3 ms·

> Getting out of the way of Silicon Valley and ensuring a strong safety net add up to a political paradox. Because Silicon Valley doesn’t want to pay for the sa

by wycats 12y ago

> Getting out of the way of Silicon Valley and ensuring a strong safety net add up to a political paradox. Because Silicon Valley doesn’t want to pay for the safety net. > There is very little evidence that the people who are getting rich off technological innovation are eager to pay for a robust social welfare net, no matter how rich they get. Quite the opposite. Translated into a political program, the Andreessen solution has no constituency. These statements are totally unsourced and contradict what Marc tweeted. I am in this allegedly non-existent constituency.

punee 12y ago
I am not sure either how he inferred from Andreessen's tweets that there was any paradox in Silicon Valley not paying for the safety net. From a (n admittedly somewhat utopian) techno-libertarian POV, couldn't Andreessen mean that Silicon Valley will be providing that safety net itself by making it affordable through technology? Silicon Valley won't "pay" for the safety net, it will get paid for it.
glenra 12y ago
You feel like this sort of liberal should be asked: how much is enough? When will we know that the government is spending enough on the safety net, or is your answer always that we need to spend more, no matter how much we're spending already? Does evidence on spending effectiveness even matter to you? The problem here is not that the US is spending too little on a safety net, it's that we don't get much effectiveness for what we do spend and we have all sorts of policies that work in the other direction to actively make things worse for the disadvantaged classes. Like the "war on drugs", the "war on terror", import protectionism, immigration restrictions, high minimum wages, and farming price supports - all issues where the libertarians are practically alone out there in trying to make things better. Here's a nice series of video shorts describing some of the issues where libertarian economist-types differ from everybody else: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-89qFWVrrmc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-89qFWVrrmc

by wycats 12y ago

punee 12y ago

I am not sure either how he inferred from Andreessen's tweets that there was any paradox in Silicon Valley not paying for the safety net. From a (n admittedly somewhat utopian) techno-libertarian POV, couldn't Andreessen mean that Silicon Valley will be providing that safety net itself by making it affordable through technology? Silicon Valley won't "pay" for the safety net, it will get paid for it.

glenra 12y ago

You feel like this sort of liberal should be asked: how much is enough? When will we know that the government is spending enough on the safety net, or is your answer always that we need to spend more, no matter how much we're spending already? Does evidence on spending effectiveness even matter to you? The problem here is not that the US is spending too little on a safety net, it's that we don't get much effectiveness for what we do spend and we have all sorts of policies that work in the other direction to actively make things worse for the disadvantaged classes. Like the "war on drugs", the "war on terror", import protectionism, immigration restrictions, high minimum wages, and farming price supports - all issues where the libertarians are practically alone out there in trying to make things better. Here's a nice series of video shorts describing some of the issues where libertarian economist-types differ from everybody else: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-89qFWVrrmc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-89qFWVrrmc