Because daddy Musk is the paragon of knowledge, efficiency and business acumen, don't you know? Everything he says is of course, by default, the truth and constructive.

/s in case it's not obvious.

The world can remain irrational longer than you can remain alive.

The cult of celebrity is why...

I stopped by the elon musk subreddit the other day.. they haven't gotten the memo yet.

Because he built a massive electric car company, launched a new global satellite internet service with micro-satellites, and successfully launched reusable heavy rockets?

(In before someone replied with the famous Obama quote “you didn’t build that”)

He said he was going to do huge, groundbreaking things and actually delivered on them?

Elon is clearly capable but I get it, people disagree with his politics so they pretend he not credible at all?

> Because he built a massive electric car company, launched a new global satellite internet service with micro-satellites, and successfully launched reusable heavy rockets?

That's a non-sequitur.

> Elon is clearly capable but I get it, people disagree with his politics so they pretend he not credible at all?

Exactly wrong, and I'd turn that around and say that people tolerate his nonsense because they agree with his politics, and defend him beyond reason.

All I'm saying is people should be judged on what they say and do and the relationship between the two. They shouldn't be excused from lying, abuse and dissembling just because they're successful in business.

Pointing out Tesla and spacex is fine but kinda glossing over some important details about this companies - he routinely over promised on products and delivers years late if at all. Definitely worse with Tesla than spacex. And he destroyed twitter, his latest venture. He’s quite obviously not the same person he was a decade ago.

Idk.. twitter/X is probably going exactly to plan (after the plan changed).

It's the very definition of a non-sequitur.

You're loading up my comment with things I did not say or reference.

Just look at the plain meaning of the words I'm using. They refer to what comes out of his mouth, that's all.

I copy-pasted your comment? How can I be "loading up your comment with things I did not say or reference"?

If what you are saying is - "my comment did not accurately reflect what I was trying to say" then ok, but I can only go by what you write. I can't read your mind.

> I'm saying Musk made claims about Tesla (creating a successful e-car company), Starlink (creating a constellation of satellites for internet globally), SpaceX (land a massive booster).

Each of these are neat.

Each of these has had complete bullshit claims attached. Mars mission by 2016; “full self driving” and robotaxis and summoning the car from LA to NYC.

He’s a fabulist. Sometimes that’s good. Often it isn’t.

> He said he was going to do huge, groundbreaking things and actually delivered on them?

How many huge, groundbreaking things that he promised has he _not_ delivered on?

And how many of those groundbreaking things have been accomplished by abusing people -- employees, customers, or even rescue divers?

Tesla – Musk did not found Tesla. It was started by Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning in 2003. Musk joined as an investor in 2004 and later took over as CEO. Tesla’s engineering and production achievements are the result of work by thousands of engineers and employees. Bought, not built.

Starlink is a project within SpaceX, which Musk co-founded, but the development of its satellite internet network has been carried out by SpaceX engineers and scientists. The technology and execution come from a large team.

Reusable Rockets – The success of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy reusability was achieved through the efforts of SpaceX’s engineers, especially Tom Mueller, who led the development of the Merlin engines.

Is your criticism really that Musk didnt build stuff HIMSELF but had a team of engineers? Yeah of course no one thinks he designed and assembled every starlink sattalite himself. Thats a preposterous contention. He did, in facf, lead the teams that accomplished this stuff.

Musk’s skill seems to be building and fostering a successful team, and picking up engineering-related skills quickly. Those skills arguably transfer to what DOGE’s goals are better than being a really great mechanical engineer or being a really great chemist.

Musk has a history of driving talented people away rather than fostering strong teams [1] — just look at the high turnover at Tesla and SpaceX, and the chaos he caused at Twitter/X. Many of his top engineers and executives have left due to his management style, which is often described as erratic and demanding to the point of burnout. As for engineering skills, he’s more of a charismatic salesman than an actual engineer.

Unlike a private company, where a CEO can make unilateral decisions and push employees to extreme workloads, the government requires collaboration, compromise, and stability. Federal agencies rely on institutional knowledge and long-term strategy, not impulsive shake-ups and mass firings.

[1] https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-loses-4-top-execut...

He’s a controversial leader, sure. I get the impression people work under him because he gives them opportunities to work on cool stuff, not because he’s a kind, compassionate boss.

But what I’m getting at is that he’s successful. Unless you believe all his amazing successes are due to luck, you have to admit that he’s very, very effective as a leader. Even if we can’t understand why, he’s still affective.

It’s easy to seem successful when you’re rich.

“Capable” and “credible” are two different things, and as much as hus record at Tesla may arguably support “capable”, it certainly goes the other way on “credible”.

(And “capable” often translates poorly between dissimilar domains, while a history of lying like a rug is more transferrable.)

That's beside the point; he's a compulsive liar, so it shouldn't be surprising when he lies.

Granting him the credibility associated with building and running some pretty successful engineering companies, in whatever the dimensions of that are deserved, is arguably warranted. Within that space the always coming next year or two FSD has proven to be hugely optimistic at best and blatantly manipulative otherwise however do some skepticism is still needed. The misrepresentations and lies he is telling as the defacto head of DOGE are so many and broad (and laced with such heavy personal and political bias) that the only pretending going on is when you say they are credible by default.

Those achievements were in a different domain. He has never had success in the domain he’s playing in now.

Also, his behavior smacks of arrogance that his past successes mean he’ll always be right.