top | item 12734069

Silicon Valley Cozies Up to Washington, Outspending Wall Street 2-1

102 points| jazzyk | 9 years ago |bloomberg.com | reply

48 comments

order
[+] throwaway98237|9 years ago|reply
Back in 2005-2006 I was working on Wall St., studying for my CFA exam, working to get a place in our equities group, all while half-diverting my attention to the other coast, watching in awe as a whole bunch of upstarts were following in the footsteps of Robert Noyce and crew, building a new future. This new future didn't seem to look like the old way of doing business, like on Wall St., where it was where you went to school, who your neighbors were, who's ass you kissed at work. It was like the wild west, where the fit survived and prospered, where anyone could go and make a new life, and build something that would improve everyone's life.

Fast forward 5 years or so and my delusions of "this time it will be different" were all but shattered. Watching Facebook put up walls around the commons, watching Apple fence off their garden, watching Google get into bed with the government and our military. Watching payroll head-counts become more and more dominated by sales teams. Watching founders head for the exit that is Wall St., which is exactly where Noyce and Crew had fled from back in the day.

My guess is that it's all about the systemic qualities of our economic system. How could Silicon Valley had become anything else. I mean, if we're honest about it, Silicon Valley's first big customer was the military. And where there is money to be made Wall St. and the Ivy League will soon follow, stamping out cookie cutter companies implementinng their tried and true methodology for extracting the maximum value for shareholders.

So sad.

[+] aaron-lebo|9 years ago|reply
All you have to do is follow the money.

Where did virtually all of the dominant politicians go? The Obamas, Bushes, Clintons, Cruz, etc all went through a very limited set of schools.

Where did virtually all of the leaders of the big companies come from (Gates, Zuckerberg)? A very limited set of schools.

Where do the heads of media and Wall Street go? A very limited set of schools.

How connected is tech with politics now?

Schmidt was an informal advisor and major donor to Barack Obama's 2008 presidential campaign, and began campaigning the week of October 19, 2008, on behalf of the candidate.[47] He was mentioned as a possible candidate for the Chief Technology Officer position, which Obama created in his administration,[48] and Obama considered him for Commerce Secretary.[49] After Obama won in 2008, Schmidt became a member of President Obama's transition advisory board and has since become a member of the United States President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST).[50] Schmidt has served on Google’s government relations team.

How connected is tech with finance now?

Google's current CFO was a Morgan Stanley exec.

And then there are really shady figures who have operated within these institutions for years like Jeffrey Epstein:

He is also a longtime friend of Prince Andrew, Duke of York: they have stayed at each other's homes, and have vacationed together in Thailand. In December 2010, the prince was a guest in Epstein's New York residence for several days, shortly after Epstein completed his Florida sentence for soliciting an underage girl. His dinner with Andrew at the mansion was attended by (among others) Katie Couric, George Stephanopoulos, Charlie Rose, and Woody Allen.[9] The 50,000-square-foot (4,600 m2) 9-story mansion is just off Fifth Avenue and overlooks the Frick Collection. It is reported[by whom?] to be the largest private residence in Manhattan, having originally been built as the Birch Wathen School.

You just need to follow the money. There's way too much money at the top controlled by a relatively small group of people.

[+] buzzybee|9 years ago|reply
To loosely paraphrase Marx, capitalism tends to destroy itself while self-perpetuating. SV did, and still does, perform a certain benefit in making goods and services flow. It's also a very attractive power center for our generation.

The hope we should all have is that disruption does, in fact, prevail and keep any one tech monopoly in check with a new "up-and-comer" always over the horizon; that the government does not become entirely captured by business, can exert the interests of the public and effect a compromise; and that presently marginalized voices - on any issue, from identity to climate to existential threat - are heard and their concerns addressed through the process.

[+] dccoolgai|9 years ago|reply
So beautiful. The ossification of their cookie-cutter mills is the fertilizer for your new ideas and new ways of doing things to sprout and take hold.
[+] yuhong|9 years ago|reply
Wall Street was not that good in the first place. 2005-2006 was when the mortgages that led to the recession in 2008 was probably made.
[+] samfisher83|9 years ago|reply
I am pretty sure stanford is an IVY school and its been at the heart of SV.
[+] ComteDeLaFere|9 years ago|reply
Wow. Considering this, and the fact that tech will undoubtedly get blamed for designing many jobs out of existence, how long before we see an Occupy Sand Hill Road?

Asked with some humor, but... not really.

[+] forgetsusername|9 years ago|reply
>how long before we see an Occupy Sand Hill Road?

I say it in every "Rage against the system!" thread on these boards: there are many people here who are "the system" as far as the proletariat are concerned. As SV rises in power and its players become engrossed in politics, that becomes more evident. So be careful when you wish for revolution. You might find yourself on the wrong side.

[+] ktamura|9 years ago|reply
Unsurprising at all. All businesses/sectors are at the mercy of policymakers, and it's natural to invest some of the newfound wealth into influencing public policies. The size of lobbying budget is more or less a proxy for the size and the growth of the sector.

The irony, of course, is Silicon Valley's holier-than-thou self-righteousness in relation to Wall Street and/or lobbying.

[+] omouse|9 years ago|reply
Keep in mind this is venture capitalists or founders spending, employees don't most of what SV elitists are lobbying for.
[+] adrenalinelol|9 years ago|reply
The same is true on Wall St. A run of the mill analyst/associate/vp isn't going to burn their money by donating it to a political candidate.
[+] AndrewKemendo|9 years ago|reply
Silicon valley is doing better at politics, and yes spending is up, but is influence?

The big companies are very new to this game and the people who think they are big players, aren't. Apple seems to be the only one that has some teeth as they were able to resist being compelled for the signing keys, however the powers that be just went to the Israelis for a crack.

If you want to see what effective lobbying looks like look at Lockheed, Northrop, CACI, Honeywell etc... These guys get massive legislation passed, sponsor candidates, control voting on the floor of Congress. Musk has arguably come the closest to being a real player in the game but has a very mixed records and is not rely seen as as much of a threat to ULA and the auto industry.

Silicon valley is realizing it needs this, but it has been lucky so far that it hasn't had to fight many entrenched players. This will change as ambitions rise.

[+] gjolund|9 years ago|reply
Google is working directly with the Clinton campaign. I think they have it figured out.
[+] djyaz1200|9 years ago|reply
Tech enjoyed a long period of minimal regulation as it was changing/moving fast and government didn't understand it. No longer. Just like auto, finance and other big industries tech will be heavily regulated. These regulations will be used to ensure those with money and power are able to keep it. Like it or not that's how our country works.
[+] rtkwe|9 years ago|reply
You don't have to bring in a nefarious motive for SV starting to lobby harder to make sense. When they weren't being heavily regulated congressional ignorance about tech didn't really matter. Then Washington starts coming out with some really misguided information and privacy laws like sopa so the big tech companies had to get involved or wind up dealing with bad regulations.
[+] jgalt212|9 years ago|reply
Yes, must keep the trustbusters at bay.
[+] gabrielgoh|9 years ago|reply
does anyone have details on what these lobbying efforts are directed towards?
[+] mslkmdf|9 years ago|reply
I'm not sure you know what Occupy Wall Street was about.
[+] ComteDeLaFere|9 years ago|reply
Since I live a few blocks from Zuccatti Park and was present for most of the Occupy rise and fall, I'm pretty sure I know what it was about, but feel free to share. And yes, I personally feel that a clear parallel is shaping up.
[+] oldmanjay|9 years ago|reply
To be fair, it's really hard to tell from the outside because the messages were all so muddled and the actions amounted to hanging out in a park. What's your take?