15 ms·

I try to view things like this from the other perspective and wonder just why so many people still view this person like he's the common man's savior. I think I

I try to view things like this from the other perspective and wonder just why so many people still view this person like he's the common man's savior. I think I'm cognitively dissonance-ing myself from possibly all the cognitive dissonance I'm surrounded with.

paulgb 1y ago
I’m not a fan of Trump but my steelman argument for this is: policing public markets is a public good because efficient capital markets are the bedrock of a capitalist society. It’s hard to make the same case for crypto, which (despite the insistences of its participants) more or less exists in isolation from the rest of the market. The industry feels it is over-regulated. Makes sense that a more lassiez-faire leader would take a more hands-off approach to it.
- nielsbot 1y ago
  But what’s to reason to not prosecute lawbreakers/fraud?
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - paulgb 1y ago
    My read is that they will still prosecute fraud once it happens, they just won’t proactively regulate the industry.
  - stevenwoo 1y ago
    I’m thinking there will be prosecution but there will be quid pro quo’s like the guy Trump just pardoned after the felon donated 2 million to GOP. https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/nikola-founder-milton-pardoned-by-trump-after-fraud-conviction https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/nikola-founder-mil... Wipe the slate so the felon no longer owes money for fraud.
- bamboozled 1y ago
  Why police any gambling where people can get addicted and lose their home and worse m? There’s a lot of reasons.
  - paulgb 1y ago
    I worry that having the SEC regulate crypto can actually be worse for those people, because it sends the message that it’s a legit government-approved investment instead of a wild west zero-sum craps table.
    - bamboozled 1y ago
      The reality is that it exists and that people take crypto risks. Just like illegal gambling. There is a reason exchanges were investigated in the first place and it wasn’t for fun.
- nativeit 1y ago
  If nothing else, I feel like this view is myopic. Capital markets are people and jobs. When crypto projects collapse, or rampant fraud, abuse, manipulation, and outright theft are allowed, that money is coming out of real peoples pockets, and that has real rippling effects that are not only objectively disruptive to the economy, but are also much more difficult to then predict, measure, and respond to which further amplifies their detrimental impacts.
  - paulgb 1y ago
    This isn’t really “allowing” fraud though. From the memo: > Prosecutors shall prioritize cases that hold accountable individuals who (a) cause financial harm to digital asset investors and consumers; and/or (b) use digital assets in furtherance of other criminal conduct, such as fentanyl trafficking, terrorism, cartels, organized crime, and human trafficking and smuggling. Seeking accountability from individuals who perpetrate these types of wrongdoing deters future illegal activity, compensates victims, and promotes the public’s confidence in the digital asset markets and broader industry. On the other hand, criminal matters premised on regulatory violations resulting from diffuse decisions made at lower levels of digital asset companies often fail to advance the priorities of the Department. I read this as switching from proactive enforcement (stop the act before it causes damage) to reactive regulation (punish the guilty after the act happens). Proactive regulation of public markets makes sense because the general public has an interest in well-functioning capital markets even if they are not direct participants (markets are essentially the capitalist replacement for central planning).
InsideOutSanta 1y ago
[flagged]
0x5f3759df-i 1y ago
The average person spends less than 5 minutes a month consuming news content and assumes important information will just fall into their lap. People in general are just not paying all that much attention. Trump’s secret sauce is exploiting this from every angle.
an0malous 1y ago
“And in their desperation, they turned to a man they didn't fully understand.” — Alfred describing why the mob hired the Joker It’s clear that both political parties in the US are captured by the investor class, the democrats didn’t even have an election to choose Kamala she was selected by their donors who preferred someone they could control over someone with the best chance of winning. If the lesson people take away from this is that Republicans are just uneducated and naive, they’re missing the point. People were desperate for something different, they thought Trump was someone from outside of the system but they didn’t realize that the system is money and no one is outside of it.
- CoastalCoder 1y ago
  Could someone explain why the parent comment would (currently) be downvoted? It has an interesting conjecture, and sounds like it was written in good faith.
  - aftbit 1y ago
    Likely because it enraged some Democrats with the reference to Kamala being unelected. It's back above 0 for me now, so it looks like the broader consensus is that this is in fact a good comment.
    - const_cast 1y ago
      It doesn't anger anyone, it's just dishonest. The circumstances of her being the democratic candidate are well-document, you can't just say things that aren't true. Biden won the primary, then he stepped down. That's the actual story, and if you don't include the teensy little detail you're being dishonest. As a reminder to everyone, choosing not to tell the whole truth is dishonesty.
      - an0malous 1y ago
        > The nomination will officially be voted on either shortly before or during the convention itself. Unless a major Democratic figure mounts a serious challenge — which did not appear to happen within 24 hours of Biden’s announcement — the president’s endorsement of Harris will likely carry the day with delegates https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/is-it-really-unlawful-to-replace-biden-on-the-democratic-ticket-election-law-experts-say-no https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/is-it-really-unlawful-... You’re the one being dishonest. The democratic nomination wasn’t official until August, and to suggest the Democratic Party had no other option is factually incorrect and a revision of history that ignores the months the party and pundits spent discussing other options, as well as the legal argument the party itself made to justify choosing Harris.
ASalazarMX 1y ago
Welcome to demagogy 101. In this session, we'll talk about "guiding" public opinion by buying a small but loud support team that looks bigger in the media. Thank you for enrolling at Banana Democracy Uni! We look forward to train the new generation of wannabe dictators.
whimsicalism 1y ago
i mean the other perspective is that this headline is a lie. i'm no supporter of trump, but it is a simply false headline
- scryers_bloom 1y ago
  What about the headline is a lie (I do think it may have changed, but I'm not sure after looking at it this morning)?
  - whimsicalism 1y ago
    yeah they changed it

paulgb 1y ago

I’m not a fan of Trump but my steelman argument for this is: policing public markets is a public good because efficient capital markets are the bedrock of a capitalist society. It’s hard to make the same case for crypto, which (despite the insistences of its participants) more or less exists in isolation from the rest of the market. The industry feels it is over-regulated. Makes sense that a more lassiez-faire leader would take a more hands-off approach to it.

nielsbot 1y ago
But what’s to reason to not prosecute lawbreakers/fraud?
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- paulgb 1y ago
  My read is that they will still prosecute fraud once it happens, they just won’t proactively regulate the industry.
- stevenwoo 1y ago
  I’m thinking there will be prosecution but there will be quid pro quo’s like the guy Trump just pardoned after the felon donated 2 million to GOP. https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/nikola-founder-milton-pardoned-by-trump-after-fraud-conviction https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/nikola-founder-mil... Wipe the slate so the felon no longer owes money for fraud.
bamboozled 1y ago
Why police any gambling where people can get addicted and lose their home and worse m? There’s a lot of reasons.
- paulgb 1y ago
  I worry that having the SEC regulate crypto can actually be worse for those people, because it sends the message that it’s a legit government-approved investment instead of a wild west zero-sum craps table.
  - bamboozled 1y ago
    The reality is that it exists and that people take crypto risks. Just like illegal gambling. There is a reason exchanges were investigated in the first place and it wasn’t for fun.
nativeit 1y ago
If nothing else, I feel like this view is myopic. Capital markets are people and jobs. When crypto projects collapse, or rampant fraud, abuse, manipulation, and outright theft are allowed, that money is coming out of real peoples pockets, and that has real rippling effects that are not only objectively disruptive to the economy, but are also much more difficult to then predict, measure, and respond to which further amplifies their detrimental impacts.
- paulgb 1y ago
  This isn’t really “allowing” fraud though. From the memo: > Prosecutors shall prioritize cases that hold accountable individuals who (a) cause financial harm to digital asset investors and consumers; and/or (b) use digital assets in furtherance of other criminal conduct, such as fentanyl trafficking, terrorism, cartels, organized crime, and human trafficking and smuggling. Seeking accountability from individuals who perpetrate these types of wrongdoing deters future illegal activity, compensates victims, and promotes the public’s confidence in the digital asset markets and broader industry. On the other hand, criminal matters premised on regulatory violations resulting from diffuse decisions made at lower levels of digital asset companies often fail to advance the priorities of the Department. I read this as switching from proactive enforcement (stop the act before it causes damage) to reactive regulation (punish the guilty after the act happens). Proactive regulation of public markets makes sense because the general public has an interest in well-functioning capital markets even if they are not direct participants (markets are essentially the capitalist replacement for central planning).

InsideOutSanta 1y ago

[flagged]

0x5f3759df-i 1y ago

The average person spends less than 5 minutes a month consuming news content and assumes important information will just fall into their lap. People in general are just not paying all that much attention. Trump’s secret sauce is exploiting this from every angle.

an0malous 1y ago

“And in their desperation, they turned to a man they didn't fully understand.” — Alfred describing why the mob hired the Joker It’s clear that both political parties in the US are captured by the investor class, the democrats didn’t even have an election to choose Kamala she was selected by their donors who preferred someone they could control over someone with the best chance of winning. If the lesson people take away from this is that Republicans are just uneducated and naive, they’re missing the point. People were desperate for something different, they thought Trump was someone from outside of the system but they didn’t realize that the system is money and no one is outside of it.

CoastalCoder 1y ago
Could someone explain why the parent comment would (currently) be downvoted? It has an interesting conjecture, and sounds like it was written in good faith.
- aftbit 1y ago
  Likely because it enraged some Democrats with the reference to Kamala being unelected. It's back above 0 for me now, so it looks like the broader consensus is that this is in fact a good comment.
  - const_cast 1y ago
    It doesn't anger anyone, it's just dishonest. The circumstances of her being the democratic candidate are well-document, you can't just say things that aren't true. Biden won the primary, then he stepped down. That's the actual story, and if you don't include the teensy little detail you're being dishonest. As a reminder to everyone, choosing not to tell the whole truth is dishonesty.
    - an0malous 1y ago
      > The nomination will officially be voted on either shortly before or during the convention itself. Unless a major Democratic figure mounts a serious challenge — which did not appear to happen within 24 hours of Biden’s announcement — the president’s endorsement of Harris will likely carry the day with delegates https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/is-it-really-unlawful-to-replace-biden-on-the-democratic-ticket-election-law-experts-say-no https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/is-it-really-unlawful-... You’re the one being dishonest. The democratic nomination wasn’t official until August, and to suggest the Democratic Party had no other option is factually incorrect and a revision of history that ignores the months the party and pundits spent discussing other options, as well as the legal argument the party itself made to justify choosing Harris.

ASalazarMX 1y ago

Welcome to demagogy 101. In this session, we'll talk about "guiding" public opinion by buying a small but loud support team that looks bigger in the media. Thank you for enrolling at Banana Democracy Uni! We look forward to train the new generation of wannabe dictators.

whimsicalism 1y ago

i mean the other perspective is that this headline is a lie. i'm no supporter of trump, but it is a simply false headline

scryers_bloom 1y ago
What about the headline is a lie (I do think it may have changed, but I'm not sure after looking at it this morning)?
- whimsicalism 1y ago
  yeah they changed it