6 ms·

If I was a billionaire I would probably buy Nauru[1], it's a 21km2 independent island state with <10k people and GDP ~30M$, which comes at 3000$ per capita. I w

If I was a billionaire I would probably buy Nauru[1], it's a 21km2 independent island state with <10k people and GDP ~30M$, which comes at 3000$ per capita. I would offer 50.000k$ to every citizen (more than they will earn in 15 years), which comes down to 500M$, to abdicate authority trough democratic process and move off the island (or possibly stay and work for me). Then build your own benevolent dictatorship that's already recognized internationally as a state. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nauru http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nauru

newman314 15y ago
The problem with this is that that is just the first step. Having a nation with no alliances means that you will pretty much be invaded with impunity. But given the way certain nations have been behaving of late, having your own nation may not make much of a difference.
- moonchrome 15y ago
  In my fantasy billionaire scenario hiring PMC would be a viable option. Also, with lot's of cash to throw around - how hard would it be to build an alliance with neighboring states, bribing politicians, "friendly relations", etc. You would probably trade with them anyway, build a few facilities there to please the people/sell the story.
techiferous 15y ago
You'd have to be creative with the economy. Nauru is literally made of shit. The phosphate-rich soil has been basically completely mined, so it has very little natural resources. It's very expensive to have humans living on an island with little natural resources. You'd have to be very creative in your business model to make this work. But I imagine that's your point entirely: the business model would be founded on the "benevolent" dictatorship which would have the latitude to create a completely unique economic system that could attract particular types of business ventures.
- moonchrome 15y ago
  IMO you could afford to build high tech self sustaining enviroment for <50k people easily, a few micro nuclear reactors [1] would provide enough electricity, hydroponics, seafood farming, or advanced things like protein from bacteria/algae protein for food production, import the luxuries. They seem to have drinkable fresh water source, and with enough power and cash desalination is viable. The fantasy business model would be to be rich enough to be able to personally cover these costs and establish a high tech R&D environment :) I'm not suggesting that this is actually possible, it's one of those things - what would I do if I had Bill Gates kind of money. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toshiba_4S http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toshiba_4S
  - JoachimSchipper 15y ago
    Wait, you're proposing to create an unfettered dictatorship with access to nuclear technology? And you think everyone will be fine with that?
    - moonchrome 15y ago
      Micro nuclear reactors don't have weapons grade uranium/plutonium in large quantities, AFAIK at best they could be used to build a dirty bomb. And what would be the point of that ? I'm not proposing building a religious sect, just a society of hand picked individuals from different fields, like engineering, natural sciences, architecture, arts etc.
      - deleted 15y ago
        [deleted]
      - jiggy2011 15y ago
        Reminds me somewhat of the "rapture" city in the game bioshock.
        moonchrome 15y ago
        Hopefully it would be a boring, mutant free version :)
techiferous 15y ago
> I would offer 50.000k$ to every citizen to abdicate authority trough democratic process and move off the island (or possibly stay and work for me). History teaches us that there will always be hold-outs and that the most effective way to achieve this goal is through brute force. This is how the U.S. base in Diego Garcia came to be. The islanders who lived there were forcibly deported from their homes in the 1970s by the British who owned the islands.
- moonchrome 15y ago
  >History teaches us that there will always be hold-outs and that the most effective way to achieve this goal is through brute force. That's assuming you want them all of the island and that you need everyone's consent to take over, you just need the majority to be take power trough democratic process and the few that wish to remain could be employed/incorporated in to the state.
  - techiferous 15y ago
    True. And yes, please keep thinking of alternatives to brute force. :) I recently read a fascinating book called "Miles from Nowhere" which described life in the least populated counties in the U.S. One recurring theme is that counties with almost no one living in them are subject to being taken over by groups with their own agenda. For example, a county with only 150 people in it might be the target of a group of libertarians. 800 libertarians may agree to move there to set up a libertarian government. The point the book made was that virtually uninhabited is very different than uninhabited, and that there are still people there who have wishes, dreams and rights of their own. So what you are describing is actually an act of force. Overtaking Nauru for your own purposes is a unilateral destruction of someone's home. Imagine for some odd reason the entire population of China decided to buy out and relocate to your city and turn it into a Chinese culture and economy. You may have nothing against the Chinese or Chinese culture, but you may wish to simply keep your home city as is. Democracy is often thought of as peaceful, but it can often be a vehicle for the majority to disregard the legitimate needs of the minority.
    - 15y ago
ThaddeusQuay2 15y ago
If the data contained on your servers is bothersome enough to the US, then their military will simply bomb your tiny state out of existence, which is made even simpler if there is no one around to stand up for you. I've had this idea, both in the form of a small country, like yours, and in the form of a large ship, forever sailing the world's oceans, never docking anywhere, but both are easy targets. Far up in space or deep down in the ocean are likely the only good scenarios, and neither of those is cheap or easy.
tesseractive 15y ago
Ok, fine. So you're a billionaire with an island nation state and (presumably) a private army to protect it. As a business owner, I then have the choice of doing my business in a major Western democracy with an elected government that is publically answerable to millions of people, or subjecting my business to the whims of an eccentric billionaire with his own private army who is answerable to no one. If you want to do that with your own billions, have at it. But I wouldn't want to locate a business there, do business with you, or even go to work for you, an employer from whom I could have no possible legal recourse in the event of a dispute.
- moonchrome 15y ago
  >If you want to do that with your own billions, have at it. But I wouldn't want to locate a business there, do business with you, or even go to work for you, an employer from whom I could have no possible legal recourse in the event of a dispute. It sounds like you are risk averse and probably don't share the goals, wouldn't be swayed by the value proposition - so you wouldn't move there. It's true that there would have to be trust in the person doing this, but I'm assuming the billions didn't drop from the sky and I have done something to earn them, the process of getting them should provide plenty of material to evaluate my trustworthiness. Trusted third party insurance is also an option.
- michaelkeenan 15y ago
  > an employer from whom I could have no possible legal recourse in the event of a dispute. That part is easily solved: the dictator can put up a bond in some trusted country. The bond is forfeited if the dictator betrays you. The contract laws of the trusted country apply. It could be that some enterprising dictator could gain a better reputation for respect of property than the US government[1]. A reputation for respecting property rights, combined with a country, is an extremely lucrative asset, and it would be costly to lose it. > As a business owner, I then have the choice of doing my business in a major Western democracy with an elected government If moonchrome can offer a better regulatory environment, you might prefer to do business with him. Maybe your business is melanoma detection. HN user danifong approached YCombinator with that idea, and Graham told her[2]: “The trouble with the melanoma detection idea is that you’d spend most of your time dealing with legal and regulatory crap. That sort of work doesn’t really take advantage of your skills.” [1] The USA has questionable regard for property rights, e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London [2] http://daniellefong.com/2010/02/11/how-law-shapes-the-business-landscape-and-a-patent-puzzle/ http://daniellefong.com/2010/02/11/how-law-shapes-the-busine...
tocomment 15y ago
Thats an amazing idea. Would they take 5k each. If so we just need to find 10k people to contribute. Kick starter anyone?

newman314 15y ago

The problem with this is that that is just the first step. Having a nation with no alliances means that you will pretty much be invaded with impunity. But given the way certain nations have been behaving of late, having your own nation may not make much of a difference.

moonchrome 15y ago
In my fantasy billionaire scenario hiring PMC would be a viable option. Also, with lot's of cash to throw around - how hard would it be to build an alliance with neighboring states, bribing politicians, "friendly relations", etc. You would probably trade with them anyway, build a few facilities there to please the people/sell the story.

techiferous 15y ago

You'd have to be creative with the economy. Nauru is literally made of shit. The phosphate-rich soil has been basically completely mined, so it has very little natural resources. It's very expensive to have humans living on an island with little natural resources. You'd have to be very creative in your business model to make this work. But I imagine that's your point entirely: the business model would be founded on the "benevolent" dictatorship which would have the latitude to create a completely unique economic system that could attract particular types of business ventures.

moonchrome 15y ago
IMO you could afford to build high tech self sustaining enviroment for <50k people easily, a few micro nuclear reactors [1] would provide enough electricity, hydroponics, seafood farming, or advanced things like protein from bacteria/algae protein for food production, import the luxuries. They seem to have drinkable fresh water source, and with enough power and cash desalination is viable. The fantasy business model would be to be rich enough to be able to personally cover these costs and establish a high tech R&D environment :) I'm not suggesting that this is actually possible, it's one of those things - what would I do if I had Bill Gates kind of money. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toshiba_4S http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toshiba_4S
- JoachimSchipper 15y ago
  Wait, you're proposing to create an unfettered dictatorship with access to nuclear technology? And you think everyone will be fine with that?
  - moonchrome 15y ago
    Micro nuclear reactors don't have weapons grade uranium/plutonium in large quantities, AFAIK at best they could be used to build a dirty bomb. And what would be the point of that ? I'm not proposing building a religious sect, just a society of hand picked individuals from different fields, like engineering, natural sciences, architecture, arts etc.
    - deleted 15y ago
      [deleted]
    - jiggy2011 15y ago
      Reminds me somewhat of the "rapture" city in the game bioshock.
      - moonchrome 15y ago
        Hopefully it would be a boring, mutant free version :)

techiferous 15y ago

> I would offer 50.000k$ to every citizen to abdicate authority trough democratic process and move off the island (or possibly stay and work for me). History teaches us that there will always be hold-outs and that the most effective way to achieve this goal is through brute force. This is how the U.S. base in Diego Garcia came to be. The islanders who lived there were forcibly deported from their homes in the 1970s by the British who owned the islands.

moonchrome 15y ago
>History teaches us that there will always be hold-outs and that the most effective way to achieve this goal is through brute force. That's assuming you want them all of the island and that you need everyone's consent to take over, you just need the majority to be take power trough democratic process and the few that wish to remain could be employed/incorporated in to the state.
- techiferous 15y ago
  True. And yes, please keep thinking of alternatives to brute force. :) I recently read a fascinating book called "Miles from Nowhere" which described life in the least populated counties in the U.S. One recurring theme is that counties with almost no one living in them are subject to being taken over by groups with their own agenda. For example, a county with only 150 people in it might be the target of a group of libertarians. 800 libertarians may agree to move there to set up a libertarian government. The point the book made was that virtually uninhabited is very different than uninhabited, and that there are still people there who have wishes, dreams and rights of their own. So what you are describing is actually an act of force. Overtaking Nauru for your own purposes is a unilateral destruction of someone's home. Imagine for some odd reason the entire population of China decided to buy out and relocate to your city and turn it into a Chinese culture and economy. You may have nothing against the Chinese or Chinese culture, but you may wish to simply keep your home city as is. Democracy is often thought of as peaceful, but it can often be a vehicle for the majority to disregard the legitimate needs of the minority.
  - 15y ago

ThaddeusQuay2 15y ago

If the data contained on your servers is bothersome enough to the US, then their military will simply bomb your tiny state out of existence, which is made even simpler if there is no one around to stand up for you. I've had this idea, both in the form of a small country, like yours, and in the form of a large ship, forever sailing the world's oceans, never docking anywhere, but both are easy targets. Far up in space or deep down in the ocean are likely the only good scenarios, and neither of those is cheap or easy.

tesseractive 15y ago

Ok, fine. So you're a billionaire with an island nation state and (presumably) a private army to protect it. As a business owner, I then have the choice of doing my business in a major Western democracy with an elected government that is publically answerable to millions of people, or subjecting my business to the whims of an eccentric billionaire with his own private army who is answerable to no one. If you want to do that with your own billions, have at it. But I wouldn't want to locate a business there, do business with you, or even go to work for you, an employer from whom I could have no possible legal recourse in the event of a dispute.

moonchrome 15y ago
>If you want to do that with your own billions, have at it. But I wouldn't want to locate a business there, do business with you, or even go to work for you, an employer from whom I could have no possible legal recourse in the event of a dispute. It sounds like you are risk averse and probably don't share the goals, wouldn't be swayed by the value proposition - so you wouldn't move there. It's true that there would have to be trust in the person doing this, but I'm assuming the billions didn't drop from the sky and I have done something to earn them, the process of getting them should provide plenty of material to evaluate my trustworthiness. Trusted third party insurance is also an option.
michaelkeenan 15y ago
> an employer from whom I could have no possible legal recourse in the event of a dispute. That part is easily solved: the dictator can put up a bond in some trusted country. The bond is forfeited if the dictator betrays you. The contract laws of the trusted country apply. It could be that some enterprising dictator could gain a better reputation for respect of property than the US government[1]. A reputation for respecting property rights, combined with a country, is an extremely lucrative asset, and it would be costly to lose it. > As a business owner, I then have the choice of doing my business in a major Western democracy with an elected government If moonchrome can offer a better regulatory environment, you might prefer to do business with him. Maybe your business is melanoma detection. HN user danifong approached YCombinator with that idea, and Graham told her[2]: “The trouble with the melanoma detection idea is that you’d spend most of your time dealing with legal and regulatory crap. That sort of work doesn’t really take advantage of your skills.” [1] The USA has questionable regard for property rights, e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London [2] http://daniellefong.com/2010/02/11/how-law-shapes-the-business-landscape-and-a-patent-puzzle/ http://daniellefong.com/2010/02/11/how-law-shapes-the-busine...

tocomment 15y ago

Thats an amazing idea. Would they take 5k each. If so we just need to find 10k people to contribute. Kick starter anyone?