Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan launches dark-money group to influence CA politics • Hacker News Board

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

#301

Post by johnnyanmac » Thu, Feb 12, 2026, 5:04 AM UTC

CamperBob2 wrote: post #292

johnnyanmac wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>why did they give up their agency to these shadowy media oligarchs decades tearing down education is paying its dues. Once again, from the people who are making you feel like democracy isn't working. >I'm tired of giving stupid people so much power over my life. If power is money, boomers still have a lot of power. And they leveraged politics their whole lives to benefit them (even if destruction of the younger gene…

I disagree that education had any meaningful part to play. It's true that less-educated people were more inclined to vote for Trump, but it's also true that we got all the "education" about Trump between 2016 and 2020 that anyone should have needed. You can fix ignorance with education, but you can't fix stupidity.

>we got all the "education" about Trump between 2016 and 2020 that anyone should have needed.

Well the "real" cause is economy. Trump had a strong economy in term 1 until COVID. If you weren't affected by the China trade war (and many in the red states arent), you could ignore the day to day politics and think "yeah Trump is great!"

But "economy" is too generic, and I feel that phenomenon is more attributed to "ignorance".And the comfortability to remain ignorant and fall for the spin telling you "things are good". That all feels to stem from education.

Is ignorance stupidity? Sometimes. They go hand in hand.

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

#302

Post by johnnyanmac » Thu, Feb 12, 2026, 5:15 AM UTC

root_axis wrote: post #297

johnnyanmac wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but this is what more people wanted. You haven't even tried checking 2026 approval ratings, have you?

His approval has been hovering around 40%, which is pretty typical for him and is still higher than his lowest levels in term one. He has a lot of opposition, but most of those are people who voted against him. Those that did vote for him are generally pleased.

On the surface, pretty much any polling you can point to will have trump close to his global minima, despite only being 25% through his term. While he started his polling in the high 40's/low/50's (as usual).

Losing 10 points in a year is pretty radical change. About the same change as term 1, but it did rise after that. I'm not so certain it's rising this time between the dozen Watergate level scandals in the wild.

----

Now, under the surface, the makeup of the approval is more polarized than ever. D's started abysmally and sunk to single digit levels. R's started 90 percent and fell some 4-5 points in comparison, but is still extremely high. The real dips really come from the fallout of Independents cratering like a rock. Maybe I need to review more polling numbers, but that sort of split was truly eye opening. The Independent numbers definitely suggest that there's some voter regret at work in such a short time

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

#303

Post by computably » Thu, Feb 12, 2026, 5:22 AM UTC

terminalshort wrote: post #189

femiagbabiaka wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. X is not, and has never been, "the press". 2. If you were to have categorized them this way previously, botting and pay-for-reach have made it definitely not that way now. 3. It is bad when any individual can shift the politics of the entire globe simply because they have enough money. Feel free to insert your most hated left-wing billionaire instead of Elon, I still believe the same thing.

[flagged]

As a non-communist non-billionaire, I couldn't disagree more! :)

The abuse of absurd levels of wealth to advance one's own agenda is little more than bribery. When targeted towards those poor enough to worry about basic needs, it is effectively coercion, equally unethical as violence. (Not to mention such wealth is inevitably built on top of a a violent, exploitative system.)

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

#304

Post by johnnyanmac » Thu, Feb 12, 2026, 6:10 AM UTC

kadabra9 wrote: post #300

johnnyanmac wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>and that they can tax billionaires more without them simply leaving the state (because CA is magical and unique (it's the 4th largest economy in the world, don't you know!) and they'll come crawling back to be a part of it) more like because data from other wealth taxes has shown that millionaires don't leave that easily. If they are, they are replaced by others https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DXZMXZCY0I >People pu…

In 2022 Norway increased wealth tax to 1.1%, expected to bring in an additional $146M tax revenue. Individuals with a net worth of $54B left the country, led to a $594M loss in tax revenue. https://citizenx.com/insights/norway-wealth-exodus/

Okay. And let's look at Norway'S GDP as a result

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD?location...

It fell, like much of the post COVID world. But somehow, I don't think that 600m tax opportunity cost contributed to 112 billion dollar drop in GDP. And then after that it basically stayed flat (rose by 1 billion, or.2% rise)

So, not too convinced this is a net loss for society. Studies in New York (pre Mamdmi) show that more people will come in than leave if the area is desired enough.

>https://www.governing.com/finance/taxing-millionaires-will-s...

Spoilers: turns out COVID causing impact to social life impacted emigration more than any wealth tax. Then after COVID things bounced back.

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

#305

Post by johnnyanmac » Thu, Feb 12, 2026, 6:16 AM UTC

kadabra9 wrote: post #295

johnnyanmac wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>And I did engage with the real point You did not and still are not. This isnt about making billionaires cover the entire country's budget. Its about making sure power doesn't consolidate in any one person. Do I really need to repost the other 80% of my comment (the entire 2.point?) Which part of "high corporate taxes mean business owners invest in business" needs clarification? Are we suggesting that the tax codes i…

You’re discussing raising corporate or individual income tax rates. I’m discussing a proposed broad wealth tax on unrealized gains and assets. The tax rates of the 50s were high, but were filled with loopholes and deductions in that the effective tax rate that was actually paid was much lower. There are arguments to be made how much those policies contributed to the boom of that decade, but those are separate to argu…

>but were filled with loopholes and deductions in that the effective tax rate that was actually paid was much lower.

Yes, thanks for reiterating my main point.

Now if we use that same mindset and apply it to a wealth tax...

Hence my main point. Taxes aren't all about extraction of money, they also help to nudge people to do things they normally wouldn't do. So nudging them to actually help the area they are in is really powerful.

Or they can leave. If so: good. Make room for those who do want to innovate and not extract money from the people (and more beach space).

Not all billionaires are "job creators", especially given the actions taken the last few years. That's why some of the legitimate "millionaire flights" that do happen don't necessarily impact the way that's predicted on paper.

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

#306

Post by TFYS » Thu, Feb 12, 2026, 6:21 AM UTC

scoofy wrote: post #236

ohbleek wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“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 studie…

It's not enough to only look at elections. The topics that the media discusses, and therefore the options that people are aware of and the issues people base their vote on are decided by mostly privately owned and increasingly consolidated media companies. Nobody will know about candidates that are not approved by some part of the elite in this media landscape. Any opinions that go against the interests of the media owning elite will not see much coverage. Sure, maybe money during elections does not matter that much, but elections are the very last step of the process of picking leaders, and the preceding steps matter as well.

Also, if money did not matter during elections, I doubt we'd see so much spending on them. Studies are being funded by companies and the wealthy as well, so a study or two saying money doesn't matter is not definitive proof.

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

#307

Post by namesbc » Thu, Feb 12, 2026, 6:55 AM UTC

terminalshort wrote: post #160

oulipo2 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. We should tax billionaires away.

[flagged]

You cannot have a functioning economy or political system when there are billionaires because they no longer are accountable to the market or the people

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

#308

Post by JuniperMesos » Thu, Feb 12, 2026, 8:06 AM UTC

terminalshort wrote: post #115

femiagbabiaka wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm commenting on one such excess. Here is another: https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/31/elon-musk-2026-elec... . The Nazification of X and federal subsidies for Elon's companies are another. There are many more examples. s/relations/elections/ -- because Elon et. al don't just intervene in the elections of the country they live in, but actually any country he's interested in -- and uses the U.S. as a bludgeon in…

How is Elon's editorial control of X something the government needs to (or even should have the power to) "reign in?" How is that not freedom of the press just like the owner of the New York Times having editorial control over his newspaper? Same goes for his donation to the PAC. What is the nefarious activity they are engaged in? Why are they not allowed to exercise their freedom of the press in the same way as any…

Before Elon Musk bought Twitter the previous owners engaged in different kinds of editorial control. The people who argued that editorial control of Twitter was something the owners had the right to do on their private platform and the people who argued that the government should find some legal mechanism to characterize this editorial control as some kind of crime so they could force Twitter not to do it, were flipped from what they are now.

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

#309

Post by trymas » Thu, Feb 12, 2026, 8:41 AM UTC

kadabra9 wrote: post #240

shimman wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

> And where will we get the money to fund this fantasy land ...

What are you talking about? Current administration is doing exactly that. Cutting taxes for the wealthy and adding all those loses to national debt at record level increments. No fiscal responsibility at all.

Total fantasy and essentially poor and middle-class funds the rich through their taxes (and government money printer), not to mention how mega companies like Walmart constantly underpays workers that those workers then need to survive on government subsidies, yet another funding for the rich.

This is happening with every USA government (AFAIK especially/only republican ones) since Reagan.

EDIT: also as sibling comment said - poor people spend money instantly, returning it back to economy. America was already taxing wealthy through the teeth years ago - that helped fund incredible amounts of infrastructure and let built strongest middle class (probably in history) for decades. Now all that wealth is just accumulating in someones back accounts. Trickling any day now...

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

#310

Post by sa-code » Thu, Feb 12, 2026, 8:50 AM UTC

terminalshort wrote: post #135

sa-code wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve heard about a borrowing tax as an alternative, because that’s when paper money becomes spending money I would love to see that discussed

I want to do some improvements on my house. So I take out a home equity loan. Oops! Actually since my house is worth $500K more than when I bought it, now I have to pay $100K to the government since the gain is now realized by using the asset as collateral!

You get points for effective use of rhetoric, but it's more of a solvable challenge and not a deal breaker.

The goal of a borrowing tax would be to prevent someone with a a $200 mil stock portfolio living off the "buy, borrow, die" strategy and not home equity loans on mere middle class millionaires.

Capital gains, for example, on a primary residence already have an exclusion of a certain amount. There's no reason a borrowing tax can't kick in only after one has let's say 10mil in assets or securities.

Heck, you could even exempt primary residences regardless of value, so you should be fine

edit: here's an explanation of the buy, borrow, die strategy for those who are interested https://www.reddit.com/r/BuyBorrowDieExplained/comments/1f26...