Yes, but he's a bit of a paradox in this respect because he clearly values his own opinion over everyone else. Given some of the positions he's filled, with some of the personalities he's chosen, to pick a team that's clearly liberal and forward thinking team in this aspect vs. (anecdotally, I haven't read the actual evidence supporting this) the very staunch flat earth, climate denial, intelligent design type conservatives who don't even believe in evolution in other aspects... that's a gigantic paradox to have on one team.
I don't know if having this spectrum of people is a strategic move on Trumps part for some deeper purpose or if it's just because they believe the things he believes and he's trying to make for an easy political life.
"in this respect because he clearly values his own opinion over everyone else."
Musk or Trump? :)
Musk might be liberal on some kind of social issues, but he's more of a libertarian than anything, he's not remotely some kind of 'bernie' guy.
Musk told his wife, as they were having their 'first dance at the wedding' - that 'he's the alpha' in the relationship. Does that sound progressive? Or how about dumping his wife who bore 5 children for a girl 1/2 his age? Prog cred?
Also " very staunch flat earth, climate denial, intelligent design type conservatives "
... this is casual bigotry on your part. 'Flat Earth'? Seriously? You're just going to throw that in?
And you do realize it was Father David LeMaitre - a Catholic Priest and Physicist, who conceived of the 'big bang'?
Anyhow - I'm not going to defend any of that necessarily, but your remarks amount to a casual kind of bigotry which is the bane of political discussion these days. Try to avoid this crude kind of stuff.
And FYI Trump was a 'NYC tough-guy Democrat' for most of his life. The Clinton's went to his and Melania's wedding for gosh sakes.
Anyhow - neither Trump nor Musk could truly be considered classically liberal or conservative in either sense of the term.
Funny: both of them are good businessmen, but neither of them have the faintest grasp of economics.
Evidence that Musk has not "the faintest grasp of economics"? I'm not sure that you can make that claim about anyone who has a company that they created that is worth >$1bn.
Also, as long as people don't reject Flat-earth, climate-denial, or intelligent design, they are condoning those things. The Republican party have been masters of allowing these beliefs to come along for the ride for years. 2 of them seem to be rooted in religious freedom, and can be safely left out of political discourse. the 3rd, climate change denial, needs to be discussed, and needs to be handled on the basis of facts instead of beliefs.
When you look back though the past few decades or so of political history really only two options exist. The politicians we have elected were utterly incompetent (based on campaign promises vs what was achieved) or they achieved the goals that were the most important to them. I believe it is the second option, they care little about a balanced budget and a great deal about enriching the donor class.
Basically nobody believes in 'Flat Earth' it's ridiculous that you'd put that in there.
And it's surprising how many CEO's in tech don't have a grasp of economics.
Elon doesn't know what the Fed's QE program does or what it means.
Watch investors speak about what they think of the future, and of business, then watch Elon, Zuck etc. speak. There's a marked difference. The investors are economically literate, and usually speak in those terms. Founder don't.
Elon is in 2 business that are fundamentally affected by things like currency, interest rates, consumer credit - Solar City and Tesla. And he never - ever - talks about it.
Most engineers are financially and especially economically illiterate.
But I don't think you actually need to understand econ really well to be a CEO or a good entrepreneur, I just think it's really weird that they don't.
You're describing the difference between macroeconomics and microeconomics. Pretty much every successful entrepreneur I know has a very solid grasp of microeconomics, oftentimes much more solid than most economists or financiers. They don't always have a detailed understanding of macroeconomics, and many of them don't need one to run their businesses.
When you can steal market share from existing incumbents, oftentimes with a 10x better product value proposition, then currency, interest rates, and consumer credit are rounding error. They don't matter - you have a potential market that is many times greater than the current size of your company, so you just convince your competitors' customers to switch to you and you get growth even if the economy as a whole is contracting. But on a macro-level, this is zero-sum, because your gain is your competitor's loss. On a macro-level, the only things that lead to everyone's gain are improvements in productivity and better use of unemployed resources.
Now, when it comes to the original thread subject, this is very relevant: it's worrisome that Trump seems to be treating the U.S. economy as a whole the way you would treat a business, and is applying microeconomics tools in a situation subject to macroeconomics. But it's not true that Elon, Zuck, etc. don't understand economics; rather, they understand economics, but the part of it that is relevant to their daily lives is different from the part that pundits and economists care about.
"When you can steal market share from existing incumbents, oftentimes with a 10x better product value proposition, then currency, interest rates, and consumer credit are rounding error."
Tesla does not have a product that is fundamentally superior to anything.
Regular car companies releasing amazing electric cars that are now 'long range' and for 1/2 the price.
Tesla's nice display and 'danger modes' are a gimmick.
They are running out of competitive advantage very quickly.
Apologies for the casual bigotry - I may have spoke flippantly and without carrying out much in the way of in depth first hand research as I should have, but I have heard many reports in this vein, and perhaps it is media BS/propaganda that has proliferated this idea, but if there's any truth to them, then that's a yuuuge gap on one advisory team.
>And you do realize it was Father David LeMaitre - a Catholic Priest and Physicist, who conceived of the 'big bang'?
*Georges Lemaitre, and note that he was Catholic, not Evangelical. It's the latter that has a strong cohort of anti-evolution, arguably anti-science-as-a-whole types.
> And you do realize it was Father David LeMaitre - a Catholic Priest and Physicist, who conceived of the 'big bang'?
Actually, I was not aware of this, that's really actually quite interesting. Probably the most interesting thing in your dismissal of my flippant use of 2 words :D
It's hard to pin Musk down as a libertarian when his companies rely on fat government subsidies and contracts. There probably isn't a real label for someone like him other than pragmatist or opportunist.
It's such a crazy and demeaning thing to say to someone, especially 'right after the fact' at the wedding, after the vows.
'Buy the way, this is the other part of the deal you just signed!'
I stick my foot in the mouth all the time, but I would never do anything like that.
He's crazy rich, powerful and famous, marrying a young, probably a little naive woman ... the 'roles' seem rather obvious, no reason to demean the poor girl.
He's an old real estate hand, they're used to more diversity than will ever be found in SV/Tech or stereotypical business in general. Real estate is the art of compromise between extremely diverse people/groups.
I'd say there's probably more diversity working in real estate than most any other large industry. Today you're meeting with some commie union leader, tomorrow a bank prez, next week you're buying off some environmentalist with a donation to their cause. Local political leaders for your plot of dirt could be anything from ultra left to ultra right and you gotta work with them to make your money. Not to mention you're buying and selling to absolutely anyone, money talks. Local urban governments vary from ultra left to moderate and you gotta work with them. The neighbors are all over the political map and if you want them to sign off at the planning commission meeting...
I suspect that Trump deliberately sets things up so that there are multiple people involved who will disagree, which enables him to maintain control of the situation by picking who to support and how much.
I first noticed this with the muddle over who was actually the leader of his campaign team, and then with the Bannon & Priebus setup: giving them equal prominence makes them more subservient to Trump, since if they can't agree they both need to plead their case to Himself.
The myth of the Flat Earth is the modern misconception that the prevailing cosmological view during the Middle Ages saw the Earth as flat, instead of spherical.[1][2] During the early Middle Ages, virtually all scholars maintained the spherical viewpoint first expressed by the Ancient Greeks. By the 14th century, belief in a flat earth among the educated was essentially dead. Flat-Earth models were in fact held at earlier (pre-medieval) times, before the spherical model became commonly accepted in Hellenistic astronomy.[3]
I don't know if having this spectrum of people is a strategic move on Trumps part for some deeper purpose or if it's just because they believe the things he believes and he's trying to make for an easy political life.
I guess in the long run, we shall see.