We should just nationalize SpaceX at this point.

saturn8601 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

People keep saying this, how do you guarantee that Starlink doesn't turn to crap after it is nationalized? No one who calls for nationalization ever has an answer to this.

Frankly, there is the argument that all of this tech and optimization was there for others to develop but no one cared that much and its only now after you and others realize how good it is that you want to just go in and take it "because its so vital to national security".

Furthermore why can't someone just copy them? Drop a ton of money on poaching their engineers and just copy whatever the government needs?

Clearly leadership at SpaceX including Musk are a driving force behind this being so good...just look at the trash all the other companies are peddling. The magic might just go away if its nationalized and if it does then you probably can't just go "oh sorry bro heres your company back pls give us more magic".

▲

panick21_ 3 hours ago | parent [-]

> how do you guarantee that Starlink doesn't turn to crap after it is nationalized

How do you guarantee that Starlink doesn't turn to crap if you don't nationalize it?

Its a silly question. Governments have successfully operated various telecommunication systems for a long time.

Lots of modern telecommunications and sat tech comes out of the government.

But this will depend on each countries experience. I think one can make a solid argument that the denationalization of telco systems in the 90s was a mistake.

Same goes for the breakup of AT&T. The better option would have been to just nationalize the baby bells. And make AT&T focus on long distance competition and the technology. Maybe also nationalize Bell Labs and keep it operating financed from a the income of the Baby Bells.

Because what actually happened is that these Baby Bells simply got massive monopolies, made gigantic profits and were then able to do lots of other infrastructure plays and then mostly glob back together.

> take it "because its so vital to national security".

I think for that you don't need to take it. If you take (forced sale) it, it would be because you want to provide universal access subsidized without lining Musk pockets even more. But you would need a real long term vision for this to be worth it.

> Furthermore why can't someone just copy them? Drop a ton of money on poaching their engineers and just copy whatever the government needs?

Because the system is already built and working, why spend the capital on building the same thing again.

For me some kind of open access law would make more then nationalization. But the suggestion to nationalize isn't crazy.

	▲	db48x 8 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> …without lining Musk pockets even more. I just can’t fathom the logic here. You say that you don’t want to line Musk’s pockets, but seizing SpaceX/Starlink would cost a trillion dollars or more and all of that money would go to Elon Musk! The government would have to issue a trillion dollars of bonds, agreeing to pay interest on them for decades, and then hand all of the money over to Elon Musk who then doesn’t have to pay that interest. You’re deluding yourself to think that it’s even feasible. And it’s also a bad idea just on general principles. I agree that the breakup of AT&T was a mistake though.

▲

no-dr-onboard 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

What a silly comment :). Do you realize that spacex could not have come about without someone doing it privately?