Untitled topic • Hacker News Board

Re: undefined

#411

Post by briandear » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 1:41 PM UTC

himynameistimli wrote: post #135

nostrademons wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty much all of Thiel's investing thesis is to invest in things that are statistically on track to fail, but whose payoff if they succeed is greater than most people imagine. PayPal, Facebook - both of these were terrible ideas when they came out (along with a number of other ones that did, in fact, fail). His idea is that people consistently mis-price risk, and so investing in a portfolio where everyone else thin…

Actually if he loses, he becomes the first investor in a ultra conservative right-wing media empire, Trump Media, which appears to already have quite a large following.

Ultra-conservative? Not by a long shot. I was a Ted Cruz backer and Trump to me is as bad as Clinton.

Trump isn't conservative. He's a big government populist. Completely different despite him having an 'R' next to his name.

He is about as close to Cruz as Sanders was to Clinton (in terms of policy philosophy.)

By the way, I understand downvotes because I mentioned Cruz in a positive way, however let's keep in mind that we can disagree with economic philosophy and role of government and still be friends!

I want a flat tax and a repeal of FATCA and Cruz was the only candidate that supported that. If some Democrat comes along with that proposal, they'd get my vote too.

FATCA and it's unintended consequences have caused serious harm to many Americans overseas, so that was my primary issue this election.

The only reason I support the RNC this election is because they have FATCA repeal in the platform while the Democrat side both enacted FATCA as wel as expressed support for continuing it.

Here's an article that delves deeper into FATCA if anyone is interested: http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21605911...

Re: undefined

#412

Post by douche » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 1:47 PM UTC

ubernostrum wrote: post #224

chroem- wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clinton has been exposed in plain daylight as having done things that would have made Richard Nixon blush. It's so bad that her campaign has been forced to hire a crew of dedicated astroturfers to cover for her, and they have no scruples over doing this either. How does that make her better than Trump?

And this country voted for Richard Nixon twice. Once in a historic landslide. Do you feel that disqualifies Clinton from the presidency?

One wonders what Nixon's legacy would have been if he just hadn't gotten caught. He wasn't a complete fuckup, and did actually accomplish some worthy things, but Watergate casts a shadow over it all.

Meanwhile, look at his opponent in 1960. JFK is practically revered as a saint because he had his brains blown out on national television. We largely forget or excuse his intense sex addiction, or that he very nearly pushed the world over the edge of Armageddon, or that he was instrumental in escalating the Vietnam War. To the benefit of his legacy, at least, he was killed before his chickens came home to roost and became a martyr figure instead.

Re: undefined

#413

Post by eli_gottlieb » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 1:48 PM UTC

tvural wrote: post #264

Thiel might have ulterior motives, but his support of Trump is not too surprising if you've listened to his other ideas. He feels that the political agenda has been overrun by distractions, like "who can use which bathroom", at the expense of real problems, like the stagnation of median wages over the last forty years. He prefers the days when the national conversation was about how to beat the Soviets, and sees the…

>He feels that the political agenda has been overrun by distractions, like "who can use which bathroom", at the expense of real problems, like the stagnation of median wages over the last forty years. He prefers the days when the national conversation was about how to beat the Soviets, and sees the lack of substance in our political agenda today as tied to a slowdown in progress.

Yes, and I agree with him. Strangely enough, when I thought about how to have a substantive politics, it led me to support Bernie Sanders. Now, you may not like Bernie yourself, but he sure as hell wasn't a climate-denying wannabe-dictator with a habit for sexual assault.

If you believe politics ought to be about policy, then the Trump candidacy has been miserable for your goal. I can't see how Thiel can hold that goal and support Trump, unless I posit that Thiel is choosing attitude ("MAGA") over substance (mercantilism and a typically Republican dislike of science and technology).

>He's often said that one of his favorite interview questions is, "tell me something you believe to be true but which nobody agrees with you on".

Our society cannot grow or move forward until the finance/real-estate capital complex is removed from control.

Re: undefined

#414

Post by speeder » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 1:49 PM UTC

tekni5 wrote: post #226

code_sardaukar wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clinton's plan for Syria is scary. Ironically it displays the kind of toughness that Trump claims to represent. Personally I think it is a bad move, and Russia has already been reasonable, e.g. backing the Iran deal. You don't even need to be a libertarian or an isolationist to believe that the neoconservative approach is wrong.

This is the only issue that really worries me, Clinton might actually attempt to get some leverage over Russia as she says. In such a bold move, Russia will feel so cornered that it may break out into a major war, with possible use of limited nuclear weapons. The western world doesn't understand the mentality of Russia, they have had two regime collapses this century already. Putin believes that everything needs to b…

I think this applies to whole Asia.

This is how Japan was pushed into WWII, and how China right now is being pushed in arming up.

Quick history lesson:

China, basically dominated the world, even when the world weren't aware of China's existence for most of the history, then when England and US came knocking into China's door, they managed to force China into a mix of submission, collapse and opening.

Then US tried to repeat the feat with Japan, starting with the infamous "black ships" (how the japanese called the mysterious US warships when japan still used wooden ships).

Japan then started a serious attempt to avoiding "being the new China", and started to literally imitate US and Europe: invade everywhere, and attempt to become a colonizing superpower.

This in the end is the reason why Japan ended in WWII.

Russia saw what happened to countries around them, Iraq was literally created by England, with borders intentionally crappy to create internal problems (Lawrence of Arabia publicy proposed this), US and Europe actions in Japan and Korea region basically turned Japan and Korea into virtual US colonies, in fact, Japan plans I mentioned earlier failed, badly, Japan DID became a "new China" that must obey US interests, and instead of "black ships" at their ports, ended with a permanent base in their territory.

Not only to Putin, but to the russian population, stuff like trying to sanction Russia, is viewed as an strongarm attempt to pull Russia into submission, to the russian population, the fact that they are becoming poorer due to US sanctions, and US allies oil-price meddling, isn't a reason to become angry at Putin, to them it is reason to consider US the ultimate enemies, and do their best to support Putin no matter what happens.

US, England and France seemly doesn't understand that after 2 centuries meddling in Asia in a imperialistic manner, one country that always has been very imperial themselves, will see them as a major threat and will never, ever, back down.

To Russia, nuclear war is more desirable than "slavery", it is better to die, than to submit.

(this is not even counting yet the psychological effects of Russia terrain... Russia geography is so fucked-up that only people that are mentally resilient and willing to endure famine, poverty and extreme situations will live there)

Re: undefined

#415

Post by Udo_Schmitz » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 1:50 PM UTC

Amezarak wrote: post #388

mattmanser wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a foreigner, I really don't get this attitude. Hillary's a hawk, so let's support the obviously erratic, racist, bigoted, tax-dodging, incompetent, incoherent, sexually assaulting idiot who looks very much like a new Hitler and thinks if you win an election you get to lock up your opponents like a crazy third world state. Boggles my mind that 'Murica' 'Freedom' can bring out such a petty, childish and obviously se…

What you're missing is nuance. When you say "the obviously erratic, racist, bigoted, tax-dodging, incompetent, incoherent, sexually assaulting idiot", you're taking the opposition beliefs as fact, just like the Republicans who claim Clinton is an "obviously erratic deathly ill man-hating murdering warmongering power-hungry alcoholic liar." Look at each candidate from their point of view. For example: > thinks if you…

> When you say "the obviously erratic, racist, bigoted, tax-dodging, incompetent, incoherent, sexually assaulting idiot", you're taking the opposition beliefs as fact,

That's actually the way most people in Europe see him. Our source is not any opposition but Donald himself: listening to his interviews and speeches lets him certainly come across as "erratic" and "incoherent", he bragged about "sexually assaulting" women, and how he talks about and treats minorities makes him seem "racist" and "bigoted". As he has no clue about the state of world politics and no coherent policy proposals (flip-flopping during the same speech, interview or even sentence) the "idiot" label seems hardly avoidable. You could argue the "tax-dodging" though, for all I care.

I also don't see him as a new Hitler, more like a Mussolini type.

>just like the Republicans who claim Clinton is an "obviously erratic deathly ill man-hating murdering warmongering power-hungry alcoholic liar."

In Germany she would clearly be a conservative, which I'm not, but listening to her she comes across as extremely smart and very coherent, so "erratic" really doesn't apply. No idea why I would think she is "deathly ill", never saw anything that made her come across as "man-hating", no idea where "murdering" comes from; "alcoholic"? Never heard about drinking problems. That leaves "warmongering", "power-hungry" and "liar": maybe not more than the average American President in the last 200 years.

Re: undefined

#416

Post by blisterpeanuts » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 1:51 PM UTC

morgante wrote: post #342

forgetsusername wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "His supported policies include registration of minorities, Do you have a source for this? What is considered a "minority"? I thought it was directed at "illegal immigrants", which I agree is a dumb idea. But saying it applies to "minorities" is a stretch. > torture, curtailing of the free press, restriction of religious freedom, and reprisals against political enemies" How much worse is it to openly support these…

> Do you have a source for this? There are two different proposals I'm thinking of. One for making a national registry of all Muslims in the United States (a religious minority) and another for police being able to demand immigration papers at any time. The problem is that there isn't any way to look at someone and say they are an "illegal immigrant" so you end up with a totalitarian regime where police are stopping…

Undoubtedly, enforcement of immigration law can only take place in two types of venues: places of employment and public services such as schools, law enforcement, and social services.

Employers are already required to effectively vet applicants for legal residency. They have all sorts of tax forms to fill out and they can be severely fined for hiring illegals off the books.

Obviously, as well, if a LEO discovers a faked driver's license during a routine traffic stop, the illegal is in big trouble.

Interestingly, deportations have greatly increased during the Obama administration.

Re: undefined

#417

Post by eli_gottlieb » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 1:51 PM UTC

sgc wrote: post #402

golemotron wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just like the US this year. This is not an exaggeration. Many people would have professional and personal consequences for supporting Trump in public. People like Peter Thiel and Scott Adams have enough money to not care. Scott isn't even endorsing him and he says that his speaking engagements have dried up. We may see a big difference between the polling and the election results this year. The Shy Tory Effect came t…

Yeah, I had pretty major family problems for saying that I thought he was a lot of hot air and not actually that dangerous--with a disclaimer that I would never vote for him. Although my perspective on him has changed, it seems to me that the American left has turned into the authoritarian controlling power they so often claim to fight against.

>Although my perspective on him has changed, it seems to me that the American left has turned into the authoritarian controlling power they so often claim to fight against.

Only if you consider Clinton to be leftist, which really doesn't make much sense.

https://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2016

Re: undefined

#418

Post by empath75 » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 1:52 PM UTC

neonbat wrote: post #405

_tpzm wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He is a libertarian I just find this impossible to reconcile with his support for Trump, the most authoritarian presidential candidate in a very long time and possibly ever. I think many of his supporters would actually agree with that description, they like that about him, and they absolutely do not describe themselves as libertarian. They describe themselves as "conservatives" who want a "strong" president to "ta…

thiels philosophy is actually deeply technocratic authoritarian. in a lot of ways he is a technocrat and not a true libertarian. hes said on multiple occasions that politics has failed libertarians and that they should try 'alternatives.'

Yeah he seems more of a Mencius moldbug dark-enlightenment type.

Re: undefined

#419

Post by empath75 » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 1:53 PM UTC

DominikR wrote: post #341

madaxe_again wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Conversely, he could from a family like mine - my Omi is Austrian, along with a slew of cousins. Dinner table conversation still turns to how things would have been better had herr Hitler won. My uncle has to leave the room he so vociferously objects to his mother and his children. So, that collective memory swings both ways. Maybe Thiel lacks education in history and pines for a glorious fictitious past, which is a…

Hitler was a Socialist, not a right wing politician. That's what you Austrians/Germans get wrong. Hitler enacted a 70% income tax for the highest incomes, implemented a full welfare state, free childcare, free schools, free everything to force propaganda down their throats. He was an arts student (probably he would have done well with SJW's of today), a vegetarian, anti smoking, pro animal rights, anti religion etc.…

It's sort of amazing that you can be this misinformed and managed to type in complete sentences.

Re: undefined

#420

Post by tiatia » Sun, Oct 16, 2016, 1:55 PM UTC

tvural wrote: post #264

Thiel might have ulterior motives, but his support of Trump is not too surprising if you've listened to his other ideas. He feels that the political agenda has been overrun by distractions, like "who can use which bathroom", at the expense of real problems, like the stagnation of median wages over the last forty years. He prefers the days when the national conversation was about how to beat the Soviets, and sees the…

"who can use which bathroom" Isn't this the major problem we have currently?

Muslim terrorists. Warmongering Hillary, Zero Interest rates, crumbling infrastructure, imploding retirement funds. Who gives a fuck? But hey, bathroom problems.