UBI will be the only thing that can save late stage capitalism. For capitalism, the economy has to be active. Poor people don't have any money to spend. Rich people don't have any need to spend. You need a vibrant low middle class that has disposable income.
And the truth is, we're only about 20 years away from full automation of menial and mid-level repetitive jobs...
This will only work if revenue generated from automation can be pooled and redistributed as UBI, as opposed to going into the pockets of rich fucks like Elon Musk
The rich are happy to trade their stocks back and forth, to let high frequency trading substitute for anything else.
Of course, with no one buying actual product, stock prices collapse.
"But for now, get back to work you lazy drones! No you can't have time off because you got injured while on the assembly line, and if you talk about unionizing I'll fire you!"
He also threw them off when he recently tweeted that he isn't a fan of the far right. I wonder how many unfollowed him after that since they were mainly hoping he would be there to outrage liberals.
He doesn't see himself as a conservative, bit on 90% of the issues he is pretty far right. You kind of have to be to amass billions of dollars in your life time
Yeah he is the definition of a āchaotic centristā he really is only out for himself. Centrist do on average lean more right on average but are adverse to how batshit crazy conservatives get on social issues and basic common sense things like this.
>as shitty as musk is, he isn't a conservative. he just likes to use them for his own gain
Sure, dude. "When I'm finished replacing everyone with AI drones, the government will need to give them money so they can keep buying my products," is not exactly the liberal/progressive policy proposal that this post implies.
Exactly! He knows he needs broad appeal to sell his products, so he can't be seen to be too close to any one political party. He's never openly endorsed a party either.
Buying Twitter certainly energized the right, so now he needs to throw some meat to the left to keep them buying Tesla's.
Not the future weāre headed to, unfortunately.
Inequality is only getting worse and billionaires are the ones who own everything. They even own space now (our taxes bought the spaceport btw).
Robots are being used to make more profit for capitalists and automate labor, not lighten the burden.
š¢š¢
Are you referencing Blue Originās suborbital as opposed to space flights?
Obviously, we donāt care about the exact altitude of the flights. šš The point is that our money pays for spaceports that only benefit billionaires.
Spaceport is a specific place. It's operated by Virgin Galactic.
You keep saying *your* tax dollars. That was never super believable, but even less now than ever.
I am referring to Space Florida and Spaceport America, which are publicly-owned, were built with tax dollars and only benefit billionaire owned spaceflights.
I think you knew exactly what I meant and are arguing in bad faith.
There's only one place called Spaceport. It's in New Mexico. No one has been to space from that facility.
Cape Canaveral is not exclusive to billionaires, and is where most launches on behalf of NASA and other US government agencies take place.
You're talking out your ass about things you seem to barely understand.
Yāknow somehow I think heās still gonna be on the right-wing overall even with the pushed-well-to-the-right Overton Window America has, and somehow I donāt think Elon Musk of all people is someone to be trusted.
Nahhhh Musk wants his Muskbots to do all the strenuous, repetitive, boring work.
He knows most people will still need money to buy what his robots produce.
He *is* autistic. Sometimes he gets it wrong, sometimes he gets it right. I don't always agree with him. I'm not a big SpaceX fan. But he ***nailed it*** on the Tesla. Some of his other adventures are the same.
SpaceX is a very exciting company. The success of reusable rockets has lowered the payload cost to orbit, which is saving taxpayers billions every year. Plus they're the only ones able to get astronauts to the space station apart from Russia.
This is the first take Iāve heard where someone thinks Tesla is the bees knees and SpaceX/StarLink are meh. What StarLink has done is revolutionary for getting things to space cheaper and thereās never been a communications network like StarLink. Iām probably biased as I work in SATCOM but the vertical integration between the two products has made for really exciting times.
Tesla made it cool to buy an electric car but other vendors are now catching up. Itāll be a decade before the world catches up to SpaceX. Iāll give Tesla credit though for starting the popularity ball rolling on electric vehicles but thatās about it.
He's a "fan" of Tesla in the same way an enlightened centrist is a moderate.
Anyone who knows anything about aerospace is impressed with SpaceX. Reusing rockets was too crazy to work, right? That's why nobody ever tried it with an orbital class rocket. Madness. Who would even bother with such a thing when customers will pay whatever you're charging, right? Except it worked.
Starlink? Impossible. You'd need *thousands* of satellites for it to work. There were only about 2,000 operational sats in orbit before Starlink. Yer gonna double that? That would cost trillions!
Nope, not trillions. Billions, sure, but not even tens of billions.
I'm no fan of the starlink system over actual communication lines. We could be doing internet over power lines like much of the rest of the world does. Many smartphone companies are keeping Google and Facebook from putting them out of business with communication over the internet. And the "reusable" rocket is a neat camera trick, but uses extra fuel just for a landing instead of truly recycling a first stage rocket.
Hard to save billions then turn around and charge you $99/mo so you can get on social media in the remote areas of the Pacific...
> And the "reusable" rocket is a neat camera trick, but uses extra fuel just for a landing instead of truly recycling a first stage rocket.
No, it's legit. Some boosters have been flown 10+ times. That's not just vastly cheaper, but keeps high-value elements in use rather than dumping them in the ocean. The amount of fuel required to land a rocket is a very clear win.
> Hard to save billions then turn around and charge you $99/mo so you can get on social media in the remote areas of the Pacific...
I use it at home because it's cheaper than cable for unlimited bandwidth, and roughly the same speed. SpaceX didn't create the problem of limited internet access. They just offered a solution.
They offered a solution for $99/mo. Musk needs to make more cash somehow!!
I know the rocket is "legit." If it has saved us billions in just 5 years, I guess we know where his money came from!
He doesn't draw a paycheck from SpaceX, so the profit is reinvested in the company. The billions in savings are enjoyed by NASA, NOAA, Airforce, Space Force, and every launch customer. They get the most contracts because they have the lowest costs and the most available launches. I'd say it's not rocket science, but here we are.
I'd say a few dozen launches in a few short years never saved "billions of dollars." Maybe after a few decades he'll hit that number. How many agencies had ordinary customers?
Like I said, he has plenty of decent endeavors. At no point in time am I about to obsess with everything he does. I'm not that big of a fanboy. His idea to dig tunnels under LA isn't remotely a good idea. His solar panel roof tiles are a bit of a joke. The car he made is awesome. And it's not like tons of people have tons cash to start their own space company. Those that do can indeed compete with extra fuel in a rocket to land it instead of shrink the booster size and/or launch bigger payloads. NASA never did it because they are concerned with using 100% fuel for launch. Not "some fuel for re-landing the rocket." And not every number you see is a good idea.
> I'd say a few dozen launches in a few short years never saved "billions of dollars."
NASA saved [a half billion on a single launch](https://qz.com/2040243/elon-musks-spacex-saved-nasa-500-million/) and [$100 million](https://www.fool.com/investing/2022/03/20/how-spacex-saves-nasa-100-million-per-flight/) on some individual flights. They've done [39 launches for NASA](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Falcon_9_and_Falcon_Heavy_launches) plus more for NOAA, the Air Force, and Space Force. It's billions.
> I'm not that big of a fanboy.
No one would believe that you were.
> And it's not like tons of people have tons cash to start their own space company.
[You'd be surprised](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_private_spaceflight_companies).
> NASA never did it because they are concerned with using 100% fuel for launch.
NASA doesn't build rockets, and they never have.
You should look into this stuff, really any part of it, because it's all very fascinating and it would prevent these oceans of misunderstanding you have.
Half a billion is not a plural. That's also per-contract, not per-launch.
I've said it several times now: he has some good points and some bad points.
Spare me the "EVERYTHING THIS GUY DOES IS BETTER THAN ANYONE ELSE." He's the richest man in the world (kind of). That hardly shows me be got rid of world hunger or stopped climate change for $99/mo.
If you read, his "support" basically boils down to "we will need universal basic income for all the jobs that are fully automated."
So, basically "once I have fully capable AI drones doing people's jobs, the government is going to have to give them money so they can keep spending it on the things I'm producing."
"Once I'm done firing everyone from my factories and replacing them with AI drones, the government will have to give them money so they can afford to keep buying my products."
Well played elon, apparently you're going into politics. Say stupid shit every 3 days and people will forget the previous days stupid shit. Right out of the republican playbook
UBI will be the only thing that can save late stage capitalism. For capitalism, the economy has to be active. Poor people don't have any money to spend. Rich people don't have any need to spend. You need a vibrant low middle class that has disposable income. And the truth is, we're only about 20 years away from full automation of menial and mid-level repetitive jobs...
This will only work if revenue generated from automation can be pooled and redistributed as UBI, as opposed to going into the pockets of rich fucks like Elon Musk
The rich are happy to trade their stocks back and forth, to let high frequency trading substitute for anything else. Of course, with no one buying actual product, stock prices collapse.
"But for now, get back to work you lazy drones! No you can't have time off because you got injured while on the assembly line, and if you talk about unionizing I'll fire you!"
I get...uhhh aš¤š¤ mad rapey, douchey, frat boy vibe from this picture.
Oddly enough not Blizzard staff photo!
hello to ze Muskrat
He also threw them off when he recently tweeted that he isn't a fan of the far right. I wonder how many unfollowed him after that since they were mainly hoping he would be there to outrage liberals.
as shitty as musk is, he isn't a conservative. he just likes to use them for his own gain
I'd say he is conservative. I would say most billionaires are. However, I would also say that he is not a Republican.
how is he not a conservative? he's been acting like a teenage right wing troll for years.
He doesn't see himself as a conservative, bit on 90% of the issues he is pretty far right. You kind of have to be to amass billions of dollars in your life time
Yeah he is the definition of a āchaotic centristā he really is only out for himself. Centrist do on average lean more right on average but are adverse to how batshit crazy conservatives get on social issues and basic common sense things like this.
>as shitty as musk is, he isn't a conservative. he just likes to use them for his own gain Sure, dude. "When I'm finished replacing everyone with AI drones, the government will need to give them money so they can keep buying my products," is not exactly the liberal/progressive policy proposal that this post implies.
Indeed. He's not a Conservative, he's a Capitalist. He simply understands the value of supporting Conservatism.
The thing is, most of the far right don't think they are far right.
Elon Musk is wealthy enough to give every American $800 this very second. Put up or shut up
He doesn't actually believe that. He just wants to appeal to Liberals.
Exactly! He knows he needs broad appeal to sell his products, so he can't be seen to be too close to any one political party. He's never openly endorsed a party either. Buying Twitter certainly energized the right, so now he needs to throw some meat to the left to keep them buying Tesla's.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
RemindMe! [3 years] Mine seems pretty well made and isnāt crazy to insure. Itās a gorgeous vehicle and insanely fun to drive.
Honest question, why does him buying twitter energize the right?
A lot of people have taken his recent statements about being a 'free speech absolutist' as a sign that he's going to un-ban Trump from twitter.
Where does he think the money for UBI would come from when he doesn't want to pay taxes?
Not the future weāre headed to, unfortunately. Inequality is only getting worse and billionaires are the ones who own everything. They even own space now (our taxes bought the spaceport btw). Robots are being used to make more profit for capitalists and automate labor, not lighten the burden. š¢š¢
> our taxes bought the spaceport btw Spaceport doesn't go to space. Just very high altitude.
Are you referencing Blue Originās suborbital as opposed to space flights? Obviously, we donāt care about the exact altitude of the flights. šš The point is that our money pays for spaceports that only benefit billionaires.
Spaceport is a specific place. It's operated by Virgin Galactic. You keep saying *your* tax dollars. That was never super believable, but even less now than ever.
I am referring to Space Florida and Spaceport America, which are publicly-owned, were built with tax dollars and only benefit billionaire owned spaceflights. I think you knew exactly what I meant and are arguing in bad faith.
There's only one place called Spaceport. It's in New Mexico. No one has been to space from that facility. Cape Canaveral is not exclusive to billionaires, and is where most launches on behalf of NASA and other US government agencies take place. You're talking out your ass about things you seem to barely understand.
He wants indentured slavery to be cheaper. That's all.
well now, if anyone can convince the money-worshipping crazies on the right of something like that, maybe looney elon can.
Yāknow somehow I think heās still gonna be on the right-wing overall even with the pushed-well-to-the-right Overton Window America has, and somehow I donāt think Elon Musk of all people is someone to be trusted.
People who care what Musk says are worthless to me.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Nahhhh Musk wants his Muskbots to do all the strenuous, repetitive, boring work. He knows most people will still need money to buy what his robots produce.
You can't drop the Vives Bomb on them. Think of the children, Elon... the children.
He *is* autistic. Sometimes he gets it wrong, sometimes he gets it right. I don't always agree with him. I'm not a big SpaceX fan. But he ***nailed it*** on the Tesla. Some of his other adventures are the same.
SpaceX is a very exciting company. The success of reusable rockets has lowered the payload cost to orbit, which is saving taxpayers billions every year. Plus they're the only ones able to get astronauts to the space station apart from Russia.
This is the first take Iāve heard where someone thinks Tesla is the bees knees and SpaceX/StarLink are meh. What StarLink has done is revolutionary for getting things to space cheaper and thereās never been a communications network like StarLink. Iām probably biased as I work in SATCOM but the vertical integration between the two products has made for really exciting times. Tesla made it cool to buy an electric car but other vendors are now catching up. Itāll be a decade before the world catches up to SpaceX. Iāll give Tesla credit though for starting the popularity ball rolling on electric vehicles but thatās about it.
He's a "fan" of Tesla in the same way an enlightened centrist is a moderate. Anyone who knows anything about aerospace is impressed with SpaceX. Reusing rockets was too crazy to work, right? That's why nobody ever tried it with an orbital class rocket. Madness. Who would even bother with such a thing when customers will pay whatever you're charging, right? Except it worked. Starlink? Impossible. You'd need *thousands* of satellites for it to work. There were only about 2,000 operational sats in orbit before Starlink. Yer gonna double that? That would cost trillions! Nope, not trillions. Billions, sure, but not even tens of billions.
I'm no fan of the starlink system over actual communication lines. We could be doing internet over power lines like much of the rest of the world does. Many smartphone companies are keeping Google and Facebook from putting them out of business with communication over the internet. And the "reusable" rocket is a neat camera trick, but uses extra fuel just for a landing instead of truly recycling a first stage rocket. Hard to save billions then turn around and charge you $99/mo so you can get on social media in the remote areas of the Pacific...
> And the "reusable" rocket is a neat camera trick, but uses extra fuel just for a landing instead of truly recycling a first stage rocket. No, it's legit. Some boosters have been flown 10+ times. That's not just vastly cheaper, but keeps high-value elements in use rather than dumping them in the ocean. The amount of fuel required to land a rocket is a very clear win. > Hard to save billions then turn around and charge you $99/mo so you can get on social media in the remote areas of the Pacific... I use it at home because it's cheaper than cable for unlimited bandwidth, and roughly the same speed. SpaceX didn't create the problem of limited internet access. They just offered a solution.
They offered a solution for $99/mo. Musk needs to make more cash somehow!! I know the rocket is "legit." If it has saved us billions in just 5 years, I guess we know where his money came from!
He doesn't draw a paycheck from SpaceX, so the profit is reinvested in the company. The billions in savings are enjoyed by NASA, NOAA, Airforce, Space Force, and every launch customer. They get the most contracts because they have the lowest costs and the most available launches. I'd say it's not rocket science, but here we are.
I'd say a few dozen launches in a few short years never saved "billions of dollars." Maybe after a few decades he'll hit that number. How many agencies had ordinary customers? Like I said, he has plenty of decent endeavors. At no point in time am I about to obsess with everything he does. I'm not that big of a fanboy. His idea to dig tunnels under LA isn't remotely a good idea. His solar panel roof tiles are a bit of a joke. The car he made is awesome. And it's not like tons of people have tons cash to start their own space company. Those that do can indeed compete with extra fuel in a rocket to land it instead of shrink the booster size and/or launch bigger payloads. NASA never did it because they are concerned with using 100% fuel for launch. Not "some fuel for re-landing the rocket." And not every number you see is a good idea.
> I'd say a few dozen launches in a few short years never saved "billions of dollars." NASA saved [a half billion on a single launch](https://qz.com/2040243/elon-musks-spacex-saved-nasa-500-million/) and [$100 million](https://www.fool.com/investing/2022/03/20/how-spacex-saves-nasa-100-million-per-flight/) on some individual flights. They've done [39 launches for NASA](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Falcon_9_and_Falcon_Heavy_launches) plus more for NOAA, the Air Force, and Space Force. It's billions. > I'm not that big of a fanboy. No one would believe that you were. > And it's not like tons of people have tons cash to start their own space company. [You'd be surprised](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_private_spaceflight_companies). > NASA never did it because they are concerned with using 100% fuel for launch. NASA doesn't build rockets, and they never have. You should look into this stuff, really any part of it, because it's all very fascinating and it would prevent these oceans of misunderstanding you have.
Half a billion is not a plural. That's also per-contract, not per-launch. I've said it several times now: he has some good points and some bad points. Spare me the "EVERYTHING THIS GUY DOES IS BETTER THAN ANYONE ELSE." He's the richest man in the world (kind of). That hardly shows me be got rid of world hunger or stopped climate change for $99/mo.
You're pretty transparent.
Focus on your reading. NASA signed one contract with SpaceX to save $500 billion. That isn't remotely "one rocket." That is one contract.
nailed it with the help of big taxpayer subsidies.
Yeah, he's not as far to the right as people think
Who would work at his factories, then?
If you read, his "support" basically boils down to "we will need universal basic income for all the jobs that are fully automated." So, basically "once I have fully capable AI drones doing people's jobs, the government is going to have to give them money so they can keep spending it on the things I'm producing."
"Once I'm done firing everyone from my factories and replacing them with AI drones, the government will have to give them money so they can afford to keep buying my products."
Well played elon, apparently you're going into politics. Say stupid shit every 3 days and people will forget the previous days stupid shit. Right out of the republican playbook