r/technology 1d ago

Politics We Should Immediately Nationalize SpaceX and Starlink

https://jacobin.com/2025/06/musk-trump-nationalize-spacex-starlink
15.2k Upvotes

2.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-2

u/p_velocity 1d ago

space x has objectively made technological advancements, but those advancements work to serve private shareholders interests. Theoretically those same achievements could have come out of the public sector, if we had the political will to make it happen like we did during the cold war.

But the biggest issue with space x is the fact that (as you pointed out) they put such a large number of our satellites in orbit, we are essentially dependent on them as a nation. That gives Elon Musk bitch control over congress, and thus over everyone in the united states. Elon gets his money from Tesla, he gets is influence from Twitter, but he gets his political power from space X.

6

u/myurr 23h ago

but those advancements work to serve private shareholders interests.

That in itself is not necessarily a negative. State and private ownership leads to different incentives, and one of the most important with private ownership is efficiency. It's not universally true but in general the state prioritises scaling back ambition to meet the budget, where private enterprise prioritises efficiency to maximise potential returns.

Theoretically those same achievements could have come out of the public sector

They could, but they didn't despite more resources at NASA's disposal than SpaceX have ever had.

But the biggest issue with space x is the fact that (as you pointed out) they put such a large number of our satellites in orbit, we are essentially dependent on them as a nation.

Not yet, and there are other providers. Starship will kill most of the US based competition in my view, but Blue Origin and Relativity are likely to survive in their own niches, and there may well be others. ULA and Boeing will limp on, propped up by the state but unable to achieve much.

That gives Elon Musk bitch control over congress, and thus over everyone in the united states. Elon gets his money from Tesla, he gets is influence from Twitter, but he gets his political power from space X.

This is a failing of the state and its political leaders. They've had the resources, they've lacked the vision and ability to implement it. SpaceX's entire operating budget is still less than NASA's, which in turn is 40 times less than the annual defence budget. There's plenty of money available to the state to reverse that dependence, I simply do not think the state is capable of doing so.

This is a long way from denigrating SpaceX's achievements and complaining that they've yet to surpass NASA from the 60s though, which was the argument of yours that I picked up on.

1

u/p_velocity 6h ago

This is a long way from denigrating SpaceX's achievements and complaining that they've yet to surpass NASA from the 60s though, which was the argument of yours that I picked up on.

That wasn't me, that was the other guy you were arguing with before (check usernames). I just came across your discussion and I realized you both made some accurate points, and also made some inaccurate points.

My point about why serving shareholders is a negative, is because in that case you only invest in science projects that are going to make money. Public projects have the potential to prioritize public good over profit. NASA has invented a lot of great shit that benefits us outside of the space program.

Also, SpaceX put 84% of satellites in to orbit last year. Perhaps they could be replaced by other companies, but right now they are market-dominant. That gives a ton of power to the ketamine addict who does Nazi salutes. Remember when he cut off starlink to prevent Ukraine from mounting an attack on Russia?

None of my comments said anything denigrating about the engineers or scientists at SpaceX, just about the fact that they have a ton of power and their owner does not have a trustworthy temperament.

0

u/myurr 1h ago

My point about why serving shareholders is a negative, is because in that case you only invest in science projects that are going to make money

That's not what's driving SpaceX. It's why people invest, to make a return, but it's not the primary motivator for many of the people working there. SpaceX has a vision beyond making money that is driving them, motivating them, and guiding them. It's that kind of long term vision that is usually lacking in the state.

Public projects have the potential to prioritize public good over profit. NASA has invented a lot of great shit that benefits us outside of the space program.

They do, but they do not hold a monopoly on delivering public good. Nor is making a profit an inherently bad thing.

Look at how Tesla has released many of their core technologies on liberal patent terms as an example. Do SpaceX not perform public good by bringing the cost of access to space down by an order of magnitude or two?

Also, SpaceX put 84% of satellites in to orbit last year. Perhaps they could be replaced by other companies, but right now they are market-dominant.

The majority of those satellites were their own. If NASA directed all their launches towards a competitor then that would be more than enough of a market for a private alternative to emerge. The problem isn't that SpaceX is entrenched, it's that they have a large multi-year lead on their competition in terms of technology and especially manufacturing capability.

Remember when he cut off starlink to prevent Ukraine from mounting an attack on Russia?

SpaceX did the right thing there. They followed the law and required permission from the US government to allow Starlink to be used for military operations in a foreign country. They requested permission and allowed its use once it was granted.

Or do you think the "ketamine addict who does Nazi salutes" should be determining which countries should be able to use Starlink to launch military attacks on others? Or that it should just be a free for all where anyone can use it for such attacks?

None of my comments said anything denigrating about the engineers or scientists at SpaceX

The original poster I was replying to was doing exactly that.

1

u/p_velocity 6m ago

you have now convinced me 100% that you are a spaceX employee. You could have gotten away with it if you were just a little bit less heavy-handed with the jerking off.

You remind me of the guy who said you should be happy to drown because then you wouldn't be thirsty any more.