At this point I am finding it hard to hate Elon Musk.
For everything he does that has annoyed me (like Gloating at people being bombed in the middle east) — his business acumen has completely unlocked for people what they we thought was impossible.
There should be nothing wrong with recognizing that any individual is a mix of things you're going to like and things you're not. That could be judged all the way to a mix of things which are morally correct, amoral, or immoral... but the reality is probably a mix.
It should be OK to praise the guy for those good traits and in turn to criticize the guy for what he does wrong: both in turn calling out the specific actions and less "the person". Its rare that demonizing someone is really appropriate or anything other than self-serving and we should see those that make that effort in that light.
Completely agree. But regardless of if we criticize or praise. He is gossip worthy. Going from being in a Marvel Movie as the architype of Iron Man, all the good things he has done, to recently jumping around at a rally of a madman, and kind of looking nuts himself.
It does beg comparison to the typical evil genius. He could literally be a villain from a Bond Movie, funding Specter. It's all fun and games. But just on surface, it is hard not to talk about him. He embodies too many sci-fi tropes.
On days like today, that was amazing to see. I'd like to think all the bad is overblown.
Yes he’s amazing and we’re lucky to live in a time and place where he can lead thousands of people that can do these things. He’s an example of what’s possible by a capitalist and how capitalism empowers individuals to shape the world and make it better for everyone. So naturally there’s a group of people trying to stop him due to envy and other copes.
Think you are confusing capitalism with variety of other political fields.
Capitalism does nothing to ensure personal/individual freedoms. There is no 'empowering'.
Technically slaves were also a valuable part of the capitalist system at the time. They were integral to the flow of capital, as they were an asset.
You can have Dictator/Authoritarian governments also be capitalist. Huge misunderstanding these days is thinking China is communist. They stopped being communist decades ago and are not as Capitalist as the US. But that doesn't help individuals that much.
Even today, Human Resources, is about 'humans' as capital, how to manage the human assets. Capitalism doesn't help the individual, the induvial is the resource to be mined.
China stopped being real communist because they were tired of starving. They are the proof that a centralized managed economy only leads to stagnation at best and mass death more commonly. Today they are a very competent cartel that takes a big on all free market production. Deng was mainly a genius and saved the country from Maoism.
Slavery existed well before capitalism and is economic system independent. Slavery occurs across a wide spectrum of economic systems today. It will always exist. It’s up to governments not capitalists to outlaw it. Capitalists need rules to play by.
Human Resources are the socialist/communist/leftist contribution to our economic system. They can’t actually contribute anything useful but they can deploy commissars to ensure the humans in the organization have right think. HR and all the associated schemes are simply leftist grift that infects everything.
>>>China stopped being real communist because they were tired of starving. They are the proof that a centralized managed economy only leads to stagnation at best and mass death more commonly. Today they are a very competent cartel that takes a big on all free market production. Deng was mainly a genius and saved the country from Maoism.
Doesn't change my statement that they aren't communist anymore, now. You are just agreeing. I didn't make any statement that was pro-communism.
>>>Slavery existed well before capitalism and is economic system independent. Slavery occurs across a wide spectrum of economic systems today. It will always exist. It’s up to governments not capitalists to outlaw it. Capitalists need rules to play by.
Yes. That was my statement. That capitalism alone does not lead to individual rights. I guess you agree again. I miss-understood your previous statement that seemed to imply capitalism had lead to individual flourishing, and thus SpaceX.
>>>>Human Resources are the socialist/communist/leftist contribution to our economic system. They can’t actually contribute anything useful but they can deploy commissars to ensure the humans in the organization have right think. HR and all the associated schemes are simply leftist grift that infects everything.
HR has nothing to do with socialism. It is clearly a Risk Management department. They are just as likely to fire victims as the guilty. The only calculation they use is the risk/cost to the company. If it is more expedient to get rid of a victim they will do it. They are not on the employee's side. If HR fires you for hanging a noose on your coworkers locker, that is minimizing the risk from someone unhinged.. That is not being socialist.
Is there any source for first-hand specifics of what she does?
I used to argue in reddit (same username as my HN) basically calling Musk a fraud and Gwynne Shotwell being all the brains 6 years ago, but I've since changed my position after seeing engineers in spaceX give props to Musk at podcasts, twitter, and various interviews.
The only 'grift' that holds up is about FSD. Everything else is nonsense. They are making Boring tunnels, the costumer paid and they delivered. The company didn't take off as much as Musk hoped but calling it a 'grift' isn't accurate.
Hyperloop was never promised, that's literally just people who don't like Musk made up. In fact he EXPLICITLY said 'I'm not gone build Hyperloop, its just an idea I had', and then people who don't like him 10 years later 'where is the promised Hyperloop'. How does that make sense? Musk never received a single $ for Hyperloop, but somehow this is a 'grift'.
> how many billions of dollars in government subsidies?
They are big cooperation's in capital intensive industries. When you build big investments, you get government tax reduction and other things, this is literally normal. If you don't like it, that's fine, but that how it works. Its not a 'grift' unless you want to go down the 'modern capitalism is grift' route.
Outside of that, most subsidies he got, were just universal subsidies that anybody could get. The US government gave the same amount of subsidies to foreign companies selling EV cars in the US. This was a plan to increase EV adoption in general. And arguably it worked. How is again is this a 'grift'.
And for SpaceX, I think its pretty clear that the government got much, much, much more then it ever paid for when they paid SpaceX. I would argue SpaceX has already saved the US government more money then they ever paid for SpaceX development. Just Clipper going on Falcon Heavy is billions in savings.
There are plenty of reason to dislike him but those aren't really good ones. Except the FSD one, that one I think is quite bad. At least they finally allowed moving the FSD from one car to the next, but that's not enough.
For everything he does that has annoyed me (like Gloating at people being bombed in the middle east) — his business acumen has completely unlocked for people what they we thought was impossible.