3 ms·

> I know right! Except for […] You mean like Krugman recognizes in this paragraph: > Granted, Musk has had some real successes. Tesla was ahead of the EV curv

> I know right! Except for […] You mean like Krugman recognizes in this paragraph: > Granted, Musk has had some real successes. Tesla was ahead of the EV curve, and Starlink is a critically important service as well as a viable business. Krugman's hypothesis is in the very next paragraph: > But these achievements weren’t enough to make Musk the world’s richest man. His wealth has, instead, historically rested mainly on self-fulfilling faith — investors believing in Musk’s genius have piled into stocks in Musk-controlled companies, and the rising value of these companies has enhanced his reputation for genius. followed by: > We have a term for enterprises that look successful because they keep drawing in new investors and keep drawing in new investors because they look successful. They’re called Ponzi schemes. And Elon Musk is basically a human Ponzi scheme. > Furthermore, the SpaceX IPO now in progress makes it clearer than ever that Musk’s greatest skill isn’t developing futuristic products. It’s his mastery of financial shell games and his ability to leverage insider influence, especially his influence with the Trump administration.

volkk 4mo ago
[flagged]
- Flashtoo 4mo ago
  > It's literally the free market at work--it's really simple, if you don't believe in whatever he says, don't speculate! This, too, is actually addressed in the article - the whole point is that you're being forced to participate/speculate through this rapid inclusion in indices and mutual funds, because he's had the indices change the rules for him. So no, it's not that simple.
  - volkk 4mo ago
    The indexes/mutual funds have a 1 year limit. The company would've been introduced into them anyway. You think SpaceX is going to collapse within a year? They fast forwarded the inevitable. But I do conceded that is shady to do. But to me, that seems to be the _actual_ main complaint of the article. Everything else is "i don't really like Elon Musk and don't believe in his vision"
- happytoexplain 4mo ago
  I've never understood how common the appeal to "simplicity" is. It's also very simple to just kill everybody you disagree with. There isn't a simpler idea, really. What is the point? Why even write a comment?
  - volkk 4mo ago
    i don't know what you're trying to say, it's a figure of speech

volkk 4mo ago

[flagged]

Flashtoo 4mo ago
> It's literally the free market at work--it's really simple, if you don't believe in whatever he says, don't speculate! This, too, is actually addressed in the article - the whole point is that you're being forced to participate/speculate through this rapid inclusion in indices and mutual funds, because he's had the indices change the rules for him. So no, it's not that simple.
- volkk 4mo ago
  The indexes/mutual funds have a 1 year limit. The company would've been introduced into them anyway. You think SpaceX is going to collapse within a year? They fast forwarded the inevitable. But I do conceded that is shady to do. But to me, that seems to be the _actual_ main complaint of the article. Everything else is "i don't really like Elon Musk and don't believe in his vision"
happytoexplain 4mo ago
I've never understood how common the appeal to "simplicity" is. It's also very simple to just kill everybody you disagree with. There isn't a simpler idea, really. What is the point? Why even write a comment?
- volkk 4mo ago
  i don't know what you're trying to say, it's a figure of speech