politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
I hope not. It would be a shame to dump SpaceX in particular for purely political reasons, when (so far) they've been the best contracter by far.
As the head of NASA said, they don't work with Elon Musk, they work with SpaceX, and the relationship has been good.
I do hope they leave X though, and just promote a Fediverse instance or something instead. That's more of Elon's pet project/playground now.
Nationalize spacex.
Our supreme court is already showing us that laws and precedent don't mean anything anymore. Might as well use the chaos for some good.
I didn’t realize that. Too bad Space X can’t divest from that turd.
Or Harris can just fund NASA to build the rockets themselves and steal all the talent from X.
The thing about SpaceX and NASA is that their purposes aren't really the same. NASA does space exploration and science type work to a large extent, which requires them getting their equipment up into space, but since rocket launches themselves are no longer the frontier of space technology, they don't really want to be in charge of launching everything up the that people want launched (which is a lot these days), they want to focus their efforts on pushing the boundary. It would be like trying to solve the problems with Boeing by making the FAA build all the country's planes instead. Not to say that nationalization is necessarily bad, but more that if it were done, it would make more sense to keep SpaceX it's own entity as a state run corporation than to fold it's commercial rocket launching into NASA.
Alternatively, something else I could imagine threatening Musk with, if the government had the stomach for it, would be to seize SpaceX and then make it employee-owned, which avoids changing it's competitiveness in the launch industry (it has become so dominant because, for the moment, it has actually done a pretty good job at reducing launch costs and improving rocket technology, and doing anything too disruptive with it while it remains in that position might disrupt that), but takes away Elon's share of the money and decision making.
She could literally nationalize all his interests, and he is so unlikeable even his investors would probably welcome a government buyout on the cheap.
Elon may be a face of the Company, he's not responsible for much other than general long term vision. Despite what he may claim, he isn't handling the engineering directly, and Gwynne Shotwell has been running operations for nearly it's entire existence.
Hopefully they can, some day. Maybe another entity will make Elon an offer he can't refuse when he needs cash, as the synergy with his other ventures doesn't seem huge.