Musk, Bezos, Zuckerberg… and the President? The Real Power Behind Space and Tech

Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and Mark Zuckerberg, three of the most influential and polarizing figures in modern industry, seated alongside President Trump’s newly chosen cabinet at his inauguration. For some, this moment screams progress: a partnership between government and innovation, ushering in a new age of space exploration and technological breakthroughs. For others, it looks more like the start of a billionaire-run dystopia, one rocket launch, one Mars base, and one algorithm, or, should I say, one banned app at a time.

In a country split down the middle, where half the population sees Trump as a necessary disruptor, and the other half sees him as a chaotic wrecking ball. This partnership raises a very real question: Who’s steering us into the future? Is it the government, with its lofty declarations and notoriously slow processes? Or is it the billionaires on the stage whose companies already dominate the skies, the servers, and the digital town square?

Under this administration, space and tech policy won’t just be about budgets, government contracts, and rocket launches. It’s going to be a battleground, a messy, tangled collision of public interests and private ambition. Will this uneasy partnership between political leaders and billionaire innovators spark the next great leap forward? Or will it deepen the cracks in an already fractured nation? Only time will tell. As the old proverb says, “The wind does not break a tree that bends.” The question is, how much bending is too much before the system snaps?

Who really runs the show in space and tech?

When we think about space exploration or groundbreaking technology, imagining the president at the helm, green-lighting missions, approving budgets, and making the big calls is tempting. But here’s the reality: the presidency is less “captain of the ship” and more “chief storyteller.”

Presidential power, in many ways, is theater. Presidents inspire, rally, and sell us on the big picture, but they’re not down in the trenches engineering rockets or writing algorithms. Freakonomics Radio episode 404 once pointed out that their greatest power is symbolic. They don’t steer the rocket. They point to the stars and say, “Let’s go.” And nowhere is this dynamic more obvious than in space and tech policy.

The power of speech compared to the rocket is compelling.

Take JFK’s famous “We choose to go to the Moon” speech. It was stirring, ambitious, and a cultural reset for America during the Space Race. But JFK wasn’t the one crunching the numbers or sketching blueprints for the Apollo program. His power gave NASA the political backing to turn a wild dream into a real-life moon landing.

That’s where presidents shine: creating vision, building support, and inspiring a sense of purpose. But the actual work of designing, funding, and executing has always been left to others: scientists, lawmakers, engineers, and, increasingly, billionaires with rocket companies and global tech empires.

Tech policy is where billionaires and bureaucrats collide.

The same is true for technology. The president can highlight AI, cybersecurity, or the digital divide as critical national priorities, but turning those speeches into tangible results? That’s where things get tricky. It requires a messy collaboration between lawmakers, federal agencies, and private companies; increasingly, those companies aren’t just participating. They’re running the show.

Take SpaceX’s Starlink, Elon Musk’s satellite-based internet project. A president might tout it as a groundbreaking way to connect rural communities and bridge the digital divide. But the government doesn’t own the satellites, doesn’t control the timelines, and definitely doesn’t have a say in what Musk posts next. Similarly, Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin isn’t just competing for NASA contracts. It also pursues Bezos’ personal dream of millions of people living and working in space.

And then there’s Mark Zuckerberg, who’s not aiming for the stars but has already reshaped our digital world. Platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp aren’t just social tools. They’re global forces that influence public opinion, elections, and cultural trends. For presidents, platforms like Meta represent both an opportunity and a nightmare. Sure, social media can amplify a president’s message like never before. But it’s also a breeding ground for disinformation, polarization, and privacy concerns. Tackling Meta’s influence means grappling with free speech debates, algorithm-driven chaos, and Zuckerberg’s relentless vision for the “metaverse.”

So, Who’s Benefiting From Billionaire Innovation?

Here’s the thing: These billionaires aren’t just innovating. They’re reshaping the rules. Musk controls the satellites, Bezos aims for the Moon, and Zuckerberg owns the digital town square. Their ambitions push the boundaries of what’s possible, often faster than the government can keep up. And while their contributions are undeniable, it’s worth asking: Who’s really benefiting?

Has it always been this way? Has big money always been pulling the strings behind the scenes, or have we entered a new era where billionaire influence has stepped boldly into the spotlight? Musk, Bezos, and Zuckerberg don’t just shape policy through quiet lobbying or campaign contributions; they’re the face of innovation itself. They’re on stage, posting on social media, and hosting splashy rocket launches in full view of the public, making their ambitions impossible to ignore.

This isn’t the shadowy influence of industrialists from decades past; this is power in plain sight. Musk’s Starlink dominates the skies, Bezos’ Blue Origin fights for government contracts, and Zuckerberg’s Meta shapes how billions of people communicate. They’re not just players in the system. They’re rewriting the system itself.

And that’s where things get tricky. When private companies drive public programs, the lines get blurry. Are their innovations truly serving the public good, or are they bending the system to fit their own goals? When the faces of big money are this visible, it becomes harder to separate progress from self-interest.

What happens when a crisis forces leadership?

There is one moment when the president’s role becomes more than symbolic: crisis. If satellites are hacked, critical infrastructure crashes or a tech disaster spirals out of control, the president’s authority expands. Red tape gets cleared, and decisions have to be made fast.

But crises also test the limits of leadership. Is Trump ready for that challenge? His presidency has already been defined by division, with half the country cheering him on as a decisive leader and the other half bracing for chaos. How he handles a crisis involving space or technology, especially with billionaires like Musk, Bezos, and Zuckerberg in the mix, will say a lot about his ability to lead. Will he bring these powerful players together to fix the problem? Or will it all unravel, with each billionaire following their own agenda and trying to force a completely different direction?”

So, who’s really in charge?

The answer? Everyone and no one. The president is a key figure, yes, but they’re just one part of a much larger system. That system includes lawmakers, scientists, engineers, and now, billionaires like Musk and Bezos, who don’t just participate in space and tech policy. They drive it.

Whether it’s sending humans to Mars, regulating AI, or building a better internet, the president’s role is to inspire and guide. But when private companies hold so much power, the line between leadership and followership starts to blur.

Here’s the truth: progress is never about one person, one office, or even one company. It’s collective. If the president can inspire us to aim higher, to dream bigger, that’s a powerful role. But the real test is whether this collaboration between government and private industry serves the greater good or just the ambitions of those already at the table.