11–20 of 112 posts
Are we supposed to assume that by Thiel giving $300k to Hawley's political campaign in 2015, Thiel is behind Hawley's antitrust investigation into Google? Enough with the "click bate" titles and attenuated conclusions. Another article from a major news outlet that contains zero facts supporting its implied premise.
If he was more important, he could simply call the president like Zuck: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/13/mark-z...
Are we supposed to assume that by Thiel giving $300k to Hawley's political campaign in 2015, Thiel is behind Hawley's antitrust investigation into Google? Enough with the "click bate" titles and attenuated conclusions. Another article from a major news outlet that contains zero facts supporting its implied premise.
Why else should a Silicon Valley billionaire give 300k to someone running for attorney general in a Missouri? Is he just interested in justice being pursued in a small Midwestern state he doesn't live in, that he is neither from, nor studied in, nor has his major business interests in?
$300,000 is a sizable donation for someone running for attorney general in a low key state.
Okay. That's not illegal and there's no evidence of bribery. My congressman also fought for net neutrality and I also gave him money. In fact, I gave him money because I wanted him to fight for net neutrality for me.
You gave your congressman as significant an amount of money as theil did?!
There's plenty of behavior from Google that smacks of anti-trust. From not showing competitors products in search results (protonmail was the most prominent recent case) to locking out customers heavily reliant on Google, they've gotten rather "evil" Having said that, I have zero confidence in politicians to make this right. If Google is evil, politicians are the spawns of Satan. Republicans probably have a bone to p…
Republicans support big business, though, right? (Having large successful businesses in blue states provides a well if funds they can transfer to the red states... As we see them doing with the current tax proposals.)
Google will probably end up hiring an expensive local law firm in Missouri and spend money on marketing to Missourians to improve its image. Without the AG's threat of a lawsuit, Google expenditures would probably largely avoid Missouri.
If this is true, the AG is playing at something that kinda smells like a legal form of racketeering, unless there is actually strong grounds to bring a anti-trust case.
Are we supposed to assume that by Thiel giving $300k to Hawley's political campaign in 2015, Thiel is behind Hawley's antitrust investigation into Google? Enough with the "click bate" titles and attenuated conclusions. Another article from a major news outlet that contains zero facts supporting its implied premise.
Also, even if there is no connection, it doesn't seem "clickbait"y. The article is probably drawing a tenuous connection, but it seems straightforward in it's attempt.
In other countries corruption is more honest: want the license to build a building? It will cost you an apartment or $XX,XXX. Personally, I prefer the later...
Are we supposed to assume that by Thiel giving $300k to Hawley's political campaign in 2015, Thiel is behind Hawley's antitrust investigation into Google? Enough with the "click bate" titles and attenuated conclusions. Another article from a major news outlet that contains zero facts supporting its implied premise.
That would be a sound assumption. Why else should a Silicon Valley billionaire give 300k to someone running for attorney general in a Missouri? Is he just interested in justice being pursued in a small Midwestern state he doesn't live in, that he is neither from, nor studied in, nor has his major business interests in? $300,000 is a sizable donation for someone running for attorney general in a low key state.
According to Forbes' estimates, Thiel is worth about $2.8 billion. Donating $300,000 for him is proportional to giving maybe $30 for a normal upper-middle class person.
There's plenty of behavior from Google that smacks of anti-trust. From not showing competitors products in search results (protonmail was the most prominent recent case) to locking out customers heavily reliant on Google, they've gotten rather "evil" Having said that, I have zero confidence in politicians to make this right. If Google is evil, politicians are the spawns of Satan. Republicans probably have a bone to p…
Republicans support big business, though, right? (Having large successful businesses in blue states provides a well if funds they can transfer to the red states... As we see them doing with the current tax proposals.)
The Republican base hates Silicon Valley with a passion. There's good political hay to be made by pretty much any Republican politician going after them. Imagine how popular going after gun manufacturers would be for the Democratic base, then imagine gun manufacturers were both insanely wealthy and powerful, and near universally loudly opposed to Democrats culturally. You don't really have to imagine the power of that; there's a reason Weinstein thought he could deflect the accusations against him by going after the NRA. Similar situation, but SV is far richer & more powerful than the NRA is.
Also, getting rid of SALT deductions isn't about "transferring funds to red states", it's about disincentivizing high state and local taxes.