4 ms·

At a 2014 celebration of Governor Patrick’s innovation leadership, Google’s Eric Schmidt announced that “if you want to solve the economic problems of the U.S.,

At a 2014 celebration of Governor Patrick’s innovation leadership, Google’s Eric Schmidt announced that “if you want to solve the economic problems of the U.S., create more entrepreneurs.” I'm a Bernie Sanders supporter, but I totally agree with Eric Schmidt here. In fact, I would go so far as to say that the growing incubator/accelerator industry, of which YC is at the vanguard, is one of the most hopeful, encouraging things happening in the world today. I think it's ridiculous that Paul Graham has to defend himself against charges of exacerbating inequality, when he's done as much as anyone to start the economy down a new path. (Disclosure: I have not applied to YC or any other accelerator, but I might in the future.) So -- is this too much of a contradiction, to be what this author calls an "innovation liberal" while supporting a populist/socialist candidate? Economic change, of the kind the US is now going through, is always wrenching and painful; there are always people on the back side of the curve who suffer. I think the challenge for government is to craft policies that support the changes, and those driving them, while not excessively punishing those left behind. I think that broadly, the pendulum in the US has swung too far in the direction of minimizing the safety net in support of individual responsibility, and the surprising success the Sanders campaign is having -- Bernie himself did not think, a year ago, that he could get as far as he has -- shows that the public mood is starting to swing back the other way. I think that's healthy, to a point, and that's why I'm supporting him. Let's not make this a discussion about Bernie, though. I recognize he is not perfect, and I'm not even 100% certain he would make a good President. I just think the issues he is raising deserve a larger hearing.

jeremyt 11y ago
It always puzzles me to hear people say that they think the social safety net "pendulum" has been swinging too far in the direction of personal responsibility. By any measure, social safety net spending is significantly higher than it has ever been. News comes out every day of some new government mandate like paid parental leave, paid personal days, etc. The minimum wage is creeping higher every day. Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare spending has never been higher. We just passed a massive, expensive, entitlement known as Obamacare, which provides (or was supposed to) health insurance to everyone in America. Obama, during his first term, passed a massive expansion of government-subsidized student loans. We are in the process of a significant expansion of home loans for low income and people with dodgy credit. Except for the very limited, bipartisan, welfare reform under President Clinton (which has since basically been reversed), I'm not aware of any shrinking of the welfare state that has happened in the last 20 years.
- ScottBurson 11y ago
  > The minimum wage is creeping higher every day. Not in constant dollars [0]. It peaked in 1968. It's a bit lower than that now -- if you accept the official inflation estimates, which some argue are understated. > Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare spending has never been higher. True, though as a percentage of GDP, Social Security hasn't increased that much since 1975 -- it reached 4% then, and is around 5% now. [1] I'll let you look up the numbers on Medicare and Medicaid. The situation with the ACA is complicated -- it is costing some money in the short run, but (a) it's less than originally projected, and (b) more importantly, it does seem to be curbing healthcare inflation (something is, anyway). All that said, your point that the welfare state hasn't been shrinking, either, is a fair one. Perhaps it's fairer to say -- as I think the OP is arguing -- that economic conditions, particularly since the Great Recession, and especially the fact that the middle class has been shrinking in recent years, put us in a situation where the need for the safety net is arguably greater than it had been until recently. [0] http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/07/23/5-facts-about-the-minimum-wage/ http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/07/23/5-facts-abou... [1] http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/social_security_spending_by_year http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/social_security_spending...
Grishnakh 11y ago
>Let's not make this a discussion about Bernie, though. I recognize he is not perfect, and I'm not even 100% certain he would make a good President. I'm a Bernie supporter too, but I recognize this too, but the thing is, thanks to our crappy political system, he doesn't need to be a "good President", he just needs to be the least bad one. I don't worry about just how great a President he could be: I just know that with any of the other three in office, it's going to be somewhere between terrible and a complete disaster. With Bernie, I don't think he'll be terrible, and that's good enough for me. But yeah, I'm hopeful: I think the issues he's raising do deserve a much larger hearing and I think the only way we're going to do that is by electing him. The establishment politicians don't want to raise those issues and at best want to give them a little lip service while dismissing them as "not politically feasible at this time".

jeremyt 11y ago

It always puzzles me to hear people say that they think the social safety net "pendulum" has been swinging too far in the direction of personal responsibility. By any measure, social safety net spending is significantly higher than it has ever been. News comes out every day of some new government mandate like paid parental leave, paid personal days, etc. The minimum wage is creeping higher every day. Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare spending has never been higher. We just passed a massive, expensive, entitlement known as Obamacare, which provides (or was supposed to) health insurance to everyone in America. Obama, during his first term, passed a massive expansion of government-subsidized student loans. We are in the process of a significant expansion of home loans for low income and people with dodgy credit. Except for the very limited, bipartisan, welfare reform under President Clinton (which has since basically been reversed), I'm not aware of any shrinking of the welfare state that has happened in the last 20 years.

ScottBurson 11y ago
> The minimum wage is creeping higher every day. Not in constant dollars [0]. It peaked in 1968. It's a bit lower than that now -- if you accept the official inflation estimates, which some argue are understated. > Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare spending has never been higher. True, though as a percentage of GDP, Social Security hasn't increased that much since 1975 -- it reached 4% then, and is around 5% now. [1] I'll let you look up the numbers on Medicare and Medicaid. The situation with the ACA is complicated -- it is costing some money in the short run, but (a) it's less than originally projected, and (b) more importantly, it does seem to be curbing healthcare inflation (something is, anyway). All that said, your point that the welfare state hasn't been shrinking, either, is a fair one. Perhaps it's fairer to say -- as I think the OP is arguing -- that economic conditions, particularly since the Great Recession, and especially the fact that the middle class has been shrinking in recent years, put us in a situation where the need for the safety net is arguably greater than it had been until recently. [0] http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/07/23/5-facts-about-the-minimum-wage/ http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/07/23/5-facts-abou... [1] http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/social_security_spending_by_year http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/social_security_spending...

Grishnakh 11y ago

>Let's not make this a discussion about Bernie, though. I recognize he is not perfect, and I'm not even 100% certain he would make a good President. I'm a Bernie supporter too, but I recognize this too, but the thing is, thanks to our crappy political system, he doesn't need to be a "good President", he just needs to be the least bad one. I don't worry about just how great a President he could be: I just know that with any of the other three in office, it's going to be somewhere between terrible and a complete disaster. With Bernie, I don't think he'll be terrible, and that's good enough for me. But yeah, I'm hopeful: I think the issues he's raising do deserve a much larger hearing and I think the only way we're going to do that is by electing him. The establishment politicians don't want to raise those issues and at best want to give them a little lip service while dismissing them as "not politically feasible at this time".