But what is certain is that campaign money contributes to the GDP. It funds a lot of salaries. This is the broken window fallacy. If you have two groups with d

But what is certain is that campaign money contributes to the GDP. It funds a lot of salaries. This is the broken window fallacy. If you have two groups with diametrically opposed goals, giving them each more money to spend "increases GDP" in a local sense, but the result is that a bunch of people spend a lot of effort for a net result of zero, when it could have gone toward something useful. I'd rather that money go to people instead of a faceless cryptofund. I think that's the joke. Yeah, the crypto piece is just for additional silliness. For a real version of this you'd need, like, a spreadsheet with two columns.