Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why a $154B CEO just endorsed stripping most Americans of voting rights

fortune.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 378 posts

Re: Why a $154B CEO just endorsed stripping most Americans of voting rights

#181

Post by rayiner »

andsoitis wrote: post #29

> one that would strip voting rights from anyone who pays no income tax It could be an interesting thought experiment to consider the second and third order consequences, even if, from first principles this is a non-starter in a democratic society. First off all, what percent of people do not pay any taxes on income? What portion of them are poor vs. hedge fund managers or other super wealthy people who have structur…

> Regardless, if you work at Shopify, you should consider quitting. You do not have to work for a crazy person like that.

Democracy is an engineering exercise, just like any other system. Every part of the system has trade-offs that must be evaluated. You can make a logical argument that any other policy is open to abuse, etc. But why do you have to accuse other people of being “crazy” for having ideas about how to engineer a system?

Re: Why a $154B CEO just endorsed stripping most Americans of voting rights

#182

Post by mae3x »

trollbridge wrote: post #128
andsoitis wrote: post #29

> one that would strip voting rights from anyone who pays no income tax It could be an interesting thought experiment to consider the second and third order consequences, even if, from first principles this is a non-starter in a democratic society. First off all, what percent of people do not pay any taxes on income? What portion of them are poor vs. hedge fund managers or other super wealthy people who have structur…

In the U.S., it's about 28% of the populace which pays no taxes (or ends up netting to zero or negative taxation; for example, working families with children are often in a situation where they might owe $2,000 in taxes but also get a credit of $5,000, for a net refund of $3,000.) My 28% figure includes property, sales taxes, etc. but does not include taxes that employers, landlords, and so on pay. This is all very b…

when you say "pays no taxes" do you mean income taxes or any taxes altogether? What about FICA/SECA 15.3% tax? Sales tax? Property tax? Individual income tax only makes up 53% of federal revenues as per https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/gover....

Re: Why a $154B CEO just endorsed stripping most Americans of voting rights

#184

Post by roryirvine »

kklisura wrote: post #99
andsoitis wrote: post #29

> one that would strip voting rights from anyone who pays no income tax It could be an interesting thought experiment to consider the second and third order consequences, even if, from first principles this is a non-starter in a democratic society. First off all, what percent of people do not pay any taxes on income? What portion of them are poor vs. hedge fund managers or other super wealthy people who have structur…

> Lütke holds seven per cent of Shopify, according to Forbes, and controls nearly a third of the votes attached to the company’s current shares. Since March 1, 2020, his base salary has been the figure he requested: $1, down from his previous $800,000. [1] [1] https://financialpost.com/personal-finance/high-net-worth/wh...

So, just so that I'm clear, that means that Lütke himself pays no income tax?

(assuming that he's not paid a salary by anyone else)

Re: Why a $154B CEO just endorsed stripping most Americans of voting rights

#185

Post by AussieWog93 »

robinhood wrote: post #4

Fascinating 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?

I think everyone has weird ideas like this, but these rich, well-connected guys don't have to worry about their lives being ruined when they actually share them out loud.

I can't imagine many aerospace manufacturers turning down a contract with SpaceX because Elon said something politically incorrect. James Damore, on the other hand...

This isn't hate towards these rich guys (I think everyone should be able to say shit like this), just pointing out that we as a society hold them to different standards than we do regular people.

Re: Why a $154B CEO just endorsed stripping most Americans of voting rights

#186

Post by lux-lux-lux »

andsoitis wrote: post #29

> one that would strip voting rights from anyone who pays no income tax It could be an interesting thought experiment to consider the second and third order consequences, even if, from first principles this is a non-starter in a democratic society. First off all, what percent of people do not pay any taxes on income? What portion of them are poor vs. hedge fund managers or other super wealthy people who have structur…

The majority of voters who pay no income tax are (heavily Republican) retirees.

Re: Why a $154B CEO just endorsed stripping most Americans of voting rights

#188

Post by palmotea »

andsoitis wrote: post #29

> one that would strip voting rights from anyone who pays no income tax It could be an interesting thought experiment to consider the second and third order consequences, even if, from first principles this is a non-starter in a democratic society. First off all, what percent of people do not pay any taxes on income? What portion of them are poor vs. hedge fund managers or other super wealthy people who have structur…

> ...vs. hedge fund managers or other super wealthy people who have structured their income in a way as to pay zero or near-zero income taxes? Would the latter be disincentivized from continuing those regimes?

Oh, you know if something like this was implemented, those people would re-structure their income so they pay $1 in income tax.

Or they wouldn't bother, because they have far more effective ways of influencing the political process than voting. This would be purely about disenfranchising weaker people who could get in the way of them getting even more power.

Re: Why a $154B CEO just endorsed stripping most Americans of voting rights

#189

Post by oldandboring »

scrumper wrote: post #59

Just to play with this a bit, this proposal instantly and completely ends Republican power. Low-taxed rural poor and retiree votes are gone, entirely. Higher earning coastal white collar and professional workers get 3-5 votes, offset to some degree but far from entirely by the business-owning rich blue collar class. The middle classes get 1. It's fairly obvious what that would mean for representation in the USA. Seco…

You are a lone voice of reason in these comments, presumably because you checks notes read the article.

I will add that voting blocs do shift. In fact, in the last two US presidential elections, retirees actually broke for the Democrat. That could have something to do with Trump or be an actual trend.

Additionally, these rich people do pay a lot of tax, they just do it through different parts of the tax code and at a lower overall rate (by avoiding social security and Medicare taxes by way of earning through long-term capital gains). On the other hand they also own more real estate than you (probably) in desirable locations and pay a lot of property tax they can't avoid.

All that notwithstanding I sense that the root of this discussion that this guy's getting excoriated for, was exploring how to short-circuit the phenomenon wherein older people, voting at higher rates (and holding office long into their old age), secure for themselves preferential benefits at the expense of struggling younger generations. The thread took off in a strange way from there, but... I guess I like where it was trying to go at the outset.

Re: Why a $154B CEO just endorsed stripping most Americans of voting rights

#190

Post by duped »

throw1234567891 wrote: post #120
duped wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm referring to how both Lütke and DHH, a Shopify board member, have fascist politics. The word does have meaning. But underlying that meaning is a philosophy that there is an in group that should have power and many out groups from which power should be stripped. There is a long history of industrial leaders supporting fascist ideology.

Yeah, but please google first on what Mussolini preached. State-owned corporazioni are nothing like privately operated businesses of today. Don’t hang on the word. The correct word you are looking for is plutocrat, indeed.

The word I wanted to reach for was Nazi but I toned it down
Post reply on HN