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

Saudi Backlash Threatens U.S. Startups

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 76 posts

Re: Saudi Backlash Threatens U.S. Startups

#51

Post by ganeshkrishnan »

KerrickStaley wrote: post #49

I think employees at companies that are backed by Saudi Arabia (via Saudi's Public Investment Fund or indirectly via Softbank's Vision Fund) should feel empowered to push back against upper management and ask them to refuse further investment (easy) and/or work with other investors to buy out Saudi's share (hard). If you work at a company that's backed by Saudi Arabia, the proceeds of your work are funneling up into…

Morality only exists once you have a comfortable life and your basic needs are met. When your life (and startup's) life depends on funding and you have spent all your life saving's in bootstrapping your startup let me know how much you would push back on Saudi money? And would you stop at Saudi but not Australia which has a worse human rights records for minorities, lesser women representation in parliament than even Saudi Arabia and much more xenophobic than even the middle east countries? (Fox news has minority viewership in US but Murdoch has close to 90% viewership in Australia)

For what it's worth, the West always had a myopic and sledge hammer approach to solving these issues with threats and violence.

Re: Saudi Backlash Threatens U.S. Startups

#52

Post by jballanc »

cat199 wrote: post #24
jballanc wrote: post #5

I doubt this will be a popular opinion on HN, but...this is what comes of libertarianism. What is a government other than a group of people who agree to work together toward certain goals and hold each other accountable to certain moral and ethical standards? Yet somehow, "government" has become the enemy, a thing to be done away with or reduced in scope. When you do that, and replace government with "voted for with…

not a libertarian, but what do the alleged actions of of a theocratic monarchy have to do with the potential excesses of free market capitalism?

Sorry if I was unclear. I didn't mean to link "libertarianism" and "despotic theocratic monarchy", but rather "libertarianism" and "ethics via purchasing power". Ideally, governments should be worried about ethics and businesses should be worried about making money. Instead, in the US today we have businesses worried about ethics and the government worried about making money.

Re: Saudi Backlash Threatens U.S. Startups

#53

Post by KerrickStaley »

ganeshkrishnan wrote: post #51
KerrickStaley wrote: post #49

I think employees at companies that are backed by Saudi Arabia (via Saudi's Public Investment Fund or indirectly via Softbank's Vision Fund) should feel empowered to push back against upper management and ask them to refuse further investment (easy) and/or work with other investors to buy out Saudi's share (hard). If you work at a company that's backed by Saudi Arabia, the proceeds of your work are funneling up into…

Morality only exists once you have a comfortable life and your basic needs are met. When your life (and startup's) life depends on funding and you have spent all your life saving's in bootstrapping your startup let me know how much you would push back on Saudi money? And would you stop at Saudi but not Australia which has a worse human rights records for minorities, lesser women representation in parliament than even…

People won't want to use products that are backed by shady investors. Employees won't want to work for companies that are backed by shady investors. It's in the best interests of both company leadership and shareholding employees to avoid affiliation with these bad actors. If the upper management doesn't recognize that, it's up to the employees to raise the concern.

Re: Saudi Backlash Threatens U.S. Startups

#54

Post by ganeshkrishnan »

KerrickStaley wrote: post #53
ganeshkrishnan wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Morality only exists once you have a comfortable life and your basic needs are met. When your life (and startup's) life depends on funding and you have spent all your life saving's in bootstrapping your startup let me know how much you would push back on Saudi money? And would you stop at Saudi but not Australia which has a worse human rights records for minorities, lesser women representation in parliament than even…

People won't want to use products that are backed by shady investors. Employees won't want to work for companies that are backed by shady investors. It's in the best interests of both company leadership and shareholding employees to avoid affiliation with these bad actors. If the upper management doesn't recognize that, it's up to the employees to raise the concern.

https://www.moral-relativism.com/

Moral relativism is the view that ethical standards, morality, and positions of right or wrong are culturally based and therefore subject to a person's individual choice. We can all decide what is right for ourselves. You decide what's right for you, and I'll decide what's right for me. Moral relativism says, "It's true for me, if I believe it."

Re: Saudi Backlash Threatens U.S. Startups

#55

Post by jballanc »

merpnderp wrote: post #10
jballanc wrote: post #5

I doubt this will be a popular opinion on HN, but...this is what comes of libertarianism. What is a government other than a group of people who agree to work together toward certain goals and hold each other accountable to certain moral and ethical standards? Yet somehow, "government" has become the enemy, a thing to be done away with or reduced in scope. When you do that, and replace government with "voted for with…

The leader of the Senate just said they’re dropping the hammer inn Saudia Arabia. I’m sure this will include sanctions which is likely what you’re hoping for.

It is what I'm hoping for, but I'm not holding my breath. Remember when the Senate instructed President Trump to sanction Russia? Yeah...

Re: Saudi Backlash Threatens U.S. Startups

#56

Post by jballanc »

seibelj wrote: post #13
jballanc wrote: post #5

I doubt this will be a popular opinion on HN, but...this is what comes of libertarianism. What is a government other than a group of people who agree to work together toward certain goals and hold each other accountable to certain moral and ethical standards? Yet somehow, "government" has become the enemy, a thing to be done away with or reduced in scope. When you do that, and replace government with "voted for with…

You can have a libertarian ethos without taking it to the logical extreme, just as you can consider yourself socialist without believing that the government should forcibly seize the means of production and outlaw private property. A libertarian attitude has its place and deserves a seat at the philosophical table.

Agreed, but I don't think that negates my point: taken to an extreme, libertarianism is extremely inefficient with respect to morals. Instead of making clear choices once (or once per election), I am now tasked with making an ethical choice with every purchasing decision.

One may argue whether or not it is ever possible to avoid at least some component of ethics in purchase decision making as every company must make many decisions on how to source labor and materials. One may also argue whether or not it is ever possible to completely avoid paying for a social safety net (or lack thereof) as crime increases when poverty is rampant.

I merely wanted to point out that (IMHO) the only reason we're even having to read articles like this is because of a glaring lack of moral authority at the head of the current administration.

Re: Saudi Backlash Threatens U.S. Startups

#57

Post by gamblor956 »

jballanc wrote: post #55
merpnderp wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The leader of the Senate just said they’re dropping the hammer inn Saudia Arabia. I’m sure this will include sanctions which is likely what you’re hoping for.

It is what I'm hoping for, but I'm not holding my breath. Remember when the Senate instructed President Trump to sanction Russia? Yeah...

The Senate did sanction Russia...

Re: Saudi Backlash Threatens U.S. Startups

#58

Post by jiveturkey »

mrkstu wrote: post #26

I hope everyone who condemns the Saudis and those doing business w/them are doing the same with those doing so with China. China regularly disappears its citizens, and now openly is sending them by the hundreds of thousands to re-education camps. Xi and Prince Salman are two sides of the same coin and if you're comfortable with one and not the other, you're just virtue signaling. I'm just a IT guy at a business that…

> China regularly disappears its citizens

The difference here is that SA killed a citizen of another country. I'm not arguing the morality of it, just pointing out the important difference.

Re: Saudi Backlash Threatens U.S. Startups

#59

Post by matrixmultiply »

xemoka wrote: post #48
matrixmultiply wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

#metoo is focused on witch hunting.

This is ridiculous. The #metoo movement is not focused on "witch hunting", there are many different people associated with this "movement" and there is no real guiding person or organization that is focused on it. Individuals may be trying to take advantage of it, but don't throw everything out because of a couple rotten actors (that you perceive).

> Individuals may be trying to take advantage of it, but don't throw everything out because of a couple rotten actors (that you perceive).

Most are against due process, so it is difficult for me to take the movement seriously.

Re: Saudi Backlash Threatens U.S. Startups

#60

Post by seibelj »

jballanc wrote: post #56
seibelj wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can have a libertarian ethos without taking it to the logical extreme, just as you can consider yourself socialist without believing that the government should forcibly seize the means of production and outlaw private property. A libertarian attitude has its place and deserves a seat at the philosophical table.

Agreed, but I don't think that negates my point: taken to an extreme, libertarianism is extremely inefficient with respect to morals. Instead of making clear choices once (or once per election), I am now tasked with making an ethical choice with every purchasing decision. One may argue whether or not it is ever possible to avoid at least some component of ethics in purchase decision making as every company must make…

I don't think the alleged amorality of the current US administration is due to libertarian philosophical beliefs. See tariffs and anti-immigration sentiment to start.
Post reply on HN