After reading the headline, and then first seeing Peter's picture in the article, I was expecting to read that he was going to be directly investing in Paul Graham and YC.
Ha.
With Eye On Future, Billionaire Investor Bets On Paul
21–30 of 52 posts
Re: With Eye On Future, Billionaire Investor Bets On Paul
#22Sorry, but political articles are "off topic".
Re: With Eye On Future, Billionaire Investor Bets On Paul
#23"I believe we are in a world where innovation in stuff was outlawed. It was basically outlawed in the last 40 years — part of it was environmentalism, part of it was risk aversion," he says. "And all the engineering disciplines that had to do with stuff have basically been outlawed one by one."
I smell bullshit. There are a few unjustly felonious fields-- nuclear power, stem cells, and recreational psychotropics are the ones that spring to mind. But in general, government regulation seems an easy scapegoat for the massive extraction of money and talent into the inanely lucrative military and financial sectors, along with a consumerist economy which inappropriately values making something cheaper over making it better.
To whatever extent innovation has been outlawed, it is not the result of environmentalism or risk aversion but of the power of those industries which would be hurt by innovation.
Re: With Eye On Future, Billionaire Investor Bets On Paul
#24"I believe we are in a world where innovation in stuff was outlawed. It was basically outlawed in the last 40 years — part of it was environmentalism, part of it was risk aversion," he says. "And all the engineering disciplines that had to do with stuff have basically been outlawed one by one."
As an engineer myself, this quote illustrates Thiel's ignorance of engineering progress over the past 40 years, and his disregard for the risks posed by industrial-scale experiments on the general public. People like him are precisely why we need environmental regulations in the first place, instead of simply relying on people's common sense and prudence.
You are assuming that those regulations lead to a better outcome.
This is not very likely given that the amount of issues the world is facing is not going to be solved by alternative energy as we know it, nor by ignoring the very essence of progress.
Reality don't care what way we do thing. It will judge us by our ability to survive whatever it throws at us.
Whether that is astroids hitting earth, lack of resources or simply insufficient use of them.
The engineering progress over the past 40 years have primarily been piggybacking on the 60 years that came before. This is not to take anything away from what have been accomplished, just to say that the fairly safe progress is based on much more risky progress that went before.
Re: With Eye On Future, Billionaire Investor Bets On Paul
#25"I believe we are in a world where innovation in stuff was outlawed. It was basically outlawed in the last 40 years — part of it was environmentalism, part of it was risk aversion," he says. "And all the engineering disciplines that had to do with stuff have basically been outlawed one by one."
Were you trying to highlight the ridiculous level of hyperbole in his diatribe? So the regulation of things deemed potentially harmful to the individual or society is equivalent to universal criminalization of innovation? Sounds like he's been exposed to a few too many regulated substances, perhaps through no fault of his own.
For one, there are many more harmful things yet to be discovered which are still legal to work with; people like him could invest their focus there if they have such an affinity. Coincidentally, I hear there's funding for private rocket research.
Re: With Eye On Future, Billionaire Investor Bets On Paul
#26How far will $2.5 million go anyway? How will it compare to say $5 or $15 million? Sounds like chicken feed to me (coming from him) ..especially now with the FB IPO a done deed.
What amount (if any) to Paul would it take for him to get kicked off the Bilderberg steering committee?
Re: With Eye On Future, Billionaire Investor Bets On Paul
#27Stupid "bet" by Thiel. If he was truly thinking of the future, he'd be better off supporting Rand Paul not Ron. But a fool and his money...
Obviously he doesn't believe that Ron Paul will win the Republican nomination. Only an imbecile would believe that and Thiel is not that. The point is that as long as Ron Paul is out there on the political flank of plausible candidates with a small committed support base, the more centrist candidates will tack towards his position to try and capture some of his support. Witness how Santorum pulled Romney towards more…
The point is that as long as Ron Paul is out there on the political flank of plausible candidates with a small committed support base, the more centrist candidates will tack towards his position to try and capture some of his support.
do you have any example to support this claim? Ron Paul isn't running for the first time. Which of his positions got anywhere close to mainstream candidate's agenda previously?
Witness how Santorum pulled Romney towards more socially conservative positions just by existing.
Santorum was Romney's runner-up if not outrunning him during several moments.
Re: With Eye On Future, Billionaire Investor Bets On Paul
#28Re: With Eye On Future, Billionaire Investor Bets On Paul
#29I supported Paul last time around and was disappointed to discover he wasn't really serious about (or maybe simply not prepared for) winning the primary or having a significant impact on US politics at the expense of his political party. I got the feeling he was perfectly content to let his r3volution get hijacked by the Tea Party and used to suit the purposes of various politicians. The money I donated was not used…
His movement has quite a big impact in GOP right now. They are replacing people in local GOP parties with their own. Even if Ron Paul doesn't win now, whoever will be their candidate in 2016 or even for the next Congress elections, will have a very high chance of winning.
You may or may not like the libertarian views, but I'd say they'd be a huge improvement to the current religious conservatives, the neo-conservatives who want more wars and bigger military budgets, and the general corruption within GOP.
Re: With Eye On Future, Billionaire Investor Bets On Paul
#30Dear Mr. Thiel: How about throw some money Gary Johnson's way? It's pretty clear that Ron Paul won't be winning the GOP nomination; but Governor Johnson will likely be on the ballot in all 50 states, as the Libertarian alternative to the major party hegemony. Thx, Mindcrime
The problem with Gary Johnson is that when it comes to the financial crisis he's too close to the status quo. His position is that nobody did anything illegal, so no prosecutions, etc.
That's demonstrably false, and the lack of S&L-like prosecutions is a symptom of governmental capture/crony capitalism, and its consequent moral hazard is something we'll paying for sooner or later.
From that perspective, Ron Paul and/or Bill Still > Gary Johnson.