Rich people don't have enough power? He must not understand what levers he can already pull to get what he wants.
Why a $154B CEO just endorsed stripping most Americans of voting rights
81–90 of 378 posts
Re: Why a $154B CEO just endorsed stripping most Americans of voting rights
#82Paywalled articles seem to enhance the "comment without reading, based on vibes" effect.
From the article:
"Pension recipients should have their financial futures “locked in and guaranteed,” but in return would be reclassified as “dependents” and lose the right to vote—the same way minors can’t vote. A reply from “Eric Thor,” who claimed to be a retired banking executive as well as “armchair economist and policy wonk,” proposed a sliding scale: zero votes for anyone who pays no income tax, one vote for those earning $1–100K, two votes for $100–200K, scaling up in that pattern to a hard cap of five votes for anyone earning $500K or more. The pitch was framed as fairness—reward “representation” for those who “foot the bill” through taxation."
"That was the good system that Lütke endorsed."
Most of the commenters here seem to be responding to...something other than this?
Re: Why a $154B CEO just endorsed stripping most Americans of voting rights
#83[flagged]
The sociopath part is what allows one to do what it takes to get ultra rich in the first place. Other than Gates, not one comes to mind who gives anything to charity, for example (yes, I’m sure one or two exists).
Gates has spent many fortunes cleaning up his image, but he was one of the nastiest business practice worst monopolists ever.
"During Bill Gates’s tenure leading Microsoft, the company paid out an estimated $8.46 billion in publicly known antitrust settlements, competitor payouts, and government fines."
Re: Why a $154B CEO just endorsed stripping most Americans of voting rights
#84[flagged]
The sociopath part is what allows one to do what it takes to get ultra rich in the first place. Other than Gates, not one comes to mind who gives anything to charity, for example (yes, I’m sure one or two exists).
Gates is actually quite problematic (Epstein is a lot of the problem). If you need an exception to prove the rule, Buffett is a little easier of a fit.
Re: Why a $154B CEO just endorsed stripping most Americans of voting rights
#85Fascinating to see how many tech people, as soon as they get rich, turn to extreme. Name them all - they mostly all are very active on X, and each new tweet pushes the limits of what was previously deemed unacceptable. I'm rich, so my opinion must be more important, right?
Who is going to say what is and isn't acceptable? You?
Each person says what is and isn't acceptable, it can't really be any other way.
Re: Why a $154B CEO just endorsed stripping most Americans of voting rights
#86Fascinating to see how many tech people, as soon as they get rich, turn to extreme. Name them all - they mostly all are very active on X, and each new tweet pushes the limits of what was previously deemed unacceptable. I'm rich, so my opinion must be more important, right?
Who is going to say what is and isn't acceptable? You?
Yes. If the billionaires can do it, why not me?
Re: Why a $154B CEO just endorsed stripping most Americans of voting rights
#87Re: Why a $154B CEO just endorsed stripping most Americans of voting rights
#88Fascinating to see how many tech people, as soon as they get rich, turn to extreme. Name them all - they mostly all are very active on X, and each new tweet pushes the limits of what was previously deemed unacceptable. I'm rich, so my opinion must be more important, right?
Who is going to say what is and isn't acceptable? You?
I'm far too stupid for that and I'm also privileged so what do I know. Many are more qualified to do so.
I just think that his statement is not acceptable and is clearly dangerous for the society as a whole.
Re: Why a $154B CEO just endorsed stripping most Americans of voting rights
#89People need to stop conflating evil intentions with evil capacity. It is done regularly with Elon, Thiel, etc. As arrogant as they may be on X, they are drooling imbeciles when it comes to politics. Remember Blake Masters? Remember the Wisconsin supreme court election? How is the admin they endorsed doing? Has Lutke thought about how high-income individuals in metro areas vote?
They have failed again and again. There is no reason to believe Lutke's worthless dreams will go unchallenged if they are ever attempted in the first place.
Re: Why a $154B CEO just endorsed stripping most Americans of voting rights
#90With the recent trend of flagging pg's articles, it might be time for the HN community to evaluate if they want to continue giving attention, eyeballs and time to something like HN, and YC by proxy. The hostility - not from HN posters but from the rich class, is not something to be taken lightly, and being on HN shows indirect support for unrestrained toxicity. Maybe a lift and shift to elsewhere (Lobste.rs etc) is in order? And make no mistake: on paper this would not really "do" anything, but walking away is a strong symbolic gesture all the same.