Trump's Early Statements Indicate He'll Be a Tech Industry Ally

[You_are_a_cunt]

Quote

NEWS ANALYSIS: A close look at statements by newly-inaugurated President Donald Trump may provide some comfort to the US technology industry, but it’s clear that some policies will change.

Quote

During his inauguration speech President Donald Trump spoke about a number of issues that were designed to appeal to his base, including calls for improving infrastructure in the U.S., declining to support a multi-lateral trade partnership and a strong call to as he said it, to “put America First.”

But then towards the end, Trump issued a call that should give the technology industry some encouragement. “We stand at the birth of a new millennium,” he said, “ready to unlock the mysteries of space, to free the earth from the miseries of disease and to harness the energies, industries and technologies of tomorrow.”

Quote

For example, a number of statements by President Trump indicate that he would lower the corporate tax rate to 15 percent, increase tax benefits for research and development as well as accelerate the depreciation rate for business purchases.
These are all beneficial to corporate interests and they especially favor technology companies, if only because tech companies spend a lot on R&D. But the acceleration of depreciation also means that companies can buy more of the technology industry’s products more quickly.
Such support for tax breaks on research and on depreciation may be related to new interest by Apple and others including Foxconn and Axios in moving manufacturing from Asia to the U.S. Likewise, Japan’s technology giant, Softbank has announced a plan to invest $50 Billion in startups in the U.S. Such plans, even if only partly carried out, would being a significant number of new manufacturing jobs to the U.S.

Quote

Two of the administration's most important appointments that involve technology are already known. Federal Communications Chairman Chairman Tom Wheeler stepped down concurrent with Trump's inauguration and the new administration has said that current Commissioner Ajit Pai will immediately take over as interim chairman, with a permanent appointment of Pai as the chairman soon to follow.
Pai has said that net neutrality’s days are numbered and his statements as a commissioner have shown significant opposition to Wheeler’s positions on consumer protection and on the FCC’s role as a protector of personal privacy. While this doesn’t mean the end of the Internet as we know it, there will certainly be changes.

Quote

“A strong space program will encourage our children to seek STEM educational outcomes and will bring millions of jobs and trillions of dollars in investment to this country. The cascading effects of a vibrant space program are legion and can have a positive, constructive impact on the pride and direction of this country," Trump's answer said.

Sauce: http://www.eweek.com/it-management/trumps-early-statements-indicate-hell-be-a-tech-industry-ally.html

 

My view:

It's an interesting analysis, but I find it somewhat fuzzy and I'll take it with a trough of salt.

 

While tax breaks and some monetary incentives might be good for any company in general, I doubt companies that have Chinese contracts will shift their attention (and manufacturing) to the US.

 

Another suspicious/odd part is the appointment of Ajit Pai to the FCC and his clear anti-net neutrality position. Can Trump make sure Pai doesn't screw everyone over? Maybe. Maybe not.

 

The shift of focus to the space program could be a global advantage, since we know how many technological advances stemmed from NASA and the USAF.

 

In the end, Trump's presidency is filled with contradictions, uncertainties and an overall sentiment of worry, as he doesn't seem to be the most stable president.

[vanished]

Well, if he wants to make America great, there's room to improve internet service for one thing

[You_are_a_cunt]

1 minute ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

Well, if he wants to make America great, there's room to improve internet service for one thing

I'd personally disband the FCC alltogether and rebuild it from the ground up

[Sauron]

He owns a corporation and lo and behold, the first thing he does it lower corporate taxes and increase their benefits. So deja-vu.

 

Sure, let's make the infrastructure better with the money that we get from ta- oh wait.

[You_are_a_cunt]

1 minute ago, Sauron said:

He owns a corporation and lo and behold, the first thing he does it lower corporate taxes and increase their benefits. So deja-vu.

 

Sure, let's make the infrastructure better with the money that we get from ta- oh wait.

Don't tell me you didn't see it coming..

[SCHISCHKA]

Haha trump is going to harness the energies. There were protests in Wellington today against trump for some reason, a lot of wasted energies there

[ivan134]

9 minutes ago, Sauron said:

He owns a corporation and lo and behold, the first thing he does it lower corporate taxes and increase their benefits. So deja-vu.

 

Sure, let's make the infrastructure better with the money that we get from ta- oh wait.

If there's anything the Bush years taught us, it's that lower corporate taxes create jobs and grow the economy.

[captain_to_fire]

I'll just sit in the corner eating popcorn and singing "Don't cry for me America". 

[Teddy07]

9 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

If there's anything the Bush years taught us, it's that lower corporate taxes create jobs and grow the economy.

are you serious?

[Sauron]

14 minutes ago, revsilverspine said:

Don't tell me you didn't see it coming..

I see everything.That's, like, my thing.

 

His electorate doesn't seem to have the same gift though. And sure, Hillary wasn't really a great alternative, but I'm flabbergasted it got down to those two in the first place.

[Sauron]

11 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

If there's anything the Bush years taught us, it's that lower corporate taxes create jobs and grow the economy.

The Bush years taught us that electing entrepreneurs is a very bad idea. Not just Bush, there's a guy in Italian politics you should meet:

[divided_throwaway]

I'm worried about his anti-net neutrality stance. There are too few companies out there that can compete with each other, and many of them are not very well received by their customers.

[stconquest]

INB4 someone notes that he did not write that speech.  Of course now that he said it, he will have to follow through...

 

...

[Castdeath97]

RIP US internet.

[themaniac]

3 hours ago, Sauron said:

He owns a corporation and lo and behold, the first thing he does it lower corporate taxes and increase their benefits. So deja-vu.

 

Sure, let's make the infrastructure better with the money that we get from ta- oh wait.

you do realize that most of the US based corporations don't actually pay US tax's and that's because the tax's are too high, the base is 35% then with some other factors it goes to around 40%, while I wouldn't have lowered the tax's that low, I would have lowered them to 20%-25%, so all in all, if this actually gets them to pay US tax's than we will end up with more money to use on improving the nation. also do note that I do not like Trump(Hillary as well for that matter)

[Misanthrope]

Interested to see how he's gonna reconcile that with his stance on abolishing Net Neutrality, something he supports and the "tech industry" (outside of ISPs) vehemently oppose.

[Sauron]

7 minutes ago, themaniac said:

you do realize that most of the US based corporations don't actually pay US tax's and that's because the tax's are too high, the base is 35% then with some other factors it goes to around 40%, while I wouldn't have lowered the tax's that low, I would have lowered them to 20%-25%, so all in all, if this actually gets them to pay US tax's than we will end up with more money to use on improving the nation. also do note that I do not like Trump(Hillary as well for that matter)

If they have stuff abroad to pay lower taxes a tax reduction isn't going to convince them to come back unless it gets the taxes below what they would pay abroad, which is not the case here. Besides if the goal was recuperating money from multinationals all it would take are higher bulk import fees. On the other hand, people with business in the country (namely Trump) enjoy a direct tax cut.

8 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Interested to see how he's gonna reconcile that with his stance on abolishing Net Neutrality, something he supports and the "tech industry" (outside of ISPs) vehemently oppose.

He probably counts on his base to forget about that, at least until it suits him.

14 minutes ago, huilun02 said:

I'd be happy enough if he manages to solve the national debt get to the end of the mandate without robbing the population of their freedom, starting another cold war, or melting the north pole.

Fixed it with more reasonable expectations.

[FloRolf]

4 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

Well, if he wants to make America great, there's room to improve internet service for one thing

If he does that then I sure wouldn't mind him taking over Germany as well. 

[Misanthrope]

14 minutes ago, Sauron said:

He probably counts on his base to forget about that, at least until it suits him.

Most of us in Mexico count on that as well actually.

[suits]

3 hours ago, Sauron said:

He owns a corporation and lo and behold, the first thing he does it lower corporate taxes and increase their benefits. So deja-vu.

 

Sure, let's make the infrastructure better with the money that we get from ta- oh wait.

Well he doesn't own it anymore but...

[Deli]

52 minutes ago, huilun02 said:

Like the last 10 presidents who promised to cure cancer?

 

I'd be happy enough if he manages to solve the national debt without robbing the population of their freedom, starting another cold war, or melting the north pole.

If he does build a wall separate US and Mexico, spends trillion to rebuild the infrastructure, expand the nuclear arsenal, gives everyone medical insurance coverage access, and big tax cut. I can't see how he can solve the national debt.

 

Don't forget, balance the budget and fix the debt are exactly the same. I doubt he can even balance the budget, nevermind the debt.

[Sauron]

35 minutes ago, suits said:

Well he doesn't own it anymore but...

Sure, technically he doesn't. Just like Silvio Berlusconi doesn't own the newspaper, the tv network, the websites and the construction company, his close relatives do. It's just a legal loophole.

[straight_stewie]

4 hours ago, revsilverspine said:

I'd personally disband the FCC alltogether and rebuild it from the ground up

I have a similar feeling, but more extreme. Organizations like the FCC, the SEC, and the EPA (just to name a few) exist only because congress has delegated powers to them. In other words, congress decided that it was a waste of time to convene on such issues and so created organizations and delegated the power of law making to them. This is both good and bad, but I believe the bad outweighs the good.

The Good

• The organizations can hire people who are educated or skilled in the area in which they rule. In other words, the EPA can higher people who study climate and geography, the SEC can higher people who study securities and exchanges, and the FCC can hire people who study technology in such a way that they can make law about such. This prevents dumbass congressmen from passing laws that affect things that they don't understand.

The Bad

• The organizations have almost unilateral power to pass law/policy that they see fit. As an example of this going wrong: The US Military often auctions off used military trucks (unarmed trucks, like duece and a halfs or 5 tons or HWMMVs). This gives the military a small amount of income (or atleast offsets some losses) greater than just scrapping them, and it brings new life to vehicles and even to some small businesses. However, the EPA decided that the Military can no longer sell you military vehicles that do not meet emissions requirements (even though most vehicles that are sold to the public are aged "vintage"). This hurts the military, and the citizens.  

[Syntaxvgm]

Look, not gonna lie, there are some things I look forward to him doing. I certainly hope to get better gun laws under him, maybe a hearing protection act or repealing the stupid NFA laws. But nearly everything he's said on the tech front and the cabinet choices he's made as well as the agenda the senate republicans have tried to push in the past has me more than worried that the crazy last 4 or 5 years we've had in terms of the governments relation to the tech industry will be even worse the next 4. And I really don't think this is enough evidence to call him a 'tech ally. '

 

Every indication is that his tech policy will be purely about national security, which usually comes with things like more surveillance and stuff like forced backdoors and the government placing gag orders on its targets so they can't even speak out against what they are forcing them to do.

 

I'm terrified that what has been happening in terms of the government's relation to the free internet as well as rampant abuse of loosely interpreted intellectual property laws by groups like the MPAA and the entertainment industry in general will not only continue down this path which would be horrifying enough of a concept to me, but do so at a much accelerated pace. 

[You_are_a_cunt]

3 minutes ago, straight_stewie said:

~snip~

Just to make it clear: my view is a pure 3rd party view. I am NOT from the US, or anywhere near the Americas. I am in Europe.

 

I remember seeing multiple documentaries where the FCC, being somewhat free to do as it wills, made life extremely hard for large groups of people, following its own narrow minded views. The fact that it is appointed and not elected is one of the main problems. While the FCC can hire highly educated and skilled people, it can also hire people that fit within the current leadership's views.

Any organization with too much power and the wrong leadership/management can bring way more harm than good.