Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Breitbart, other conservative outlets escalate anti-SpaceX campaign

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 175 posts

Re: Breitbart, other conservative outlets escalate anti-SpaceX campaign

#51

Post by kelukelugames »

mmcwilliams wrote: post #43
kharms wrote: post #7

The only motivation I can think of is that Musk's resources are limited and if he spends more time/money on SpaceX less gets spent on Tesla. Still, super weird.

What about the fact that Musk publicly exited the presidential councils he was a member of over the Paris Accord? It was a move that would have offended US conservatives, particularly those at Breitbart, on at least two fronts: supporting efforts to combat climate change and damaging the President's reputation as an ally to Silicon Valley.

True, the President is vindictive. I wonder if we can use this. Send in someone who pretends to be anti renewable energy and then piss off Trump so Trump will praise solar power.

Re: Breitbart, other conservative outlets escalate anti-SpaceX campaign

#52

Post by jmh530 »

grondilu wrote: post #40
marksellers wrote: post #2

This new flavor of conservatism is so strange in light of how bound to free market ideals most flavors of conservatism are. In general, I really quite dislike Conservative/Liberal labels as political stances are not two-dimensional, but rather multidimensional. Parties are loose alliances of disparate groups. And somehow there's this rising contingent of neocons, who also happen to dislike SpaceX. Does anyone underst…

> Does anyone understand this? I don't quite grasp the details of the story, but the "four kinds of money"[1][2] theme may help understand the point of view. Why exactly would Musk spend money in a way that disturbs conservatives more than how say ULA does it, is probably complicated, but I assume they have their reasons. PS. Also, quite illuminating is Ron Paul's original opinion piece on foxnews [3]. 1. https://www…

The whole thing doesn't even make sense. We used to have a monopoly that cost a whole bunch of money. If Elon Musk can do it for less, then he's breaking up the original monopoly.

Re: Breitbart, other conservative outlets escalate anti-SpaceX campaign

#53

Post by kelukelugames »

corpMaverick wrote: post #44
barrystaes wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US are only two political parties. Yet North Korea and Russia only have one, so its not that bad. And diversity does exists.

AFAIK, China only has one. And it seems to work remarkably well. At least they seem to have very smart people at the top.

I would say the bottom quintile Americans is doing orders of magnitude better than the bottom quintile of Chinese. Maybe even bottom half. This is probably true when comparing any developed nation to a developing nation.

Re: Breitbart, other conservative outlets escalate anti-SpaceX campaign

#54

Post by Already__Taken »

Symmetry wrote: post #24
SEJeff wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It actually is different. ULA gets $880 million to $1 billion per year just to keep the factory lights on[1] for the EELV Launch Capability Contract. This isn't money for a service such as launches or new rockets, it is just to keep the lights on. SpaceX doesn't get any of that. If anyone is subsidized by the USG, it is overwhelmingly ULA. SpaceX could have simply charged 1/2 of ULA's $422 million per launch and inst…

Lets not be too harsh on the ULA. They offer services like vertical integration that only the government cares about and they've gone over 100 launches without a payload loss. So if I was sending up a $10 billion space telescope they're the obvious choice for that. I doubt they're going to get any more business for $200 commsats though now that SpaceX is getting on tempo.

There might not be a business for $10bil telescopes every 10 years when there's an option of 10 $1bil telescopes launching every year.

The launch capacity/cost to propose such thinking just didn't exist.

Re: Breitbart, other conservative outlets escalate anti-SpaceX campaign

#55

Post by linkregister »

TorKlingberg wrote: post #32
marksellers wrote: post #2

This new flavor of conservatism is so strange in light of how bound to free market ideals most flavors of conservatism are. In general, I really quite dislike Conservative/Liberal labels as political stances are not two-dimensional, but rather multidimensional. Parties are loose alliances of disparate groups. And somehow there's this rising contingent of neocons, who also happen to dislike SpaceX. Does anyone underst…

Everything these days is polarized on a one-dimensional axis. Musk does electric cars and solar, so he's an environmentalist, thus a leftie, and thus their enemy. He also left some Trump advisory council a while back.

Correct, this is an identity politics and team membership controversy, not rooted in good policy.

A good parallel would be boycotts of Hobby Lobby due to ideological differences with its ownership. The fundamentals of the business are at worst benign. (I am not making a statement in support of the viewpoints espoused by the Hobby Lobby ownership).

SpaceX is a public good since it saves hundreds of millions of tax dollars, so this is unfortunate.

Re: Breitbart, other conservative outlets escalate anti-SpaceX campaign

#56

Post by grondilu »

jmh530 wrote: post #52
grondilu wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Does anyone understand this? I don't quite grasp the details of the story, but the "four kinds of money"[1][2] theme may help understand the point of view. Why exactly would Musk spend money in a way that disturbs conservatives more than how say ULA does it, is probably complicated, but I assume they have their reasons. PS. Also, quite illuminating is Ron Paul's original opinion piece on foxnews [3]. 1. https://www…

The whole thing doesn't even make sense. We used to have a monopoly that cost a whole bunch of money. If Elon Musk can do it for less, then he's breaking up the original monopoly.

Have you read Ron Paul's piece? I think the argument about Russia makes a lot of sense. He claims that introducing protectionism in space actually made things more expensive, not cheaper.

"Specifically, Section 1615 of this year’s NDAA expressly forbids the Air Force from developing new launch vehicles by restricting expenditures to the development of new engines or the modification of existing systems. This prohibition is supposedly designed to address the “Russian threat” -- a threat manufactured by those seeking a new Cold War. In addition to flaming anti-Russian hysteria, this provision makes the company SpaceX the only affordable option for launch services. "

Also, shouldn't we be glad that space exploration is an international effort? Why should the USA design and build itself its entire launch systems?

Re: Breitbart, other conservative outlets escalate anti-SpaceX campaign

#57

Post by SEJeff »

Already__Taken wrote: post #54
Symmetry wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lets not be too harsh on the ULA. They offer services like vertical integration that only the government cares about and they've gone over 100 launches without a payload loss. So if I was sending up a $10 billion space telescope they're the obvious choice for that. I doubt they're going to get any more business for $200 commsats though now that SpaceX is getting on tempo.

There might not be a business for $10bil telescopes every 10 years when there's an option of 10 $1bil telescopes launching every year. The launch capacity/cost to propose such thinking just didn't exist.

You're not the only person to think that: https://www.spaceintelreport.com/ses-tells-satellite-builder...

Re: Breitbart, other conservative outlets escalate anti-SpaceX campaign

#58

Post by tim333 »

Not that I agree with it but the conservative argument against SpaceX seems to be largely:

>Despite the numerous public statements by SpaceX CEO Elon Musk decrying crony capitalism, SpaceX would not exist without government contracts and subsidies. According to The Wall Street Journal, government contracts account for about 70 percent of SpaceX’s contracts. U.S. taxpayers have provided SpaceX more than $5.5 billion in the form of Air Force and NASA contracts.

from "Ron Paul: Crony defense budget hands SpaceX a monopoly - why?" op ed in Fox News http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/09/12/ron-paul-crony-def...

I think he also annoys Breitbart types by talking about global warming.

Re: Breitbart, other conservative outlets escalate anti-SpaceX campaign

#59

Post by wmil »

marksellers wrote: post #2

This new flavor of conservatism is so strange in light of how bound to free market ideals most flavors of conservatism are. In general, I really quite dislike Conservative/Liberal labels as political stances are not two-dimensional, but rather multidimensional. Parties are loose alliances of disparate groups. And somehow there's this rising contingent of neocons, who also happen to dislike SpaceX. Does anyone underst…

There's a lot of money in defence procurement. Existing players will spend money to badmouth newcomers.

It's not entirely clear how Brietbart is being influenced... possibly the author is getting direct money or promises of future business.

Or they were simply taken out for a few drinks and convinced that SpaceX is the worst thing ever.

Re: Breitbart, other conservative outlets escalate anti-SpaceX campaign

#60

Post by wmil »

Freak_NL wrote: post #46
kevinmchugh wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "no gods no masters" (Game of Thrones reference, ding on the pop-culture) that's not a game of thrones reference as far as I can tell. It's an old anarchist and socialist slogan. It'd be an odd fit for that part of the right. "No gods or kings, only man" is a Bioshock reference that pops up sometimes in those parts.

> "No gods or kings, only man" is a Bioshock reference that pops up sometimes in those parts. Which in turn uses Ayn Rand's philosophy (Objectivism) as the basis of the fictional (failed) society in Bioshock. (Compare with this quote: https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/207108-at-first-man-was-ens... ) Ayn Rand and her philosophy are quite popular in right-wing circles (and incidentally, largely denounced in academic ci…

> and incidentally, largely denounced in academic circles

Not surprising. A tenured professor getting government grants for research is a villain by Randian standards.

Post reply on HN