3 ms·

Its not really an interpretation- he has literally talked about this as his playbook dozens of times. One step in the playbook is reduce - “if you dont break t

Its not really an interpretation- he has literally talked about this as his playbook dozens of times. One step in the playbook is reduce - “if you dont break things 10% of the time then you are not reducing enough” is almost verbatim what he has said, and done, for all of his companies. I strongly disagree with my fellow Americans that government systems should be immune to this process or that people will be harmed. This sensitivity to perceived harm is a problem in and of itself.

spiderfarmer 2y ago
The biggest problem for people like you is that there are plenty governments and companies that are being led by competent leaders that don’t need to wield an axe to effect change. To the people wielding the axe, every problem looks like a tree.
saagarjha 2y ago
You think breaking things for 10% of Americans is not harmful?
- toyg 2y ago
  Of course it isn't, for him; that 10% is people who rely on the state, which means the poor. He is not poor, he does not need the state. Until, that is, he has an accident, a surprise, something that derails his "normal" life, and then he will cry that the government wasn't there to save him.
  - netsharc 2y ago
    America runs on the myth of "If you work hard enough, you'll succeed.". If you believe this, and you discount the role external factors has played in your life (who your parents are, whether you were discriminated against, that chance meeting with an investor who happened to like the same football team as you and gave you your break), you'll believe the opposite "If you're not successful, it's because you're lazy.", ignoring factors like poor education or hard luck like illness or accidents. And so the poor get viewed as lazy grifters, while the billionaires are the piously hard-working...
watwut 2y ago
I would point out that former twitter lost both advertisers (you know money resource) and users. Its usability went down. Now the obvious difference is that x dont matter to people in real life, goverment does. It is pretty obvious that real goal here is to cause maximal harm and destruction. Fascists do better in destroyed countries, Musk does not need consumer protection or functional FBI, he wants them corrupt and weak. Just as he made x weaker. I am aware that pro-Musk people do not care about ethics, harm, morals or legality. Harm to other people is feature to people like you, I get it.

spiderfarmer 2y ago

The biggest problem for people like you is that there are plenty governments and companies that are being led by competent leaders that don’t need to wield an axe to effect change. To the people wielding the axe, every problem looks like a tree.

saagarjha 2y ago

You think breaking things for 10% of Americans is not harmful?

toyg 2y ago
Of course it isn't, for him; that 10% is people who rely on the state, which means the poor. He is not poor, he does not need the state. Until, that is, he has an accident, a surprise, something that derails his "normal" life, and then he will cry that the government wasn't there to save him.
- netsharc 2y ago
  America runs on the myth of "If you work hard enough, you'll succeed.". If you believe this, and you discount the role external factors has played in your life (who your parents are, whether you were discriminated against, that chance meeting with an investor who happened to like the same football team as you and gave you your break), you'll believe the opposite "If you're not successful, it's because you're lazy.", ignoring factors like poor education or hard luck like illness or accidents. And so the poor get viewed as lazy grifters, while the billionaires are the piously hard-working...

watwut 2y ago

I would point out that former twitter lost both advertisers (you know money resource) and users. Its usability went down. Now the obvious difference is that x dont matter to people in real life, goverment does. It is pretty obvious that real goal here is to cause maximal harm and destruction. Fascists do better in destroyed countries, Musk does not need consumer protection or functional FBI, he wants them corrupt and weak. Just as he made x weaker. I am aware that pro-Musk people do not care about ethics, harm, morals or legality. Harm to other people is feature to people like you, I get it.