if elon musk hates socialism so much why is he always getting publicly owned
@tillianisafox and funded by government handouts
@ghostdancer @rysiek @tillianisafox From the 1980s onwards there was a big emphasis in converting the public economy of services into a private one. The public lost in terms of any vestiges of democratic control and private companies won in that they could exfiltrate public value into offshore bank accounts. Since these were essential services which everyone uses, under private ownership they could really squeeze people for money to the maximum extent, and we're seeing how extreme that is becoming now with "the cost of living crisis".
OCR Output (chars: 2010)
WHAT LAISSEZ FAIRE?
RITING IN THE GUARDIAN LAST JANUARY UNDER THE HEADLINE “CARIBBEAN COM-
munism y. Capitalism,” respected journalist Stephen Kinzer began
his article like this:
Visiting unhappy Cuba is especially thought-provoking for
anyone familiar with its unhappy neighbours. Cubans live dif-
ficult lives and have much to complain about. So do Jamai-
cans, Dominicans, Haitians, Guatemalans, Hondurans, Sal-
vadorans, and others in the Caribbean basin who live under
capitalist governments. Who is worse off? Does an ordinary
person live better in Cuba or in a nearby capitalist country?!
The upshot is that historical capitalism was not the free market. Rather
it was an anti-competitive, pro-business system of controls and subsidies
in which government and mercantile interests worked together in a mis-
guided attempt to produce economic growth and to promote the fortunes
of specific well-connected interests. As in any period, there are rent-seekers
and obliging rulers, with a revolving door between the two groups. But it
is important to note that there was no attempt at comprehensive economic
planning. Thus, there was scope for entrepreneurship, which needs little
encouragement to flourish. By historical standards the burden of govern-
ment was light. Grass sprouts through the cracks in the sidewalk. A little
economic freedom goes a long way.
This historical account is relevant to understanding the basis from which
the U.S. economy evolved and to realizing that the trajectory of develop-
ment has been different from what it would have been had a real free mar-
ket existed. Privilege has had long-lasting effects, which we still feel today
owing to what Kevin Carson calls the “subsidy of history.”
Thus those who call today’s system “capitalism” cannot be said to be mis-
using the term. Advocates of the real free market therefore would be well
advised to avoid using it to describe their preferred social system.
I think you may be misunderstanding something which I'm pretty familiar with, so I'm going to expatiate.
Under the "traditional" NASA model, the Feds pay very large sums of money to contractors such as Boeing to develop, build, and operate things. Most of the time these things get cancelled before actually being used, so the contractor gets most of the money without having to deliver a final product.
SpaceX is working under a pay-for-service model, and much cheaper.
@publius @tillianisafox it’s public money into private pockets. They’re using tax payer money to fund these endeavors, but when communities fight for public housing, schools and healthcare, they get the “that’s socialism” card. Spending billions of tax payer dollars in private contractors is seen as promoting competition, even though these are already monopolies being subsidized, and some don’t even fall through as you have rightly pointed out. That’s whats wrong.
NASA is getting much more, for less money, from SpaceX than under the standard procurement model. That's because of contracts which require SpaceX to risk company funds on development, which the big contractors won't do ; and also because NASA is sharing services with other customers (you could never buy a Space Shuttle launch), instead of having everything tailor made.
If you want to drag in the highly-overdone "Whitey on the Moon" line of thought, that's on you.
@publius @tillianisafox not even what Im discussing. I’m not talking about what procurement model provides the most financial surplus to a government agency. Im discussing the reason why we are using tax payer money on that in the first place, with more pressing issues needing public funding. I dont even know what you mean by whitey on the moon narrative, but i never brought it up. Let’s leave it at that shall we? I do not wish to continue this further. Nice day :)
Hate Elon all you want. He'll give you plenty of reason.
Be disgusted with Federal spending priorities if you want. It's every American's right (although so far as I am concerned, space is about the only thing the government is spending money on right now that gives people hope for the future).
But the plain fact is that SpaceX is delivering value for money. And you can see that in the fact that satellite launch, a business the US lost decades ago, has come back.
This instance is focused around the furry community, and is open to anyone interested in it. It's open to all fluffies and scalies !
To contact meow.social, please use our contact form : https://tiwy57.me/page/meow.html. E-mails are not viewed on this address.
We do not accept any form of sponsored content on our site. If you like meow, consider donating something via paypal or Liberapay