Opinions like this are why the smart and wealthy people succeed in politics, while others are encouraged to lay asphalt if they want healthcare.

Red tape and regulation has second-order effects, many of which keep you employed. By all means, you should leave America if you have any hope for a nation that eschews regulation in it's entirety. You should stay if you want to get paid to build roads, though: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financialization

It sounds like you look down on those who build roads?

No more than the free market does, friend.

I've never really understood the knee-jerk hatred toward billionaires. The reality is that while I'm sure some fraud/corruption exists, for the most part, they cannot steal money from you. They have to make something so good, a person chooses to part with their money to acquire it.

The government on the other hand, can just tax you (often without cause or justification) and offer nothing in return for what they took by force.

Yet you'll find many people decrying billionaires as the great evil while silent on governments who are in many ways, far far worse.

It's more about the concentrated power that billionaires (shouldn't) have. I didn't care that Elon Musk had $100b+ until he started using it to buy social media platforms and influence national politics.

Of course, you were concerned about how the folks who previously ran Twitter used it to influence national politics, right? You're concerned about such influence by the folks who run each of the four major networks, the folks who run the major newspapers, etc.

What is this concentrated power you speak about? In many areas, they have exactly the same power as everyone else. They get only one vote each election day. They have to queue up at the Post Office, grocery store, etc just like everyone else.

Now you're right that they have more money and they can spend it. Some things like hiring a lawyer to sue someone are too expensive for an average person but accessible to billionaires. Rich people can do things with taxes loopholes that aren't practical for the average schmoe.

It is true that they often have power at their company and sometimes they use it overtly or covertly. But even this can be limited because they have to work with partners and other shareholders. The CEO of a big publicly traded company can't just break the rules because they're on a power trip.

> They have to queue up at the Post Office, grocery store, etc just like everyone else

Don't be obtuse. The people we're talking about don't go to the Post office, or the grocery store, and they certainly don't queue up. They don't even queue up at the airport, they have private planes, private security, private everything.

And "they only get one vote each election day". Voting is the least amount of political influence that a person can have.

Actually, you're the one being obtuse. The point isn't that they use Instacart to avoid the lines. The point is that everyone can use Instacart or the USPS mobile app and everyone pretty much pays the same price. The point is that there's no special level of power that's available only to people with a billion dollars.

There's this mythology built around great wealth and it's largely false. They can't just snap their fingers and make things happen as if by magic. There's no special magic power that only they get. They have to pay for what they want and just like normal humans, they can only spend the money once.

I don't know how you can't see it, but people who have gobs of wealth absolutely have more options (and more powerful options) than people who don't. For just one small example, they can purchase equity in non-public companies. If a regular person wanted to invest in OpenAI, they couldn't. But if a billionaire wants to throw down $10b, they can.

Just like how someone who has $200k can get a mortgage to buy a house, whereas someone with only $20k cannot. That's economic power that comes from having wealth to leverage.

Might want to check from whom SpaceX and Palantir get their contracts from.

And if SpaceX was not there, who would the government turn to? Fun fact: the US is way ahead of China in space launches, but if you remove SpaceX, then China is way ahead of the US.

> And if SpaceX was not there, who would the government turn to?

NASA, like it always has.

Could you please stop using HN primarily for political and ideological battle? Your account has been doing this a ton lately, and it's a line at which we ban accounts. I don't want to ban you but we need you to use the site as intended. A certain percentage of political posts is ok but it should be nowhere near 50, let alone 90.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...

p.s. The best and most HN-good part of your comment here was "I build roads".

Ok, fair point on too much politics. I will cut it back to well under 50%. I hope you are responding similarly to those of opposing views as well?