Ok, I'm missing something. There's some shady money laundering tactic going on here. Just not seeing where it is. Can someone explain to me what the point of this is?
this post was submitted on 31 Mar 2025
34 points (100.0% liked)
politics
22568 readers
4247 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Tying the success of one platform to another to shovel potential investment money to a wildly unpopular product and platform. Ego-fueled indeed. This probably means he's working to funnel taxpayer money to xAI right now.
@Nightwingdragon @vegeta I think he's just trying to stay solvent because knows Tesla is going to *tank* and he needs to pay off the Twitter investors (using xAI investors' cash) before he gets margin called
The comment I was going to make. This is preemptive. He used TSLA stock as collateral for the twitter loan and can now use xAI to pay it off before TSLA falls under the threshold set in the twitter deal
The true genius of Elon Musk is his ‘subsidy harvesting strategy,’ political science professor says
Musk might even be making a play to fold in artificial intelligence by creating a market for chatbots and other applications in the government, Barnes said, calling it the ultimate contract. There are some signs that this could already be happening, such as one of his staffers reportedly creating an AI chatbot to streamline processes at DOGE.
https://fortune.com/2025/03/19/elon-musk-subsidy-harvesting-strategy-tesla-spacex-xai-doge/
Federal government has already had their own for years...
He borrowed money to buy twitter.
It had just gotten a very bad valuation, which might have led the people he borrowed from to change terms or take collateral.
By doing this, he set the "value" at 33 billion because that's what his other country just paid for it.
It's a house of cards where if any of his projects goes under, they all will.
While this is a short term help, it's going to make people less likely to invest in xai because it's propping up twitter.
I'm assuming this is some kind of play to protect Twitter from the Tesla stock tanking?
- Buy a company
- Run it into the ground
- ?????
- Sell it to yourself for more than you paid for it
- Profit
Isn't it wild that people think this obvious idiot is a genius?