4 ms·
Thank goodness for billionaires. There's a good case to be made that if it weren't for the likes of Musk and Bezos we'd still be stuck with the likes of ULA.
by hersko 2y ago
Thank goodness for billionaires.
There's a good case to be made that if it weren't for the likes of Musk and Bezos we'd still be stuck with the likes of ULA.
They are literally pulling us into the future and i'm all for it.
- settsu 2y agoTotally worth the exploitation, amirite?? /s (You do realize we did this before without them, right?)
- mensetmanusman 2y agoNo nation has a done what spacex has.
- hersko 2y agoCan you explain how i am exploited? I use Amazon products daily (as do you), why shouldn't i be thankful to Bezos? He has made my life tangibly better. I really don't care how many shares of Amazon he has and what the current share price is.
- Tryk 2y agoI guess it would presuppose some solidarity with the workers at Amazon At a glance: https://www.cnbc.com/2023/04/12/study-amazon-workers-seriously-hurt-at-twice-rate-of-other-warehouses.html https://www.cnbc.com/2023/04/12/study-amazon-workers-serious... https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2023-10-25/pain-exhaustion-rampant-among-amazon-warehouse-workers-study-says https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2023-10-25/pain-exhau...
- hersko 2y agoIt sounds like a bad job so they should work elsewhere. These are not slave labor camps.
- Tryk 2y agoMost people require work to pay for food and housing. Not everyone is able to find a wealth of options for selling their labour. But as I said, I think the argument requires some basic empathy/solidarity to follow.
- settsu 2y agoBy your own logic, they must like it? Do you think they wouldn't if they had viable options??
- settsu 2y agoBillionaires simply cannot exist without exploitation somewhere (though most often throughout the system that enriched them.) This isn't even controversial. Many simply choose to think it's acceptable, even preferable, through whatever twisted justifications.
- pupppet 2y agoYes thank you billionaires, if you hadn't vacuumed the wealth of a nation this could have been a government agency success. Why should we all benefit when one man can?
- renewiltord 2y agoThe sums spent on this are trivial to governments. California HSR costs much more than bringing a rocket to life. The annual cost of dialysis to the American government is many times what SpaceX or Blue Origin costs. Any number of nations' governments could do this in a wealth perspective. And none have.
- pupppet 2y agoOf course they haven’t, how can they afford to compete with private companies? We’ve all decided that taxes are bad, there’s no money in a govt position.
- renewiltord 2y agoThey have a lot more money than private companies. California HSR alone costs ten times or more than the Starship program. Annually, the American government spends some three or four times as much as the Starship program on dialysis for 0.2% of the population. Money is in abundance for a government.
- pupppet 2y agoIf this were true, NASA would never need to outsource. Why pay SpaceX when you can build your own rockets.
- austhrow743 2y agoBecause SpaceX can build them cheaper.
- hersko 2y ago
- mensetmanusman 2y agoIt actually is a feature of capitalism. Envy can blind though.
- akamaka 2y agoThere are billionaires all over the world who haven’t built successful space companies. The key ingredient is the government funding which has made the US space industry possible, such as building the launch pads, subsidizing hundreds of companies which build specialized parts, creating the GPS network required to track launches, etc. Maybe thank the taxpayers instead?