11–20 of 84 posts
> Silicon Valley In this case, does that mean something more like "an exclusive clique of lucky tech-bros that converge on political views in their private channels"? As a larger region/industry, I can't see why SV would "panic" about a city mayor of a different city in another state thousands of miles away, no matter how populous the city is.
Its just a bunch of people that see "socialist" and panic.
I'm a silicon valley founder but definitely not investor and I'm quite optimistic about Mamdani's approach to measuring where problems are and then pitch complicated fixes in a way that can be understood by average voters. The "socialism" label doesn't bother me. I know a lot of people in silicon valley rank and file engineers and technical founders who think similarly privately.
It's a funny ideology that's like "We're going to end scarcity and implement UBI, but also, be scared of socialism."
A more honest way of writing this might be ”we’re going to test UBI because it’s untested, but Mamdani is scary bc rent control has been shown over and over again to be bad for cities.”
I live in Silicon Valley. I don't notice any panic. He's terrible though. Is that "panic".
> Silicon Valley In this case, does that mean something more like "an exclusive clique of lucky tech-bros that converge on political views in their private channels"? As a larger region/industry, I can't see why SV would "panic" about a city mayor of a different city in another state thousands of miles away, no matter how populous the city is.
I live in Silicon Valley. I don't notice any panic. He's terrible though. Is that "panic".
It's a funny ideology that's like "We're going to end scarcity and implement UBI, but also, be scared of socialism."
But don't mistake socialised service provision for socialism
Socialism implies state control of the means of production.
The results of socialism, we witnessed in Eastern Europe and elsewhere during the 20th century: scarcity of goods and services
Eventually a socialist state runs out of private wealth to seize, and it becomes completely corrupt and totalitarian due to its monopoly over the means of production. And then the people rise up and demand a the restoration of a free society where people can own the fruits of their labour.
It's a funny ideology that's like "We're going to end scarcity and implement UBI, but also, be scared of socialism."
A more honest way of writing this might be ”we’re going to test UBI because it’s untested, but Mamdani is scary bc rent control has been shown over and over again to be bad for cities.”
It's a funny ideology that's like "We're going to end scarcity and implement UBI, but also, be scared of socialism."
I don't think that I've ever heard anyone in SV, at least not anyone with any real power, honestly suggest that. They don't want to pay people more than they absolutely have to now, and that's with most labor being done by humans. When humans stop being the engine of economic growth, why would those people suddenly want to implement UBI and end scarcity?
It's a fugazi meant to make you think that the people doing things have considered all of the angles, but they haven't.
It's a funny ideology that's like "We're going to end scarcity and implement UBI, but also, be scared of socialism."
A more honest way of writing this might be ”we’re going to test UBI because it’s untested, but Mamdani is scary bc rent control has been shown over and over again to be bad for cities.”
The closest position he's advocating for is to freeze the rent stabilization rate for 5 years while massively ramping up the construction of new apartments to bring rental costs down.
Much of the pushback about Mamdani seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding of the difference betwene "rent control" and "rent stabilization". I think it's extremely rare to see a politician understand the supply/demand aspect of housing costs so well. He really seems to understand these dynamics, certainly better than anyone he's running against.