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

221–230 of 378 posts

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

#221

Post by dd8601fn »

mae3x wrote: post #182
trollbridge wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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... .

Introducing the shitshow of those state level taxes makes it unworkable, for sure.

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

#222

Post by red-iron-pine »

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?

the "engineer's disease" writ large.

I am good at solving X and Y, and have deep knowledge in those areas, therefore I'm good at solving problems everywhere.

it's like how people says scientists should run the world but have never seen how utterly tribal and often brutal researchers can be.

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

#223

Post by dd8601fn »

matthewdgreen wrote: post #148
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…

I’ve spent the last three days writing an inventory management system for a small store, using Codex and Claude Code. I realize that fully replacing online tools like Shopify is a lot more work than that (the payment integrations particularly), but: I sure wouldn’t want to be in the SaaS business right now.

None of the legit ones are at risk from vibecoders.

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

#224

Post by geremiiah »

masfuerte wrote: post #16

Money is power. That is the problem with extreme wealth. It provides unaccountable power outside the democratic process. It is not surprising that an already powerful man wants even more power, but I do not understand why anyone else would go along with this.

To be fair, this is only true in western countries. It's not true, in for example Russia or China. Or to be more accurate, in Russia and China, no matter how many hundreds of billions you own, you won't be able to bend the party to your will.

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

#225

Post by nozzlegear »

MarkusQ wrote: post #167
mrwh wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And a husband who works and his wife who doesn't, should she get a vote? The commentators here are responding exactly to the spirit of what was said, there's no confusion on what's really being implied here. Namely, the destruction of the entire basis of democracy, which is one person one vote. Another way to express the general disgust: that proposal is saying, "we're going to take away your power, but we'll still l…

> the entire basis of democracy, which is one person one vote This is a relatively recent innovation; most democracies throughout history have not had this property, so it's hardly the "entire basis" of the concept. It is, however, an interesting and possibly worth goal. The obvious problem (which has been noted by many previously) is that when the people making the decisions are not the ones paying for it the system…

The billionaires are the sheep, and people with less than $100k in annual income are the wolves in this contrived scenario?

> This is a serious issue and possibly the biggest present threat to our current system

Is it?

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

#226

Post by dd8601fn »

palmotea wrote: post #194
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?

> 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. They have the money and power, but tech people in particualr lack the social graces and awareness that previous generations of rich people needed to operate. They think very highly of themselves, but…

The old timey ones were morons in every kind of human way, too. We know what dumb shit they thought and said.

They just didn’t all have instantaneous global reach while sitting on the crapper, like Henry Ford with a Twitter account.

Even the Hearst type ones usually had time and human machinery between the formation of idiotic notions and it reaching other people.

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

#227

Post by red-iron-pine »

Der_Einzige wrote: post #209
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?

All the stuff all these people post on X is just regurgitation of 4chan circa 2016. The lingo is literally all just /fit/ memes from 10 years ago rebranded. -maxxing, "mogging", "NGMI", I'm literally going nuts waiting for Gavin to start asking trump "DYEL"?

it's not by accident, they're targeting specific demographics for a reason

angry young men will vote to abolish democracy -- and have, in Europe circa 1930s -- if you can convince them it'll benefit them.

step 1 is to start speaking to them in ways they connect with.

put another way, with the boomers dying rapidly, the largest source of MAGA is young men...

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

#228

Post by red-iron-pine »

fakedang wrote: post #40
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?

Honestly just my experience, but I've found it ironic that finance bros in my circle have gone the other way i.e. the effective altruism, philosophizing, podcasting route. While tech bros are now turning openly elitist, and in some cases, racist. And before anyone claims it's selection bias from within my left-leaning circle, I was well involved within the Tory circus until recently (a couple of years back).

> effective altruism, philosophizing, podcasting route

all I see is "scam, BS, slop"

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

#229

Post by corps_and_code »

Ekaros wrote: post #151
corps_and_code wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We tried this already in America and have decided that disallowing entire groups of people from voting is bad for democracy. What happens when the federal government passes new tax laws that prevent certain genders, racial groups, etc from having to pay income tax? Are they permanently disenfranchised? This would be a system that I think would rapidly move social progress backwards and concentrate power in the hands…

Well you could have stronger constitutional protections. Say certain changes needing unanimous support from voters in referendum. Would lock in things, but would remove risks. And USA already disallows voting based on age. And somehow lot of people find it acceptable. Surely voting should be right from birth?

Alright, what about laws that only levy income taxes on people making $300k or more? That's eliminates millions of Americans without targeting any protected groups. There's no bulletproof method to allow only some people to vote that wouldn't be abused to disenfranchise others.

Also, surely you don't think a four year old should weigh in on who gets to represent them in Congress? We disallow voting on a minimum age, because children are still developing in all sorts of ways, there is no maximum age that takes away your right to vote when you reach it. You can't equate a minimum age to disenfranchisement.

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

#230

Post by cindyllm »

red-iron-pine wrote: post #227
Der_Einzige wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All the stuff all these people post on X is just regurgitation of 4chan circa 2016. The lingo is literally all just /fit/ memes from 10 years ago rebranded. -maxxing, "mogging", "NGMI", I'm literally going nuts waiting for Gavin to start asking trump "DYEL"?

it's not by accident, they're targeting specific demographics for a reason angry young men will vote to abolish democracy -- and have, in Europe circa 1930s -- if you can convince them it'll benefit them. step 1 is to start speaking to them in ways they connect with. put another way, with the boomers dying rapidly, the largest source of MAGA is young men...

[dead]
Post reply on HN