this post was submitted on 02 Sep 2024
157 points (94.4% liked)

politics

18930 readers
4742 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kibiz0r@midwest.social 33 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Fully expected some ineffectual BS, but then I saw the author was Robert Reich so I decided to give it the time of day.

He’s got some good points. Musk is very vulnerable in a lot of ways, and there’s a decent amount of ammo to attack him on each of those fronts.

If regular people, businesses, and governments all decided to say “fuck you” to him in unison, he could be bankrupt, imprisoned, dethroned, and banned from several industries in just a few years’ time.

Now, his worst-case scenario is extremely unlikely… but I wonder if the fact that bits and pieces of it might come to fruition is why he’s gone so batshit insane over the past several years. It must seem like there’s no choice but to double down on the grift now.

[–] SirDerpy@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Starlink is now critical infrastructure in the military industrial complex. While Musk owns a substantial portion of SpaceX, Starlink's parent company, and Elon over 40% of the equity, he's relatively untouchable.

Does the article address this point specifically?

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 11 points 3 weeks ago

guess the government needs to take ownership. you know. For national security.

[–] andyburke@fedia.io 3 points 3 weeks ago

My friend ... all we need to do is let his investors at him.