27 ms·
It's amazingly "on brand" that HN commenters upon the Munger quote at the top of this article. Being a fellow HN'er, I'll follow suit: The most obvious respon
by xibalba 5y ago
It's amazingly "on brand" that HN commenters upon the Munger quote at the top of this article.
Being a fellow HN'er, I'll follow suit:
The most obvious response to Munger's critics is, "Then don't live there." The U.S. is blessed with a huge number of universities, meaning lot's of choice. Particularly for those individuals with the type of accomplishments that would get them into UCSB. (It's not Stanford, but it is very selective)
- CPLX 5y agoAnd the most obvious response to billionaires who think their money buys them the right to run public institutions is "go fuck yourself". The University of California system is owned by, and created for the benefit of, the people of California. Decisions about how it should be run and what the dorms should look like should be made by democratic institutions and accountable to the public through regular elections. Billionaires are blessed with a huge number of leisure time activities and ways to feed their own outsized egos, meaning lots of choice. Particularly for those individuals with the type of money that would allow them to donate entire large buildings. Perhaps he could engage in those activities, and limit his interaction with public institutions to paying his fair share of taxes, and casting the single vote to which he is entitled.
- oh_sigh 5y agoIf you don't want the money, then don't take the money. It isn't like Charlie bumrushed them and said he was building a dorm whether they liked it or not.
- CPLX 5y agoYes, that is in fact what I'm suggesting. Or to be more precise I am suggesting that the state take his money anyways, via taxation, and then decide how to spend it through democratic means.