6 ms·

Besides monarchs in the past, for the first time in the history of Planet Earth we have many people and corporations that have more money than governments and s

Besides monarchs in the past, for the first time in the history of Planet Earth we have many people and corporations that have more money than governments and so with that comes the responsibility of "acting accordingly". I believe that in a good light this will continue to assist humanity in ways never thought of before as human ingenuity is always more nimble than large bureaucratic organizations.

throwawaygh 6y ago
Andrew Carnegie definitely had "more money than governments". Same with other titans of that time. He was a really shit person when in came to labor -- hiring literal private armies to straight up lay siege to his workers -- but he did basically create the "rich guy gives away his money as a social obligation" model of... maintaining... democratic... government? Or, to be less coy, model of staving off communist/socialist/fascist revolution. I truly and sincerely hope today's ultra billionaires are as smart and realistic as Carnegie in this respect. Carnegie emphasized education in his giving. Limited success. His library movement was largely successful, but his trade school turned into yet another hyper expensive prestinge-driven private university. Although I guess it was the brith-place of a lot of the computer technologies that made the current crop of ultra billionaires rich. I think we're over-due for someone to emphasize healthcare in their giving. (Gates did this, but not in the USA.) We're also over due for a labor backlash against this sort of obscene wealth concentration (and not even as a value-laden statement... just as a "lessons from history" thing, the pendulum will probably swing).
- michaelangerman 6y ago
  That trade school which is now CMU did not start out being a hyper expensive prestige driven university. For years prior to the computer era it was a humble university in Pittsburgh. "In 1900, he donated $1 million for the creation of a technical institute for the city of Pittsburgh, envisioning a school where working-class men and women of Pittsburgh could learn practical skills, trades and crafts that would enhance their careers, lives and communities." It was not until the dawn of the computer era that things started to change. https://www.cmu.edu/about/history.html https://www.cmu.edu/about/history.html See this link for more details.
  - throwawaygh 6y ago
    Yeah, it served its intended purpose for a long time. It's extremely difficult for a wildly successful university from humble roots to stay true to its roots. Even public institutions mostly fail to stay accessible after becoming successful. CMU has damn close to zero "working class men and women from Pittsburgh" in its student body these days, unless by "working class" you mean "parents were doctors, lawyers, and software engineers from shadyside/squill/fox chapel/etc." :(. On the other hand, it is one of the two big reasons Pittsburgh experienced a renaissance in the early 21st century (which continues to this day), and in that sense did achieve the goal of helping the Pittsburgh community thrive. Just not by elevating working class folk.
- basementcat 6y ago
  There was also a modest contribution toward basic scientific research. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnegie_Institution_for_Science https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnegie_Institution_for_Scien... Some astronomical observatories built atop certain mountains were built with his funding.
- xyzzyz 6y ago
  He was a really shit person when in came to labor -- hiring literal private armies to straight up lay siege to his workers That’s interesting. Why would he “lay siege” to workers? Were they hiding somewhere behind fortifications, and he was trying to force them to work, or what? It’s hard for me to imagine circumstances where capitalists would even find it useful to “lay siege” to workers.
  - throwaway2048 6y ago
    if only historical accounts existed of this mythical time.
    - xyzzyz 6y ago
      Well, maybe instead of sarcastic remarks you will be the one to point me to some historical accounts?
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      - throwawaygh 6y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_strike https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_strike
        xyzzyz 6y ago
        Ah, now it makes more sense: he wasn’t laying siege to workers, but rather to his own factory the workers were illegally occupying, and refusing to let in him or other workers, and after they kicked out the Sheriff, who was initially called to lawfully remove them. Finally, the occupation was dispersed by state militia. Yeah, now it all falls into place, except it’s still unclear to me which part exactly makes Carnegie a “shit person” here.
        throwawaygh 6y ago
saddlerustle 6y ago
Who has more money than governments? Sergey Brin is worth about $65 billion. The US federal budget is ~$3 trillion _per year_
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- selectodude 6y ago
  The US is the wealthiest country on earth. Sergei Brin's checking account would be the 74th largest GDP in the world.
  - jrockway 6y ago
    Checking account or total value of investments?
    - selectodude 6y ago
      It was a figure of speech. Obviously he doesn't have an 11 figure bank balance.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - cycrutchfield 6y ago
    Why are you comparing somebody’s net worth to a GDP, which is a rate? That makes zero sense.
    - Cyph0n 6y ago
      No, it does make sense: Brin could pay to run the 74th largest economy for a year.
      - cycrutchfield 6y ago
        That's not what GDP means, and also a person's net worth is not necessarily liquid.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
davidgay 6y ago
The annual budget for just San Francisco is $12 billion (https://sfbos.org/supervisor-fewer-budget-information https://sfbos.org/supervisor-fewer-budget-information). That's 20% of Sergey Brin's net worth. So no, I don't think that any billionaire is even remotely close to being able to sustainably spend what any country-level government can. For another reference: the smallest GDP listed at https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(no... is ~$40B, and government spending is usually some 10s of percent of GDP.
philwelch 6y ago
You should read a biography of J.P. Morgan sometime. In the 1890’s he bailed out the US government, and during the Panic of 1907 he basically bailed out the entire economy.

throwawaygh 6y ago

Andrew Carnegie definitely had "more money than governments". Same with other titans of that time. He was a really shit person when in came to labor -- hiring literal private armies to straight up lay siege to his workers -- but he did basically create the "rich guy gives away his money as a social obligation" model of... maintaining... democratic... government? Or, to be less coy, model of staving off communist/socialist/fascist revolution. I truly and sincerely hope today's ultra billionaires are as smart and realistic as Carnegie in this respect. Carnegie emphasized education in his giving. Limited success. His library movement was largely successful, but his trade school turned into yet another hyper expensive prestinge-driven private university. Although I guess it was the brith-place of a lot of the computer technologies that made the current crop of ultra billionaires rich. I think we're over-due for someone to emphasize healthcare in their giving. (Gates did this, but not in the USA.) We're also over due for a labor backlash against this sort of obscene wealth concentration (and not even as a value-laden statement... just as a "lessons from history" thing, the pendulum will probably swing).

michaelangerman 6y ago
That trade school which is now CMU did not start out being a hyper expensive prestige driven university. For years prior to the computer era it was a humble university in Pittsburgh. "In 1900, he donated $1 million for the creation of a technical institute for the city of Pittsburgh, envisioning a school where working-class men and women of Pittsburgh could learn practical skills, trades and crafts that would enhance their careers, lives and communities." It was not until the dawn of the computer era that things started to change. https://www.cmu.edu/about/history.html https://www.cmu.edu/about/history.html See this link for more details.
- throwawaygh 6y ago
  Yeah, it served its intended purpose for a long time. It's extremely difficult for a wildly successful university from humble roots to stay true to its roots. Even public institutions mostly fail to stay accessible after becoming successful. CMU has damn close to zero "working class men and women from Pittsburgh" in its student body these days, unless by "working class" you mean "parents were doctors, lawyers, and software engineers from shadyside/squill/fox chapel/etc." :(. On the other hand, it is one of the two big reasons Pittsburgh experienced a renaissance in the early 21st century (which continues to this day), and in that sense did achieve the goal of helping the Pittsburgh community thrive. Just not by elevating working class folk.
basementcat 6y ago
There was also a modest contribution toward basic scientific research. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnegie_Institution_for_Science https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnegie_Institution_for_Scien... Some astronomical observatories built atop certain mountains were built with his funding.
xyzzyz 6y ago
He was a really shit person when in came to labor -- hiring literal private armies to straight up lay siege to his workers That’s interesting. Why would he “lay siege” to workers? Were they hiding somewhere behind fortifications, and he was trying to force them to work, or what? It’s hard for me to imagine circumstances where capitalists would even find it useful to “lay siege” to workers.
- throwaway2048 6y ago
  if only historical accounts existed of this mythical time.
  - xyzzyz 6y ago
    Well, maybe instead of sarcastic remarks you will be the one to point me to some historical accounts?
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - throwawaygh 6y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_strike https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_strike
      - xyzzyz 6y ago
        Ah, now it makes more sense: he wasn’t laying siege to workers, but rather to his own factory the workers were illegally occupying, and refusing to let in him or other workers, and after they kicked out the Sheriff, who was initially called to lawfully remove them. Finally, the occupation was dispersed by state militia. Yeah, now it all falls into place, except it’s still unclear to me which part exactly makes Carnegie a “shit person” here.
        throwawaygh 6y ago

saddlerustle 6y ago

Who has more money than governments? Sergey Brin is worth about $65 billion. The US federal budget is ~$3 trillion _per year_

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
selectodude 6y ago
The US is the wealthiest country on earth. Sergei Brin's checking account would be the 74th largest GDP in the world.
- jrockway 6y ago
  Checking account or total value of investments?
  - selectodude 6y ago
    It was a figure of speech. Obviously he doesn't have an 11 figure bank balance.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- cycrutchfield 6y ago
  Why are you comparing somebody’s net worth to a GDP, which is a rate? That makes zero sense.
  - Cyph0n 6y ago
    No, it does make sense: Brin could pay to run the 74th largest economy for a year.
    - cycrutchfield 6y ago
      That's not what GDP means, and also a person's net worth is not necessarily liquid.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

davidgay 6y ago

The annual budget for just San Francisco is $12 billion (https://sfbos.org/supervisor-fewer-budget-information https://sfbos.org/supervisor-fewer-budget-information). That's 20% of Sergey Brin's net worth. So no, I don't think that any billionaire is even remotely close to being able to sustainably spend what any country-level government can. For another reference: the smallest GDP listed at https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(no... is ~$40B, and government spending is usually some 10s of percent of GDP.

philwelch 6y ago

You should read a biography of J.P. Morgan sometime. In the 1890’s he bailed out the US government, and during the Panic of 1907 he basically bailed out the entire economy.