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

Andrew Yang and Pete Buttigieg Have Blown Up on Twitter, and in Betting Markets

readypipe.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 192 posts

Re: Andrew Yang and Pete Buttigieg Have Blown Up on Twitter, and in Betting Markets

#81

Post by maxxxxx »

WhompingWindows wrote: post #19

Does anyone here have thoughts about the quality of candidates as it relates to their ages (i.e. comparing late 70's Bernie/Biden and these younger candidates)? While I like the policies of Bernie, for instance, I ideally would prefer someone who doesn't have a high % likelihood of serious medical issues in the next 4 years of their life. Is there an age that is too old to be a CEO/President/Senator/leading figure? A…

I agree. I don't want to see people 70+ as president. Being in my 50s I already notice that my physical energy is less than it used to be and I am pretty sure it will be worse once you are 70.

Re: Andrew Yang and Pete Buttigieg Have Blown Up on Twitter, and in Betting Markets

#82

Post by asark »

justaguyhere wrote: post #63
Octoth0rpe wrote: post #2

Re:Yang, I'm vaguely sympathetic to the idea of "elect a business person so they can run government like a business", but any openness to the idea goes out the window when the candidate's business is venture capital.

I haven't seen this "run govt like a business" idea outside the U.S (or maybe I just missed it). Biz and govt are two separate things, I don't understand how one can be run like the other. Sure, there are some overlaps, but thats about it. Can someone explain?

When invoked by laypersons, it usually means "don't run a deficit at all, and cut 'useless' (to me, so far as I know) programs". Arts funding and foreign aid are popular first candidates for the chopping block.

I don't know what it means when politicians say it, aside from being an appeal to the above. Possibly they mean the same thing.

[EDIT] incidentally, it's almost entirely associated with the Right. Unusual to see it brought up as a point in favor of a Democrat.

[EDIT EDIT] awinder probably nailed what it means when politicians say it, and/or why it's an idea some of them have promoted.

Re: Andrew Yang and Pete Buttigieg Have Blown Up on Twitter, and in Betting Markets

#83

Post by motivated_gear »

Octoth0rpe wrote: post #15
motivated_gear wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why though? I would like my government to be open to at least listening to lots of different ideas and applying an investment mindset to them. You're right, there is little operational experience that comes with being a VC. But you dont need that to initiate groundbreaking projects. Hoover didn't pour concrete at the Hoover Dam. Kennedy didn't know the rocket equation.

> You're right, there is little operational experience that comes with being a VC. Operational experience is not my concern. > applying an investment mindset to them This is my concern. I don't trust people in the VC industry to have a healthy concept of an investment mindset.

Understood. Would like to hear your thoughts on why VC does not have a healthy investment philosophy.

Re: Andrew Yang and Pete Buttigieg Have Blown Up on Twitter, and in Betting Markets

#84

Post by toss1 »

WhompingWindows wrote: post #19

Does anyone here have thoughts about the quality of candidates as it relates to their ages (i.e. comparing late 70's Bernie/Biden and these younger candidates)? While I like the policies of Bernie, for instance, I ideally would prefer someone who doesn't have a high % likelihood of serious medical issues in the next 4 years of their life. Is there an age that is too old to be a CEO/President/Senator/leading figure? A…

Right track here.

Specific cutoff age? I'd say not. But I would think that we should require of candidates a full independent medical workup from an independent practice, such as [1]. The kind of nonsense reports we get from the doctor selected by the person currently occupying the PResident's chair are clearly farcical.

(Of course, also beyond the bare constitutional requirements and the independent med workup, should be added: 2) minimal prior service as an elected official, 3) pass a standard HS Science & Technology test, 4) pass the INS Citizenship exam, 5) release a decade of tax returns, and perhaps a few other requirements that inform the citizenry of who is seeking the job... but what do I know, I'm just one of 300MM on the hiring committee)

[1] https://www.mayoclinic.org/departments-centers/mayo-clinic-e...

Re: Andrew Yang and Pete Buttigieg Have Blown Up on Twitter, and in Betting Markets

#85

Post by pixelperfect »

losvedir wrote: post #50

As an Andrew Yang fan myself, I was shocked to see that PredictIt has him as the third most expensive (read likely) candidate after Bernie and Biden, at least when I checked. This is in stark contrast to his 0-1% polling rate in the most recent polls. So, are they just very leading indicators? It got me thinking that it's a relatively cheap campaign strategy since people like to refer to those as some sort of "market…

With PredictIt there's a max bet size, so the manipulation would have to be spread over many accounts. Seems like a very high risk/reward ratio considering how many people would have to be involved, and considering most people don't know or care much about PredictIt.

Re: Andrew Yang and Pete Buttigieg Have Blown Up on Twitter, and in Betting Markets

#86

Post by luckydata »

justaguyhere wrote: post #63
Octoth0rpe wrote: post #2

Re:Yang, I'm vaguely sympathetic to the idea of "elect a business person so they can run government like a business", but any openness to the idea goes out the window when the candidate's business is venture capital.

I haven't seen this "run govt like a business" idea outside the U.S (or maybe I just missed it). Biz and govt are two separate things, I don't understand how one can be run like the other. Sure, there are some overlaps, but thats about it. Can someone explain?

[flagged]

Re: Andrew Yang and Pete Buttigieg Have Blown Up on Twitter, and in Betting Markets

#87

Post by qntty »

omalleyt wrote: post #61
rdiddly wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not so sympathetic to that idea in the first place. A business, particularly a corporation, is one of the most authoritarian structures ever devised. If the government were like a business, every citizen would be either an asset to be exploited or a liability to be eliminated.

Citizens would be the shareholders

In what way does that meaningfully differ from the way a democracy is supposed to be run? Shareholders are treated as "voters" in a democratic organization, where 1 share = 1 vote.

Re: Andrew Yang and Pete Buttigieg Have Blown Up on Twitter, and in Betting Markets

#88

Post by awinder »

themgt wrote: post #14
Octoth0rpe wrote: post #2

Re:Yang, I'm vaguely sympathetic to the idea of "elect a business person so they can run government like a business", but any openness to the idea goes out the window when the candidate's business is venture capital.

I'm taking a wait-and-see approach in general, but I do find Yang one of the most interesting candidates so far. Just to respond to this specific point, Yang wrote recently on Twitter [1]: There are lessons and principles that government can take from business - like treating customers well and resource efficiency. But anyone who says they are going to “run government like a business” is dumb. They require very diffe…

> like treating customers well

This has come up with the current president's most-dimwitted son and it's so hysterical it bears repeating. US taxpayers and voters are not the customer. They're the board.

Re: Andrew Yang and Pete Buttigieg Have Blown Up on Twitter, and in Betting Markets

#89

Post by Alex3917 »

Octoth0rpe wrote: post #2

Re:Yang, I'm vaguely sympathetic to the idea of "elect a business person so they can run government like a business", but any openness to the idea goes out the window when the candidate's business is venture capital.

He doesn't want to run the government like a business, and he's not a venture capitalist.

Re: Andrew Yang and Pete Buttigieg Have Blown Up on Twitter, and in Betting Markets

#90

Post by specialist »

justaguyhere wrote: post #63
Octoth0rpe wrote: post #2

Re:Yang, I'm vaguely sympathetic to the idea of "elect a business person so they can run government like a business", but any openness to the idea goes out the window when the candidate's business is venture capital.

I haven't seen this "run govt like a business" idea outside the U.S (or maybe I just missed it). Biz and govt are two separate things, I don't understand how one can be run like the other. Sure, there are some overlaps, but thats about it. Can someone explain?

Capitalism is our religion. It’s so much a part of our culture (identity), people aren’t aware of it.
Post reply on HN