Silicon Valley Billionaires Are the New Robber Barons

[Ronnie]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2017/08/17/silicon_valley_billionaires_are_the_new_robber_barons_134766.html

[Tekken_Guy]

I feel a lot of Democrats are putting their animus towards them aside because they're Anti-Trump.

[WritOfCertiorari]

Not to mention the insane speculation and P/E ratios a lot of these companies have. This is a disaster waiting to happen; something more should have been done after the 2000/2001 bubble burst.

[KingSweden]

I'm pretty supportive of tech since Microsoft helped put me through college, but his article is not wrong about the virtue signal extraordinaries who run these firms

[Ronnie]

I feel a lot of Democrats are putting their animus towards them aside because they're Anti-Trump.

As much as liberals often accuse Republicans of using cultural wedge issues to distract their base from issues related to their economic well-being, I think it's pretty evident that liberal elites are guilty of doing the same thing.  If the Sanders wing of the Democratic party truly wants to be consistent on the issues of monopoly-busting and economic inequality, then I think they have to begin talking about Silicon Valley.  I personally haven't heard much yet from the so-called leaders of the progressive movement on this topic.

[AN63093]

Can't bite the hand that feeds ya, Ronnie.

[Ye We Can]

Can't bite the hand that feeds ya, Ronnie.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwhBRJStz7w

In all seriousness, according to my interpretation of the Cordray theory the Social Democratic Dems will eventually bump shoulders with Silicon Valley, and push them back towards Republicans. 

[SoLongAtlas]

It's actually inaccurate to state that the Gilded Age barons had more money than the richest billionaires today. Adjusted for inflation, Rockefeller alone would have had $340 billion, Carnegie had $310 billion at his peak after selling Carnegie Steel to J.P. Morgan. Cornelius Vanderbilt had an adjusted net worth of $185 billion but lost most of his money toward the end.

I do agree that their is astounding inequality but not on the same level as the late 18th through early 19th centuries.

[Shadows]

Not to mention the insane speculation and P/E ratios a lot of these companies have. This is a disaster waiting to happen; something more should have been done after the 2000/2001 bubble burst.

The P/E ratios today are not crazy as it was before 2007-08. P/E ratios always tend to be high in new, maturing industries in a nascent stage or for new technology industries. It is not relevant to a Mfg or FMCG P/E ratio. Secondly, if you talk about companies like Apple or Google & some of the large companies, they are getting massive earnings too. The key here is to redistribute the wealth. That is why there should be a Buffet rule for Large corporations & super high net worth individuals so that they pay atleast 20-25% of profits/income.

The hatred generated for Silicon Valley among the right is ridiculous. There's a large number of good & medium pay jobs that are generated. Most of the leaders are socially progressive & aren't bigots or are lobbying against Climate Change. Bill Gates has donated most of his money to fight poverty. There are obvious problems regarding concentration of wealth but to pretend these people are like the Koch Brothers or Mercers is ridiculous.

And even within the Tech industry there are lot of differences. Bezos & Washington Post rank high in the HP list. The HP level of different organizations vary. You can't lump every organization in a bucket.

[vanguard96]

It's actually inaccurate to state that the Gilded Age barons had more money than the richest billionaires today. Adjusted for inflation, Rockefeller alone would have had $340 billion, Carnegie had $310 billion at his peak after selling Carnegie Steel to J.P. Morgan. Cornelius Vanderbilt had an adjusted net worth of $185 billion but lost most of his money toward the end.

I do agree that their is astounding inequality but not on the same level as the late 18th through early 19th centuries.

Of course the idea that all the wealth was gained unduly through government aided monopoly and corruption is a complete deception by those enthralled with state control. I suggest reading on Cornelius Vanderbilt's steamship line businesses and the crony corporatism he faced from his rivals as an example of a positive of the era from the so-called 'Robber Barons'. He of course was aided elsewhere but this is an example of him bringing a transport cost to affordable levels for many people - facing protected rivals but delivering better service at significantly lower prices.

He himself was not the showy and ostentatious owner of the mansions in Asheville and Newport that his descendants had built.

[pbrower2a]

The real robber-barons in Silicon Valley are the landlords who can easily extract half the income of a software engineer making $100K a year for an apartment that would go for about a tenth as much in Cleveland. The landlords are not so much creating wealth as they are maximizing the take.