
Peter Thiel will speak at GOP convention - peterkshultz
http://www.theverge.com/2016/7/14/12187326/peter-thiel-gop-convention-speaking
======
3pt14159
If this existence is all some sort of a really complex TV Show for computer
AI, I would find it very funny if there was a scene where Trump and Clinton
secretly plan about how to get a Democrat in the white house, meanwhile Thiel
and Gary Johnson hatch a plan (after Trump's early success at torpedoing the
GOP nomination process) to back Trump so that the disaffected GOP members go
Libertarian and break the two party race that has been dominating American
politics; but Gary is so anti-war and pro-pot that he pulls enough younger
democrats off Hilary in just the wrong states to where Trump actually wins the
electoral college votes even though by the popular vote Clinton still wins.

~~~
grandalf
I've been hoping this sort of thing happens for about a decade now. The split
between the parties is indeed not natural, and the general values of
"liberalism" are pretty much absent from both parties, but more and more
younger votes care more about liberalism than about labor, defense, and
protectionism (the causes that the major parties squabble over the details
of).

~~~
kordless
The split between the parties is a result of stored _societal_ dissonance
which was previously not a "natural" arising event before the arrival of the
Internet. Search and watch "this video will make you angry" for more context.

------
CPLX
I wonder what his comments will be on the fact that "gay conversion therapy"
is slated to be an official part of the GOP platform adopted at the same
convention.

I also wonder why there are still people who want to argue that there was
literally no genuine news value in a media outlet outing a powerful
billionaire who would personally and financially support a party that would
put this on their platform, but I guess that's another story.

~~~
lintiness
social issues are a nice little diversion from what government is really all
about: taking your money, borrowing against it, and spending it.

~~~
CelestialTeapot
> social issues are a nice little diversion from what government is really all
> about: taking your money, borrowing against it, and spending it.

The Republicans seem to waste a great deal of effort trying to fit the
government into people's bedrooms, family life, and women's doctors offices
for it to just be "a nice little diversion."

~~~
bigtex
Planned Parenthood is not a woman's doctor office.

------
danso
I'm watching a Thiel speech right now on YouTube [0]. To be honest, the only
perception I have of Thiel as a public speaker is that "Silicon Valley's" (on
HBO) Peter Gregory was partly based on him. He's a better speaker than his HBO
caricature, but he doesn't seem like someone who has been groomed to be a
public speaker. I'm impressed that he's chosen to put himself in the spotlight
here. Even if he just recites the Emancipation Proclamation word-for-word, he
is going to be relentlessly grilled by the political punditry. He already was,
for being a Silicon Valley-based Trump delegate, and then of course for the
Gawker lawsuit. I don't agree with all of his politics but at least he's
throwing himself into the public fray even though there's virtually nothing
for him to gain personally (unless he's prepping for a run for governor or
U.S. Senator).

[0] His commencement speech at Hamilton College
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=id4ywg5oemc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=id4ywg5oemc)

------
hsileng
Peter Thiel is the 21st century Koch in every single way. And I feel sad about
that. You'd think when Kochs pass, the old era will be good riddance over. But
maybe not...

~~~
brianbreslin
I suspect we will always see billionaires trying to buy political direction
(see Sheldon Adelson for example).

~~~
louprado
Or perhaps it is a means to give back to society ? Bill Gates often mentions
than the affect of the BMG Foundation is dwarfed by the resources of a
government.

Given BG's comment, wouldn't it make sense to use political influence as a
leveraged means to improve society ?

------
cjbenedikt
Obviously the Peter Principle
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_principle](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_principle)
applies to VCs as well

------
rayiner
I'm a little surprised at all the negativity. Everybody complains that the two
parties are the same, but as soon as the prospect of a Trump/Thiel ticket
comes up (which would, at the very least, shake things up), people freak out.

I'm about as far from a libertarian as you can get, but I find this
interesting! The combination of Trump's willingness to attack everything, and
Thiel's ideas on disruption could put a lot of sacred cows up for debate.
Regardless of what side you're on, that's not a bad thing. It forces the other
side to articulate defenses of the status quo, instead of leaning on inertia.

~~~
voodoomagicman
Thiel is supporting Trump, but I don't think anyone is suggesting he would be
vice president.

------
schwabacher
Is Peter Thiel still involved with ycombinator?

~~~
davesque
I'm actually curious about this too. Anyone care to comment?

~~~
JayHost
I came here to ask this too.

Thiel says weird things like "Tell me something that's true that no one agrees
with you on"

Which happens to fit the mold of a good startup.

It's also what crazy people think their bad ideas fit into.

------
marcoperaza
Maybe he just actually supports Trump, or disfavors Hillary even more. Have
you all considered that? He is close friends with Ann Coulter and his views on
the direction of the country are quite well known. It would be totally in line
with his thinking to back Trump.

The cognitive dissonance in the comments here, the desperate attempts to come
up with conspiratorial rationalizations, is kind of ridiculous.

The man deserves to be taken at his word.

------
lawnchair_larry
This is actually a good thing. If he can get that audience to lusten to his
ideas, maybe the two sides of America will get closer to finding common
ground. It's better than someone who will go there to pander and incite the
mob.

From what I've seen of Thiel, it's worth it to hear him out. He has a lot of
good ideas. Some sound a bit out there perhaps, but he doesn't seem malicious
or destructively polarizing.

------
lumberjack
[http://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-
thiel/education...](http://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-
thiel/education-libertarian)

------
tmaly
That is probably the only talk at the convention that I would be interest to
hear.

------
jjuel
Seems odd to me that he is backing Trump while being a Libertarian, but I
guess he probably doesn't feel Gary Johnson has a legitimate shot.

------
return0
I would think this would be impossible under other, gay-unfriendly candidates.

------
lavamantis
Is it weird that there's no Sarah Palin speech scheduled?

~~~
DonHopkins
They'll be playing a Markov chain of her greatest hits.

------
getgoingnow
Peter Thiel is a weird guy. For many years he said there is going to be a
major economic crisis.

\- He wrote a paper on the fall of the Roman Empire [1] and thinks something
similar could happen to the US.

\- His fund 'Clarium Capital' bet on the fall of US dollar and lost a lot of
money [2]

\- He also stated that Hillary Clinton is going to win and be a one-term
president, probably because the economic collapse is going to happen in few
years [3]. He said "You kinda don't want to win 2016".

What do you think is behind his support for Trump? Does he want the economic
armageddon to happen or not? Does he think that collapse is going to happen
and that Trump is better at dealing with consequences than Hillary?

    
    
      [1] http://bit.ly/2acARwG
      [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarium_Capital#Recent_performance_2008-2010
      [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxtXMlPSQAY

~~~
Kinnard
Ever been to Detroit? In some ways, in some places, the collapse is already
well-underway. Ruins all around.

~~~
adventured
Except there's very little data supporting that claim. Quite the opposite in
fact.

\- The middle class has continued to get richer for about 40 years, moving up
rather than down. That move up has caused the middle class to contract.

\- US household assets are up by $27 trillion since the peak in 2006/2007\.
For comparison sake, that gain alone is equivalent to 2/3 of all the wealth in
the EU.

\- US household balance sheets have improved dramatically in the last six
years. The household debt to income ratio has declined by a lot, home equity
has continued to climb. This contrasts with most of the rest of the developed
world, in which households have been rapidly accumulating vast amounts of debt
(mostly on mortgage debt accumulation).

\- Full-time job openings are near record highs.

\- Full-time job employment is at a record high.

\- Unemployment has plunged dramatically since the peak of the great
recession, including on the U6. The U6 is back to a normal level for the last
30 years, and is back to where it was before the great recession.

\- The labor force participation rate is finally climbing again. The majority
of the losses suffered there were from retirement anyway.

\- Wages have been growing modestly well for the last two years, after enough
slack was removed from the labor pool.

\- Manufacturing is near an all-time record high on output.

\- US median net wealth is higher than Germany or Sweden.

\- US median disposable incomes are the highest in the world outside of
Switzerland.

\- US GDP per capita is back to being #5 in the world (soon to be twice that
of Japan by comparison, and ~40% higher than Germany), which is rather
extraordinary given the issues the nation just went through.

Where's the evidence to support this inbound great collapse? The sole issue
that stands out meaningfully is the national debt. That's only going to get
easier to manage as rates on debt fall over the next several years. The US has
vast spare taxing capacity that very few developed nations have, the US middle
and upper-middle class is among the lowest taxed out of that group; the US
rich could easily be taxed several points higher without it significantly
impacting the economy.

~~~
tsunamifury
I pay nearly 48% tax to state federal and city, and it does significant damage
for my ability to grow in the Bay Area. There is no room to be taxed more, in
fact the tax rate here hinders the middle and upper middle class from saving
effectively for a down payment, doing actual damage to the region.

~~~
venomsnake
It is expensive to be unmarried, well earning and human in the US (I think
that tax rate is almost impossible to achieve for a family). I recommend you
to become a corporation ...

~~~
rayiner
> It is expensive to be unmarried . . . I think that tax rate is almost
> impossible to achieve for a family

When household income is above $150k, married couples with roughly equal
incomes to each other will pay _more_ in taxes than if they were single. That
is because the tax brackets for married couples are wider than for singles,
but not twice as wide.

~~~
tanderson92
Here is an interesting paper on Taxation and marriage: "Taxation and Marriage:
A Reappraisal"

> Marriage taxation presents a "trilemma": An income

> tax cannot simultaneously maintain progressive

> marginal tax rates, an equal tax burden for all married

> couples with identical incomes ("couples equity"),

> and neutrality with respect to the tax burden of

> married versus unmarried couples ("marriage

> neutrality").

Much more interesting discussion:
[http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?artic...](http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5924&context=fss_papers)

