• GentlemanLoser@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Has the precedent ever been dissatisfaction with the private ownership? Or did we we actually require federalizing the output of those companies for national security reasons?

    Genuinely curious because apparently I’m the only one who thinks nationalizing Starlink is an extreme response.

    • CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Admittedly, most examples I can think of for nationalizing things withing the US have been either when a vital industry (usually railroads) shuts down due to bankruptcy or labor disputes, or companies partly owned by foreign powers that the US ends up at war with, which I suppose could both be called national security reasons. That being said, while the Ukraine war doesnt directly threaten the security of the US, beyond I suppose the small risk of it somehow dragging the US in directly, its pretty clear that the country is not really neutral in all this either, so at the very least Musk’s actions here work directly against US foreign policy goals. Admittedly I do agree that nationalizing starlink is a bit extreme, Im not sure that the US government is necessarily a great choice to run a global internet service, especially one that is somewhat different to other companies of the same type (it operates vastly more satellites to my knowledge than other similar operations), but I do feel that threatening to nationalize SpaceX might be a decent way to get Elon to play ball, so to speak.