4 ms·

"This service is awful, let's switch to the better one" You: "and give them money in exchange for services rendered?!!?"

mcmcmc 2y ago
The whole thing is a boondoggle and running a deficit to redistribute more wealth to the top should disgust people. Your strawman is meaningless.
- dotnet00 2y ago
  Where's the strawman? You're whining about giving money to SpaceX in exchange for asking SpaceX to build something to the specifications of the program. That's not redistributing wealth to the top, that's purchasing a service.
  - mcmcmc 2y ago
    You literally made up a quote that I did not say to create a nonsensical argument. Taking taxpayer money and spending it on something that doesn’t benefit taxpayers, but does benefit people with equity in Spacex, is wealth redistribution. All fiscal policy is wealth redistribution when it comes down to it.
- tim333 2y ago
  Musk is only really rich because he owned Tesla and SpaceX and those were only successful because they produced better stuff and transformed their industries. The system is kind of working as intended. Do you think things would be better if Musk never happened and we had relied on GM and Boeing?
Dylan16807 2y ago
They didn't complain about SpaceX itself getting money, they complained that some of that money will go to Musk.
- dotnet00 2y ago
  That's a meaningless distinction though. What's the logic of not choosing the most reliable supplier in the industry just because the owner is rich?
  - Dylan16807 2y ago
    > That's a meaningless distinction though. Just because there's currently no way to separate the two financially doesn't mean the complaint is invalid. There are multiple plausible ways for those finances to become untangled. > just because the owner is rich Him being just "rich" (7-8 figure threshold) is barely a factor. It's the extreme level and the way he acts.
    - dotnet00 2y ago
      This is why I mentioned 'reliable'. People love to whine about how extreme they perceive Musk to be, but SpaceX has continued to be as reliable as ever and hasn't shown any of the urges conspiracy theorists love to imagine they will have.
      - Dylan16807 2y ago
        "SpaceX is reliable" and "I don't want Elon Musk to get money" are completely compatible thoughts to hold at the same time. Complaining about a choice doesn't mean you think it's the wrong choice. Note that I'm not really concerned with how mcmcmc feels in detail, I'm just commenting on their initial post and your response to it. They weren't objecting to money for services rendered.

mcmcmc 2y ago

The whole thing is a boondoggle and running a deficit to redistribute more wealth to the top should disgust people. Your strawman is meaningless.

dotnet00 2y ago
Where's the strawman? You're whining about giving money to SpaceX in exchange for asking SpaceX to build something to the specifications of the program. That's not redistributing wealth to the top, that's purchasing a service.
- mcmcmc 2y ago
  You literally made up a quote that I did not say to create a nonsensical argument. Taking taxpayer money and spending it on something that doesn’t benefit taxpayers, but does benefit people with equity in Spacex, is wealth redistribution. All fiscal policy is wealth redistribution when it comes down to it.
tim333 2y ago
Musk is only really rich because he owned Tesla and SpaceX and those were only successful because they produced better stuff and transformed their industries. The system is kind of working as intended. Do you think things would be better if Musk never happened and we had relied on GM and Boeing?

Dylan16807 2y ago

They didn't complain about SpaceX itself getting money, they complained that some of that money will go to Musk.

dotnet00 2y ago
That's a meaningless distinction though. What's the logic of not choosing the most reliable supplier in the industry just because the owner is rich?
- Dylan16807 2y ago
  > That's a meaningless distinction though. Just because there's currently no way to separate the two financially doesn't mean the complaint is invalid. There are multiple plausible ways for those finances to become untangled. > just because the owner is rich Him being just "rich" (7-8 figure threshold) is barely a factor. It's the extreme level and the way he acts.
  - dotnet00 2y ago
    This is why I mentioned 'reliable'. People love to whine about how extreme they perceive Musk to be, but SpaceX has continued to be as reliable as ever and hasn't shown any of the urges conspiracy theorists love to imagine they will have.
    - Dylan16807 2y ago
      "SpaceX is reliable" and "I don't want Elon Musk to get money" are completely compatible thoughts to hold at the same time. Complaining about a choice doesn't mean you think it's the wrong choice. Note that I'm not really concerned with how mcmcmc feels in detail, I'm just commenting on their initial post and your response to it. They weren't objecting to money for services rendered.