> I am a little drunk and that makes my inner socialist pop out, but is there any particular reason why we don't tax Schmidt and then use the 125M to invest in

> I am a little drunk and that makes my inner socialist pop out, but is there any particular reason why we don't tax Schmidt and then use the 125M to invest in AI, plus other things, with the outcomes being released openly? There are two reasons: 1) Mr. Schmidt already pays taxes and the US is not an authoritarian socialist regime that creates arbitrary, retroactive new taxes to confiscate the money of its citizens as soon as they decide to make a donation. I think that sort of system has been repeatedly shown to be a failure but if it's what you prefer, try N. Korea. Light versions can also be found in other ethno-states founded in the 20th century that put the words like socialist and people's in the names of their institutions. 2) We actually want research results and 125M in a directed investment goes a lot further than 125M in a federal budget with half a dozen intermediaries and overpaid contractors in the districts of enough legislators to swing the vote. This is part of why SpaceX is able to accomplish so much more, more quickly and more cheaply than NASA can. The government is absolutely crucial for some things, but preventing people from making any decisions about what they want to donate to or spend their money on is a disaster. A more reasonable solution to solve for what it sounds like you want would be to decrease the number tax loopholes and exemptions, particularly those only the wealthy can take advantage of.