Why a $154B CEO just endorsed stripping most Americans of voting rights • Hacker News Board

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

#261

Post by johnthewise » Tue, Jul 28, 2026, 4:52 PM UTC

geremiiah wrote: post #224

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.

Is that the case or is it because people's opinions matter less over there and powerful people rather use their capital to influence 'important' people behind closed doors&we're not aware of it thus assume it doesn't happen?

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

#262

Post by kennywinker » Tue, Jul 28, 2026, 4:54 PM UTC

chriscrisby wrote: post #238

kennywinker wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The majority of americans think their taxes need to be lower, and the taxes for the rich need to be higher.

Majority of Americans pay little to no taxes.

By percentage of income, or by dollar value? By dollar value, that seems possible. By % of income? Does not seem possible.

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

#263

Post by krapp » Tue, Jul 28, 2026, 4:54 PM UTC

throw0101a wrote: post #258

dualvariable wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the condescending tone of that quote only further strengthens the culture wars--liberals love it.

The quotation is not condescending to "the lowest white man", but rather is explaining a political/propaganda strategy that was active at the time. Up until that time the racists were inter-mixed between the two parties: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dixiecrat but it was the GOP that actively sought to recruit them: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy The quotation was describing the creation of the v…

And the fact that people respond to it by attacking the very groups they've been set against rather than the government and elites manipulating them proves how well it works.

See also the apopleptic rage the rural right went into when Hillary Clinton made her "deplorables" remark. Even though she was clearly and explicitly talking about the white supremacists and racists infiltrating the Trump camp - something she was entirely correct about mind you - they chose to trauma bond with the white supremacists and rally around a billionaire pedophile rather than concede a point to a "liberal" in good faith.

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

#264

Post by kennywinker » Tue, Jul 28, 2026, 4:55 PM UTC

mothballed wrote: post #204

kennywinker wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don’t have to go farther back than 100 years in history to know what this looks like. Poll taxes, land ownership requirements, etc. were pretty common. So were goon squads to beat and murder people who tried to change that. It wasn’t good.

I wouldn't want a lot of the landscape 100 years ago, but I'd happily be disenfranchised if I could get the size of government 100+ years ago (federal government <~2% of GDP in non-wartime)

That landscape you wouldn’t want is in part a product of the small government you covet.

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

#265

Post by cayleyh » Tue, Jul 28, 2026, 5:01 PM UTC

bryanlarsen wrote: post #200

mikestew wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No income tax, but capital gains tax. And capital gains tax is a lot less than income tax (hence Buffet’s “my secretary pays more tax than I do”). So the “$1/year” CEOs are simply reducing tax burden. But, yes, under the proposed scheme, Lütke doesn’t get to vote. One may rest assured that this was a simple mistake. In fact, I’m sure he meant that only those pay capital gains tax get to vote, not income tax.

No capital gains tax is due until gains are realized. Lütke's gains are almost completely unrealized.

Better yet, he gets loans, collateralized against those unrealized gains to the current value of the gains, and then writes off the loan interest against his present and future taxes! Amazing!

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

#266

Post by dualvariable » Tue, Jul 28, 2026, 5:03 PM UTC

throw0101a wrote: post #258

dualvariable wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the condescending tone of that quote only further strengthens the culture wars--liberals love it.

The quotation is not condescending to "the lowest white man", but rather is explaining a political/propaganda strategy that was active at the time. Up until that time the racists were inter-mixed between the two parties: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dixiecrat but it was the GOP that actively sought to recruit them: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy The quotation was describing the creation of the v…

Liberals are going to find it very comforting that they're not one of "the lowest white men". The people the quote is referring to won't be persuaded at all. It solves nothing. There's no solution offered to the propaganda problem. It is the flip side to the culture wars that it is describing.

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

#267

Post by dualvariable » Tue, Jul 28, 2026, 5:14 PM UTC

cloverich wrote: post #259

dualvariable wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All the stuff all these people post on X is just regurgitation of 4chan circa 2016. You can trace a lot of what is wrong with 2026 back to the right-wing countercultural movement on 4chan, probably along with meme culture in general.

it is weird how when i first heard of meme it was in the dawkins sense. then people showed me memes and i thought wtf this is just dumb jokes, what a weird transformation of the term (my understanding of it). Then i watched it become an actual vehicle for political ideology, "just jokes" when too far but real ideas the rest of the time. The left rots from them and the right becomes more extreme and everyone is losing…

Yeah, I'm on a gaming Discord where the 30+ year-old game modders who run it had to ban memes. If you don't, you'll end up with 15-year-old kids spamming memes into channels because that's just how they "talk" online.

And the "meme police" who will complain about misusing meme formats seem really regressive and anti-creative to me. Some satirist should skewer all the young adults who think that meme formats need to be defended.

[I also read The Selfish Gene back in the 90s, long before memes were just jokes]

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

#268

Post by croes » Tue, Jul 28, 2026, 5:20 PM UTC

Maxatar wrote: post #178

croes wrote: post #12

How about that: If you are a billionaire you lose your voting rights because you are already powerful enough and don’t need that extra power

There are only 900 billionaires in the U.S. Do you think if they lost their voting rights it would affect the outcome of even a single election whatsoever?

It‘s not about the outcome of an election but about putting a symbolic to their power.

Billionaires can do what they what without real consequences, this would hurt even if it has no real effect. More psychological

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

#269

Post by slowmovintarget » Tue, Jul 28, 2026, 5:32 PM UTC

I wonder if he posts from the toilet like Elon.

You should have skin in the game to vote (citizenship as a minimum in national elections, for example). It used to be that owning property was that gate (land, specifically, not income). So how do you get an electorate that isn't just interested in voting themselves free stuff?

I honestly don't know. Raising children properly is a sign you're invested in the future, but holy cow would I not want a government test for that. Let's stick with citizenship... If you really want to fix the electorate, you need to fix education, and re-socialize values of merit (individual responsibility, liberty over ease...). Not an easy or simple proposition.

A principled society is superior to a ruled society, we just don't like to pay what's needed for the former and land in the latter as a local minima.

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

#270

Post by senordevnyc » Tue, Jul 28, 2026, 5:32 PM UTC

Lord-Jobo wrote: post #164

jchallis wrote: post #26

Lutke is a German who has lived in Canada for decades. Why comment on American tax policy ? Seems out of his lane .

These people almost universally believe their opinions and thoughts are uniquely special and always worth bowing to. They are egotists. It’s one of the biggest parts of who they are.

The guy made an offhand remark. Someone else chose to write a whole article about it, and we all chose to leave hundreds of comments here.