- Reaction score
- 12,301
- Points
- 1,040
No, it's very broad. "Attacks" means "pretty much all attacks".That's one interpretation. A very narrow and useful one if you harbour specific ideologies...
My measure of Musk is that he's driven more by his ambition to realize certain ideas than to amass wealth, and perhaps an outsize ego. I've noticed he doesn't necessarily hang onto one thing when he moves on to another. People who provide goods and services get really, really wealthy by providing goods and services other people really, really want.Are you intentionally avoiding the reality that one does not become a trillionaire if one can be happy with "enough"?
People advance all sorts of ideas about Musk. They can't all be correct, so most of them must be wrong, and I suppose that's particularly true of all of the ones that have a close relationship with political partisanship.I get it, we have had these arguments before. You live in a world of theoretical absolutes, and can't seem to fathom a world where theory and reality collide in messy ways.
Starlink revenues from Ukraine and Russia are not likely to be the vital ground of Musk's entrepreneurial empire. Do you suppose Starlink revenues are greater from Ukraine and Russia at war than the revenues would be if Ukraine and Russia were at peace?It absolutely works in Starlink/Musk's favour to drag out the war, collect even more money from prolonging the war, and use the profits to do whatever fantasy Roadster flying car foolishness they want.
The "flying car" was a stunt. Musk's companies and what they do definitely are not stunts.
The simple explanation for theories that Musk is somehow pro-Russia is that their originators hate Musk because Musk supports Trump.
