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

Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan launches dark-money group to influence CA politics

missionlocal.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 362 posts

Re: Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan launches dark-money group to influence CA politics

#231

Post by aylmao »

terminalshort wrote: post #49
CodingJeebus wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is money if not a proxy of power? If money didn't buy power, no one would be interested in attaining billions in wealth.

They are obviously related, but it is a very loose correlation. If a billionaire (who does not pay me) gives me an order I will laugh in his face. If a traffic cop gives me an order, I will comply.

This doesn't mean money has no power over you.

Perhaps the billionaire can't buy your willingness to do something, but they can very much affect the material world around you, and therefore, you.

If you rent they can probably find a way to kick you out of your apartment. If someone around you _is_ willing to take an order, influencing what people around you do very much influences you. If they want something from you, and you're not willing to sell it, there will be people willing to steal it, etc.

Money very much is proxy of power. Perhaps not everything can be bought, sure. But money gives you operational range to attempt to impose your will when it doesn't.

Re: Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan launches dark-money group to influence CA politics

#232

Post by ohbleek »

scoofy wrote: post #228
johnea wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is total bullshit. Or maybe a statement of just how much the US population is uninformed/misinformed. If the later is true, the US 'electorate' really is dumb as dirt...

From 1994: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2138764 From 2024: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21582440241279659 Consistent results indicate that, yes, money tends to matter, but it's the source of that money that tends to be doing the heavy lifting.

“Study after study shows that money doesn't really effect the results of high-information elections“

Your earlier statement, in which you claim that “money doesn’t effect result” followed by a useless distinction of high or low info elections. You’re really trying to dance a fine line of nonsense here.

“ We find a positive and statistically significant relationship between campaign expenditure, campaign contributions and winning probability.”

From the same article you posted and the first academic journal result if you Google “studies on how money influences elections”.

Re: Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan launches dark-money group to influence CA politics

#233

Post by chr1 »

mystraline wrote: post #214
chr1 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think that similar law could not be passed without direct vote? The problem is not direct democracy but the fact that it is being done in a wrong way. Voting should be done without anonymity, online. One should be able to either vote for everything manually, or delegate the vote to any other person. If some change is supported by 100% of the voters it should be implemented immediately. But if smaller perce…

Dumbest idea ever. Billionaire goes: get $10 off at my store, called Scamazon, for these votes (lists votes). And naturally even the $10 is manipulated to be recouped with dynamic pricing.

What we have now is a politician saying vote for me and i'll pass laws that will give you 10k in next 4 years, people vote for the politician who then takes money from scamazon gives 10 to voters and takes 10mln to get elected again.

Eliminating the middleman makes things better already.

But more importantly with vesting time, large number of votes, ease of reversing a decision in a new vote, take $10 and vote for something that costs you more simply won't work.

Re: Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan launches dark-money group to influence CA politics

#234

Post by aylmao »

mothballed wrote: post #179
ryandrake wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to mention Lawyers. The civil court system is basically a way for wealthy people and corporations to use money to silence and/or coerce behavior out of less wealthy people. If Elon Musk or Larry Ellison woke up one day and decided to sue me, and defending myself would cost 100X my net worth, I'm probably just going to give up and do whatever they want me to do.

There still is something to it. You could bring your billion to Dubai and it might buy you some pardons from personal indiscretions and a cadre of quasi-slaves but the monarchs would never grant you real systemic political power.

If you bring a billion anywhere you won't get systemic political power unless you seek it. Political power isn't about having money, but money gives you the operational range you need to seek political power.

There's a lot of money in Dubai, so if your operation is to just hope to impress and be offered power without much effort on your end, 1 billion won't be enough. Perhaps 100 or 1,000 billion could work? Hard to tell.

If you only have 1 billion though, you need to play your cards in a smarter way. Who can you become friends with? What clubs and parties do you need to attend to make it happen? Which politicians and royals can you get dirt on? Who can you bribe for information? What gifts can you give to gain someones trust? 1 billion is enough operational range for this.

Re: Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan launches dark-money group to influence CA politics

#235

Post by thomassmith65 »

chr1 wrote: post #226
thomassmith65 wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I refuse to believe that anyone reading this is incapable of remembering at least five historical examples in which the public was happy to treat an unpopular group unjustly. There is no foolproof system that can guard against it, however declaring 'rights' and delegating the responsibility to protect them to the judiciary at least is a mitigation.

Direct voting does not replace judiciary or even senate, it only augments the house of congress. Can you bring one example where the public wanted to treat a group unjustly and parliament elected by that same public have defended the group?

  Direct voting does not replace judiciary or even senate, it only augments the house of congress.
If that is the Direct Democracy you had in mind, than we have no disagreement.

What I originally commented on was this:

  So do you believe in democracy or not?
I take issue with the implication that it's all or nothing. If we characterize anything less than a direct vote on every issue as anti-democratic, then the only people left standing will be kooks.

Re: Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan launches dark-money group to influence CA politics

#236

Post by scoofy »

ohbleek wrote: post #232
scoofy wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From 1994: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2138764 From 2024: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21582440241279659 Consistent results indicate that, yes, money tends to matter, but it's the source of that money that tends to be doing the heavy lifting.

“Study after study shows that money doesn't really effect the results of high-information elections“ Your earlier statement, in which you claim that “money doesn’t effect result” followed by a useless distinction of high or low info elections. You’re really trying to dance a fine line of nonsense here. “ We find a positive and statistically significant relationship between campaign expenditure, campaign contributions…

>Our finding is in line with existing results in the literature regarding the US House elections that incumbent candidates gain less from spending, compared to their contender counterparts. This is due to diminishing returns that occur at a certain point, after which incumbent candidates can increase the winning probability only marginally (Green & Krasno, 1988). However, this finding is in contrast with other studies considering electoral systems in Brazil, Japan, or India, where spending effectiveness is equally applicable for both incumbents and contenders (Johnson, 2013; Lee, 2020; Samuels, 2001).

So yea, sorry for providing two scholarly journal articles from two different political eras that support my thesis.

I didn’t realize that this was a bad faith discussion. Now I know.

Re: Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan launches dark-money group to influence CA politics

#237

Post by shimman »

terminalshort wrote: post #160
oulipo2 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. We should tax billionaires away.

[flagged]

Nah billionaires need to be punished, they have raped the Earth for profit and caused mass misery/death upon her people. In fact a good way for the US to rebuild credibility is to probably send a few billionaires to the Hague and have them tried for crimes against humanity in the ICJ.

Re: Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan launches dark-money group to influence CA politics

#238

Post by shimman »

kadabra9 wrote: post #211
mjamesaustin wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see, so you're suggesting 5% is not enough? I'm listening...

You could confiscate 100% of the wealth of every billionaire in this country and it wouldn’t fund the government for an entire year. It is and always will be a government spending issue, the government can’t help itself but to just steal more from the taxpayers to support their bloat.

I do agree it is a spending issue, for far too long corporate welfare has flourished in America. None of these rich people would exist with out the federal teat they suckle from, truly pathetic. Remove their bloat, take their money, and fund programs that will enable REAL economic value like medicare for all, universal childcare, free school lunches, public jobs programs, and universal education.

Re: Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan launches dark-money group to influence CA politics

#239

Post by mothballed »

shimman wrote: post #237
terminalshort wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Nah billionaires need to be punished, they have raped the Earth for profit and caused mass misery/death upon her people. In fact a good way for the US to rebuild credibility is to probably send a few billionaires to the Hague and have them tried for crimes against humanity in the ICJ.

Lots of billionaires should probably be at the hague. But we should be glad if people can become billionaires because they are generating that much value of both parties being better off, without imposing externalities on others. Yvonne Chouinard came close to this ideal, I think.

If someone can genuinely generate billions in value, not just by imposing externalities on others that they then reallocate to themselves, I will be damn glad that they exist and be damn glad that the hope of getting richer keeps them at it.

Re: Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan launches dark-money group to influence CA politics

#240

Post by kadabra9 »

shimman wrote: post #238
kadabra9 wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could confiscate 100% of the wealth of every billionaire in this country and it wouldn’t fund the government for an entire year. It is and always will be a government spending issue, the government can’t help itself but to just steal more from the taxpayers to support their bloat.

I do agree it is a spending issue, for far too long corporate welfare has flourished in America. None of these rich people would exist with out the federal teat they suckle from, truly pathetic. Remove their bloat, take their money, and fund programs that will enable REAL economic value like medicare for all, universal childcare, free school lunches, public jobs programs, and universal education.

And where will we get the money to fund this fantasy land in 8 months after the government runs out of money and we’ve already stolen all the billionaires assets?

Should we move on to anyone with a net worth over $1M and start stealing their assets too?

Post reply on HN