I just had the horrible mental image of Elon the horn-dog macking on MGT. 
And now you do too.
Yes, I did. Not sure your point here, it was obvious that you hadn’t, as you even said you were reacting to the first line.
This is a subsidy. The contract isn’t just for launch costs, it includes development costs as well.
" The US Air Force has joined in on the SpaceX action as well. In 2020, Musk’s SpaceX and United Launch Alliance won two contracts for National Security Space “launch services” worth a combined $653 million, which they will provide between 2022 and 2027."
This is the only one that you have a leg to stand on, at all. Out of all the subsidies in the article, this is the only one that is actually just purchasing a service. Now, it has to be said that SpaceX couldn’t exist at all without the government committing to purchasing these launches, and it did get subsidies in the development of these launch vehicles, so it’s not entirely not a subsidy, and it absolutely is government funded.
Which was the only claim that the posters in this thread made when you came by with your attempted snipe.
What was the point of that again?
I assume that he ripped off some private investors as well.
I’m really glad journalistic resources are being spent on answering the important questions like: Why the hell is Elon Musk so goddamn unfunny? (I mean the above sentence entirely non-ironically btw)
Great reporting and important work!
What might seem obvious to you is in fact false. I did read the full story before my first post. I drew attention to the preview line in your previous post because it directly contradicted your assertion that the post I was responding to hadn’t mentioned subsidies when it clearly had, not because it was the only thing I had read.
I would argue that being awarded a government contract to design and build space vehicles which do not yet exist is not a subsidy. Or would you say that an architecture firm retained to design a new government building is being subsidized based on their being paid to do design work?
“Here’s some money, go spend it on developing this thing we know you’d like to develop” is a subsidy. “We’d like you to develop this thing you won’t otherwise, how much do we have to pay you to do that?” is not a subsidy, it’s purchasing services. Artemis is the latter, not the former.
Look, this all arose because of the “government funded” tag Twitter was adding to NPR and BBC feed. In the sense that Twitter has used that tag, SpaceX is not meaningfully government funded. The government is their largest customer, sure. But in the sense that the Twitter tag was used up until last week, it wouldn’t apply to SpaceX any more than any randomly selected defense contractor. The tag meant “this media organization is supported in whole or in significant part by government funding which viewers may want to consider when assessing credibility.” So the Canadian Broadcast Corporation would clearly apply, since it gets about 70% of its revenue from the government. NPR doesn’t apply since the portion of its funding that’s from government is trivial. BBC is a bit of a curious case because to my foreign eyes the License Fee looks a hell of a lot like a tax, even if the BBC might like to pretend it isn’t. IMHO sticking a ‘government funded’ label on BBC isn’t really unreasonable. Most of its budget exists because Westminster passed a law saying that any radio/TV owner has to pay BBC even if they never listen to/watch BBC.
While there is some sense in which having the government as a major customer makes your business government funded, that is not what the primary meaning of the expression is. The primary meaning is that the government is giving you money, not that the government is buying goods or services from you. Elon is a giant twat-waffle and numerous of his operations suckle happily at the public teat, but the large contracts SpaceX has recently received don’t constitute ‘public funding’ in the ordinary sense of the phrase, and my first brief post was merely insisting on that pedantic point.
I was then annoyed and insulted by the snide ‘read the article’ and ‘the post you’re responding to didn’t say what it clearly did’ responses, hence my overly defensive rebuttal. 
https://www.tesla.com/support/incentives
I mean, each and every car is subsidized as long as you fall below the AGI guidelines.
Okay, I’ll believe you, it just didn’t seem that way from the way that you were talking about the preview line as though it were the only thing being talked about.
I’m not sure what post you are talking about here. Are you sure that I was the one that posted what you responded to there?
I would say that being awarded a govt contract to design something that wouldn’t exist otherwise would be.
Elon Musk had expressed interest in building reusable rockets for the purpose of opening the potential of going to Mars well before he ever landed a rocket.
I’d say it’s certainly in the former category, rather than the latter.
Artemis is not SpaceX, not sure what you mean by this. SpaceX won’t have anything to do with Artemis until at least Artemis III.
Exactly, and the point that was made was that if NPR is govt funded, then Musk’s companies certainly are as well. I didn’t say that Musk’s companies are government funded out of the blue, I simply used the same metric that Musk used to determine that NPR is.
I would say that it’s extremely disingenuous to do so. Govt funding implies the govt also has some sort of say over the operations, and the UK govt has far less say over BBC’s operations than the US govt has over SpaceX’s.
Publically funded would be a proper tag, as it is funded by the public, but the govt never gets to touch that money, it never gets to determine how that money is used by the BBC.
NPR would continue to exist if it never got another dime from the government. Could you say the same about SpaceX?
And I found myself annoyed by the assertions that you were making that seemed both as though you weren’t responding to the post that you replied to, and that you only responded to the preview line of the article.
Okay, let’s go to the tape, and then I’m dropping this as we’re getting into semantics.
The post that kicked it off, was by @squeegee with the Business Insider story where the preview line said “Musk’s companies benefited from subsidies as recently as April, when SpaceX won a $2.89 billion contract from NASA.”
I read the article hoping it wasn’t actually saying that winning a contract is the same as benefiting from subsidies, but it led with the two SpaceX contract awards that are not subsidies.
I responded:
And you responded:
In fact the quote I replied to did mention subsidies, in the preview no less and not just the article. This post of yours is what set me off. When I pointed out the fact that you were blatantly wrong about what the post I was responding to had, in actual fact, said, you accused me of not having read the article.
I will agree to disagree on the boundaries between government funding, subsidies, and being awarded government contracts, with one exception from your most recent post:
No, it bloody well doesn’t.
Finally, just for general informational purposes, Artemis is the moon landing mission of which the second SpaceX contract mentioned in the first article is a part. This is the one you said was a subsidy because it involved development, and where I disagreed that’s a subsidy but admit that reasonable people can disagree about the boundaries between subsidies and purchasing services.
“Getting into??” That ship sailed long ago.
But do continue this fascinating discussion.
Yes, except they’re not breaking apart each others’ posts into small enough chunks. Do it one word at a time for the extra tedium.
@EllisDee
I’m at a loss for words here. It’s too bad that epic has been so over used.
How about colossal?
So, anything new on Elon?
Or The Social Media Platform Previously Known As Twitter?
It’s now called Titter and it’s getting saggier by the day.
More evidence that Elmo is delusional. Check out the chart below to see how much PBS and NPR are “government funded” compared to public broadcasting in the rest of the world. Federal funding for public broadcasting in the US is so pathetic that it’s perilously close to zero. NPR gets only around 10% of its budget from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting; everything else comes from individual and corporate donations. You know what’s really government funded? Elmo.
They have.
I’m glad to see it. I donate to them each month because I love their programs. I’m happy they’re taking that route.
He really does have a knack for making things worse. It’s a kind of genius!
It would be amazing if substack really did kill Twitter but the way it did so was by convincing Elon to turn Twitter into a shitty clone of substack that is less engaging and well built.