| |
| ▲ | latexr 7 months ago | parent | next [-] | | > It’s not true for the extreme top end Any extreme is, by definition, unusual. You don’t need to be a billionaire (which is what the articule you linked to focus on) to be considered powerful or wealthy. Tellingly, that articles notes that: > The proportion of those in the list who grew up poor or had little wealth remained constant at roughly 20 percent throughout the same period. Which suggests that inheriting power and money does make a difference in your chance of success. They continue: > Most individuals on the Forbes 400 list did not inherit the family business but rather made their own fortune. But one does not follow from the other. Inheriting a business is not the only way to have a leg up. If you’re well off you have the opportunity to risk going into some venture on your own and fail, because you have a safety net. Furthermore, your affluent family can and probably will make a difference in your business. I’m reminded of a piece of news a while back where a couple of rich kids were bragging they made their company successful “from scratch” but upon further inspection into it was revealed their customers were rich friends of their parents. | |
| ▲ | cess11 7 months ago | parent | prev [-] | | There is no self-made wealth. You can't become wealthy without the labour of other people. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/apr/03/all-billion... The article you linked was a bit fuzzy, seems they counted people like Thiel and Musk as 'entrepreneurs' rather than inheritance because they didn't keep running a family company. But them being wealthy is absolutely connected to their families being privileged and the nasty, nasty crimes they profited from. | | |
| ▲ | FredPret 7 months ago | parent [-] | | You know you’ve gone off the deep end when you call Musk an “entrepreneur” in quotes instead of what he is - a regular, if excellent, entrepreneur. Having a leg up due to coming from a well-off background invalidates nothing. These top entrepreneurs and politicians typically grew up upper-middle class or as members of the minor rich; they rise to positions of prominence from there. That’s fundamentally different from inheriting power even if you’re a dunce as kings once did. | | |
| ▲ | cess11 7 months ago | parent [-] | | No, he's not, he's a douche born into criminal wealth that organisations he ends up in needs to protect themselves from. Today he's also a fascist grifter who's entered into politics. For some reason usians don't revolt when their political system elects rapists, genocidaires and people on the far right, so I'm hoping it'll turn into something like a kingdom that they find it in themselves to overturn. | | |
| ▲ | Nevermark 7 months ago | parent | next [-] | | Hard to believe now, but for quite a long time he focused on visionary technology, was an exceptional business man, an inspiring builder and leader of his organizations.He also demonstrated other unusual skills in ways people forget, never noticed, or sneer at ignorantly. Successfully navigating the national red tape for both Tesla and SpaceX, in industries with extremely entrenched regulatory captivating incumbents, demonstrated just one of many non-obvious skills. Today? He incessantly spews anti-inspirational anti-rational anti-social and anti-business diarrhea to an alarming and epic degree. He drives Twitter/X’s business logic like a drunk going the wrong way on a highway, seemingly intent on hitting every guardrail he can find. So far SpaceX and perhaps to a lesser degree Tesla are getting by on the deep talent he gathered in better times. He is an unusual person. | | |
| ▲ | cess11 7 months ago | parent [-] | | No, most of the reporting from "his organizations" is about how they defend themselves against him and blow the whistle about security concerns, plus the union busting and wage theft and so on. Plus the story about how Thiel kicked him out to save PayPal. Both Tesla and SpaceX are military labs behind plausible deniability, dual-use aprons. Hence they're run to a larger extent by people who aren't him and he works like a neat distraction for outsiders. Much like Thiel he doesn't show any "deep talent". That's something other people are bringing to the organisations they're part of. | | |
| ▲ | Nevermark 7 months ago | parent [-] | | This is hogwash. Dramatic exits after successful acquisitions are common. You have to earn “failures” like that. That created SpaceX’s seed capital. (You can’t have it both ways. If he had convinced the US to bankroll him, that would have been serious business acumen.) Minor success on hard problems, with a shoe string budget, and an attractive business plan (vertical integration, fast-failure iteration, reusability) got investment capital flowing. More successes, more capital. Result: They changed the economics of space launches & save money for all their customers, including NASA & the military. No resemblance to nepo operations or results. See Boeing, Lockheed, etc. $ billions of dollars burn with each SLS launch. Massive delays & cost plus overruns. For now. | | |
| ▲ | cess11 7 months ago | parent [-] | | Thiel put him aside before the IPO, which was before Ebay bought them. There's been a lot of reporting about how SpaceX is keeping Musk's influence at a minimum. If you go looking you'll also find video from interviews with Musk in that role where he isn't talking from a script and comes across as a clueless high schooler. Why are you taking hits for him? Does he somehow pay your bills? | | |
| ▲ | Nevermark 7 months ago | parent [-] | | > Why are you taking hits for him? Does he somehow pay your bills? I don’t like one-sided trolls who are insecure that some other people are exceptional? Is that really the kind of conversation we want to have? — More productively: I don’t have an axe to grind either way, other than giving credit where it is due, and vice versa. My original comment reflected both. He has done some truly incredible work. He earned his success. Lately, he is a mess with completely different priorities. I imagine many employees in all his companies are happier when he is not around these days. And would be happy if he stopped posting opinions, given the downstream impact to their brands. | | |
| ▲ | cess11 7 months ago | parent [-] | | Do I come across as insecure? What "success"? The stuff that other people have made happen that he takes credit for? | | |
| ▲ | Nevermark 7 months ago | parent [-] | | > Why are you taking hits for him? Does he somehow pay your bills? I responded to your pointless, inaccurate and rude conjecture with an equally pointless, rude, and what I assumed was an equally inaccurate conjecture to suggest that perhaps we keep our conversation substantive. If the sense in that still isn’t clear, you might check out the guidelines on this site for keeping discussion constructive. > What "success"? The stuff that other people have made happen that he takes credit for? I don’t know how “success” could be any more evident. But if you believe you see shortcuts that were taken, then perhaps take your insight and do something comparable? Good luck! | | |
| ▲ | FredPret 7 months ago | parent [-] | | We've seen an explosion in time spent looking at second-hand information online in recent decades - social media & news. I think a healthier way is to get information direct from the source, and from going and doing things. I think some people responded to the deluge of slop by clutching out their connection to reality and relying solely on a couple of third parties for their worldview. There's no point in arguing with someone who looks at Elon Musk and cannot see success because they can only look at him through a thick lens of ideology and tribalism. Five, ten years ago, some these same people probably thought he was in their tribe and idolized him then. Ten years ago, they probably liked Trump and his shows too. | | |
| ▲ | cess11 7 months ago | parent [-] | | I think it's the other way around. My interlocutor above has a "thick lens of ideology and tribalism". This is why they're being very unspecific and arguing like a child from a position of conviction, "this is the most evident thing there ever was". I've never had a keen eye to people that ride on the labour of other people and take credit for their work. Gossip magazines just don't work on me, and I don't trust the rich when they say they're "progressive" or whatever, like Musk did before. If they meant what they say, they'd get rid of their riches and return to society. | | |
| ▲ | Nevermark 7 months ago | parent [-] | | > My interlocutor above has a "thick lens of ideology and tribalism".
This is why they're being very unspecific and arguing like a child from a position of conviction, "this is the most evident thing there ever was". There you go again, making up my back story despite having no idea who I am. It is rude, but worse than that, a waste of words. I would insert another whimsical parody, referring back to you, but that somehow threw you last time. So I will just repeat: > Is that really the kind of conversation we want to have? > you might check out the guidelines on this site for keeping discussion constructive. -- It isn't controversial, nor should it require a complex justification to say with some confidence, that the richest person on the planet has been "successful". Widely documented synonym: "prosperous", i.e. achieving great wealth. >> "this is the most evident thing there ever was". I will be more precise and less rhetorical: based on the meanings of the words "successful", "prosperous" and "richest person on the planet" it is as close to a tautology as informal human language allows. -- > I don't trust the rich when they say they're "progressive" or whatever, like Musk did before. If they meant what they say, they'd get rid of their riches and return to society. "Progressive" doesn't mean charitable. As has been pointed out to you already, reading and using words consistent with their widely documented meanings will help you communicate better, and communicate something coherent, beyond simply projecting strong dislike and distrust of Musk. But, I am sympathetic to that viewpoint as was evident from my first comment. Musk has not lived up to values he previously espoused. And he routinely demonstrates deep hypocrisy relative to principles he claims to value today. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | FredPret 7 months ago | parent | prev [-] | | > Douche No accounting for taste > born into ... wealth It's a very minor thing in the big picture to be born into a 3rd world country like South Africa's top 1%. > criminal wealth His dad likely had some dodgy dealings, but there's every indication that he made the bulk of his money legally. Anyway, how does that reflect on Musk? Did we go back to "sins of the fathers"? > organisations he ends up in needs to protect themselves from. Ah yes, it's pure coincidence that so many of these organizations go on to absolutely kick ass. Let's check in on the EV situation at, say, GM or BMW in an alternate universe without Tesla. Or on the progress at ULA or Blue Origin. > fascist I don't think you understand what that word means. A key part of fascism is unlimited government control - the exact opposite of what he wants. > grifter He sells stuff? I guess that's bad in your eyes? > who's entered into politics How very dare he!? > rapists, genocidaires and people on the far right, Nice linking those three things together. | | |
| ▲ | cess11 7 months ago | parent [-] | | Apartheid was a crime. SA occupying and running mining operations in other countries was criminal. Profiting from it means you're accumulating criminal wealth. Mistaking first-mover advantage and access to extreme amounts of funding for "kick ass" is quite weird. No, that's not a characteristic of fascism. He's impressed by and promotes nazis, maintains his wealth through corporativism, and so on. No, it's that he makes wild promises, takes money and then don't deliver on them that makes him a grifter. | | |
| ▲ | FredPret 7 months ago | parent [-] | | Just going to drill into a couple of aspects of your rant. First, fascism is a totalitarian ideology. You could have googled it yourself instead of parroting what The View tells you. It demands 100% subordination of individual interests in service of the state. Here's a quote from Mussolini: "The Fascist conception of the State is all-embracing; outside of it no human or spiritual values can exist" [0] From his support of Trump and DOGE, we can conclude that he's the opposite of a fascist and wants to reduce the state. He's much more Millei than Mussolini. This is so elementary I'm a little confused as to why I have to spell it out. Here's some more homework for you: [1]. Words like Nazi and Fascist and Communist have meanings. If we want to have a civilized society, we must first respect the meanings of words so that we can have a conversation. Second: name a Nazi that Musk likes. Before you say Trump, here's Trump's Fine People speech. Watch the whole thing, then tell me he's a Nazi. Then also keep in mind the massive "Trump calls Nazis Fine People" hoax the media has been banging on about ever since: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGKbFA7HW-U Here's one of him disavowing the KKK many times over a long period: https://x.com/TimRunsHisMouth/status/897112536574828544 Third, Musk is known for making wild promises, many of which are as yet undone. Nobody would care who he is if that was all there is to him. But some of his wild promises are real and part of everyday life. Fourth, if you think he wins due to extreme funding, go read the stories of Zip2, Paypal, Tesla, SpaceX. All of the above teetered on the brink of nonexistence due to being bootstrapped by Musk who was then strapped for cash. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_fascism [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism | | |
| ▲ | cess11 7 months ago | parent [-] | | Fascism is a phase under capitalism where ideology breaks down and the people in power are split between going into hiding and panicked power grabs through any means available. Typically it involves ultra-nationalists taking formal political power and increasing the capitalist totalitarian impulse. The state is much, much more "all-embracing" today than what Mussolini could ever have imagined, and has been for a long time, decades. Musk wants a more total influence on the world, he doesn't want anyone to be able to say something negative about him, for example. He wants to eradicate large swathes of people, explicitly by making it impossible to talk about them and in practice it will likely boil down to the destruction of their bodies once that fails. You're obviously sympathetic to this neo-fascist movement. Let's hope you'll manage to leave, because by now it looks like the resistance to it has to get violent. | | |
| ▲ | FredPret 7 months ago | parent [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | cess11 7 months ago | parent [-] | | I'll consider setting up a terrarium but it'll take a month or two to get started. Where I live there is no grass outdoors at this time of year but I can probably find Festuca rubra seeds in the back of certain stores. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
