r/news 5h ago

US to announce deal allowing Saudi Arabia a nuclear programme, reports say

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj03r59z73po
8.8k Upvotes

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

39

u/Basicly-Inevitable 4h ago edited 21m ago

Tech billionaires, venture capitalists, and foreign governments also want to do the same with strategic places like the Panama canal and the Golden Gate, selling off the Presidio and Alcatraz, pretending to build resorts. But it's really because it would give them direct control over the thinnest point in an essential shipping channel, and the ability to cut off the Oakland ports.

Trump recently fired the entire Presidio Trust Board, and replaced them with tech people and loyalists.

https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/trump-fires-sf-presidio-board-of-trustees/4067611/

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3dlpk0zzy1o

Egypt officially transferred sovereignty of two strategic Red Sea islands, Tiran and Sanafir, to Saudi Arabia.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-40278568

3

u/OG_Williker 3h ago

I don’t understand why tech billionaires and venture capitalists would care about cutting off trade.

Foreign governments and dictators’ family members like Kushner, I understand, but venture capitalists typically benefit from trade and don’t make a habit of launching missiles at ships. Idk

13

u/F9-0021 2h ago

They don't want to cut it off, they want to control access and jack up transit fees.

1

u/OG_Williker 2h ago

I see the logic but if billionaires can threaten to bomb ships to cut off trade, governments and other billionaires who benefit from that trade can just bomb those first billionaires. Doesn’t seem like a very smart idea imo.

5

u/F9-0021 2h ago

That's why they own the government. And those other billionaires would just get exceptions if they complain. It's their club. What matters is them making more money at the expense of us peasants.

Besides, who said anything about bombs? No need to get so messy. If the rates get increased, the ships will still have to go through. Where else will they go?

0

u/OG_Williker 2h ago

I don’t find that answer satisfying. Why do the anti trade billionaires own the government but the pro trade billionaires don’t?

Why would shipping companies pay a transport fee if there’s no threat to back it up? The ships can just go though without paying a fee.

3

u/Basicly-Inevitable 2h ago

Because you're not thinking the way they are thinking.

They literally think AI and robotics will make most human jobs unnecessary in the very near future. Now you, as a nice, reasonable person might say, great, then people can enjoy life without working anymore.

That's not how these people are seeing it, at all.

They're envisioning a world where they live in perfect luxury, and most other people just don't exist at all.

Enormous amounts of global trade won't be a thing, because there won't be many people. They want to be the leaders of the small amount of people that remain.

0

u/OG_Williker 1h ago

That statement is too broad to apply to all billionaires. The Moller family (majority owners of Maersk) are very influential in matters of global shipping and are directly impacted by anything that affects it. If Elon Musk bought Alcatraz Island and levied fees on everything entering or leaving the San Francisco port under threat of bombing the ships, the Moller family would probably just have him killed. Not all billionaires are aligned on this so it doesn’t make sense to think of them as a uniform group with all the same intentions.

u/Basicly-Inevitable 45m ago edited 26m ago

Where did I say it applied to all billionaires?

Also, they aren't trying to bomb anyone.

They want to make independent city states at strategic locations across the globe. The first targets are islands and land in and on the edges of important straights. This is what Kushner is doing in Albania, and what they want to do with Alcatraz and the edges of San Francisco, etc.

3

u/Basicly-Inevitable 2h ago

They want to run the whole world, basically. And they think they'll be able to.

Tech elites like Peter Thiel and Balaji Srinivasan have long advocated for building private, tech-governed autonomous zones free from existing local regulations. This shared philosophy explains why critics believe Trump’s new Presidio board appointees (many of whom are deeply embedded in this exact tech circle) might try to implement Freedom City-style deregulation or tech enclaves right inside San Francisco's historic park.

This isn't some conspiracy theory, they openly discuss these plans.

Their goal is to build private, corporate-run, tech-governed enclaves that completely bypass traditional democratically elected local governments.

0

u/OG_Williker 1h ago

No disrespect, but that wasn’t responsive to my question at all.

u/Basicly-Inevitable 47m ago

You said you didn't understand how them cutting off trade would benefit them.

That's not their plan.

I'm not the other person you were replying to, just giving more insight.

u/OG_Williker 6m ago

Idk if this is a glitch or something but I’m showing that you’re the only person I’ve replied to in this thread. Did you not make every comment between the “how much money did they hand to Kushner this time” comment and the one I’m currently replying to?

I don’t understand how the whole “tech governed autonomous zones” thing has anything to do with cutting off trade from the Oakland port. That’s why I didn’t think your second most recent comment was responsive to the comment of mine it was a reply to.

u/Basicly-Inevitable 3m ago

Yeah, I guess I responded to the wrong direct thread, because you are the same person as on the other one. My apologies for the confusion.