[flagged]
You don't think there are any millionaires on the world's preeminent VC forum?
Nope
Google Discloses $94.1B in SpaceX Stock, Marking 6% Stake
271–280 of 344 posts
Re: Google Discloses $94.1B in SpaceX Stock, Marking 6% Stake
#272Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s so weird to see people actively try to criticize arguably the most successful person in the history of Earth.
Envy is a hell of a drug
I know this will sound inconceivable to you but some people genuinely think nobody should have that much money - including themselves. If you want to make it sound irrational and emotional the correct word wouldn't be "envy" - it would be "fremdschämen" or if you prefer something not borrowed from German: "cringe".
Re: Google Discloses $94.1B in SpaceX Stock, Marking 6% Stake
#273Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some of the richest people the world has ever seen seem to tick all the same boxes as the least likeable and most devoid of love and empathy. If only some billionaires (trillionaires?) could strike a better balance between successful and human. Especially since most wealth is actually wealth transfer from the poor and from taxpayer coffers to the rich.
It is only a single counterpoint in a sea of depressing examples but you may enjoy the story of Yvon Chouinard, owner of Patagonia, who gave it all away to trusts for protecting the environment.
Yvon is solid. Bezo's ex is good. There's plenty of gray, too, where they're trying to give a lot away or make life better for everyone.
But, fundamentally,bro become a billionaire, you exploited some people at some point in the process. Their mere existence is not ideal for society. And their assets would be better served distributed to the masses. Unfortunately, we also lack many good and strong governments and policies - so I wouldn't feel great just transfering their wealth to the governments of the world for said distribution, either.
Re: Google Discloses $94.1B in SpaceX Stock, Marking 6% Stake
#274Earlier quoted context omitted.
Investors are buying into the fallacy that musk can continue to work as a hype man, rather than some visionary or innovator. They like that he can make stock numbers go up, seemingly against all odds and reason. Whether this trend continues or not indefinitely will largely determine if incestors start looking for the door.
It's really sad to see that we just accept that Elon Musk, one of the most influential and maybe-still-the richest person in the world is constantly lying to shareholders for his own benefit. And gets zero punishment for it.
We really need to stop thinking in terms of individuals and more in terms of systems. The problem isn't just Musk. If it wasn't him, it would be someone else.
Re: Google Discloses $94.1B in SpaceX Stock, Marking 6% Stake
#275Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Elon got the FCC to change power emission rules to hamper competitors with better satellites Didn't SpaceX petition to lessen the rules around geostationary power limits? Why would less rules be corruption? Because it disfavors legacy incumbents? Amazon also benefited from the new rules.
the order of operations matters here. they tried to limit the ability of direct to device competitors to function, as the current starlink fleet is practically useless for direct to device. they got their regulatory change, and it didn't limit the ability of direct device competitors to function. THEN their petition came.
I still don't see how companies petitioning FCC for rule changes is a signal of corruption. Especially when the existing rules benefited entrenched companies who were petitioning to keep them. And the end result resulted in Amazon also getting a waiver.
Re: Google Discloses $94.1B in SpaceX Stock, Marking 6% Stake
#276Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the weakest retort to critique of the wealthy. "Youre just jealous". Lame.
It doesn't rise to the level of critique. Just baseless accusations and conspiracy theories. Success speaks for itself and the mental gymnastics of those that deny it screams "envy" as loudly as if it was written on the accuser's forehead.
Stalin was also an immensely talented and successful man. In fact he was so successful that any criticism of him became entirely inconceivable to many.
You are implying that any successful person should strive to achieve something like that? Or what point are you even trying to trying to make?
Re: Google Discloses $94.1B in SpaceX Stock, Marking 6% Stake
#277Earlier quoted context omitted.
the order of operations matters here. they tried to limit the ability of direct to device competitors to function, as the current starlink fleet is practically useless for direct to device. they got their regulatory change, and it didn't limit the ability of direct device competitors to function. THEN their petition came.
I still don't see how companies petitioning FCC for rule changes is a signal of corruption. Especially when the existing rules benefited entrenched companies who were petitioning to keep them. And the end result resulted in Amazon also getting a waiver.
because his involvement with the current administration after spending $300 million to begin with, and the subsequent appointments to the FCC that were being leveraged to begin bully other companies out of existence? it just happened to be unsuccessful and resulted in him trying to then get a waiver from his own insidious rule.
all you have to do is imagine being an investor in the smaller companies that had to navigate around the unnecessary rule change, and spend more time helping the FCC see why Elon was coming back to get starlink exempted from the rule
what stands out to me is that in other countries that we aren't conditioned to respect, we call the exact same interplay "corruption". there is no nuance, there is no "well its not bushels of cash in a back alley, it's a campaign donation and following the process proscribed by the legislature and unexpected court rulings", its just "corruption"
Re: Google Discloses $94.1B in SpaceX Stock, Marking 6% Stake
#278Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can buy IVV instead and get the same exposure but this time you get to vote. Or you could just not own spy and buy the shares individually.
What 401k program do you or your peers have that allows you to buy funds outside of the few, selected by the 401k manager? I certainly can't buy individual shares in my 401k program. And very, very few programs I'm aware of ever offered that as an option.
they typically offer a brokerage option. fidelity and vanguard both offered this when I had them. if that wasn't on the table I'd roll it into something that gave me flexibility.
Re: Google Discloses $94.1B in SpaceX Stock, Marking 6% Stake
#279Earlier quoted context omitted.
Love the typo. I think Musk's luck is running out, he's been too political this past year and he seems to also have run out of geek "street cred". Remember youtubers visiting (whatever the Tesla trade show was called) were more perplexed than impressed with what has been shown. Similar sentiment seen across trade shows (like CES) where everything was AI and no one seemed to ask themselves "why are we putting AI in th…
It’s so weird to see people actively try to criticize arguably the most successful person in the history of Earth.
I have achieved nothing this year, and yet I have had a lot more success than Mr. Musk in the "human lives saved" category by not gutting USAID. With reasonable estimates on the weight of this category I'm quite confident to have been more successful overall as well.
Re: Google Discloses $94.1B in SpaceX Stock, Marking 6% Stake
#280Earlier quoted context omitted.
With the serious lapses in governance being made by founders with these special shares, such as Musk and Zuckerberg, I wonder if the shares without these special rights will be substantially discounted. What rights do these other shareholders retain that would keep them valuable? Rights to compensation in the case of bankruptcy?
Facebook would never have become what it is today if Zuck had lost control of the voting. It would have been sold 10 times over and prob not exist today. I suspect the same could be said for Mask and his businesses.
Facebook IPOd in 2012, after it was already used by hundreds of millions of people, and after it bought Instagram