Al-Jazeera’s reporting on Musk’s coup

[ping72]

Interesting take since the US media is not stepping up.

Elon Musk tightens grip on gov’t, sparking ‘coup’ accusations

Tech billionaire has upended the federal bureaucracy in the two weeks since US President Donald Trump took office.

www.aljazeera.com

 

[Moral]

Al Jazeera does great work. Bump

 

[BelemNole]

People trash them but they do good reporting.

 

[Moral]

People trash them but they do good reporting.

And risk their lives, and have been killed by Israel. I check them out daily because they carry news that corporate media avoids like the plague.

 

[seminole97]

And risk their lives, and have been killed by Israel. I check them out daily because they carry news that corporate media avoids like the plague.

You’re not wrong.
They have their own biases, of course, but the overriding media control mechanism is the lie of omission.

And people will came back at you with, ‘Well I didn’t see it on CNN!’, as if they bother to (or could) see every tree that falls in the forest.

Read the ones you’ve don’t trust as much too, if only to see what (if any) aspects of the story they cover.

Mother Jones and National Review can cover the same story, deliver only facts, but leave two completely different impressions based on what facts they leave out.

 

[ping72]

And risk their lives, and have been killed by Israel. I check them out daily because they carry news that corporate media avoids like the plague.

Them and the BBC cover the US better than our own media.

 

[Moral]

Them and the BBC cover the US better than our own media.

AINEC

 

[mnole03]

It’s not a coup. This is how they designed the whole thing. Musk gets the authority of multiple cabinet heads, clearly violates the law, gets revenge on the people he doesn’t like, breaks some things beyond repair, and then Trump pardons him and he walks away.

Vivek’s getting out of Dodge looks like a smart play from a guy who wants a future political career.

 

[Aardvark86]

You’re not wrong.
They have their own biases, of course, but the overriding media control mechanism is the lie of omission.

And people will came back at you with, ‘Well I didn’t see it on CNN!’, as if they bother to (or could) see every tree that falls in the forest.

Read the ones you’ve don’t trust as much too, if only to see what (if any) aspects of the story they cover.

Mother Jones and National Review can cover the same story, deliver only facts, but leave two completely different impressions based on what facts they leave out.

Triangulation is a good rule of thumb.

 

[Tiny Hands Trump]

It’s not a coup. This is how they designed the whole thing. Musk gets the authority of multiple cabinet heads, clearly violates the law, gets revenge on the people he doesn’t like, breaks some things beyond repair, and then Trump pardons him and he walks away.

Vivek’s getting out of Dodge looks like a smart play from a guy who wants a future political career.

Pardon won't be able to stop the next dem admin from going after each and every one of his companies. Sounds to me like they won't need any more government contracts going forward and all existing ones canceled in the name of saving money.

 

[LunchBox50]

Al Jazeera does great work. Bump

Wired has also been doing some great reporting.

 

[torbee]

It’s not a coup. This is how they designed the whole thing. Musk gets the authority of multiple cabinet heads, clearly violates the law, gets revenge on the people he doesn’t like, breaks some things beyond repair, and then Trump pardons him and he walks away.

Vivek’s getting out of Dodge looks like a smart play from a guy who wants a future political career.

Eh, bit of a semantics argument here.

I'd say attempting to circumvent the normal checks-and-balances of a two-party system by consciously ignoring the Constitution would be "coup-like" at the very least.

 

[mnole03]

Wired has also been doing some great reporting.

It’s a crime.

 

[cohawk]

You’re not wrong.
They have their own biases, of course, but the overriding media control mechanism is the lie of omission.

And people will came back at you with, ‘Well I didn’t see it on CNN!’, as if they bother to (or could) see every tree that falls in the forest.

Read the ones you’ve don’t trust as much too, if only to see what (if any) aspects of the story they cover.

Mother Jones and National Review can cover the same story, deliver only facts, but leave two completely different impressions based on what facts they leave out.

Two impressions.

1. Those who are intellectually curious
2. Trump Voters

 

[seminole97]

Pardon won't be able to stop the next dem admin from going after each and every one of his companies. Sounds to me like they won't need any more government contracts going forward and all existing ones canceled in the name of saving money.

So we can go back to paying the Russians to get our astronauts into space?

Who can get our government’s satellites into space cheaper than SpaceX?

 

[seminole97]

Eh, bit of a semantics argument here.

I'd say attempting to circumvent the normal checks-and-balances of a two-party system by consciously ignoring the Constitution would be "coup-like" at the very least.

Two party system isn’t in the Constitution.

 

[cohawk]

So we can go back to paying the Russians to get our astronauts into space?

Who can get our government’s satellites into space cheaper than SpaceX?

The government will get gouged by SpaceX. They are just like every other defense contractor.

 

[seminole97]

The government will get gouged by SpaceX. They are just like every other defense contractor.

And yet they’re still the cheapest option.

It’s not a matter of debate. If you want to cancel SpaceX contracts you’re interested in screwing the taxpayer and/or sending the money to Russia again.

 

[cohawk]

And yet they’re still the cheapest option.

It’s not a matter of debate. If you want to cancel SpaceX contracts you’re interested in screwing the taxpayer and/or sending the money to Russia again.

How are they the cheapest option? What other options are you comparing them to?

 

[desihawk]

So we can go back to paying the Russians to get our astronauts into space?

Who can get our government’s satellites into space cheaper than SpaceX?

boeing apparently can get astronauts into space but we are still looking for someone with skills to bring them back.

 

[seminole97]

How are they the cheapest option?

By offering a lower price to get mass into orbit.

They achieved this by engineering reusable rocket boosters, massively reducing costs over competitors whose equipment is single use.

What other options are you comparing them to?

The viable ones that can be purchased and deliver cargo to space.

 

[Tiny Hands Trump]

We really need to stop listening to the guy who got taken by a drunk Russian general on nuclear war. Takes a real dipshit to pull that stunt off and still pretend he is a genius.

 

[cohawk]

By offering a lower price to get mass into orbit.

They achieved this by engineering reusable rocket boosters, massively reducing costs over competitors whose equipment is single use.



The viable ones that can be purchased and deliver cargo to space.

So, in the short term, they are the cheapest option. We need to look longer term.

 

[seminole97]

So, in the short term, they are the cheapest option. We need to look longer term.

As Citigroup outlined in a 2022 research note, NASA Launch costs dropped significantly from over $100,000/kg in the mid-1960s to around $5,400/kg for the Saturn V used in the Apollo launches starting in 1967. After the Apollo 11 lunar landing, the average launch cost remained relatively stable for decades, averaging about $16,000/kg for medium/heavy payloads and about $30,000/kg for light payloads. This was due to factors such as the use of existing launch systems, reduced number of launches, high reliability requirements for human spaceflight, and a government-funded spending culture. Bottom line: There simply wasn’t much innovation or financial motivation to be innovative.

Then came SpaceX, which pioneered lower launch costs with the Falcon 9 in 2010 ($2,500/kg) and Falcon Heavy in 2018 ($1,500/kg) that are 30 times lower than NASA’s Space Shuttle in 1981 and 11 times lower than the average launch costs from 1970 to 2010, according to Citi.

…With Starship, full reusability is expected to drive launch costs down to roughly $1,600/kg to low Earth orbit, with the potential for further reduction to about $100/kg to $150/kg over time. In Citi’s best-case scenario, launch costs could fall to about $30/kg by 2040, while in a bear-case scenario, costs could be $300/kg if rockets are only reused around 10 times.