Russia on brink of ... NOPE! Russia INVADES Ukraine!

[Young Grasshopper]

SpaceX providers services to the US government and is paid for providing those services. Is every government contract a subsidy now?

Isn’t it amazing how they’re trying to bully a PRIVATE company because Musk won’t lend his technology to kill people? They never stop to think of the consequences of providing that technology, like Musk being a target for assassination, his employees, or the potential of a crippling cyberattack on Tesla/SpaceX, because well they’re not on Musks stratosphere nor do these people run their own businesses. They want to tell the second richest person in the world with multiple businesses how to run his business, because apparently they know how to run it better.

They also want to use his companies involvement in regards to contracts/tax breaks as a reason for its justification. Pretty sure these contracts don’t include using its technology to kill Russians.

I’ll quote Blinked when he says ‘it takes two to tango’.

At the end of the day, the government happily gave him those tax breaks/contracts/subsides for various reasons. No one forced the government to help him. I’m guessing none of those reasons involved using it’s technology to bomb other countries.

Amazing how someone who deployed satellites to help civilians communicate with each other during the time of war is somehow the bad guy.

Putin Derangement Syndrome is rotting peoples brains from the core and we can see it’s effects play out in real life.

 

[K1052]

Isn’t it amazing how they’re trying to bully a PRIVATE company because Musk won’t lend his technology to kill people? They never stop to think of the consequences of providing that technology, like Musk being a target for assassination, his employees, or the potential of a crippling cyberattack on Tesla/SpaceX, because well they’re not on Musks stratosphere nor do these people run their own businesses. They want to tell the second richest person in the world with multiple businesses how to run his business, because apparently they know how to run it better.

The Russians don't come into the US trying to kill defense contractors because a) they have to try stealing our developments and b) the CIA would do the same to them, likely way more successfully.

 

[Brovane]

Without early NASA backing its likely the company would not have survived. A large chunk of their business is government based and will be for the foreseeable future. The financial success of Starlink also probably hinges on selling lots of service to the US military/government.

Why is Musk phoning Moscow, with whom he does little to no business with, to see where they think he should allow service? Also if its totally innocent lets see his chats with Russian officials like he released his chats with Ukrainian officials.

The US government is the majority purchaser of space launch services in the US launch market. SpaceX got NASA backing as part of COTS and they meet their contractual obligations in the services they provided NASA. How is that a subsidy?

I do agree, I want to understand why Musk is talking to Russian officials even it is the Russian ambassador to the US.

 

[Brovane]

I understand they lease and improve the launch sites, the lease fees do not actually cover the value of the infrastructure at the site, though.

Did you pay Ford to develop your last car? Paying for the development of, but not taking ownership of, the design is a subsidy. Especially when it is being paid to a company with exactly zero experience in the field they are being funded to develop.

Regardless, without US Government funding and infrastructure, there would be no SpaceX. Whether you call it a subsidy or not is really just semantics.

You left off some things in your example.
A better example would be this, you need a vehicle from Ford to perform a specific service but that Ford vehicle doesn't exist. So you contract with Ford to develop a vehicle that will meet your needs. You make a agreement with Ford that you will help pay for development of the vehicle but Ford tells you that if they maintain ownership of the design they might be able to sell this service to others so they agree to split the development cost with you instead of you having to pay 100% of the development cost if you maintained ownership of the design. This is how (COTS) Commercial Orbital Transportation Services works. Do you think this is a bad way for the US government to contract for services?

 

[cytg111]

Well if SpaceX is gonna corner the market with potentially as low as 10usd/kg to orbit then I'll just leave this here

Breakup of the Bell System - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Fuck the little twerp

 

[K1052]

The US government is the majority purchaser of space launch services in the US launch market. SpaceX got NASA backing as part of COTS and they meet their contractual obligations in the services they provided NASA. How is that a subsidy?

I do agree, I want to understand why Musk is talking to Russian officials even it is the Russian ambassador to the US.

I suppose this hinges on if you consider being selected for something like COTS to be "support" or not. Without this program would SpaceX have taken off?

To say that I don't entirely trust who Musk says he has and has not talked to in the Russian government and on what topics is probably a substantial understatement.

 

[Grabo]

Russia is not going to leave bud. This is fantasy stuff. But it does sound the US is prepared to leave if Zelensky doesn’t get his act together.

Politics matters and at the end of the day, the US is not going to continue funding an endless war. We have funded endless wars in the past but that was because we were directly involved in these wars with boots on the ground. No so with this one.

Also, giving Ukraine billions of dollars in US taxpayer money while Maui residents got a $700 left a bad taste in everyone’s mouth about Project Ukraine.

By all accounts Russia is not going to leave because Putin has a thing for the Ukraine, not really because most Russians think that Ukraine == Russia or because most Russian conscripts are zealots for the Cause.
The "special military operation" is doing its best to drain two countries of people. And letting Russia annex all of the Ukraine simply wasn't an option to the western world and especially not its neighbours to the west. So to call it "Project Ukraine" seems a bit callous. Like is Lavrov smiling on that poster you keep above your bedtime table?

 

[Jaskalas]

I’ll care when Putin says it. Until it comes out of his mouth, words from others are just that. Words.

You'll wait until your master tells you to speak.
Smart Orc, you did not fall for the trap of displeasing Putin.
Do you want a cookie?

 

[fskimospy]

You'll wait until your master tells you to speak.
Smart Orc, you did not fall for the trap of displeasing Putin.
Do you want a cookie?

If/when that next invasion happens I look forward to hearing his reasons as to why it’s everyone’s fault but Russia.

 

[Zorba]

You left off some things in your example.
A better example would be this, you need a vehicle from Ford to perform a specific service but that Ford vehicle doesn't exist. So you contract with Ford to develop a vehicle that will meet your needs. You make a agreement with Ford that you will help pay for development of the vehicle but Ford tells you that if they maintain ownership of the design they might be able to sell this service to others so they agree to split the development cost with you instead of you having to pay 100% of the development cost if you maintained ownership of the design. This is how (COTS) Commercial Orbital Transportation Services works. Do you think this is a bad way for the US government to contract for services?

Except, it is actually more like Ford saying "Hey we are going to build a new F200 truck" and the government says "Hey we want 5,000 of those F200 trucks" and ford saying "Okay, that'll be 3 Billion for development and then $100k each."

SpaceX was going to build Falcon 9 and Dragon regardless, or there would've been no company. They got the government to pay for it's development. Whether you want to call it subsidy or just standard NRE, doesn't really matter, when the fact remains, they have a product because the government paid for it's development.

I think it is a fine way for the government to contract, I think Firm Fixed pricing should be much more common than it is. But regardless, the product exists because of government funding, period.

 

[itsmydamnation]

I don't think that's accurate either , dragon and crew dragon only exist to go to the iss. SpaceX may have wanted to make there own human rated vehicle but it's unlikely it would be bounded by iss and nasa requirements.

On starlink what's being portrayed here is not accurate, I'm not going to go into detail but starlink developed several operating capabilities that have nothing to do with humanitarian operations, I know this because they asked if we would be interested in a product that operated like that.

Also I see fuck face von clown stick couldn't do what I asked and all they could produce is boring and deliberately vague statements from shotwell.

 

[K1052]

https://www.reuters.com/world/us-ey...h-cluster-bombs-ukraine-officials-2023-09-11/

Exclusive: US eyes long-range missiles armed with cluster bombs for Ukraine - officials​

The Biden administration is close to approving the shipment of longer-range missiles packed with cluster bombs to Ukraine, giving Kyiv the ability to cause significant damage deeper within Russian-occupied territory, according to four U.S. officials.

After seeing the success of cluster munitions delivered in 155 mm artillery rounds in recent months, the U.S. is considering shipping either or both Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) that can fly up to 190 miles (306 km), or Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS) missiles with a 45-mile range packed with cluster bombs, three U.S. officials said.

Ukraine is currently equipped with 155 millimeter artillery with a maximum range of 18 miles carrying up to 48 bomblets. The ATACMS under consideration would propel around 300 or more bomblets. The GMLRS rocket system, a version of which Ukraine has had in its arsenal for months, would be able to disperse up to 404 cluster munitions.

The M39A1 missile and M26A1/2 ER rockets would be MOST excellent additions to Ukraine's arsenal.

 

[itsmydamnation]

Moar dead orcs , this will help bring peace quicker we know grasshopper will be most pleased by that!

 

[K1052]

Would you like anything else, Poland? Some Ohio Class SSGNs perhaps? Conventional Prompt Strike?

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Would you like anything else, Poland? Some Ohio Class SSGNs perhaps? Conventional Prompt Strike?


View attachment 85674

At this point we should just subduct the Polish military into the US one, call it pole force or something.

 

[Ajay]

Some Ohio Class SSGNs perhaps

Ajay's a moran.

 

[K1052]

Thankfully, Poland is landlocked

That might be news to their Baltic coast lol...

 

[Ajay]

That might be news to their Baltic coast lol...

I cannot believe that I said that. Good God, I must need a nap

Edit: Just looked up the beautiful port city of Gdańsk - so that I don't ever make that mistake again.

 

[Zor Prime]

Biden releases 6 billion back to Russian ally Iran. That could definitely afford some huge drone manufacturing facilities.

Biden just signed a death warrant for more Ukrainians.

For fucks sake, let someone else get the D nomination.

 

[Dave_5k]

Would you like anything else, Poland? Some Ohio Class SSGNs perhaps? Conventional Prompt Strike?

I do ponder how exactly Poland is paying for all of this, although they are multi-year purchases. But it has to be putting sustained pressure on the domestic budget (or deficits).

On the other hand, given the relative spend compared to the US defense budget, these massive multi-$billion Polish purchases are only slightly more than rounding errors to the overall US defense industry.

 

[K1052]

I do ponder how exactly Poland is paying for all of this, although they are multi-year purchases. But it has to be putting sustained pressure on the domestic budget (or deficits).

On the other hand, given the relative spend compared to the US defense budget, these massive multi-$billion Polish purchases are only slightly more than rounding errors to the overall US defense industry.

I believe they indicated that their defense spend would exceed 5% GDP. It's all financed also and is going to take years to even get produced.

 

[K1052]

Biden releases 6 billion back to Russian ally Iran. That could definitely afford some huge drone manufacturing facilities.

Biden just signed a death warrant for more Ukrainians.

For fucks sake, let someone else get the D nomination.

The money goes to the Qatari central bank and only to be distributed for humanitarian expenses according to US restrictions. Iran isn't getting the $6B to spend on just whatever.

 

[Drach]

Biden releases 6 billion back to Russian ally Iran. That could definitely afford some huge drone manufacturing facilities.

Biden just signed a death warrant for more Ukrainians.

For fucks sake, let someone else get the D nomination.

From your article humanitarian goods not drone manufacturing facilities. JFC. Personally I think this a step in the right direction politically.

The waiver means that European, Middle Eastern and Asian banks will not run afoul of U.S. sanctions in converting the money frozen in South Korea and transferring it to Qatar’s central bank, where it will be held for Iran to use for the purchase of humanitarian goods.

 

[RnR_au]

I do ponder how exactly Poland is paying for all of this, although they are multi-year purchases.

Poland is doing well economically.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1696793518428107133

 

[Brovane]

Except, it is actually more like Ford saying "Hey we are going to build a new F200 truck" and the government says "Hey we want 5,000 of those F200 trucks" and ford saying "Okay, that'll be 3 Billion for development and then $100k each."

SpaceX was going to build Falcon 9 and Dragon regardless, or there would've been no company. They got the government to pay for it's development. Whether you want to call it subsidy or just standard NRE, doesn't really matter, when the fact remains, they have a product because the government paid for it's development.

I think it is a fine way for the government to contract, I think Firm Fixed pricing should be much more common than it is. But regardless, the product exists because of government funding, period.

That isn't accurate. SpaceX wasn't going to build the Dragon regardless and only developed it as part of the COTS program. SpaceX had originally planned to sell launches on the Falcon-1, until they won the Cargo Resupply contract in December of 2008. They then pivoted to the Falcon-9 which they need to launch Dragon. They leverage a large launch contract with ORBCOMM to help pay for most of the development of the F9 while they used the CRS1 contract to pay for Dragon development. Yes the product development of the F9 was significantly helped by the CRS1 program which also allowed SpaceX to quickly develop the F9 which they then leverage to break into the MLV market. However NASA and the US taxpayers received a lot from that contract including not having to pay for the development of a new EELV for the DOD and significant economic impact of bringing commercial launch services back to the US.

A good book that goes into the early days of SpaceX is called Liftoff: Elon Musk and the Desperate Early Days that launched SpaceX by Eric Berger.
Another good book on the subject is Escaping Gravity: My quest to transform NASA and launch a new space age by Lori Garver that goes into the subject from the NASA side.