Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by _elf 373 days ago
Everyone in the VC community who helped elect President Trump is partially responsible for each child that suffers and dies from a vaccine-preventable disease due to this action.
8 comments

As long as they're making money they do not care.
Trump was elected by Americans, not the VC community.
The proportion of people who donated significant money is probably higher in vcs than the general population.
Probably? Like do you have the actual probability?
There are many people across the Anglosphere (not just the U.S.) who vote however Rupert Murdoch tells them to vote.
There was also that illegal lottery dude.
I don’t see what this has to do with Trump receiving the most votes. The public had ample access to evidence that Trump is a traitor, among other things.
The sad truth is that we are all easily programmed meat machines, myself included.

The Citizens United decision allowed capital to have a much larger influence on the programming of our political media.

Obama, many faults and all, has a great quote on this topic: ~"If I watched Fox News, I wouldn't vote for me either!"

I don’t subscribe to that. People are inherently racist/sexist/classist. They were okay with the idea of equality of opportunity, but once their relative social ranking started to drop, they reverted to their base instinct of pulling others down to make up for their own failings.

That is why Trump was right about him shooting someone on 5th Avenue and getting away with it. He was smart enough to tap into this undercurrent that I was unaware of, perhaps due to my youth.

> People are inherently racist/sexist/classist.

Yes, we grow into that as we turn into toddlers, then hopefully we grow out of it. One of our simple core algo's is categorization, but it's just a base algo which came out of base survival techniques from the days of yore.

> They were okay with the idea of equality of opportunity, but once their relative social ranking started to drop, they reverted to their base instinct of pulling others down to make up for their own failings.

This is true to some extent, and very sad. However, it does not apply to everyone in my experience. It only applies to those who see the world as a zero-sum game. If I understand the last few hundred years correctly, thanks to technology, we do not live in a zero-sum world, so it's an obsolete concept. Once you learn that, it overrides those old base algo's, if you are in a social circle that allows this. However, those base categorizations do appeal to our base instincts, so it's an effective political campaigning technique for those politicians who have no shame.

I ain't young no more, and the biggest change in US politics that I have seen is that being shameless has become normalized, again.

There are many examples of when super racist/sexist/political people get to talk with those who they once hated, they drop all those previous trainings, and just see them as fellow humans, and even friends. This is why those who use the obsolete categorization ideology as their entire identity don't want you to go to university, or travel, where you might learn all that.

> People are inherently racist/sexist/classist

this feels like missing the forest for the trees.

racism, sexism, classism etc are structural issues. individual prejudices are fear-based levers that are manipulated by bad actors in order to serve economic goals.

it doesn't appear to be difficult to manipulate people using these levers when you're also responsible for the dogshit economic and social conditions they find themselves in.

“Had ample access to evidence …”

And ample access to 1000x more lies than truth. For the people who are media illiterate, facts don’t matter and truth is replaced by confirmation of priors.

Yep, this (the way we in the USA finance elections/politicians) is the crux of our political problems.
Do you see any chance of this being reversed in our lifetimes?

If not, the end state looks not great. How have you dealt with this reality for your own personal/family planning? Asking for me.

Wow this is unpopular, but you're right!
I think what gets people's goat is the VC community crowing about being farsighted futurists... and then acting just as human and shortsighted as everyone else.

Hence the schadenfreude.

It's one thing to be wrong with everyone. It's another to be wrong after a ton of people said "This is a dumb idea."

You need to frame this in terms of quantifiable material loss to them in order for there to be a chance that they'd care.
That won't help much because the quantifiable material loss in that scenario wouldn't be much.
And if he is right the gain will far outweigh the loss.
> And if he is right the gain will far outweigh the loss

So is your suggestion that medical policy based on balancing humours is actually effective altruism?

Balancing humors? Odd way to phrase that. I am saying that if you save 1 kid in an extreme situation but injured 1000 to do it you are causing more harm than good.

Our current policies favor fearmongering and cherry-picking to influence people to seek medical treatment that they don't need and come with side effects.

The fact that Doctors get paid a kickback for high child VAX percentages alone is enough to make me toss out the whole idea.

You should post this as a market on Polymarket.
You don’t become a VC by being the sort of person who cares about these things.
VC: “I pretended to be a good person because that’s what I thought would make me successful and people love me.”

Everyone: “we can tell you’re an entitled dbag.”

VC: “well now I’m going to act like an entitled dbag and it’s your fault.”

- Me paraphrasing his actual interview. You know who I’m talking about.

> Me paraphrasing his actual interview. You know who I’m talking <about>.

No, we don't, because not all of us watch the same media or follow the same threads.

same boat as you but I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess Thiel
> You know who I’m talking about.

All of them?

"> You know who I’m talking about.<"

Sorry, don't know, plz tell us!

I don't know what a VC is and at this point I'm afraid to ask
How did you find yourself on HN and not know what VC means?
Hacker News is a social media site for people to talk about (usually) tech-related news. It might be hosted by, and fully run by, a tech startup incubator, but Y Combinator isn't exactly a household name, and the only real indication that this site is related to the incubator is the domain name.

It's pretty easy to come across this site if you're just generally interested in tech stuff (I think everybody I talk to knows exactly what I refer to if I say "the orange site"), and if you're someone who's interested in tech but not particularly plugged into things like the mechanics of startups or business, well, there's a lot on here that's not related to that.

I'm sure if someone came to a site called 'hacker news' and didn't delve deeper past the main content board, then it would be easy to not organically discover what a VC might be.
It's just weird I guess as someone thats been here a while that there are users that don't know the word VC given its history in the VC/tech startup community.
It has been a long time since this place was mainly about startup culture IMHO.
Context matters though. If you're in a place that has always been about baseball and you say "I have to admit I don't know what a pitcher is" it's going to be a bit weird for the regulars.

In this case though I guess it's just hard for me to recognise how much the focus of this site has shifted and that people can come here that seemingly have no interest in startups/tech/vc.

The concept of venture capital is not new to me, but I haven't needed an abbreviation for it until now.

Also, I didn't really see the connection to the US election and vaccines.

Probably Vulture Capitalist?
Venture Capitalist
You do, however, put on your sheep in wolves clothing.
Or in this case, dead bear clothing.
I hope everyone remembers the deluge of gloating blog posts and podcast appearances by the SV tech (thought-)leadership from early February 2025, before the wheels predictably fell off.
Going down this whole group blame road is gonna turn out way worse for you thank you think.

But hey, what do I know, maybe you're 80yo and working on a short time horizon.

And this is coming from someone who abhors that business model and everyone in it.

It’s not “group blame” - it’s accurately naming the specific wealthy people who put this kleptocrat in office for a tax break.
So, does that mean that everybody who helped elect everybody who shaped FDA is responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths? I mean I sympathize, but seems a little extreme

https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2015/08/is...

Oh and to be clear my attitude towards antivaxxers is burn by /slow/ fire, but still.

I'll accept that in exchange for making it so people can sue pharma companies for VI.
Dear god, there are mechanisms in place for this already, and they are so loose they are farcical.

It’s incredible when I read this sort of comment, and then I realise that the comment is so badly ill informed that I need to respond. But it does make me wonder what sources of information the other person is reading…

Well then what are you reading. It’s well known that Pfizer and Moderna required immunity from lawsuits in order to provide the vaccine and every country gave them that immunity. Here it is from CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2020/12/16/covid-vaccine-side-effec...

Perhaps you were thinking about compensation from the government, but the original poster was talking about actually holding Pfizer and Moderna liable.

Okay, work it out for me: how was that a bad trade for world governments and society?

People still have an avenue to sue for harm -- they can sue the government.

The government took on that liability in exchange for preventing the spread of a highly pathogenic, novel pandemic with moderate mortality, thereby allowing return to normal life, with fewer deaths, faster.

Which part of that was a bad idea?

Your parent is making a useless complaint.

VI claims are still paid (faster, with lower standard of evidence, and cheaper to everyone involved). Lawsuits that go through court involve law firms and the investigations become extremely expensive for everyone.

Manufacturers (and rhetorical supply+delivery chain) are monitored by medical orgs and the federal government to ensure the doses remain safe, after passing the initial trials. These review systems catch incidents like the Samoa measles vaccine incident (in which a few nurses were at fault for injecting from the wrong bottles, which RFKJr was on the wrong side of) and other incidents where some vials were contaminated. Unless a VI plaintiff can prove gross negligence, the outcome is better under the current system. If they can prove gross negligence, they can still take a manufacturer (or any other defendant involved in the supply chain) to court.

The government decided that vaccines are a public health net positive and designed to current system to spread the risk across manufacturers and the government to ensure the cost of litigation didn’t eliminate this very useful tool.

Wait. Maybe I'm misinformed, but I believe all vaccine makers are immune from lawsuits. This started back in the 80s, and had nothing to do with COVID.
No, that’s not accurate. Any claims for vaccine related injuries are heard by the Office of Special Masters of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.
But that applies to all vaccines since 1988, there was no special carve out for the COVID vaccines as far as I can see. Am I missing something?

Edit: evidently it's more complex than that. The COVID vaccines are covered under the 2005 Prep Act instead.