3 ms·

SpaceX depends on government contracts and Elon's companies all seem to be intertwined somewhat financially,so it makes sense he would want to be close to the P

SpaceX depends on government contracts and Elon's companies all seem to be intertwined somewhat financially,so it makes sense he would want to be close to the President. Uber also heavily depends on gov policy with the contractor/employee debate. Uber is also heavily lobbying governments to privatize public transit which would benefit it. I also wouldn't be surprised if they pushed for that new in-between employee/contractor designation that they've been claiming is necessary for the new economy.

tankenmate 10y ago
SpaceX depends on government contracts far less than say ULA; so far SpaceX has had 17 successful private commercial launches and 15 successful government paid launches, and ULA has only had 1 private commercial flight on an Atlas rocket since 2010 (WorldView-3 Digital Globe). And to top it off ULA gets USD1B a year for flight readiness regardless of how many launches it makes (although this will probably go soon). EDIT: company name fix.
- yoyomaforce 10y ago
  He may depend less on gov contracts than ULA, but he still depends on them, so I'm not sure what point you're making. Not trying to be rude, I would just appreciate it if you would explain it to me, so I can understand what you mean.
  - karkisuni 10y ago
    I think its more of a response to the growing misconception that Elon's companies are exceptionally and fully dependent on government money in the form of contracts, loans, and tax breaks to its customers. This suggests the companies are being artificially kept afloat on the backs of the taxpayer and are not "good businesses". Reality is, of course, more complicated. SpaceX, Tesla, and SolarCity of course each benefit(ed) from the above, but not any more than their competitors and are not entirely dependent on them. Loans were paid back, contracts were competed and won fairly, tax breaks incentivize desired behavior and are common industry-wide in transportation/energy. Your original comment could imply that SpaceX is more dependent on the federal government than other launch providers, hitting a sensitive spot for those fighting the above misconception, but that's not the case. Governments have the money and motive to fly expensive satellites (or people) and are the biggest customers for nearly all launch providers.
    - yoyomaforce 10y ago
      I get that. There has been a lot of anti-Elon stuff published in the last 6 months.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

tankenmate 10y ago

SpaceX depends on government contracts far less than say ULA; so far SpaceX has had 17 successful private commercial launches and 15 successful government paid launches, and ULA has only had 1 private commercial flight on an Atlas rocket since 2010 (WorldView-3 Digital Globe). And to top it off ULA gets USD1B a year for flight readiness regardless of how many launches it makes (although this will probably go soon). EDIT: company name fix.

yoyomaforce 10y ago
He may depend less on gov contracts than ULA, but he still depends on them, so I'm not sure what point you're making. Not trying to be rude, I would just appreciate it if you would explain it to me, so I can understand what you mean.
- karkisuni 10y ago
  I think its more of a response to the growing misconception that Elon's companies are exceptionally and fully dependent on government money in the form of contracts, loans, and tax breaks to its customers. This suggests the companies are being artificially kept afloat on the backs of the taxpayer and are not "good businesses". Reality is, of course, more complicated. SpaceX, Tesla, and SolarCity of course each benefit(ed) from the above, but not any more than their competitors and are not entirely dependent on them. Loans were paid back, contracts were competed and won fairly, tax breaks incentivize desired behavior and are common industry-wide in transportation/energy. Your original comment could imply that SpaceX is more dependent on the federal government than other launch providers, hitting a sensitive spot for those fighting the above misconception, but that's not the case. Governments have the money and motive to fly expensive satellites (or people) and are the biggest customers for nearly all launch providers.
  - yoyomaforce 10y ago
    I get that. There has been a lot of anti-Elon stuff published in the last 6 months.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]