• EvilBit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      No, it’s that as an effective monopoly, it has unreasonable power over the government.

      • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re 17 years too late to use that argument in good faith. Not only is SpaceX not a monopoly (because there are many other companies you can buy launch services from in the USA) but because that wasn’t the case in 2006 when Boeing and Lockheed (with USA government consent!) created a TRUE launch monopoly by merging to create ULA (United Launch Alliance).

        • EvilBit@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m not strictly arguing for federalization, but you’re arguing through whataboutism. And SpaceX is an effective monopoly. Otherwise we’d use other launch services at least some significant amount.

          • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m not strictly arguing for federalization,

            You’re replying to the thread where the OP wanted to nationalized SpaceX. I haven’t heard you say different. What are you proposing instead?

            but you’re arguing through whataboutism.

            No, I’m citing precedent. Its extremely applicable because its the exact same industry, and even existed before SpaceX. .

            And SpaceX is an effective monopoly. Otherwise we’d use other launch services at least some significant amount.

            I don’t think you follow spaceflight very much if you hold this statement. I’m assuming the “we” you’re using here means US government launch.

            Here’s US government launches that ULA did in 2022 and 2023 so far: 7 launches

            Delta IV Heavy | NROL-68 United Launch Alliance | USA Cape Canaveral, FL, USA June 22, 2023, 9:18 a.m.

            Delta IV Heavy | NROL-91 United Launch Alliance | USA Vandenberg SFB, CA, USA Sept. 24, 2022, 10:25 p.m.

            Atlas V 421 | SBIRS GEO-6 United Launch Alliance | USA Cape Canaveral, FL, USA Aug. 4, 2022, 10:29 a.m.

            Atlas V 541 | USSF-12 United Launch Alliance | USA Cape Canaveral, FL, USA July 1, 2022, 11:15 p.m.

            Atlas V N22 | CST-100 Starliner Orbital Flight Test 2 (OFT-2) United Launch Alliance | USA Cape Canaveral, FL, USA May 19, 2022, 6:54 p.m.

            Atlas V 541 | GOES-T United Launch Alliance | USA Cape Canaveral, FL, USA March 1, 2022, 9:38 p.m.

            Atlas V 511 | USSF-8 United Launch Alliance | USA Cape Canaveral, FL, USA Jan. 21, 2022, 7 p.m.

            source

            How is SpaceX am “effective” monopoly?

            • EvilBit@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I was arguing a point, not a position.

              And SpaceX is literally the only means by which the US is able to send astronauts to the ISS currently. StarLink is a strategically critical service for military and probably other purposes.

              Precedent does not intrinsically imply merit.