My flagkilled post expands greatly on the sentiment of that commentary. The fact of the matter is, people with low income are not targeted(for the most part) by entrepreneurs. Along the same idea, those very people have little to no input in the economy ~ they are non-entities. I've seen plenty of posts discussing this very fact to people digging around for an idea to exploit... and the general consensus is "stay away from poor people, they have no money".
And yes, I have disdain towards Trump, and a lesser extent, republicans. I've also shared previous disdain towards democrats as well.
But the crux here is, what is to be done with low income people with limited skills? It costs money/time for skills, which they have little of. What's the downside of writing them off? (Obviously, dang is doing his work on UBI, and throwing away millions of people isn't my point in this discussion.)
HN is a place for the gratification of intellectual curiosity. Partisan sniping isn't compatible with that—indeed there's nothing that destroys it faster—so we should keep it out of our comments here.
My "intuitions" indicate that he attacked an Indiana union leader over not doing enough and being laggard. Oh, that's not an intuition, that's a recorded fact.
There's plenty other places I could cite from. But the underlying idea here, is that you don't become a business leader unless you walk on other people, crack some heads, and beat them. And yet, somehow he's supposed to think of the little guy? Which one of the countless people he's screwed over are you refferring to?