"For example, Romney feels that one of the best ways to inspire entrepreneurs is through tax reform. I’ve been to at least a hundred tech related events in NY over the last couple of years. Not one of them had tax management as the central topic of discussion. Clearly taxes are not the main obstacle that stands in the way of any aspiring entrepreneur executing an idea. Besides, most startups incur net losses for their first several years. What is the corporate tax rate on negative $500,000?"<p>Where the hell do you think most seed money comes from?<p>"Romney’s entire “best thing we can do is get out of your way” type of approach is not helpful to your average tech entrepreneur. "<p>The average tech entrepreneur needs to get over themselves.
I'm a techie too. But unlike the author of this piece, I have a little bit of perspective.<p>For tech, Romney is probably marginally better than Obama. But I'm not even going to bother justifying this statement - it's irrelevant. Neither politician will have any significant effect on the tech community, and even if they did, it's a minor issue.<p>Lets focus on a major issue: >500k people just like me (drug users) are <i>sitting in jail right now</i> for no good reason. For those who are unfamiliar, sitting in jail is far worse than being unemployed or having marginally fewer pinterest clones.<p>Another major issue is the fact that millions of people from the poorest places on earth (I'm not talking about wealthy nations like Mexico here) could be lifted from poverty. The vast majority (i.e., >95%) of India lives in what would be considered dire poverty in the US. Upper class individuals in the poshest suburbs of Mumbai suffer living conditions comparable to the poorest housing projects in the US. All we need to do to lift them from poverty is allow them to enter the US and provide us cheap medical services, clean our houses and the like.<p>So yeah, one of the politicians is marginally better than the other on an issue that neither of them have much control over. Why do we even care?
I see net neutrality as the single most important issue in my tech bubble. Giving entrenched tech companies even more of an advantage would be disastrous. The piracy issue is also woven into the thread of the net neutrality issue.<p>I am getting mixed signals from both major parties though:
<a href="http://www.dailytech.com/Democratic+Senators+Block+Republicanled+Net+Neutrality+Repeal/article23249.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.dailytech.com/Democratic+Senators+Block+Republica...</a><p><a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/conservative-legislators-are-really-outdoing-liberals-in-opposing-sopa-2012-1" rel="nofollow">http://www.businessinsider.com/conservative-legislators-are-...</a>
Disclaimer: I'm not a US citizen so I can't vote at all.<p>If your primary concern is the tech sector and entrepreneurs then the choices are pretty woeful.<p>The Obama administration is without doubt the most hostile to the tech sector through and the Internet its strong pro-IP stance between:<p>- staffing the DoJ with RIAA lawyers [1]<p>- appointing RIAA lobbyists as federal judges [2]<p>- having an anaemic stance on software patents ("don't blame us") [3] since the White House is by far the largest bully pulpit in the country they could act if they wanted to. It is within the power of Congress and the White House to reform the American Appeals Court for the Federal Circuit, which is responsible for a lot of software patent nonsense and, at this point, is arguably an example of regulatory capture<p>- only came out against SOPA/PIPA when public backlash had already basically killed them [4] [5]<p>- tried to negotiate and pass the original ACTA treaty in secret, which would have largely equated piracy with terrorism [6]<p>- used diplomatic pressure on foreign governments to tow the same hardline IP stance eg the AFACT downloading case against iiNet in Australia (which was ultimately lost) [7]<p>- enacted the America Invents Act, which gives patents to the first-to-file [8]<p>Romney has been essentially silent on the issue of software patents and, let's face it, he's the off-cycle dud candidate of this election. By this I mean look at the candidates that went up against the incumbent seeking reelection:<p>2004: John Kerry<p>1996: Bob Dole<p>1992: Clinton obviously won against Bush Sr but this was in large part to Ross Perot more than anything else (IMHO)<p>1984: Walter Mondale<p>Anyway, if the tech sector concerns you--and since you're reading HN it probably does--the choices are terrible this time around. Software patents threaten the entire tech sector
[1]: <a href="http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/04/obama-taps-fift/" rel="nofollow">http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/04/obama-taps-fift/</a><p>[2]: <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/03/riaa-lobbyist-becomes-federal-judge-rules-on-file-sharing-cases/" rel="nofollow">http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/03/riaa-lobbyist-bec...</a><p>[3]: <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/11/white-house-blame-the-courts-not-us-for-software-patents/" rel="nofollow">http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/11/white-house-blame...</a><p>[4]: <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/18/sopa-obama-donors-hollywood-silicon-valley_n_1213159.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/18/sopa-obama-donors-h...</a><p>[5]: <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngaudiosi/2012/01/16/obama-says-so-long-sopa-killing-controversial-internet-piracy-legislation/" rel="nofollow">http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngaudiosi/2012/01/16/obama-sa...</a><p>[6]: <a href="http://boingboing.net/2009/11/03/secret-copyright-tre.html" rel="nofollow">http://boingboing.net/2009/11/03/secret-copyright-tre.html</a><p>[7]: <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/08/31/afact_subcontractor_to_mpaa/" rel="nofollow">http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/08/31/afact_subcontractor_...</a><p>[8]: <a href="http://macdailynews.com/2011/09/16/obama-signs-first-to-file-u-s-patent-reform-bill-into-law/" rel="nofollow">http://macdailynews.com/2011/09/16/obama-signs-first-to-file...</a>
As a "tech startup" (wtf does that even mean?) I'll take lower health insurance premiums for employees over any tax cuts proposed by either party.<p>I don't know what other people are paying, but it costs us up to $1500/m if an employee has a family to provide decent insurance in CA.<p>But... I don't really see that ever happening without a complete overhaul of the healthcare system.