I'm surprised you didn't slyly link to the donation page.

One entity contributing more voluntarily does essentially nothing. All it does is give a free victory to competitors.

At least it would put some money where their mouth is. Are they spending any of their lobbying money on increasing their taxes? Until then it's nothing but hot air pretending to care

Can you elaborate on their point? Can people only speak about things they have funded? What money did you spend to give you the right to make that post?

IMO it is fine to express opinions and advocate positions even without contributing financially. I’m interested in why that’s a problem.

It's objectively not a problem. It just reeks of virtue signaling to me. But I'm not a billionaire so my opinions don't matter much in this country

Reading the letter in full, it is clear that when he says he expects and hopes to pay more taxes, it is because he expects and hopes that profits will increase.

If one company pays more voluntarily, it's unlikely the head of that company will remain there very long!

And then people wonder why others are tired of virtue signaling...

There is no inconsistency with advocating for changing the rules of the game for all players, while also playing according to the existing rules until that happens.

Are they lobbying for that or just writing it like it's a dream?

I do not see what difference that would make. Writing it, especially in a widely read publication, is a form of lobbying anyway.

Why does it not make a difference to bribe politicians? That's the whole point of lobbying isn't it?

I have no idea where this conversation is going. Lobbying is not bribing, and even if one were to assume lobbying is effectively bribing, expressing one’s opinion in a newsletter is certainly not bribing, so you are going to have to help connect some dots.

I was the one that said the newsletter wasn't lobbying. Someone else made that point