Most small business owners who started the business without that small million dollar loan from dad do not own machines that crank out value while they watch
No one does today. Do you think a plumber or electrician who owns his own business won't benefit from automation in their fields? They own the trucks and equipment now, why would that change? Do you think a dentist won't from automation in their fields? Mine already owns the closest thing to a "machine that cranks out value" - the machine that makes crowns. Do you think someone who owns a pizza restaurant won't benefit from automation? They are the directly ones who will benefit from kitchen and delivery automation.
The big manufacturing facilities in the US are heavily automated already - that's not where a change-in-kind is coming. It bringing that automation down in minimum practical scale allowing more and more people to benefit.
Heck, why would you think, when small-scale manufacturing is fully mature, that the "machine that cranks out value" wouldn't be in everyone's house? I predict the same arc as laser printers here - from massive capital outlay, to specialty shops scattered everywhere, to easily affordable for everyone.
You seem to be the only frequent advocate on this topic capable of math.
What other taxes would you have over the 17% flat tax? The US has never sustained federal revenue above 20% of GDP (~20% flat tax) with any tax scheme. Maybe you could add 17% of the UBI to that limit, though that's speculative. A 17% flat tax would be about 20% more than current income+payroll tax, and while we'd never adopt it (since without loopholes it would actually tax the rich), I think it would work just fine. Add in corporate and we're talking about $3.45T federal revenue (more than current, less than the current budget). There's little headroom for additional taxes above that, but I think there's some.
I think the most we could tax under any tax scheme (relative to current GDP) is about the amount of the federal budget ($3.8T). Current federal spending is about: * $2.3T SS+Medi*+"welfare" * $273B Federal pensions (good luck there) * $580B Defense * $249B Interest on debt * $706B Everything else the government does
So, if we limit the discussion to just the "checks mailed to people" part of the budget, There's still $1.5T of stuff the government does we still have to pay for, even if we entertain the fantasy that federal pensions could be replaced by a new system.
The remaining $2.3T divided equally gives about $7000 each. I don't think that's going to work given the expense of health care for the elderly.
You don't seem to mind that they don't have to contribute to live it up.
I don't care at all, because it's a very small number of people. Most small business owners started the business. Most 1%ers are there for only a couple of years. Most Americans have stock investments, and gradually accumulate retirement savings.
Way and colleagues simulated the Venusian climate at various time points between 2.9 billion and 715 million years ago, employing similar models to those used to predict future climate change on Earth.
I'm making the popcorn right now.
These guys aren't credible enough to start a real internet fight. Venus has a lot of mystery, but we know the atmosphere wasn't merely the result of some runaway greenhouse effect. The crust of Venus melted, about 500 million years ago, from all the evidence available.
Venus is just a strange place. The surface very nearly doesn't rotate. The other planets in the Solar System have significant angular momentum, as any reasonable model of plant formation would suggest. Venus has a "solid" crust, no plates in motion or subduction zones like the Earth, suggesting the heat of the core is released catastrophically rather than more gradually with the crust involved in convection. But that's all guesswork. Could the planet have supported life before the crust melt event? Maybe, if it was the first one, and not a regular occurrence, but the near lack of rotation would still make a mess of things.
It's worth remembering for the Earth that the amount of carbon in the air, the oceans, and all known fossil fuel reserves, together, is a rounding error compared to the carbon in the (geologically slow) rock cycle. Earth won't look like Venus unless our crust melts as well.
What you do is combine all the current benefit programs into the UBI. Get rid of medicare/aid, social security, welfare, etc... Reabsorb the budgets that are used to run those programs, and combine the resulting funds into the UBI stipend. Employers can also subtract the UBi amount from what they pay to their workers so that the cost is offset for the employers as well. Say the UBI is 1k/mo.
Really. $12k/year. Replacing Social Security and Medicare. So, seniors dying in the streets is your plan. I don't think that plan will get much buy in. Social Security pays about $24k, Medicare is more valuable than that. You can't even buy health insurance for $12k/year as a senior.
So, you're going to replace Social Security payments of $24K or so with a UBI of $5-10K? Seniors literally starving to death in the streets. Quite a modest proposal there.
You can see the actual budget numbers here, BTW, at least for the big-ticket items. http://www.usdebtclock.org/ "Welfare" is $300B.
You sound like half the fresh college hire engineers: "lets just re-invent this from scratch, without understanding how it works and why it is the way it is! It's so easy that way!".
Yep, no one ever started a business from scratch. No poor immigrant ever made good. Everyone who is rich came from rich parents. Total social immobility, that's what the US is famous for. You betcha.
BTW, I only expect someone to do something today if they aren't living off their savings/investments. That's how it's supposed to work, after all: you earn and invest during your working years, then live off those investments during your waning years. You know, those investments you just happen to have after 40 years of savings.
I am all for UBI if it can be implemented intelligently.
Problem is, the math doesn't work. Lets say we pay out 100% of current federal revenue as UBI (setting aside the fact we'd still need Medicare etc). That's just over $10,000 per citizen. Is that even a subsistence wage? Will that even buy health insurance from the exchange? Heck, let's say all medical expenses are met by faerie dust. Is $10k really subsistence income in most of the US ? Even in rural areas, full time minimum wage is significantly more than that.
And of course we can't give all the federal budget to the UBI. And we can't handwave medical costs. So it all comes down to assuming that some future tax increase will raise federal revenue in a way that no past tax system ever has (that is, bring in more than 20% of GDP). Good luck with that.
There's a story called the Ant and the Grasshopper. The basic idea is that if you save your money, you will be fine come retirement...you will even be able to retire early.
I remember that story. The ants worked hard while the grasshopper laughed. Then the grasshoppers formed a union and demanded equal rights "the ants are just too lofty, we will make them give us food". Then the ants moved to Galt's Gulch, and lived happily ever after with their perpetual motion engines. Odd story.
So how about the people who happen to own the machines? Do they have to contribute
"Happen to own", yep. Contributed nothing to get them, nope, you did not build that. Just happened to own. Woke up one day and the machine fairy had left them a factory under their pillow. Just happened one day.
You understand the difference between someone owning the land, and the land being on a reservation, right? Native Americans can buy land in the US proper?
Per other/. commenters, the protest location doesn't seem to be on any reservation. I'm pointing out that simply owning the land doesn't automatically let you get away with this sort of thing, without getting into who actually owns the land, what leases exist, etc.
It's protectionism, obviously, but it's the IMO reasonable kind: imposing certain rules on all sorts of hire cars. I don't think Uber is a taxi service. It's a hired car service, of which taxis and limo are kinds. Uber is a new kind. I've always thought local governments trying to force Uber to be a taxi service were doing it wrong, but uniform regulation for all hired car services is legit.
E.g., in Texas you have to have a chauffeur's license to drive others for money. Doesn't matter whether it's taxi, bus driver, actual chauffeur, whatever. You don't have to argue about whether Uber is a taxi service to require it's drivers to get that license. Austin made up some BS to drive Uber out, but had the same requirements been attached to the chauffeur's license, that would have been legit.
Stroustrup had some good advice in one of his books on taming the error messages (basically, force instantiation of a method who's name was a clear error message). But that's obviously a hacky work-around to a language failing.
I'm eager to play with the new (ish) "concepts" (basically, interface definitions for templates) just because they seem like they should fix the template error mess once and for all.
You may be right about lambdas, but at least here doing something non-trivial in an unnamed function (and thus getting no useful logging or error messages) isn't a failing unique to C++.
We don't have the facts. Was she trespassing? Did she know ahead of time that the protesters intended to commit these crimes? Either of those is a crime. It's also a crime in some cases to make promotional material for criminal activity (especially if you label the activity "terrorism"), which is what the cops might be going for here, but that's very narrow and unlikely to stick.
If the AG is trying different charges to see what sticks, chances are they've got nothing. But we don't have the facts.
A landlord can commit trespass on property rented or leased to another in many states. Just because you own the property doesn't make you immune to trespass charges. The fact that someone vaguely associated with you owns the property in no way protects your from trespass charges.
The first amendment gives you no right to trespass, riot, cause damage, or assemble in any way other than "peaceably".
Journalists are just people. People have first amendment rights. Journalists are not nobility, not aristocrats, no matter how much they like to image that. They have the same rights as anyone else, no special privilege.
And the rights of an ordinary person should be enough, assuming she wasn't actually committing crimes.
Terrifying in theory, but in practice anything without a unit test is broken anyhow, so it's not really so bad, The error messages on the other hand...
Depends on the compiler, of course, but the STL isn't some runtime library, it's a set of templates, which means only bits you use get compiled. Strings and vectors tend to be reasonably lightweight.
Unless of course, you're the guy who says "I'm not going to bounds-check my array access, I only have 2K!" leading to the world's biggest botnet of Internet-enabled toilets.
I dont know about that, but Go is useful if you need massive concurrency. Goroutines make it trivial to spin up new threads and keep things in sync. In fact, the entire language seems to revolve around that concept.
I don't see that it makes concurrency any easier than Java, C#, or modern C++. Sure, it's easier than C, but it's a garbage collected language, so why would you compare it to C?
My opinion is this: If you just need a general purpose programming language, go doesn't give you anything new. It sits in a strange place where it is not c but also not quite high level, so you get high-levelish things (such as goroutines) but you still need to deal with c type annoyances.
You are better off with python, java, c# or even c++ in most cases.
As for generics, I am very confident that Go will eventually have them, but you are indeed correct that it does not have them today.
This kills Go for me.
One of the big problems with C++, C#, and Java is that generics were an afterthought (and still are, in Java). Those mistakes were made a long time ago now. For a new (-ish) language to repeat that mistake just makes no sense.
Yes, your language needs to have strongly typed container classes, and not just those in the standard library. Go natively supports strongly typed maps and dynamic arrays, which is nice and all, but how was it not obvious that it needs a mechanism to make more such things?
I'll help if you like. Name some SJW things you think I believe, let's see how wrong you are.
Things SJWs say, recent AmiMoJo quote edition:
A world where entitlement is the deciding factor, you will be evicted from your home the moment someone else offers to pay more.
The journalistic integrity angle is pretty weak because it all started as a reaction to a lie about a female game developer having an improper relationship with a journalist.
"Men feel entitled to women's bodies." "Not all men!" "Trump says he's entitled to women's bodies." "But all men talk like that."
Wouldn't it be easier and better to just require some form of ID and check at gunshows?
feminism as a movent has embraced intersectionality
Low taxes are not a solution to unemployment. They might encourage companies to move, but the jobs are low paid.
You really are a special kind of idiot, aren't you? He clearly called her "Miss Housekeeping" due to her race.
I don't think it's that people can't handle free speech, it's just that a) not every wants to live life at MAX VOLUME all the time, and b) the risk of being attacked on those sites (e.g. by doxing) is high.
It's interesting how sites with a reputation for being toxic manage to recover by splitting the worst bits off. Reddit did it by shifting the worst bits over to Voat, which like 8chan was hailed as the new king where everyone would migrate too but ended up just being a cesspit.
Even Slashdot did it, when the disastrous Beta programme lead to the creation of Soylent News, which is now full of right wing outrage stories (okay so not that different to Slashdot).
The alt-right moderators are always out in force on every story about Trump it anything "social justice" related. They get in early to try to control the debate, and unfortunately it works.
He called her "Miss Piggy" and "Miss Housekeeping", both sexist and racist. He clearly was not referring to her contractual obligation.
Careful, this is what leads to post-factual politics and disasters like Brexit. Once people decide that all experts are just partisan agenda pushers, unreliable and untrustworthy, all they have left is their own gut feeling. They make decisions based on what they see in their immediate surroundings and what politicians tell them.
Remember that Thiel is an outspoken racist, and that Trump considers tax dodging to be the "smart" thing to do so tends to get support from other people who similarly feel that it's their job to avoid paying the IRS anything as best they can.
This is a common tactic in the on-going culture wars: adopt a popular meme and corrupt it to your own agenda, relying on its popularity to make it seem like your cause has more support than it really does.
Statistically, the vast majority of financial fraud is carried out by white men. See why it's wrong now?
It's mostly the poor oppressed white guys who are worried about a woman, a feminist even, getting to be president because she is popular with minorities. The logical conclusion is mandatory castration for them, because they are all rapists.
On any sort of social issue, you just keep going on about how everything is racism and sexism, how censorship makes sense at times, how the right is full of evil, but most just sad creatures so stupid as to be easily misled, and so on.
Slashdot Mirror
Most small business owners who started the business without that small million dollar loan from dad do not own machines that crank out value while they watch
No one does today. Do you think a plumber or electrician who owns his own business won't benefit from automation in their fields? They own the trucks and equipment now, why would that change? Do you think a dentist won't from automation in their fields? Mine already owns the closest thing to a "machine that cranks out value" - the machine that makes crowns. Do you think someone who owns a pizza restaurant won't benefit from automation? They are the directly ones who will benefit from kitchen and delivery automation.
The big manufacturing facilities in the US are heavily automated already - that's not where a change-in-kind is coming. It bringing that automation down in minimum practical scale allowing more and more people to benefit.
Heck, why would you think, when small-scale manufacturing is fully mature, that the "machine that cranks out value" wouldn't be in everyone's house? I predict the same arc as laser printers here - from massive capital outlay, to specialty shops scattered everywhere, to easily affordable for everyone.
You seem to be the only frequent advocate on this topic capable of math.
What other taxes would you have over the 17% flat tax? The US has never sustained federal revenue above 20% of GDP (~20% flat tax) with any tax scheme. Maybe you could add 17% of the UBI to that limit, though that's speculative. A 17% flat tax would be about 20% more than current income+payroll tax, and while we'd never adopt it (since without loopholes it would actually tax the rich), I think it would work just fine. Add in corporate and we're talking about $3.45T federal revenue (more than current, less than the current budget). There's little headroom for additional taxes above that, but I think there's some.
I think the most we could tax under any tax scheme (relative to current GDP) is about the amount of the federal budget ($3.8T). Current federal spending is about:
* $2.3T SS+Medi*+"welfare"
* $273B Federal pensions (good luck there)
* $580B Defense
* $249B Interest on debt
* $706B Everything else the government does
So, if we limit the discussion to just the "checks mailed to people" part of the budget, There's still $1.5T of stuff the government does we still have to pay for, even if we entertain the fantasy that federal pensions could be replaced by a new system.
The remaining $2.3T divided equally gives about $7000 each. I don't think that's going to work given the expense of health care for the elderly.
You don't seem to mind that they don't have to contribute to live it up.
I don't care at all, because it's a very small number of people. Most small business owners started the business. Most 1%ers are there for only a couple of years. Most Americans have stock investments, and gradually accumulate retirement savings.
Way and colleagues simulated the Venusian climate at various time points between 2.9 billion and 715 million years ago, employing similar models to those used to predict future climate change on Earth.
I'm making the popcorn right now.
These guys aren't credible enough to start a real internet fight. Venus has a lot of mystery, but we know the atmosphere wasn't merely the result of some runaway greenhouse effect. The crust of Venus melted, about 500 million years ago, from all the evidence available.
Venus is just a strange place. The surface very nearly doesn't rotate. The other planets in the Solar System have significant angular momentum, as any reasonable model of plant formation would suggest. Venus has a "solid" crust, no plates in motion or subduction zones like the Earth, suggesting the heat of the core is released catastrophically rather than more gradually with the crust involved in convection. But that's all guesswork. Could the planet have supported life before the crust melt event? Maybe, if it was the first one, and not a regular occurrence, but the near lack of rotation would still make a mess of things.
It's worth remembering for the Earth that the amount of carbon in the air, the oceans, and all known fossil fuel reserves, together, is a rounding error compared to the carbon in the (geologically slow) rock cycle. Earth won't look like Venus unless our crust melts as well.
What you do is combine all the current benefit programs into the UBI. Get rid of medicare/aid, social security, welfare, etc... Reabsorb the budgets that are used to run those programs, and combine the resulting funds into the UBI stipend. Employers can also subtract the UBi amount from what they pay to their workers so that the cost is offset for the employers as well. Say the UBI is 1k/mo.
Really. $12k/year. Replacing Social Security and Medicare. So, seniors dying in the streets is your plan. I don't think that plan will get much buy in. Social Security pays about $24k, Medicare is more valuable than that. You can't even buy health insurance for $12k/year as a senior.
Everything is easy with fantasy budgets.
No, he's a realist. The world is being reinvented right now, and our silly play money is going to have to be reinvented to match.
You should start a Utopia! I'm sure it will work out just as well as the wave of them in the late 1800s (the industrial revolution).
It's not about the money. It's about the fact that all we have is all we make. Robots are a small percentage of that, and will be for my lifetime.
So, you're going to replace Social Security payments of $24K or so with a UBI of $5-10K? Seniors literally starving to death in the streets. Quite a modest proposal there.
You can see the actual budget numbers here, BTW, at least for the big-ticket items. http://www.usdebtclock.org/ "Welfare" is $300B.
You sound like half the fresh college hire engineers: "lets just re-invent this from scratch, without understanding how it works and why it is the way it is! It's so easy that way!".
Yep, no one ever started a business from scratch. No poor immigrant ever made good. Everyone who is rich came from rich parents. Total social immobility, that's what the US is famous for. You betcha.
BTW, I only expect someone to do something today if they aren't living off their savings/investments. That's how it's supposed to work, after all: you earn and invest during your working years, then live off those investments during your waning years. You know, those investments you just happen to have after 40 years of savings.
I am all for UBI if it can be implemented intelligently.
Problem is, the math doesn't work. Lets say we pay out 100% of current federal revenue as UBI (setting aside the fact we'd still need Medicare etc). That's just over $10,000 per citizen. Is that even a subsistence wage? Will that even buy health insurance from the exchange? Heck, let's say all medical expenses are met by faerie dust. Is $10k really subsistence income in most of the US ? Even in rural areas, full time minimum wage is significantly more than that.
And of course we can't give all the federal budget to the UBI. And we can't handwave medical costs. So it all comes down to assuming that some future tax increase will raise federal revenue in a way that no past tax system ever has (that is, bring in more than 20% of GDP). Good luck with that.
There's a story called the Ant and the Grasshopper. The basic idea is that if you save your money, you will be fine come retirement...you will even be able to retire early.
I remember that story. The ants worked hard while the grasshopper laughed. Then the grasshoppers formed a union and demanded equal rights "the ants are just too lofty, we will make them give us food". Then the ants moved to Galt's Gulch, and lived happily ever after with their perpetual motion engines. Odd story.
So how about the people who happen to own the machines? Do they have to contribute
"Happen to own", yep. Contributed nothing to get them, nope, you did not build that. Just happened to own. Woke up one day and the machine fairy had left them a factory under their pillow. Just happened one day.
Native tribes own that land
You understand the difference between someone owning the land, and the land being on a reservation, right? Native Americans can buy land in the US proper?
Per other /. commenters, the protest location doesn't seem to be on any reservation. I'm pointing out that simply owning the land doesn't automatically let you get away with this sort of thing, without getting into who actually owns the land, what leases exist, etc.
It's protectionism, obviously, but it's the IMO reasonable kind: imposing certain rules on all sorts of hire cars. I don't think Uber is a taxi service. It's a hired car service, of which taxis and limo are kinds. Uber is a new kind. I've always thought local governments trying to force Uber to be a taxi service were doing it wrong, but uniform regulation for all hired car services is legit.
E.g., in Texas you have to have a chauffeur's license to drive others for money. Doesn't matter whether it's taxi, bus driver, actual chauffeur, whatever. You don't have to argue about whether Uber is a taxi service to require it's drivers to get that license. Austin made up some BS to drive Uber out, but had the same requirements been attached to the chauffeur's license, that would have been legit.
Stroustrup had some good advice in one of his books on taming the error messages (basically, force instantiation of a method who's name was a clear error message). But that's obviously a hacky work-around to a language failing.
I'm eager to play with the new (ish) "concepts" (basically, interface definitions for templates) just because they seem like they should fix the template error mess once and for all.
You may be right about lambdas, but at least here doing something non-trivial in an unnamed function (and thus getting no useful logging or error messages) isn't a failing unique to C++.
We don't have the facts. Was she trespassing? Did she know ahead of time that the protesters intended to commit these crimes? Either of those is a crime. It's also a crime in some cases to make promotional material for criminal activity (especially if you label the activity "terrorism"), which is what the cops might be going for here, but that's very narrow and unlikely to stick.
If the AG is trying different charges to see what sticks, chances are they've got nothing. But we don't have the facts.
A landlord can commit trespass on property rented or leased to another in many states. Just because you own the property doesn't make you immune to trespass charges. The fact that someone vaguely associated with you owns the property in no way protects your from trespass charges.
The first amendment gives you no right to trespass, riot, cause damage, or assemble in any way other than "peaceably".
Journalists are just people. People have first amendment rights. Journalists are not nobility, not aristocrats, no matter how much they like to image that. They have the same rights as anyone else, no special privilege.
And the rights of an ordinary person should be enough, assuming she wasn't actually committing crimes.
Terrifying in theory, but in practice anything without a unit test is broken anyhow, so it's not really so bad, The error messages on the other hand ...
In other words, SJW is just someone you don't like for whatever reason you want to throw at them today.
Keep thinking that. Keep wondering why everyone calls you an SJW, even though oddly they aren't calling everyone else that.
Most people don't try to blame everything on: sexism, racism, the white man. Just so you know. Most people. Don't do that.
2K ram - check
8k flash - check
STL - yeah sure
Depends on the compiler, of course, but the STL isn't some runtime library, it's a set of templates, which means only bits you use get compiled. Strings and vectors tend to be reasonably lightweight.
Unless of course, you're the guy who says "I'm not going to bounds-check my array access, I only have 2K!" leading to the world's biggest botnet of Internet-enabled toilets.
How many letters are we going to add to this acronym? We only have 26.
Oh, they'll repeat them. There is no limit. Then holy wars will break out over what the first T stands for. Nukes will fly.
I do find it amusing though that the BDSM crowd has by-and-large rejected the alphabet soup crowd, finding such categories too limiting.
Anyone else find Go's syntax horrible and avoid the language completely because of it?
I find its syntax gives me flashbacks to Pascal. Terrifying flashbacks.
I dont know about that, but Go is useful if you need massive concurrency. Goroutines make it trivial to spin up new threads and keep things in sync. In fact, the entire language seems to revolve around that concept.
I don't see that it makes concurrency any easier than Java, C#, or modern C++. Sure, it's easier than C, but it's a garbage collected language, so why would you compare it to C?
My opinion is this: If you just need a general purpose programming language, go doesn't give you anything new. It sits in a strange place where it is not c but also not quite high level, so you get high-levelish things (such as goroutines) but you still need to deal with c type annoyances.
You are better off with python, java, c# or even c++ in most cases.
Well put, I should add "Python too" to the above.
As for generics, I am very confident that Go will eventually have them, but you are indeed correct that it does not have them today.
This kills Go for me.
One of the big problems with C++, C#, and Java is that generics were an afterthought (and still are, in Java). Those mistakes were made a long time ago now. For a new (-ish) language to repeat that mistake just makes no sense.
Yes, your language needs to have strongly typed container classes, and not just those in the standard library. Go natively supports strongly typed maps and dynamic arrays, which is nice and all, but how was it not obvious that it needs a mechanism to make more such things?
I'll help if you like. Name some SJW things you think I believe, let's see how wrong you are.
Things SJWs say, recent AmiMoJo quote edition:
A world where entitlement is the deciding factor, you will be evicted from your home the moment someone else offers to pay more.
The journalistic integrity angle is pretty weak because it all started as a reaction to a lie about a female game developer having an improper relationship with a journalist.
"Men feel entitled to women's bodies."
"Not all men!"
"Trump says he's entitled to women's bodies."
"But all men talk like that."
Wouldn't it be easier and better to just require some form of ID and check at gunshows?
feminism as a movent has embraced intersectionality
Low taxes are not a solution to unemployment. They might encourage companies to move, but the jobs are low paid.
You really are a special kind of idiot, aren't you? He clearly called her "Miss Housekeeping" due to her race.
I don't think it's that people can't handle free speech, it's just that a) not every wants to live life at MAX VOLUME all the time, and b) the risk of being attacked on those sites (e.g. by doxing) is high.
It's interesting how sites with a reputation for being toxic manage to recover by splitting the worst bits off. Reddit did it by shifting the worst bits over to Voat, which like 8chan was hailed as the new king where everyone would migrate too but ended up just being a cesspit.
Even Slashdot did it, when the disastrous Beta programme lead to the creation of Soylent News, which is now full of right wing outrage stories (okay so not that different to Slashdot).
The alt-right moderators are always out in force on every story about Trump it anything "social justice" related. They get in early to try to control the debate, and unfortunately it works.
He called her "Miss Piggy" and "Miss Housekeeping", both sexist and racist. He clearly was not referring to her contractual obligation.
Careful, this is what leads to post-factual politics and disasters like Brexit. Once people decide that all experts are just partisan agenda pushers, unreliable and untrustworthy, all they have left is their own gut feeling. They make decisions based on what they see in their immediate surroundings and what politicians tell them.
Remember that Thiel is an outspoken racist, and that Trump considers tax dodging to be the "smart" thing to do so tends to get support from other people who similarly feel that it's their job to avoid paying the IRS anything as best they can.
This is a common tactic in the on-going culture wars: adopt a popular meme and corrupt it to your own agenda, relying on its popularity to make it seem like your cause has more support than it really does.
Statistically, the vast majority of financial fraud is carried out by white men.
See why it's wrong now?
It's mostly the poor oppressed white guys who are worried about a woman, a feminist even, getting to be president because she is popular with minorities. The logical conclusion is mandatory castration for them, because they are all rapists.
On any sort of social issue, you just keep going on about how everything is racism and sexism, how censorship makes sense at times, how the right is full of evil, but most just sad creatures so stupid as to be easily misled, and so on.