Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook Founder’s Favor Comes with Complications

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–49 of 49 posts

Re: Facebook Founder’s Favor Comes with Complications

#41

Post by indubitable »

nl wrote: post #35
indubitable wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A simple question for you. Do you think the way up the current US political ladder is more about merit or more about quid quo pro ? I think there's this sort of cognitive dissonance many of us are suffering. Are you happy with your professional politicians in Washington? Do you think they're doing a good job? It seems to me that many people want change in Washington, and don't appreciate that the 'political experienc…

Do you think the way up the current US political ladder is more about merit or more about quid quo pro? I think there's this sort of cognitive dissonance many of us are suffering. Are you happy with your professional politicians in Washington? Do you think they're doing a good job? It seems to me that many people want change in Washington, and don't appreciate that the 'political experience' rhetoric is being pushed…

Most all US politicians are inherently captured by special interest groups. One of the few things that works as an accurate predictor of who wins an election is money. And that money comes in the form of "donations" which leaves politicians to do the bidding of those that donate to them. They need it to get into office and then literally the first day they get into office they begin fund raising for the next run.

Neither party really wants to do anything except further their own power. Maybe one of the most clear examples of this is the TPP. It was going to be one of the biggest corporate handouts in American history, and it was being spearheaded by a democratic president who ran on a platform of trying to remove k-street influence (special interest/big donors) from politics. And while the democratic party put token opposition up, when it came time to for congress to vote away their right to amendment or debate of the TPP - they lined up and made sure he got the votes. It's all a charade.

Finally, a functional government would actually be dysfunctional. Our entire political system is built on checks and balances that means even a small voice in congress has the ability to stop actions from being carried out. The problem is we don't actually have a dysfunctional government. They are doing exactly what they're intending to do - carry out corporate and special interests with 0 hesitation, and then mostly flub about the rest of the time.

Re: Facebook Founder’s Favor Comes with Complications

#42

Post by valuearb »

jacobolus wrote: post #23
734786710934 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The proper way to improve education in a community is to get involved with the existing school systems That didn't work out too well when Zuckerberg tried it: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-newark-schools-p...

Having unaccountable billionaires with no knowledge of the field dump piles of money down (along with dictating how it should be spent) in a splashy PR stunt is a horrible way to improve public institutions. Instead we should properly tax the billionaires, and then elect public officials who value public education, so they can figure out how to improve schools with the advice and help of all of the local stakeholders…

Valuing "public education" means you don't value education per se, but you value the part that maintains your party a voting base of education unions and bureaucrats.

Moving my kids from public school to a charter was the second best thing we ever did for them. The difference in the quality of their education was immense.

Breaking public school unions would be the best thing we could do for public schools. There is ZERO justification for tenure at the school teacher level.

Re: Facebook Founder’s Favor Comes with Complications

#43

Post by valuearb »

As a free-market libertarian there is nothing worse that crony capitalism. And that's what happened here.

When the political leadership of my beloved former lunchtime basketball grounds of East Palo Alto tries to claim they didn't take the RV Park for the school, they immediately contradict themselves.

"She added that the flood-prone street would be rebuilt for the school, so the R.V.s would have had to move in any case."

And you known Chan-Zuckerman was behind it. Eminent domain should never be allowed to be used for one business, even a non-profit school, to take the property of another. It should only be used for the highest public purposes, and only with fair compensation.

Re: Facebook Founder’s Favor Comes with Complications

#44

Post by jacobolus »

valuearb wrote: post #42
jacobolus wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having unaccountable billionaires with no knowledge of the field dump piles of money down (along with dictating how it should be spent) in a splashy PR stunt is a horrible way to improve public institutions. Instead we should properly tax the billionaires, and then elect public officials who value public education, so they can figure out how to improve schools with the advice and help of all of the local stakeholders…

Valuing "public education" means you don't value education per se, but you value the part that maintains your party a voting base of education unions and bureaucrats. Moving my kids from public school to a charter was the second best thing we ever did for them. The difference in the quality of their education was immense. Breaking public school unions would be the best thing we could do for public schools. There is Z…

You can already see the results in several states. It’s pretty ugly so far, and likely to only get worse. Teachers are trending less qualified and less experienced, move from district to district more, turnover is higher, everyone is more stressed out, parents and students are less satisfied and less successful, schools are still poorly maintained and supplied, more money than ever gets siphoned off by business consulting firms etc. The super-wealthy in those states get a bit of a tax cut, but nobody else really sees any advantage.

The primary way that charter schools juke their stats (to the extent they are able – often their outcomes are just objectively mediocre) is by selecting out a collection of students likely to be successful and kicking out the rest. Of course, there is a spectrum, and some charter schools (just like some regular public schools) are quite successful.

Valuing “public education” means that you value education of the broad citizenry, instead of only valuing education for your own kids and screw everyone else.

Re: Facebook Founder’s Favor Comes with Complications

#45

Post by nl »

indubitable wrote: post #41
nl wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think the way up the current US political ladder is more about merit or more about quid quo pro? I think there's this sort of cognitive dissonance many of us are suffering. Are you happy with your professional politicians in Washington? Do you think they're doing a good job? It seems to me that many people want change in Washington, and don't appreciate that the 'political experience' rhetoric is being pushed…

Most all US politicians are inherently captured by special interest groups. One of the few things that works as an accurate predictor of who wins an election is money. And that money comes in the form of "donations" which leaves politicians to do the bidding of those that donate to them. They need it to get into office and then literally the first day they get into office they begin fund raising for the next run. Nei…

Most all US politicians are inherently captured by special interest groups. One of the few things that works as an accurate predictor of who wins an election is money. And that money comes in the form of "donations" which leaves politicians to do the bidding of those that donate to them. They need it to get into office and then literally the first day they get into office they begin fund raising for the next run

Counter example: Trump.

Re: Facebook Founder’s Favor Comes with Complications

#46

Post by gimmeminusnow3 »

Why in earth I would care what Facebooks founder think about anything else than violating my privacy and pushing psychological programs to people ??

All of you should know by now, that Facebook is CIA's and NSA's creation. People please leave these services.

Re: Facebook Founder’s Favor Comes with Complications

#47

Post by indubitable »

nl wrote: post #45
indubitable wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most all US politicians are inherently captured by special interest groups. One of the few things that works as an accurate predictor of who wins an election is money. And that money comes in the form of "donations" which leaves politicians to do the bidding of those that donate to them. They need it to get into office and then literally the first day they get into office they begin fund raising for the next run. Nei…

Most all US politicians are inherently captured by special interest groups. One of the few things that works as an accurate predictor of who wins an election is money. And that money comes in the form of "donations" which leaves politicians to do the bidding of those that donate to them. They need it to get into office and then literally the first day they get into office they begin fund raising for the next run Coun…

Right, though I'm not sure what this has to do with our discussion? The issue was on the inherent conflict of interest for individuals who make their way to the top of politics through the system - through the experience that's supposed to be valued. In many ways the product is tainted before it even 'ripens.'

Re: Facebook Founder’s Favor Comes with Complications

#48

Post by nl »

indubitable wrote: post #47
nl wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most all US politicians are inherently captured by special interest groups. One of the few things that works as an accurate predictor of who wins an election is money. And that money comes in the form of "donations" which leaves politicians to do the bidding of those that donate to them. They need it to get into office and then literally the first day they get into office they begin fund raising for the next run Coun…

Right, though I'm not sure what this has to do with our discussion? The issue was on the inherent conflict of interest for individuals who make their way to the top of politics through the system - through the experience that's supposed to be valued. In many ways the product is tainted before it even 'ripens.'

Right, though I'm not sure what this has to do with our discussion?

I think your argument is a perfect summary of the conventional progressive view. I'm progressive and very sympathetic to the argument you make.

But I think there's a lot more going on in politics than this neat narrative spells out.

I pulled out the Trump thing, because it's a great example of a person who spent a lot less than his opponents but won anyway.

https://www.vox.com/2016/2/9/10941690/campaign-finance-left (which was written prior to Trump) has a lot more details on this.

To pull a quote: research on lobbying suggests that lobbyists are not the omnipotent power brokers that voters sometimes imagine them to be. Further, it suggests that insofar as they matter, they matter for reasons that are hard to regulate away.

I think campaign finance is important, but more than that I want to see progressive candidates win.

I don't think the nihilist argument that "politics is broken" is correct. Nor do I think there is anything which implies an inherent conflict of interest in politicians. A pro-NRA candidate will be supported by the NRA, and if they win they will listen to people they already know. The same with a pro-environmental issues candidate.

This isn't simply being beholden to special interests - there is a strong interdependence between the group and the candidate and it runs both ways.

Re: Facebook Founder’s Favor Comes with Complications

#49

Post by nl »

nl wrote: post #48
indubitable wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, though I'm not sure what this has to do with our discussion? The issue was on the inherent conflict of interest for individuals who make their way to the top of politics through the system - through the experience that's supposed to be valued. In many ways the product is tainted before it even 'ripens.'

Right, though I'm not sure what this has to do with our discussion? I think your argument is a perfect summary of the conventional progressive view. I'm progressive and very sympathetic to the argument you make. But I think there's a lot more going on in politics than this neat narrative spells out. I pulled out the Trump thing, because it's a great example of a person who spent a lot less than his opponents but won…

(Also, someone seems to be coming through and downvoting both our posts days after this dropped off the front page. I've upvoted yours, but just be aware it is happening)
Post reply on HN