The trick would be to get billionaires to compite in status in this way, instead of say buying megayatchs. Something like "my scientists cured more cancers than your scientists". Maybe a Nobel-like prize recognizing donors and sponsors of high achievements? Or national awards for the largest philantropist?
I was going to comment, Substack ate it. I switched to another Android window then back, it first showed the draft then reloaded and wiped it.
* Billionaires don't control their money, lots going on behind the scenes
* Beggars / grifters are generally fools, would do more harm if they weren't incompetent.
* **Prefer better to worse**, therefore must judge, judging correctly correlates best with intelligence, equality is false
Contact Enon Harris (enon.harris at gmail, LinkedIn, or Substack messaging) if interested in:
* Best $10M-$250M: make everything permanently antiseptic for pennies per square meter using edible ingredients.
* Best $250M-$50B: self-reproducing "seed factories", economically and technically feasible, 40+years research, alternative to UBI, allows flex and mass production on Earth and beyond.
I am serious about using money to improve politics, including getting CO2 taxation on the national agenda. [Bloomberg's money was useful in raising the salience of gun safety legislation in VA.] But buying senators is not actually the way to go. More useful would be a really massive voter registration project tailored in each state to offset voter suppression laws, help people jump through the hoops being set up to discourage voting. Public information in favor of immigrants and immigration would be another useful issue. Done right it would even be tax exempt.
Also agreed, another great idea. Do them all! Not sure what Stacey Abrams spent, but wasn't all that high, think in the $10m range, maybe a few times that.
How much would it cost to pay $X/ton of CO2 (X = the estimated tax on net CO2 emissions needed to keep global temperatures below Y degrees) captured and permanently sequestered.
The trick would be to get billionaires to compite in status in this way, instead of say buying megayatchs. Something like "my scientists cured more cancers than your scientists". Maybe a Nobel-like prize recognizing donors and sponsors of high achievements? Or national awards for the largest philantropist?
I was going to comment, Substack ate it. I switched to another Android window then back, it first showed the draft then reloaded and wiped it.
* Billionaires don't control their money, lots going on behind the scenes
* Beggars / grifters are generally fools, would do more harm if they weren't incompetent.
* **Prefer better to worse**, therefore must judge, judging correctly correlates best with intelligence, equality is false
Contact Enon Harris (enon.harris at gmail, LinkedIn, or Substack messaging) if interested in:
* Best $10M-$250M: make everything permanently antiseptic for pennies per square meter using edible ingredients.
* Best $250M-$50B: self-reproducing "seed factories", economically and technically feasible, 40+years research, alternative to UBI, allows flex and mass production on Earth and beyond.
Buying 51 senators who will vote for a tax on net CO2 emissions ought to be doable.
Precisely!
West Virginia has around 14k coal miners, the supposed lobby that affects Manchin. That's it. Even in its heyday was only like 100k.
I am serious about using money to improve politics, including getting CO2 taxation on the national agenda. [Bloomberg's money was useful in raising the salience of gun safety legislation in VA.] But buying senators is not actually the way to go. More useful would be a really massive voter registration project tailored in each state to offset voter suppression laws, help people jump through the hoops being set up to discourage voting. Public information in favor of immigrants and immigration would be another useful issue. Done right it would even be tax exempt.
Also agreed, another great idea. Do them all! Not sure what Stacey Abrams spent, but wasn't all that high, think in the $10m range, maybe a few times that.
I know I’ve said this before but this is your best piece ever!
If you keep saying it it must just mean I'm topping myself, and that's a comforting fiction I can live with.
How much would it cost to pay $X/ton of CO2 (X = the estimated tax on net CO2 emissions needed to keep global temperatures below Y degrees) captured and permanently sequestered.