Elon Musk now owns 9.2% of twitter...update.. will soon be the sole owner as Board of Directors accepts his purchase offer

Page 112 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,710
51,001
136
and the same right wingers have never supported putting business owners in jail for hiring the undocumented

Do they really care about the border enough to remove the incentive for crossing?
The way you remove an incentive to enter the United States is to make it an unattractive place to want to live and work, which is a stupid idea.

People want to come here to work. We need workers. The solution is obvious but stupid racists can't deal with too many brown people so here we are.
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
70,268
29,013
136
That sounds super unconstitutional and like a terrible idea even if it weren’t.
It's completely constitutional and it gets results. Fear of Superfund liability is what got industry to come clean, not any regulatory enforcement. If employers had to pay the true costs of their undocumented workers, they wouldn't hire them.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,710
51,001
136
It's completely constitutional and it gets results. Fear of Superfund liability is what got industry to come clean, not any regulatory enforcement. If employers had to pay the true costs of their undocumented workers, they wouldn't hire them.
So to be clear you believe if you break the law the government can force you to pay off the private debts of individuals that you had nothing to do with? So if tomorrow you murder someone the government can make you pay off some random person's student loans?

This entire line of thinking is so, so stupid. The answer to our problems is to radically increase immigration and make it much easier to come here legally, not dream up some bizarre draconian punishment for business owners who are just trying to deal with our idiotic immigration law.
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
70,268
29,013
136
The way you remove an incentive to enter the United States is to make it an unattractive place to want to live and work, which is a stupid idea.

People want to come here to work. We need workers. The solution is obvious but stupid racists can't deal with too many brown people so here we are.
Allowing the workers to come here and work here legally is the obvious solution. Given that conservatives are adamantly opposed to the obvious solution, nail the employers. I bet conservatives would have an epiphany right quick.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,710
51,001
136
Allowing the workers to come here and work here legally is the obvious solution. Given that conservatives are adamantly opposed to the obvious solution, nail the employers. I bet conservatives would have an epiphany right quick.
I do not think ruining vital businesses in a attempt to get conservatives to liberalize immigration laws will be successful.
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
70,268
29,013
136
So to be clear you believe if you break the law the government can force you to pay off the private debts of individuals that you had nothing to do with? So if tomorrow you murder someone the government can make you pay off some random person's student loans?

This entire line of thinking is so, so stupid. The answer to our problems is to radically increase immigration and make it much easier to come here legally, not dream up some bizarre draconian punishment for business owners who are just trying to deal with our idiotic immigration law.
The point of strict, joint, and several liability to get business owners who hire undocumented workers to stop gaming the system they created. The current system benefits these business owners at the expense of everyone else, including the workers. Nail their asses and create the incentives to change the current system.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,710
51,001
136
The point of strict, joint, and several liability to get business owners who hire undocumented workers to stop gaming the system they created. The current system benefits these business owners at the expense of everyone else, including the workers. Nail their asses and create the incentives to change the current system.
Even that is debatable. Illegal imimgrants pay billions and billions in taxes each year and utilize services at very low levels. In addition they contribute to Social Security and Medicare despite being ineligible for benefits. In addition being in America helps these workers, that's why they come. It also results in lower prices for consumers, although I don't like the mechanism. So no, lots of people benefit outside of the business owners.

We will not punish our way out of this and the US legal system is already insanely draconian. We need to lower penalties, not increase them.
 

mikeymikec

Lifer
May 19, 2011
18,659
11,420
136
Musk is a shithead but this move makes sense. Why do you need a board if you’re the sole owner?

Because one person doesn't make all the decisions at most multi-billion-dollar corporations? Why not just fire all management staff and have every single member of staff directly report to one person?
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,710
51,001
136
Because one person doesn't make all the decisions at most multi-billion-dollar corporations? Why not just fire all management staff and have every single member of staff directly report to one person?
I mean generally speaking what the board does is supervise the company and the CEO and if the CEO owns the company there’s no supervising of him to do.

I don’t think he should fire all the managers or whatever but I also don’t think a privately owned company needs the type of supervision a board provides.
 

sdifox

No Lifer
Sep 30, 2005
97,032
16,250
126
Because one person doesn't make all the decisions at most multi-billion-dollar corporations? Why not just fire all management staff and have every single member of staff directly report to one person?


You do when you own the whole thing. Having a board is only a requirement if you are publicly traded.
 
Last edited:

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
20,975
5,593
136
I admit that law exists, but it has tons of loopholes for defenses and enforcement is minimal. A good first step would be to permit private civil actions based on the law and/or generous whistleblower rewards. That is, if people are serious about barring aliens from working here instead of just giving the "issue" lip service.
I was told the fine was $25k per occurrence, which seems substantial to me.
Far and away the biggest issue is paying cash. Substantial savings for the employer, employee gets hosed if he gets hurt. In construction, comp rates can hit 50% or more for some trades.
 

MrSquished

Lifer
Jan 14, 2013
23,156
21,281
136
Bloomberg has a report that Musk has restricted access to moderation tools to like a dozen people. That should work out.
The EU warns that scheister they ain't fucking around with his bullshit ways



This is gonna be a big fire with Twitter left as just a small pile of glowing embers full of the hardcore racist shitty maga and white nationalist racist bigots of the world left to circle jerk in the remnants.

And people like Greenman saying, well this was just fine for the planet
 
  • Like
Reactions: zinfamous

manly

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
11,901
2,848
136
Because one person doesn't make all the decisions at most multi-billion-dollar corporations? Why not just fire all management staff and have every single member of staff directly report to one person?
He actually needs the middle management because WashPo (IIRC) reports they're planning on laying off 25% of the workforce soon, and potentially up to 50%. Senior management, especially a brand new team, won't know who should be laid off first. He fucked up with his foot-dragging on closing the acquisition though. It seems like he won't meet today's deadline to fire folks without their stock bonuses vesting tomorrow. If the WashPo reporting is true, it takes more than a weekend to lay off 1700ish workers in an orderly fashion.
 

MrSquished

Lifer
Jan 14, 2013
23,156
21,281
136
He actually needs the middle management because WashPo (IIRC) reports they're planning on laying off 25% of the workforce soon, and potentially up to 50%. Senior management, especially a brand new team, won't know who should be laid off first. He fucked up with his foot-dragging on closing the acquisition though. It seems like he won't meet today's deadline to fire folks without their stock bonuses vesting tomorrow. If the WashPo reporting is true, it takes more than a weekend to lay off 1700ish workers in an orderly fashion.
But he's such a genius businessman!

I mean this shit show has really killed the myth of billionaire infallible genius. He has been a walking shit show and it's gonna get worse.
 

kt

Diamond Member
Apr 1, 2000
6,018
1,324
136
He actually needs the middle management because WashPo (IIRC) reports they're planning on laying off 25% of the workforce soon, and potentially up to 50%. Senior management, especially a brand new team, won't know who should be laid off first. He fucked up with his foot-dragging on closing the acquisition though. It seems like he won't meet today's deadline to fire folks without their stock bonuses vesting tomorrow. If the WashPo reporting is true, it takes more than a weekend to lay off 1700ish workers in an orderly fashion.
Easy peasy, Musk will do a mass lay off via Twitter. Trump would be proud of him.
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
24,281
10,935
136
It is indeed rather ironic that the only guaranteed access to widely distributed "free speech" in the U.S. is based entirely on how much money you have and spend on it ~ and that access has now mostly been bought out by extreme Conservatives
Codified by our SCOTUS as a matter of fact.
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
48,246
37,666
136
It is hilarious that Musk bid himself down to $8/mo from $20 for verification to noted vicious dealmaker Steven King without even being asked.

Totally knows what he's doing lol.