Oh I’m quite confident that they and their monied backers are very interested in the plight of the farmers. When those farmers get knocked out of the market, the big agri corps can buy farms for pennies on the dollar.

I’d be shocked if he’s actually in good enough physical health to run again.

Sadly, I think Vance and his ilk might actually be a graver threat and Trump leaving the picture affords them an opportunity to rise up. The corporate cyberpunk dystopias they’re dreaming of are terrifying.

Evidence he bought his way in?

Sure, there are a lot of dumb people at those companies. But that’s not the point. Failures don’t prove that the leadership or specific individuals are dumb. Plenty of smart people have failed.

But have fun inadvertently supporting Musk!

Deep red states have long relied on wealthier, mostly blue states for hand outs. Without that flow of money many of those states would sink into underdeveloped status.

Edit: and if red states want to take a chainsaw to their own legs by turning off the money tap themselves, well have fun with that.

everyone where? Can you link the evidence or provide details so I can try to find it?

Musk’s wealth isn’t the best indicator of his intelligence. It’s more circumstantial evidence at best.

“corporations with those who own them.”

This veers towards been an non sequitur. The claim isn’t that Musk is the corporation or that he is responsible for every decision. However, he is one of the (and probably THE) prominent voices in his companies and his decisions can massively impact the company’s trajectory. One success is luck, multiple successes suggests there’s a lot more than luck at play.

you’re not getting into UPENN being a complete idiot. Whoever started the company, Musk oversaw periods of the growth in SpaceX, Tesla, Paypal etc.

Musk is (edit: not) the smartest person in the world like he thinks he is. But it’s nearly an objective fact that he’s not stupid.

This is such a dumb hill to die on, and more importantly it benefits Musk.

edit: and as for failed programs, welcome to the world of business. Google, Amazon, Microsoft Apple, etc. constantly launch ideas that don’t pan out. Are their leaders and engineers and everyone else dumb because a project failed?

Eh, I despise Musk and believe he is a grave threat.

But this “Musk isn’t smart” narrative is a waste of time and underestimating Musk makes him more dangerous.

Tesla was a nothing burger company before he acquired it. SpaceX has been highly successful under his leadership. Musk may not have provided much technical knowledge, but he’s accomplished too much for it to be random luck, and steering such companies, even if not on a daily basis, is going to require applied intellectual skill.

Edit: guys you can downvote all you want but underestimating Musk just weakens your position and aids him. You’re not going to an Ivy League school with average or below intelligence.

You’re also not starting and guiding various companies to high level success if you’re dumb. Yes Musk has failed projects. Essentially every company and many if not most entrepreneurs have suffered failures.

Allegedly he also got a relatively high SAT score (1400) according to Isaacson, a respected biographer (I’d want to see hard proof however).

Musk’s IQ is probably something like 125, not 160. But it’s not going to be 90 or other like that.

But I guess you can go ahead and play into his hand and boost him by underestimating him.

Dude there’s no need for petty insults. Clowns are highly trained professionals who bring joy to the world. No need to insult them with unfair associations to slimy dinosaur politicians.

They shall be tut-tutted once, tut-tutted twice, tut-tutted three times. And they might get a stern glare as well.

I’m pretty sure once she crosses into “physical” action (not the right word but not sure what to use) she’s probably just getting removed herself. In this hypothetical case, maybe that encourages widespread resistance, but I think we’ll hear crickets in a few weeks.

If she’s going to extreme measures, probably best to do so as a last resort. She might be able to pin Adams under state laws or other mechanisms to try and remove him. If nothing else, better to go into a showdown with Trump with stronger legal backing.

So what does the governor do? What does anyone do? What’s “the” action? The only avenue forward is hopefully legal measures because if governor breaks any serious laws she’s done and nothing happens.

Yeah, it is all political theater because one party is much more powerful than the other.

Yeah I think we all agree Trump doesn’t give AF about what’s legal. But crucially, Trump can do that because he’s commander in chief of the world’s largest military, has a Supreme Court that supports him, has a rabid base that would go to war for him, and a Congress that overall is more favorable to him than Democrats.

In other words, Trump is in a position to flout rules. The governor is not. This doesn’t make me happy. I don’t support it. But it is what it is.

“Do you honestly think having some legal justification would change anything about how Trump would respond?”

Not sure where you’re going with this. Sadly, we’re in a might makes right era. I’d be surprised if Trump pays more than cursory attention to the lawyers advising him.

Pretty much the only thing the governor can do is political theater or resigning in protest (which Trump could care less about).

I’m not a we go high when they go low kinda guy but it’ll be really hard for a governor to act like Trump. And it’ll be especially hard if said governor has to go up against Trump. It’s hard to compel Trump because who enforcers anything on him? Yet Trump is probably drooling at the possibility of sending federal agents to arrest a governor.

None of this makes Trump’s abhorrent behavior okay, of course.

BeHoLD tHE pOWeR oF a TuT tUT!

I once stumbled on a discussion, on Reddit I think (or maybe it was Twitter) from a small-time farmer who basically admitted that most farmers in his position realized regulations were important and could be a force for good, but large agri-businesses constantly flouted rules and never got anything more than a slap on the wrist when caught. A sort of “rules for thee, not for me” situation. And so all the small time farmers had to cut corners and ignore regulations to remain competitive and viable.

Overly complex regulations could increase the barrier of entry for newer companies, small time entrepreneurs, etc. In some instances it can actually be in the interest of large, established companies to maintain overly complex regulatory environments as it keeps competition out of the market.

Insightful simplification of regulations that increases their effectiveness while reducing unnecessary burdens might be feasible, and also, beneficial for society as a whole.

Unfortunately, it doesn’t look like we’re going to get that with this administration. They’re just going to smash and break, and at best, they might realize they broke some important things and perhaps repair it to a limited extent.

edit: clarified a few points.

Great points and well put.

But if we do that how will the uber rich afford their 4th homes? Could you imagine getting by with just three homes?

(In truth, if too much wealth ends in the hands of the few, there won’t be enough money to sustain the consumption needed for economies to prosper.)

The old guard GOP IMO has raised a populist dragon they can no longer effectively control. McConnell, the Fox News media cabal, and other old guards never stopped to realize that eventually their dragon would start to turn on them. The brand of populism used doesn’t always line up with traditional GOP aims. If they harm the wrong crowd, the populist branch could quickly turn on them.