Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance' • Hacker News Board

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#391

Post by davedx » Sat, May 30, 2026, 1:25 PM UTC

petterroea wrote: post #271

devlovstad wrote: post #258

I have AkademikerPension as my pension fund through work and this move suits me quite well. They've already excluded Tesla as well as a variety of companies that profit of weapon production, fossil fuel production or are suspected for human rights violations. https://akademikerpension.dk/ansvarlighed/ekskluderede-selsk...

In Norway the oil fund are actively arguing against boycotting these kinds of companies saying, and I paraphrase: "but our job is to earn money and we can't do that if you hippies keep standing in the way with your morals" Good to see it isn't necessarily the case.

If you want to make money, buying SpaceX stock isn't the way to do it

This is about valuation not ESG

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#392

Post by __Joker » Sat, May 30, 2026, 1:26 PM UTC

petterroea wrote: post #271

devlovstad wrote: post #258

I have AkademikerPension as my pension fund through work and this move suits me quite well. They've already excluded Tesla as well as a variety of companies that profit of weapon production, fossil fuel production or are suspected for human rights violations. https://akademikerpension.dk/ansvarlighed/ekskluderede-selsk...

In Norway the oil fund are actively arguing against boycotting these kinds of companies saying, and I paraphrase: "but our job is to earn money and we can't do that if you hippies keep standing in the way with your morals" Good to see it isn't necessarily the case.

Yeah, there is lot talking out of both sides of their mouth here.

If nothing else, at least these should be choice of users to let them choose based on their values and requirements.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#393

Post by [deleted] » Sat, May 30, 2026, 1:27 PM UTC

carlosjobim wrote: post #266

pimeys wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a Nordic (Finland), I think this is true. In the history, US has been always admired and we've loved to travel there and cherish the culture. Damn, I was there when Conan O'Brien traveled to Helsinki, and greeting him with this massive crowd of people who really love him. I married an American, I've traveled through the country multiple times with my partner. Love the food, people, the nature, the cities. But this…

> The idea of crossing the border and having to flip a coin is the border control guy a nice guy or not That is nothing new. It's how it's been forever. And not only arriving in the USA, but also Canada, Germany and other places.

[deleted]

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#394

Post by wjnc » Sat, May 30, 2026, 1:28 PM UTC

brikym wrote: post #252

wjnc wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A long and a short cancel out. So you could construe this yourselves. (Recognise that this has a long tradition on HN ;)

Besides laziness being a tradition among programmers (in a good way), that kind of complex activity is going to generate tax in a lot of jurisdictions.

If you care to explain why, I’m interested. I imagine a situation where large Sum X is in ETF but gets adapted by a few little shorts. It’s still mainly the ETF in the portfolio. (Exactly this is why in my firm some ETFs are deemed too precise, since they are thought to follow the insider knowledge as well.)

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#395

Post by copx » Sat, May 30, 2026, 1:32 PM UTC

Geezus_42 wrote: post #248

bazodedo wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The earth is finite, and space, for all intents and purposes, is not, and expansion into it would thus be required to sustain any super linear growth of the economy. Well, and rockets are cool. Perhaps people would much rather invest in something with the veneer of furthering space exploration (and the promise of infinite riches) than buy into some crypto blockchain startup. And, its not as if other current valuation…

SpaceX isn't opening space to everyone. They're are preparing for the select few to be able to escape once the earth is no longer sustainable due to their own efforts.

Actually given that the first colonists on Mars will live pretty miserable lives before dying early of radiation poisoning Musk and Co are trying to recruit other people to move there.

Musk, Thiel, Bezos etc. none of these guys have ever said they want to move there.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#396

Post by tordrt » Sat, May 30, 2026, 1:32 PM UTC

Gomotono wrote: post #382

90d wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a tricky situation isn't it? We wouldn't have gotten where we are without fossil fuels, but now we realize they are not sustainable to be dependent on and we cannot continue this level of growth. I don't think it is actually possible using current means to power what we have come to know as a "first-world lifestyle" for the majority of the planet.

Thats not true. We don't know if we would be able to be were we at. There is also no value in this. If we owuldn't known about progress through oil and gas, who would say that we would be unable to get to the same point just a 100 years later? No own would be hurt if we would have achieved this 100 years later but healthier. It was also ignored on purpose. Oil companies knew very well, researchers knew. Apparently th…

How would we do the whole industrial revolution thing on whale oil and lumber? Whales would most certainly be extinct by now, thats for sure.

100 years later is an immense amount of extra human suffering, not to say that reaching current level would most certainly take much much longer than 100 extra years.

Im sorry but this whole tirade is just delusional. Its cheaper and better to replace all use of fossil fuels with renewables? Why are we not doing it? Waiting to here your grand conspiracy as of why people are not "doing it".

Why did china build over 50(78GW) new large scale coal plants last year when they could get so much cheaper renewable?

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#397

Post by NoahZuniga » Sat, May 30, 2026, 1:32 PM UTC

runeks wrote: post #203

I wanted to see how well Akademikerpension has done wrt. returns. This graph shows average yearly return from the financial crisis 2009 until 2021 and they are actually the best performing among other Danish pension funds [1]. [1] https://www.finanshus.dk/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Pensions...

Judging a pension fund by how it performs in a bull market seems wrong. Like their main job is to limit your downside from market crashes (if they're not doing that then they offer nothing compared to an index fund), so its strange to not include 2008 crisis (or .com bubble popping).

Checking this shows that the top 2 performers in this graph lost more money (~8%) in 2008 than the bottom 2 (~2%)

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#398

Post by IshKebab » Sat, May 30, 2026, 1:33 PM UTC

vkou wrote: post #374

brikym wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> five trading days before the major index rebalance. I didn't realize this. That's really scammy.

Musk in a nutshell, but as long as the stock price goes up everyone looks the other way.

Yeah when they crash and burn everyone will be like "how did we let this happen?".

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#399

Post by Gomotono » Sat, May 30, 2026, 1:33 PM UTC

tristanj wrote: post #316

SlinkyOnStairs wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The datacenter thing is mostly just a meme that billionaires say because it makes them feel smart and gets them media attention, it doesn't seem to move stock significantly. The actual distortion field is around Starlink. Which is the main product and the only one that's (nominally) profitable. It's the one all the hype centers around. xAI is barely even notable in the AI space. This also makes it possible to judge t…

I find it amusing to read comments like these, because they remind me of the massive awareness gap between people who understand SpaceX's product line, and those who don't. In your world, you only see and interpret SpaceX's existing products. You then see SpaceX's eye-watering valuation, and then are confused where this comes from. Meanwhile, people who understand SpaceX's product line, and the implications these pro…

Srsly?

Just to be very clear about Starship: We have a very limited amount of payload we are sending up in space every year.

The biggest jump in payload is starlink itself. Starlink though doesn't scale very well. V2 can only handle a certain amount of customers and has only a lifetime of 5 years.

Space-X has to build Starship to even being able to send v3 up to increase the margin of this setup. But even then, every 5 years that thing has to be replaced and new build.

Every mobile tower, fiber cable etc. underground has a lot higher lifetime than that.

Starlink also has the issue of latency handover. Every few minutes you have to do a handover which leads to package loss. I can't do a Teams Call through Starlink fyi.

And Starlink already exists and is relativly affordable despite that, they only have 9-10 Million customers and they had to increase the price.

And while all of this 'magic no one gets' is happening, Starship hasn't profen non leo orbit with proper payload AND reusability. Without reusability, they will not get the costs down that much anymore. Its already relativly cheap.

And in parallel all of this 'trillion dollar future margin magic' gets opposition by other companies like eutelsat and Amazon.

Ah yes the world changing product of starlink mobile. Which doesn't get booked in the USA, is slow and needs a lot of energy. Whatever you think this is, 500km mobile range is 500km and this on a planet were normal people already have a very very well working mobile setup for at least 10 years by now.

Is space-x some kind of business gap? yes sure. Will they make billions with this? Depending on other companes, yeah sure. Is it a trillion dollar business? No

Yes yes i'm fully unaware of this.

Btw. Musk def sells you the story of Mars and dyson sphere and stuff to keep the magic but while he does all of this, he rents out colossus 1 and 2 to his competitors because he is unable to sell his OWN AI product.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#400

Post by andyjohnson0 » Sat, May 30, 2026, 1:36 PM UTC

myk9001 wrote: post #352

andyjohnson0 wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nothing is stopping the US from deploying those in Greenland That would require the (politically unlikely) agreement of the Danish government. See article 2 of the relevant treaty [1]: "...establishing and/or operating such defense areas as the two Governments, on the basis of NATO defense plans, may from time to time agree to be necessary..." > The only reason Trump wants Greenland is he's not all there -- Greenla…

So, you're saying the US (300+ mln, #1 military) never actually requested to deploy them and Denmark (5 mln) never actually refused. But because you think an agreement is unlikely, it's straight to annexation by force. Do I have that right?

No, I'm saying that new military installations would be unlikely to be agreed due to domestic political sentiment. Pituffik was certainly agreed by both sides, but that was a long time ago.

(I'm not Danish or Greenlandic, so this is just my reading of the situation.)