Trump’s immigration ban just lost at least 180,000 US tech jobs

January 31, 2017

After months working with a European company to set up their Silicon Valley venture arm, the company told me this morning they are suspending their plans after Trump’s immigration order. The situation is too chaotic, they said.

That’s $200 million that will not enter the US economy, that will not be invested in US startups and technologies that drive the US economy.

Venture backed startups, both public and private, account for 11% of US jobs and 21% of GDP according to the NVCA and Thomson/Reuters.

$200m is about 1% of annual venture dollars. One could argue that this single decision could remove as much as 0.2% of GDP and 0.11% of US jobs over time. That’s 180,000 jobs depending on your source for jobs data and how quickly funds are invested.

This isn’t politics, this is economic duncery.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

UPDATE:  I made one important assumption in my calculation of lost jobs, which was encapsulated by my short addition of “over time”.  I assumed this isn’t just a single fund, but something that the corporation would do for multiple funds.

The impact of a single fund has to be calculated differently.  Based on about $700B invested over all of venture’s history (data is sketchy between sources for this), a $200m fund is .03% of total capital invested, including recent investments that haven’t yet impacted jobs or GDP data (30% of that $700B has been in the last 5 years, not enough time for the full outcome to be known) .  That’s around 50,000 jobs for just this single fund.

Trump was right about exactly one thing

January 30, 2017

If this is winning, Trump was right, I’m tired of it.  It’s too much winning.

I know lots of folks read my blog to learn about venture capital, technology, or some obscure or obtuse thing I’m thinking.  We’ll get back to that.  Think of this as my ongoing “Constitutional Special Edition”.

At our house we outlined in March four things I would described as “The Four Horsemen of the Constitutional Apocalypse”.  These would be the things that would indicate the potential fall of our government, or it’s reinvention in the Putin/Mussolini/Hitler style.

In the first week, Trump made “progress” on two of them.  The ones he’s making “progress” on are:

  1. Restriction of movement/requirement of citizens to carry papers – an immigration order that affected green card holders and valid visa holders.  Reince Preibus even indicated the order could be expanded to more countries.
  2. Mass firing or resignations of the Joint Chiefs of Staff – Steve Bannon replaces the Joint Chiefs and the Director of National Intelligence on the National Security Council.

    And for your reference, the two he might get to in the next few weeks are:

  3. the creation of “neighborhood watch” or “citizens patrols” to report neighbors and or “keep the peace”.
  4. a terrorist event/fake terrorist event that allows Trump to declare Martial Law.

So while trying to hold Trump accountable to the Law on things like bribes/emoluments, we now have to fight other unconstitutional or controversial items.

And I haven’t even gotten into the attacks on the First Amendment and the maligning of the media. Only tinpot dictators don’t want the press pointing out inconvenient truths.

Recall the goal of a narcissist is to create chaos so as to wear people down and thus exert control.  We can’t get tired, we can’t forget.  This is a marathon, and if you get too riled up too soon, you’ll bonk before the finish.  Then someone else will win.  Beaten, say, by someone who jumps on the subway at mile 7 and jumps back in the race at mile 24 to claim victory.

 

New Year’s lessons from a random 5 year old

January 3, 2017

While on a delightful New Year’s day run, I heard the following conversation between two 5 year old boys.

“How many people exactly love you?” asked one.

“Five,” responded the other, without hesitation and with absolute certainty.

What a great, certain answer! And the question is not about some lower order relationship like “how many Facebook friends do you have?” or even the more adult “how many people would come to your funeral?” It’s about “love”, which is that mysterious, irrational attachment to another person — the thing that would make someone crawl over broken glass for another or listen to Justin Bieber at that person’s request.

And the answer of “five” works out to one person for every year of life. If all of us maintained that pace, our answer should be quite a bit higher than that. If you’re like me, you’re behind plan.

If you don’t have a New Year’s Resolution to build a few one or two deep attachments this year, perhaps this 5 year old can convince you to add it.

Trump: How to Stop a Narcissist

December 30, 2016

As I said, Trump reminds me of the narcissists of my life. But the number one question you asked me was “what do we do about it”? I have some ideas, and I want some help.

Narcissists generate chaos to keep others on their heels and allows the narcissist to have control.  Every time I hear someone responding to an outrageous Trump tweet or comment, what I really hear is that Trump just won — by creating the chaos he needs.  Restart the nuclear arms race, anyone?  An important issue, but really just a narcissistic act by Trump.  Don’t enable Trump by taking his every burp seriously. President Trump’s budget proposal will not include money for expanding our nuclear arsenal.

Amidst this turmoil, we thankfully have a great filter to pick our battles.  With a President as opposed to a candidate, boss, parent, or spouse, we are going to focus on the Law and whether Trump violates the Law.

It’s about the Law, not the “look at me” narcissism.  I’ve been reading Chernow’s Alexander Hamilton biography, and watching HBO’s John Adams series.  The foundation of our country rests on the Law (I’m going to keep using the capital “L” to make the point), and the Law does not flow from a King.  It flows from our Constitution and our laws.  These are the things I care about, not whether Kanye West is giving Trump some narcissism advice.  Ignore whether Trump toyed with Mitt Romney’s desire for Secretary of State.  Ignore what Trump thinks of Saturday Night Live.  Pay attention to when he breaks the Law.

Two potential Law transgressions.  As of today, the two violations of the Law that we should fight to investigate are:  1) did the Trump campaign coordinate with Russia on the hacking of the DNC?  If so, that’s not just illegal, that’s treason.  Treason is punishable by a lot more than impeachment, and 2) Bribery is still illegal for a President (the “Emoluments” clause of the Constitution is just an archaic word for “bribe”).  Either the President needs to divest his business holdings or disclose them so we know whether he’s being bribed or driving policy to suit his business needs.  A Russian government conference at the Old Post Office Trump hotel generates personal income that can count as an “emolument”.

Serious things we’ll have to ignore, part 1.  There are already other examples of Trump Law Skirting, and the list will grow.  For instance, nepotism laws explicitly prohibit Ivanka from taking a White House job (which would subject her to conflict of interest and disclosure rules of which Donald is not subjected, which would be fun).  I suspect she will be an unofficial but actually official advisor, trying to get around the Law.  We could fight that too!  But winning that fight would frankly just affect Ivanka, and while important, we will exhaust our efforts focusing on everything. We should leave those fights to others.

Serious things we’ll have to ignore, part 2.  While I care about policy, the winning party and candidate get to set policy.  That category of debate, like whether the EPA should allow offshore drilling near cities, is one that exists within the Law.  They happen every day and after every election.  These debates are how democracies make decisions.  If I disagree with offshore drilling, or the nomination of Rex Tillerson, I pursue that within the Law.  I accept that there is a side of the debate different than mine.  Those are arguments worth having, but most of us aren’t full time policy wonks, so we’re going to leave that to professionals and experts.

Help!  So after 500 words, the next step is to find the best method for mobilizing action on egregious potential violations of Law (and others likely Law violations as they come).  I’ll keep working, thinking, and looking, and you let me know what tools, technologies, and movements you’ve uncovered or have at your disposal.  I’m not looking to the Republican controlled Congress to do their job on these issues unless we fight.

It’s not about the tweets or the man or the party.  It’s about the Law.

I understand Donald Trump

December 14, 2016

I have had too much personal experience with narcissists, but  now that has a silver lining.  It allows me to understand Donald Trump.  Here is a tutorial for narcissistic behavior, in my view, and how it describes our Trumpian future.

  1. Narcissists create chaos around them in order to have control. Narcissists need to manipulate the environment to suit their self narrative.  They often do this by creating chaos, which keeps most rational people off balance, lurching from crisis to crisis, and susceptible to manipulation.  I suspect a Trump presidency will be a long string of small to large crises.  For example, we’ve given up on understanding Trump’s financial holdings, so that when he manipulates the stock market by criticizing a Boeing presidential airplane, we don’t even look into it.  He could have shorted Boeing stock before that statement, and made a quick gain.
  2. Narcissists do not apologize. Because narcissism is a reaction to a weakly formed ego, narcissists can’t admit mistakes – this would crush their soft insides.  Narcissists are not introspective, which is why it is a psychological condition that is not susceptible to therapeutic change.  Trump will make a political misstep, say, telling Theresa May “stop by if you’re in town” in apparent ignorance of how head-of-state protocol works.  Rather than apologize, there will be a four step process of 1) ignore, 2) deny, 3) blame / criticize someone else, 4) change the subject.  This is a similar cycle that spawns the spouse abusing phrase “don’t make me hit you again!”  It will happen over and over again.
  3. Narcissists need to feel like the smartest person in the room. Despite tough talk, narcissists aren’t capable of handling feedback or criticism.  In their own minds the narcissist is the best at everything.  Trump’s refusal to take a morning security briefing is a reaction to his own knowledge gap.  If he feels less smart, he doesn’t study more, he leaves the room to find another one where he’s the smartest.  Studying more is to admit ignorance.  Thus, people around Trump need to be second tier sycophants that need to agree or leave.   Trump is building his cabinet as I write this with more military men than is normal and a rumoured personality type of straight talkers.  This will likely backfire as those egos push against Trump.  Instead, we’ll get people like Omarosa, who said “Every critic, every detractor will have to bow down to Donald Trump” in the creepiest voice I’ve heard.  Alex Baldwin’s SNL lampoons of Trump require Trump to fire back because they make him look stupid.  Nixon had an enemies list, Trump has the Department of Energy environmental scientist list (and probably a lot more lists).
  4. The rules don’t apply to Narcissists. But they do apply to everyone else.  Because the world is a movie with the narcissist as the star, everyone else has to adhere to the script.  This is how Trump can say terrible things about people (e.g., take your pick of insults), yet criticize others for the smallest slight or misstep.  Beyond insults to substantive matters, Trump can accuse Hilary of risking classified information, yet nominate a National Security Advisor that has actually been proven to have shared classified information.  “Doesn’t matter, because that guy is my guy, and I’m always right.  This is my movie.”
  5. I can go on with this. A male narcissist’s relation to women is based on the woman’s ability to reward his ego. A narcissist can often gain weight, because a lack of self-reflection prohibits any thoughts of “I should go on a diet”.  The phrase “give them an inch and they will take a mile” is written for narcissists and describes the challenge for the Republican led Congress.  By accepting things like conflicts of interest and Russian connections, the Congress will enable Trump to run roughshod across whole swaths of acceptability and legality.

The sum of Trump’s narcissism can lead to scary outcomes.  It doesn’t matter if a trade war with China harms the working middle class Trump voters, because that’s not at the heart of a Trump decision.  What is at the heart of a Trump decision is the risk/reward to Trump’s ego.

To people without experience of these personality types, Trump’s internal algorithm seems confusing.  Normal people try to rationalize other’s narcissistic behavior using their own mental frameworks.  It doesn’t work to project ourselves onto Trump in order to understand some secret, brilliant plan.  Nope.  Instead, recognize the pathology.  Quit treating it as normal.  Quit rationalizing.  Quit accepting.  Fight.  I really do believe that democracy is at risk.

What I learned from SnapChat’s Bob Marley face

May 4, 2016

SnapChat took some heat for introducing a feature that would replace someone’s face with Bob Marley’s. Whether it’s a large-scale resurgence of “blackface”, which was the point of much media coverage, is but one shocking thing about this.

The other shocking thing is that we are really only moments away, in tech development time, from being able to completely hide how we look on any video.  This isn’t just airbrushing, where Cindy Crawford’s mole can disappear or Britney Spears can look young and svelte again.

No, this is entirely made-up visuals in everything from home videos and selfies to hollywood movies to VR headsets.  You and your spouse could be Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie when you’re using your VR headsets.  I suspect a baby boom would not be far behind.

You can also be someone else when using any video version of Reddit and the like, where cyberbullying and racism is facilitated by everyone being anonymous.  I see no reason for that to change when we move from text to video with these technologies.  Reality will continue to bend, and social norms will lag technology and contribute to, um, “unusual” and even unfortunate behavior.

Presidential primaries are less democratic than American Idol

April 21, 2016

Presidential primaries are not democracy in action. Presidential primaries are opinion polling. They are convoluted beauty pageants for ugly people.

Remember that the Republican and Democratic parties are not the government, they are private institutions (which are actually conglomerations of a bunch of state or local institutions). They can listen to the voters or not.  Their rules can be whatever they want them to be.  In 1920, for example, only convention delegates that could demonstrate the ownership of a car could vote at convention, delivering the nomination to Calvin Coolidge and his coalition of wealthy supporters and Detroit auto workers.  OK, I just made that up, but the rules committees could have approved that, and any other rule they wanted.  “Only candidates name Steph Curry can be on the ballot?  No problem, we can do that.”

On the Democratic side, while delegates are awarded roughly proportionally to the vote, 15% of the total convention votes go to 719 party members as an insurance policy in a close battle.  That’s similar to letting your children walk through a department store by themselves — except for that funny looking kid leash you’ve attached to them.

s-l1000

You the voter are that kid.  The party is the disembodied hand.

The Republican side is far more complex, with each state having different rules, and different number of human votes adding up to delegates (from 810 votes per delegate in Maine to 95,601 votes per delegate in Illinois.  That’s pretty far from one person, one vote).  There’s enough room for unintended consequences that the rules designed to help insiders like Mitt Romney and Jeb Bush are helping outsiders like Trump.  It’s like Cupid’s Arrow killing its target, or like this:

unintended-consequences-pic

Squashed by the party’s own rules.

American Idol, despite some controversy, is basically far more democratic.  Sure, they get the occasional ballot stuffing argument or hanging chad like recount.  But it is still a paragon not a pariah of voting rules compared to presidential primaries.  You call the number that corresponds to your candidate, and they record the vote.  If you are super passionate, you can even call more than once and they will record up to 10 votes per voter (that may sound undemocratic, but it is an alternative voting format similar to weighted or ranked choice voting, and some vote scholars think it’s a good idea).  You can’t even write a multi-million dollar check to your favorite finalist.  How novel.

So basically, this would be an upgrade for the American Primary Voter:

american-idol-voting

Alphabet clamps down on GOOG

March 24, 2016

This may be the first time I get to say “I told you so”.  In August, I predicted that the creation of the holding company structure at Google would lead to the eventual shutdown or sale of various high concept pieces of Google.

It’s begun.

Today, Alphabet announced the free spending days are over.  “The fiscal discipline era has now descended upon everything” says Tony Fadell, whose Nest was purchased for over $3 billion in what the company may now refer to as the “drunken sailor era”.

GOOG is also seeking to sell Boston Dynamics, the maker of spooky humanoid robots and even spookier videos of humans beating up said robots.  It makes me fearful of the coming robot apocalypse.  Although not as fearful as the potential Trumpocalypse, now trending at 2 of 4 horsemen at website Slate.

We should expect more from Alphabet in this vein.  Entrepreneurs seeking to sell their companies to Google for 3,000x revenues have probably seen the window close.  The loss of free Odwalla can’t be far behind.

Logic takes a holiday in politics

March 20, 2016

This is a partial list of things I don’t understand that are used for rationale in our current political dialogue:

  1. “The President should not nominate a Supreme Court Justice in an election year”, but the 34 Senators and 438 Congresspeople that are up for re-election this year keep doing their work?  Shouldn’t Chuck Grassley wait until the people have a voice in his reelection before he takes a stand this year?  Do we elect Presidents for 3 years, Senators for 5, and Congresspeople for 1 year?
  2. Constitutional originalism — does that mean that the “right to bear arms” is limited to single shot, muzzle loading muskets?  Are black people only counted as 3/5ths of a human?
  3. Protesters are violating our First Amendment rights to free speech!”  I am baffled that no one points out that the First Amendment only prevents Congress, not individuals or corporations, from limiting speech.  It is uninvolved in various people trying to yell over each other at a campaign rally.  You can even punch protestors, if you want, but you’ve now violated a different law.
  4. Back to the Supreme Court nominating process.   The Constitution doesn’t say the Senate has to vote on nominees, simply that they should “Advise and Consent“.  Does that mean that doing nothing is an implicit consent, similar to a pocket veto being an implicit veto?  Or does it mean that the Senate will devolve into not holding hearings on any vacancies until the President and the Senate are part of the same party?

 

Terrorism, war, or domestic guns the problem?

January 6, 2016

I grew up in a gun-toting part of the US. I went out shooting with my dad when I was a kid. My classmates would go out deer hunting before school during deer season. I get it. It’s part of the fabric of big swaths of US Society. It’s like those bucolic scenes of fly fishing on a lazy river, with trees in the background and butterflies fluttering, but with loud bangs. I am of this tribe.

But i’m also a big believer in looking at data, or as Daniel Patrick Moynihan said “You’re entitled to your own opinion, but your not entitled to your own facts.”

So, some facts:

1) Gun homicide in the US kills more Americans in one year than terrorism has killed in the last 60 years.  And it’s not even close.

gun deaths

2) In the US, firearms have killed more people just since 1968 than were killed in all US wars since the Revolutionary War.  World War II had fewer US casualties than US gun violence since 1999. (More data at the link and description of methodology)

  • All US War Casualties = 1,396,733.
  • Firearm deaths in US since 1968 = 1,516,833
  • WWII US casualties 405,399.
  • Firearm deaths in US 1999-2015 = 519,338

I’m not sure why there isn’t more indignation.  Perhaps it’s because there are safe neighborhoods in the US.  Maybe it doesn’t affect the middle class voter enough, either in terms of a feeling of security or in the pocketbook.  Or the news cycle doesn’t address these issues.  Maybe we’re just numb.

On a per capita basis, we should be putting up memorials at a feverish pace:

  • For every WWII memorial, there would be a gun violence memorial every 15 years.
  • For every Vietnam memorial, there should be a gun violence memorial for deaths in the last 2 1/2 years.  There would be 20 gun violence memorials per Vietnam memorial just since the end of the Vietnam war.

Soldiers die valiantly defending their homeland and way of life.  Gun violence victims die in their living rooms, at work, walking their newborns in strollers, basically living the way of life so protected by soldiers.