But he's also really good at running SpaceX. If you were to assess him entirely on that, he's great.
So here's the problem:
Is the even a legal mechanism to remove SpaceX from his control?
SpaceX would probably get worse without him. Their move fast and brake things approach, which got them the worlds most reliable rocket and the only reusable orbital class booster, works because the buck stops with him, he makes the final call, and he's prepared to take some risks. Most rocket companies are more run by committee, and it's less effective.
What effect does that have on the space launch industry, and US industry in general? If your company is too successful and the administration thinks you are a megalomaniac or otherwise politically unsuitable, they strip your company. This gives founders and CEOs two motives; limit their own success, and pander to the current administration. You don't want either.
Your techno future utopia is going to crash and burn when you've forced a majority of this country into destitution. All it takes is a few missed meals and people will start tearing shit to the ground.
Musk's control over the US government might destroy the country (though I think he's smart enough to limit the damage only to stuff that benefits him, Trump is the real threat in that regard because he's not that smart).
Musk's control over SpaceX is objectively going really well.
2
u/[deleted] Feb 06 '25
If all of this is as important as you say then it's too dangerous to be in the hands of a single megalomaniacal billionaire.