthenet@kbin.social 79 points 1 year ago

Boy if only the pentagon had a way to deal with rogue actors, I wonder what they’re in charge of

[-] mosiacmango@lemm.ee 14 points 1 year ago

Sounds like the octagon didnt get it done, so we might as well give another shape a try.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Nioxic@lemmy.dbzer0.com 61 points 1 year ago

So he is.. breaking the US law.

[-] demlet@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago

Hahaha, this person thinks laws apply to the wealthy.

[-] BloodForTheBloodGod@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 year ago

Who don't go out of their way to annoy the other powerful and rich.

[-] Savvy95@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

Yes. If he talks with Putin about "government policy" or "international relations" then he has to register with the US government as doing so.

It's against the law to privately speak with foreign nations about those categories. It may put you at odds with US policy or maybe you dont see the whole picture, so it's better in the US eyes to ban foreign diplomacy by private citizens.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] theodewere@kbin.social 38 points 1 year ago

of course Saruman called Sauron

[-] taanegl@lemmy.ml 38 points 1 year ago

Then the question everyone should ask him on Twitter/X is... "Are you an agent of foreign principal?"

[-] STUPIDVIPGUY@sopuli.xyz 12 points 1 year ago

he is an agent of capital principle

[-] theodewere@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago

no he isn't.. he has only ONE principle.. it is spelled E - L - O - N..

[-] sciawp@lemm.ee 34 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

How can we call our system a democracy when one unelected man can hold so much power?

[-] quantum_mechanic@sh.itjust.works 21 points 1 year ago

Look at Rupert Murdoch. He unquestionably holds more power than Musk and has been at it for a long time. Democracy is an illusion, since people are very easily influenced by the media they consume.

[-] FaeDrifter@midwest.social 7 points 1 year ago

Better education that emphasizes skepticism and critical thinking would do so much to fight the influence of media.

[-] TechDiver@kbin.social 21 points 1 year ago

If hitler was alive he'd boast he personally spoke to him as well as if it was some kind of achievement

[-] letsgocrazy@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

Ein reich? Ein Volk? Ein Führer?

Interesting.

[-] citycat@lemm.ee 18 points 1 year ago

“arrest me for espionage and/or treason, please"

[-] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

They can't arrest him. In the U.S., we have a wealth threshold above which there is no accountability.

The only reason trump is being held accountable is because he isn't a billionaire. If you count his debts, he probably isn't even a millionaire.

His son-in-law Jared sold secrets to the Saudis for billions, but now he's a billionaire so he cannot be held accountable for being a spy and a traitor. That's how we do things in the U.S. The wealthy cannot be held accountable here.

[-] Wr4ith@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

Struggling implies that they tried anything

[-] anarchrist@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 year ago

They should get that guy the Flanders's used and spank Elon for a year until he's not a turd any more.

[-] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Elon is already plenty annoying. I couldn't imagine how much more so he'd be if he started talking like Flanders. (Iirc that spanking was the reason Ned began using the gibberish).

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] cloudy1999@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 year ago

At first, I thought this was one of those rule posts.

[-] isVeryLoud@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2023
416 points (96.4% liked)

politics

18888 readers
3765 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS