I don't think it's a straight quid pro quo or that he's on a secret Signal chat with Trump or anything. Just part of a broad alignment of the tech oligarchy with the Republican Party on anti-labor and anti-regulation lines.
Again, why would Elon Musk, with net worth near 300 billion dollars, go through all this trouble to maybe save 0.01% of his net worth in fines in some hypothetical scenario? The ROI seems absolutely terrible for that theory.
And why when Trump and the Republican party was in power in 2018, did they allow Musk+Tesla to be fined if there is such a tight relationship along 'anti-regulation' lines between the SEC and the President/political party in power?
And again, if he cares about political influence, why go through all this trouble and why not just directly incentivize politicians?
I think 2018 is exactly the kind of thing he is trying to avoid; I think you are underestimating the impact vigorous enforcement of labor and securities laws would have on his business prospects. Elon and his companies of course also spend quite a lot of money on campaign donations, lobbying, and political activity.
I think this is probably only one factor at play here, and who really knows to what degree, but it's certainly more of a factor than marketing pablum about Elon being a futurist deeply concerned with the optimal future of humanity or whatever.
None of my questions have been addressed, so I'm guessing you are pretty deep into your theory. I do wonder whether there is any piece of evidence or logical thinking through probabilities/incentives that would alter your theory of "Elon Musk buys Twitter to curry favor from Trump & the Republican party"?
Would the fact that Tesla mostly just donates to Democrats alter anything [1]?
Or that Elon Musk makes more personal donations to Democratic politicians [2]?
I'm guessing not. I'm guessing you'll ignore this and see that he and his companies donated some money to Republicans (even though he gives more to Democrats) and that therefore means he's a diehard Republican who is driven to look out for the party.
That he also donates to Democrats does not seem at all fatal to my speculation, as many avowedly right-wing (in the economic sense), anti-labor, anti-regulation businessmen donate freely to both parties. You seem to have some very confused notions about U.S. politics and political economy more generally.
-Is CEO of an electric car company and produces solar panels to help mitigate climate change
-Donates mostly to Democrats personally and through his companies
-Did not donate to Donald Trump, and said "I feel a bit stronger that he is probably not the right guy. He doesn't seem to have the sort of character that reflects well on the United States."
-Was fined by the SEC when Trump & the Republican party were in power in 2018
-In June 2017, announced that he would be leaving Trump's business advisory council in protest of the president's pulling the U.S. out of the Paris climate agreement. "Climate change is real. Leaving Paris is not good for America or the world,"
-Has a net worth of nearly 300 billion dollars
-------------------------------------------------
Wants to buy Twitter for $43 billion, because:
-It'll curry favor from Trump and the Republican party
-And if elected, Trump/the Republican party will make it so the SEC is easier on him (even though they were in power when he did get fined before)
-In a hypothetical scenario where he would get fined, this preferential treatment could save him 0.01% of his net worth
You are right, I am very confused, and this has to be the end of the thread for me. I do like probing conspiratorial thinking, but I think we've reached a dead-end. I bid you adieu.
Yes, I think he likely regrets his previous public positioning and is adjusting. I think, as I said, this is part of a broader shift in the tech-ocracy towards more explicit anti-labor and anti-regulatory positioning, and I think the potential risks of vigorous securities & labor law enforcement to Elon's wealth and personal freedom are likely substantially higher than the slap on the wrist he received from Trump's SEC (which, you'll remember, also imposed some mild restrictions on his ability to Tweet, which clearly irked him far more than the fine). I also don't think a billionaire with a California-based business donating to Democrats is at all fatal to my little theory here, as plenty of right-wing anti-labor, anti-regulation plutocrats donate to Democrats if they think it is in their material interest to do so.
Given that this is your second attempt at quitting the thread with a pre-emptory sign off, I would like to apologize for agitating you so much with my idle speculation here, and I sincerely hope you're able to make this attempt stick.
