1ºTwo days ago I posted a comment about TESLA and the fact that it is very concerned that Ford and VW have entered the electric car market in a big way as competitors and that management was very concerned that MUSK is relying on China for its sole supplier of Lithium batteries. Musk even tweeted about how it would be a good idea for some entrepreneurs to produce more lithium. Was the purchase of Twitter a smoke screen for Musk to leverage his TESLA/SpcaeX stock value before it crashes? Today Jeff Bezos is asking the same question. Almost all of the money to buy Twitter was in the form of loans against his stock holdings in that he only had $2.95 billion in cash at the time of the tender before Morgan Stanley stepped in to finance the deal as mostly debt.
2ºIt’s simply not true. Do some homework. Elon has paid taxes , created jobs and gives to charity.. what the hell else do you want?! A 2 faced Dem that lies through their teeth that they want to help the poor?? Who is being helped now? Inflation and gas skyrocketing, literally killing the lowest earners. It’s pathetic and sad thst you don’t see the correlation between all the recent handouts and now everything is too expensive. What good did a little boost do when now everything is ridiculously expensive? Everyday common items and gas prices aren’t through the roof because Elon didn’t pay enough. It’s because you believed a fantasy that a Democrat was gonna give you all the money for free. Now we are all paying and struggling.
3ºChris Burton Some Children of Rich people squander their fortune and others are able to become entrepreneurs. I believe there is a talent for it. Plus I think he lives fairly modestly and reinvests his money back into his companies. Even though he came from money he was able to grow pay pal and sell it for billions, then he was off to the races using that money. However we do know he received lots of government subsidies for Tesla. He believes in his product and is kind of a green geek. His vision is to make space eventually accessible for private travel. He wants to send people to inhabit Mars. I don’t and you don’t have the wherewithal to do that. I don’t begrudge him for his money or his vision. Back to Twitter. He believes in open discourse, questioning both sides of the issue. Even if you don’t agree with the other side Questioning furthers advancement
4ºEveryone should just log out and let the white supremist people have their free speech and listen to it by themselves. There will be so much static and conflict. It's like parents letting their kindergarten age children use the f word and tell grandma to eat their fecal matter, because they have to have the right to free speech. Free speech without civility. Civility takes free speech away from people and should be abolished. Do away with all rules as well. Don't forget common sense, get rid of it and say what you want to anyone you want. See someone using crutches and laugh at them and tell them they are lazy for using them. Hurt them, it's what you think they are doing and you now have the right to tell them, it's what free speech is in America now. The girl that told her boyfriend to kill himself, and he did, she will be let out of prison. Musk and trump will meet her at the door and walk her out. It was her right to free speech; he didn't have to listen! This is what America has come to and Musk is ushering it in. Freedom for all to say as they please. No more being taken off of facebook for a month to punish you for saying what you want. What's the excuse they use when they do that? Oh yea, it violates our values. Values? FU! I'm free from values now because I have free speech!
5ºDaniel S Lovejoy this isn’t true. You can take an immigrant family, say Viet Nam or India, I am not talking about the elite. I am speaking of a working class. They come to this country barely or, not speaking the language at all. A few years later, their child is the valedictorian, they own a business and do not contribute to crime. There are two reasons, HARD WORK, they aren’t used to everything being given to them. Secondly, they have tremendous respect and are grateful for the opportunities this country offers. Something (just by your comment) many Americans have forgotten.
6ºDeborah Wall McGraw what is the problem with being more centered, instead of right or left ? The right/left paradigm is why there is no free thought or compromise on issues, and why nothing functions any longer and problems are never resolved. Neither side is right all the time, and tbh, the dems take it to the extreme. The republicans have actually compromised on many issues. The dems want it 100% their way, and when given an inch they take a mile.
Ps: people who did mature past libertarianism and went far left, should follow the things they so proudly support. Primarily abort themselves
7ºKathleen Hudson Coulter It’s not a matter of either / or , which Americans have never understood nor appreciated. You can have, as in Europe—with its own robust economies and flourishing monied classes—capitalism balanced with a certain amount of socialized security for all (health, education, housing, etc.). There’s no want for example of capitalist opportunity in Europe (or, say, Canada)—people are free to get rich (just not as free, but neither are people as free to descend into abject poverty). It tarnishes our integrity as a nation to allow ever expanding disparities in wealth. If you were to study the economy of the 1950s and 1960s when the American Dream was more closely aligned with reality, you’d find what today is considered a horrifying level of government regulation (that was in place in part to ensure the rise of the working and middle classes)—and it happens also to have succeeded. We’ve been chasing that dream ever since, but ensuring the spoils only for the very rich and corporations. That isn’t done in other countries and it’s not “socialism”—it’s humane.
8ºFor those of you celebrating this as a win for free speech, there has always been times in the past when free speech was not allowed for the benefit of many others. For example, if you want to run into a movie theater and yell out fire when there isn't a fire, you will get in trouble for your attempt at free speech. Similarly, if you wanted to use a building to gather people together to plot a terrorist attack against the United states, your so-called Free speech would not be allowed, but also if the owners of the building decided they don't want you using their building to plot an insurrection, they have the right to stop you from doing that. In the Twitter situation, they had a virtual building that was allowing Donald Trump to organize chaos throughout the country. The private business decided to no longer allow Donald Trump to use their proverbial building to destabilize the country. That has nothing to do with free speech but private enterprise protecting their interests.
9ºKristi Lamarca I've done my share of back breaking work, I got tired of it soooo I evolved.. like I said I started scrubbing decks, building tow, servicing engines, now I'm steering.. you got to have the drive to work your way up..
As far as inheritance, oh well.. I'm sure you'd like to think everyone has it that easy, unfortunately I don't know anyone personally who's benifited from one.
And if you work for a chain, yes they'll move you to management, and maybe management will move up the corporate ladder.
I'm disappointed in each and every person who's responding, all I hear is excuses... none of you guys have drive, ambition, or a once of integrity..
10ºGreg Jones this is nothing new, government entities have always been guilty of trying to control the narrative and spreading propaganda long before Obama, Trump or Biden were ever in office. However, per the constitution it is clearly stated that Congress can pass no law to restrict free speech. That has not happened, the companies made decisions (right or wrong) based on their policies and that does not rise to the level of a constitutional violation despite political pressure from either party. Whether it is right or wrong of them to do is totally separate from constitutionally protected free speech.