Thread: Space X Falcon Heavy Launch soon!!

Originally Posted by JDNSW

But in general you are right - the world as a whole benefits from those people who are willing to risk a lot of their own money to pursue their dreams

There is the rub. Musk is risking US taxpayer's money, not his. His whole empire is based on subsidies from the taxpayer, so no risk for him. Musk will be just fine, win or lose.

Originally Posted by Pedro_The_Swift

would need a long use-by date....

So does XXXX in the civilised world.

Originally Posted by Mick_Marsh

Why? How long did it take the Tesla to get out beyond the orbit of Mars? A week?

I know they are quick, Mick, but are you sure??

Originally Posted by johntins

There is the rub. Musk is risking US taxpayer's money, not his. His whole empire is based on subsidies from the taxpayer, so no risk for him. Musk will be just fine, win or lose.

I'm not sure where that comes from - as far as I can determine at a quick look, SpaceX has had no US taxpayer subsidies, being financed from private funds, including Musk's own money, plus deposits for launch services (some of which will be from the US taxpayer, but these launches cost the US taxpayer less than any available alternatives).

Musk himself is a multibillionaire (Wikipedia says about $20, but his money did not come from any form of subsidy - it came from IT, specifically selling two startup companies. The first, Zip2, was sold to Compaq, The second, and online payments system, X.com merged with another company, Confinity, to become paypal, which was sold to ebay, with Musk's payment in ebay shares being the foundation of his fortune, as these shares rose significantly.

I can't find any evidence of large subsidies for Tesla, but even if they have had subsidies, I suspect they pale compared to the subsidies granted to major car manufacturers in the US following the GFC. And are irrelevant, seeing that SpaceX is not cross-subsidised from Tesla - both companies are losing money at the moment, I suspect, but are able to get private capital because the investors expect them to be successful.

Originally Posted by johntins

So does XXXX in the civilised world.

if by civilised you mean whatever the Kardashians are telling you to do/drink/wear this week,,,

I wonder what the warranty is on his Tesla in space - he might have to extend the distance a bit.

*phone rings

"Good Morning, Tesla Australia, How may I direct your call?"
"Service Centre please"
"One moment Sir"

"Service Centre"
"Do you have roadside Assist?"
"why yes sir,,"
" I have a small problem---"

Originally Posted by Toxic_Avenger

OT, but this doesn't bother me.
Efficacy of the molecule is the same in the generic post patent. But within patent, I recall they can alter the drug molecule to keep the active site as-is but change a salt or other functional groups on the molecule to squeeze it in under a new patent (of course after all the clinical trials).

Trying to recall the numbers, but everyone's favourite statin, Lipitor, for lowering cholesterol, had a $12Bn R&D investement behind it over the course of its development. This investment was returned in the first 2 weeks of the drug's release. Not bad money if you can get it!

Trump is very upset about PBAC haha

He basically said Australia need to respect American intellectual property...

I guess we are lucky because PBAC is such a bitch to negotiate with so that we always/usually get the best price... But from the perspective of pharmaceutical companis, you will hate PBAC to death.....

And now Trump is helping these big pharmas, pressing Australian government...Let's see what would come out of it..

P.S PBAC keep her negotiated prices secret... Just imagine what could happen if that leaks.... Aussie pay $50 while the rest of the world is paying $150 (don't get me wrong, I am proud of PBAC. Especially when they beat the **** out of big pharma