4 ms·

Yes it does matter. Money thrown away on his lies is money that isn’t invested on real projects.

bilbo0s 1y ago
I think the point is that if it's his money he's pissing away, then any other projects the money would have been spent on would have been equally dubious in any case. He's not going to, all of a sudden, become wise simply because he doesn't spend money on what he's spending money on. Did we give him wayyy too much free money via subsidies? Yes. But that was our mistake. And if we hadn't given it to him, we would have given it to some other scam artists somewhere or other. So even in the case of the counterfactual, we could expect a similar outcome. Just different scumbags.
- _aavaa_ 1y ago
  > And if we hadn't given it to him, we would have given it to some other scam artists somewhere or other. No we wouldn’t have. Not every dollar we give goes to scam artists. And there are a whole lot of industries and companies far less deceitful.
panick21_ 1y ago
Overall SpaceX is incredibly successful and Tesla is still reasonable successful. So money overall is hardly thrown away.
- lm28469 1y ago
  Success being defined here as "something that makes numbers go up in some capacity"
  - nolok 1y ago
    From a stockholders point of view tesla is a massive success. From a car design and development point of view, it's a massive waste of lost opportunities. From a self driving interested person, it's a joke. Really depends on how you view things, in a purely money in the stock market aspect tesla is doing great.
  - panick21_ 1y ago
    Well in the same measure of success that we use for every company.
    - rhetocj23 1y ago
      No. They are proxies. But not the truest measures of success.
      - panick21_ 1y ago
        Ok so how is SpaceX not succcessful. Please explain.
        JumpinJack_Cash 1y ago
        > > Ok so how is SpaceX not succcessful. Please explain. Only isolated people need Starklink and 95% of people on Earth live in urban cities with pop > 100,000. So it's a product for the 5%
        panick21_ 1y ago
        Ok, great so fuck those people then right? What kind of absurd argument is that? Like any company that doesn't serve 100% of people on the planet is by definition not a success? That's the dumbest fucking argument I have ever heard and I hope you are not actually series about that. Because Apple doesn't serve 100% of the population either, so clearly Apple is not successful. By your logic right? And its not even true. People that live in big cities do a thing called 'flying' between big cities quite often. And Starlink is already starting to be dominant in the airline market, meaning all those city people, when they fly use Starlink. And Starlink is used in agriculture and mining, and shipping. So all those city people do actually use things that have Starlink in the supply chain. Common man, its fine to hate Musk, but at some point reality is a thing.
        JumpinJack_Cash 1y ago
        The world was never the same after Windows 95 or the iPhone, or Google search Amazon or Facebook. Paradigm shifts they were Musk companies are essentially reinventing the wheel for no reason whatsoever (or for political purposes) chasing what can be defined at best extremely marginal quality of life improvement for the general population. Uber and the food delivery apps are much more consequential but they are not as performative as a rocket landing on its butt, so easily amused people are not as enthusiastic (even though they are on the aforementioned food delivery apps 3+ times per day) > > Common man, its fine to hate Musk, but at some point reality is a thing. Reality implies that an individual be present and having knowledge of where their quality of life comes from . If you disappeared Musk companies the world will go on without a single trouble. Disappear Microsoft or Apple or Aramco or Google and you'll have Civil War within a week. Maybe you should get a dose of reality, for the stock market is not it, however pleasant the gainz might be.

I think the point is that if it's his money he's pissing away, then any other projects the money would have been spent on would have been equally dubious in any case. He's not going to, all of a sudden, become wise simply because he doesn't spend money on what he's spending money on. Did we give him wayyy too much free money via subsidies? Yes. But that was our mistake. And if we hadn't given it to him, we would have given it to some other scam artists somewhere or other. So even in the case of the counterfactual, we could expect a similar outcome. Just different scumbags.

_aavaa_ 1y ago
> And if we hadn't given it to him, we would have given it to some other scam artists somewhere or other. No we wouldn’t have. Not every dollar we give goes to scam artists. And there are a whole lot of industries and companies far less deceitful.

panick21_ 1y ago

Overall SpaceX is incredibly successful and Tesla is still reasonable successful. So money overall is hardly thrown away.

lm28469 1y ago
Success being defined here as "something that makes numbers go up in some capacity"
- nolok 1y ago
  From a stockholders point of view tesla is a massive success. From a car design and development point of view, it's a massive waste of lost opportunities. From a self driving interested person, it's a joke. Really depends on how you view things, in a purely money in the stock market aspect tesla is doing great.
- panick21_ 1y ago
  Well in the same measure of success that we use for every company.
  - rhetocj23 1y ago
    No. They are proxies. But not the truest measures of success.
    - panick21_ 1y ago
      Ok so how is SpaceX not succcessful. Please explain.
      - JumpinJack_Cash 1y ago
        > > Ok so how is SpaceX not succcessful. Please explain. Only isolated people need Starklink and 95% of people on Earth live in urban cities with pop > 100,000. So it's a product for the 5%
        panick21_ 1y ago
        Ok, great so fuck those people then right? What kind of absurd argument is that? Like any company that doesn't serve 100% of people on the planet is by definition not a success? That's the dumbest fucking argument I have ever heard and I hope you are not actually series about that. Because Apple doesn't serve 100% of the population either, so clearly Apple is not successful. By your logic right? And its not even true. People that live in big cities do a thing called 'flying' between big cities quite often. And Starlink is already starting to be dominant in the airline market, meaning all those city people, when they fly use Starlink. And Starlink is used in agriculture and mining, and shipping. So all those city people do actually use things that have Starlink in the supply chain. Common man, its fine to hate Musk, but at some point reality is a thing.
        JumpinJack_Cash 1y ago
        The world was never the same after Windows 95 or the iPhone, or Google search Amazon or Facebook. Paradigm shifts they were Musk companies are essentially reinventing the wheel for no reason whatsoever (or for political purposes) chasing what can be defined at best extremely marginal quality of life improvement for the general population. Uber and the food delivery apps are much more consequential but they are not as performative as a rocket landing on its butt, so easily amused people are not as enthusiastic (even though they are on the aforementioned food delivery apps 3+ times per day) > > Common man, its fine to hate Musk, but at some point reality is a thing. Reality implies that an individual be present and having knowledge of where their quality of life comes from . If you disappeared Musk companies the world will go on without a single trouble. Disappear Microsoft or Apple or Aramco or Google and you'll have Civil War within a week. Maybe you should get a dose of reality, for the stock market is not it, however pleasant the gainz might be.