Time to Take a Stand • Hacker News Board

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#501

Post by finid » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:19 PM UTC

TuringNYC wrote: post #454

finid wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Muslims, then GC holders. Very soon, certain group of citizens will suffer the same fate. The prison walls are getting closer... By the time you're able to reach out and touch them, it'd be too late.

Well, that didnt take long. The definition is about to get broader, per WSJ: In a statement that the State Department is due to release, which was reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, the 90-day visa moratorium extends beyond just citizens of Iraq, Iran, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Libya, and Yemen. It also applies to people who originally hail from those countries but are traveling on a passport issued by any other natio…

That is very, very broad.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#502

Post by lefstathiou » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:19 PM UTC

zeteo wrote: post #169

>1. Call 2. Participate 3. Share 4. Vote This is the same kind of bullshit that's lost Hillary the election and got us here in the first place. It might have worked in the '90s to get a gold medal for Rosa Parks. It will not work in 2017 to make Trump back off his core message. The problem here is not that your side isn't loud enough and can't get political attention for an issue. The problem is that the opposing sid…

For many Americans Sam Altman and Madonna are unrelatable so the messaging falls on deaf ears (or is potentially even counter productive). Nobody believes Google or YC is hiring refugees, or that Sam Altman and others are sending their kids to public schools attended by refugees, or living in low to middle income neighborhoods housing refugees and having to manage the increased violence that ensues. All well and good to bang your hands on a table from the Ivory tower that is San Francisco when millions of people in middle America believe that you are not the one bearing the cost of this "open door" policy. To be effective, I think the message needs to come from people middle America can relate to not millionaire celebs and billionaire tech CEOs.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#503

Post by facetube » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:19 PM UTC

jdoliner wrote: post #406

refurb wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. Doesn't it make sense to prioritize those people who are under the most persecution in those countries?

.

From another comment thread: "Refugees are referred to the US by the UNHCR.". You're also comparing the percentage to the total population of the country, rather than those who applied for asylum/refugee status. This is not a meaningful comparison. Finally, you provide no year-over-year data; it's possible that they fled first in previous years, or are residing in areas that are protected by pro-Assad forces.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#504

Post by Animats » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:19 PM UTC

Things companies in tech can do:

- Demand to see the detailed plan for TrumpCare. What's it going to cost us? What will it do to our employees? Where are the details? That's what lobbyists are paid to find out. Employers have a big stake in this.

- Demand to see the tariff plan. So far, it's all talk, but soon it will be legislation. This has huge impacts for many businesses. Business planning and investment will stall until the details are settled. Already, you don't want to build a factory in China or Mexico. On the other side, will there be efforts to make it easier to sell into China?

- About that infrastructure thing. What kinds of projects will be supported? Roads? Internet access? Pothole repair?

- How serious is the administration about not employing illegal aliens? Will employer sanctions be increased or more stringently enforced? Will employers be going to jail? On the other side, will the enforcement be effective enough to force growers to use robotic picking? Is it time to get behind ag startups like Abundant Robotics? Get into robotic floor cleaning for commercial buildings?

- Will there be tax incentives for investing in communities in rural America? If so, how much, and when will they become available?

- Will Glass-Stegall come back? That was a Trump campaign promise, and it's in the Republican platform.

Every one of those is a real business issue, and business needs to know what's going to happen.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#505

Post by angry-hacker » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:20 PM UTC

koolba wrote: post #40

Are there any publicly pro-Trump founders in the current YC batch and, if so, how ostracized do they feel reading things like this? EDIT: If there's no answers from the current batch (either due to sample size or general shyness), I'll pose the same question regarding past YC alumni. I find it hard to believe out of a thousand people there isn't a single Trump supporter.

I'm sure there are but they are afraid to say so. On many ways Thiel has the biggest balls, he sounds weak, but sure does have guts. I applaud him for having courage. I'm sure many people here don't live in a liberal circlejerk either but are afraid to talk out because of the aggressive left.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#506

Post by concinds » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:20 PM UTC

CalChris wrote: post #366

SirensOfTitan wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Anyone in a position of power who took a look at Trump and didn't recoil with disgust needs to be exiled from civil society. And this well represents the leftist-elitistic-rhetoric that drove so many to vote for Trump (HRC's "deplorables" comment). Five year olds say "I told you so," adults find reasonable pathways forward in difficult situations. People voted for and supported Trump for a variety of reasons, let's…

Adults usually tell five year olds I told you so after having already told them. Republican voters had many choices in their primary. Cruz, Carson, Christie, Huckabee, ... were just as bad. So your variety of reasons isn't very convincing. At a certain point, you have to take responsibility for your vote. Hand waving it away with a variety of reasons isn't fooling anyone.

> you have to take responsibility for your vote

You're not advocating "responsibility". You're saying Trump supporters are morally defective, and when they refuse that label, you say: "see! not only are you morally flawed, but you won't even admit it! proves my point!"

Is it hard to understand that Trump supporters vote for what they think is morally just and right, just like you, and not for evil, because they're evil?

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#507

Post by andy_ppp » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:21 PM UTC

Those people implementing these orders need to also take responsibility for their actions. The concentration camp guards take just as much responsibility as dictators.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#508

Post by baytrailcat » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:21 PM UTC

myblake wrote: post #22

_m8fo wrote: post #7

Why is that all of these posts saying to "take a stand" fail to explain the political process? I'll just quote myself here. If you want to help stop trump the most effective ways are to: 1. Call - Local congresspeople (http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/) - Senators (https://www.senate.gov/senators/contact/) - Local officials (https://www.usa.gov/elected-officials) 2. Participate - Get involved in local electi…

How effective is calling local congress members if you live in an area with a strong progressive majority such as the Bay Area. Not that we shouldn't voice our option to our represented officials but I suspect in some ways it's redundant whereas things like raising money for national organizations may be more impactful.

I disagree that this will not be helpful. The old-guard of Democratic Party hails from these hyper liberal areas (Fienstein, Schumer, Pelosi), and based on what we have seen so far, they aren't even showing a slightest hint of resistance to Trump. See the senate democrat's response to Trump nominees for example. Put enough pressure on them, they will at least form a semblance of resistance which can inspire and have real effects.

For a practical example, if people of San Francisco jointly decide that they want Nancy Pelosi to do X, Y and Z (otherwise she will get primaried in 2018), she will have no option but to do that. This is exactly what the Tea Party did (with tremendous help from Koch brothers) in last eight years. They unseated the old leaders and took over the party.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#509

Post by burkaman » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:21 PM UTC

rcpt wrote: post #322

burkaman wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard the exact opposite, people saying Trump's orders on highly controversial but minor-in-the-grand-scheme-of-things pipelines are cover for his less tangible but much more damaging moves on immigration and refugees. As to your last point, it is not unreasonable to ask the president for evidence when he challenges a core pillar of our society. It is good that hugely significant yet baseless opinions are not co…

I have not heard that. It doesn't even make sense to me given what's actually getting covered in the press is immigration, his crazy tweets, and gross comments on a bus.

Well, neither of these ideas make sense. He's just going through his list of priorities and trying to do what he promised to do. Maybe his tweets are a deliberate smokescreen, but his executive orders are not.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#510

Post by jacquesm » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:21 PM UTC

rdtsc wrote: post #488

jacquesm wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are other options: nationwide strikes, sit-ins, boycotts and so on.

Sadly I can't remember last time that was effective. I remember Occupy Wall Street from a few years back. So was so much excitement and energy there but what came of it? A bunch of arrests mostly. There were some anti-Trump protests. Right after election remember people blocking hospital exits, and setting cars on fire. At the inauguration, downtown DC, a lot of protestors torched trash cans in the street and blocked…

Vietnam, MLK, Womens voting rights, gay rights, workplace safety, end of apartheid etc.

Plenty of them all over the world. Occupy Wall Street lacked one thing: a clearly defined goal. You can protest social and economic inequality but that's not the same as saying we will continue to protest until we have 'X' where X is some very clear, concrete and achievable goal.