Hacker News Reader

Comment by mcrad | Hacker News Reader

I see mostly Dem and Dem-leaning celebrities been talking up crypto, and a conservative side more educated and knowledgeable about dysfunction in the financial sector as a whole. So even without any stats on the donations, it seems fairly logical to suggest party favoritism is at play.

View on HN

Genuinely ludicrous to say that cryptocurrency has historically been talked up by Democrats; similarly, Republicans have historically been vastly more trusting of the financial industry

I mean ludicrous that since 2009 it's Democratic thinking to bail out the banks, sweep inflation concerns under the rug, spend more money, funding unprofitable tech companies etc. I never said Republicans aren't in on the deal, just that it's obvious one side leading the charge on those things.

> I mean ludicrous that since 2009 it's Democratic thinking to bail out the banks, sweep inflation concerns under the rug,

Again, more ludicrous tribalism. The Great Recession bailout was all orchestrated under Bush. Trump famously was hounding Powell to lower rates before the pandemic, which would have had even more disastrous inflation consequences, just to make the stock market go up.

I think your mistake is to look at bought-and-paid-for politicians, I'm talking about the general public. My guess is you don't know many republican voters and therefore unqualified to to make the comparison. Most democrats I know think the bailout "paid for itself" lol

Ignoring the factual errors in your post, it's really not addressing the point on cryptocurrencies.

It's an opinion about democratic thinking, and a general assessment in correlating level of education in finance/econ to party bases. I have no idea what "facts" you are referring to. Just wow.

The bank bailout was 2008, proposed and lobbied for by the Bush administration. It passed the House with support from 45% of Republicans and the Senate with support from 69% of Republicans. Generally considered bipartisan, it almost certainly saved the financial industry. It's not clear what you mean by "a general assessment in correlating level of education in finance/econ to party bases".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Economic_Stabilizati...

https://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll681.xml

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/110-2008/s213

Yep, and so began the golden age of fraud we now experience, and the backdrop for this SBF story. 100% agree that the bailout was bi-partisan and necessary though.

Conspiracy theorists of any variety argue that their conclusions are fairly logical.

And it's completely illogical to assume no conspiracy in this case?

Logic isn’t the issue here.

You’re trying to apply logic to articles you’ve read on the internet. This isn’t like you read a cake recipe on the internet and then tried it out in your kitchen. Or read an article about some web framework and tried it out by making a blog. Or read about mathematical topology and tried it out on some problem you’ve been working on.

I'm applying logic based on my actual experiences with corruption, you're obviously taking some other approach to come up with an opinion.

Maybe, if only maybe, you should make political donations illegal. That would pretty much solve it for the legal part of business. But money is free speech whatever that may mean (I know what it means legally, you can still ban it).

Don't trust impressions from the news media

Reply on news.ycombinator.com