What if we give all billionaires so much money they will become trillionaires ? Will that save democracy?
this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2026
412 points (98.4% liked)
politics
31071 readers
2256 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
We can raise taxes on the middle class and cut social services and education!
And don't let people enter the housing market. Just charge them higher and higher rent forever!
This was the only thing I could find that resembled a money boner
The author could totally rehash the ancient Athenian arguments, as their flavour of democracy was Sortition - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sortition . They (e.g. Aristotle, Plato) argued against elections - because rich and wealthy would capture them and take over the government, perverting it to further enrich themselves. The only way to have a democratic body was to select Senate (slight simplification, read the wiki for details) at random from all adult citizens.
This has been known to humanity for over 2500 years.
This concludes my democracy talk.
I've actually been in support for random selection for a long time. Treat the offices of the country like jury duty. Random selection every few years, and allow veto power via recall to remove them and do a new election if they do a poor job.
It can't possibly be worse than what we have now.
Something to keep in mind going forward to be sure. With the world how it is, a violent revolution is an inevitability. And what kind of governance we want afterwards needs to be thought up now.
I like the idea of replacing primaries with sortition. Select 10 candidates random from among the list of people who voted in the last election. If someone doesn't want to be on the list of candidates, they can decline and another will be added. Then you hold an election with a runoff between the randomly selected candidates.
I like this system because it still gives the people some choice. With 10 random candidates, it will be rare for an election to not have a diversity of viewpoints represented. So people will still be able to vote to support the policies they support. And you'll still have a voting layer to hopefully weed out the worst of the worst.
Yes, this would still let money have some impact on races. But it would eliminate the main way the wealthy actually influence elections - the primary phase. The wealthy have their most influence in politics before the primary even begins. Right now we're already in the middle of the 2028 shadow primary for the presidency. Potential candidates are quietly going around to potential wealthy backers, lining up support and financing in exchange for future favors. This is why "just vote in the primary!" never seems to work - the wealthy put their thumbs on the scale before the official primary even began.
It's very hard for people to get their name out there. If an average unknown person wants to run for US House or US Senate, they're going to need a ton of money just to get enough people to know their name. Candidates who aren't independently wealthy have to sell out before the primary process even begins. Replacing primaries with sortition would eliminate the greatest tool the wealthy have to influence elections, while still preserving the fundamental right of people to choose their leaders.
I really like the idea you have brought up. We need to get away from popular elections of candidates who represent parties towards a system of randomizing elected officials that places the focus on actual policies.
Politicians desperately need accountability. As it stands they can lie through their teeth and then do pretty much whatever they want once elected with zero consequences until the next election cycle.
If someone doesn’t want to be on the list of candidates, they can decline and another will be added.
We can just pay off whomever wins or threaten/disappear people until we find someone pro-billionaire.
Fatalism is fatal. You're postulating a mechanism that exists regardless of type of government, so it's irrelevant to the discussion here.
Getting rid of the capitalists is a requirement before any change can take place.
It could be argued that the us has NEVER actually been a true democracy, or even a functioning representative republic. I'd argue all government is just theatre if I was feeling really fatalistic. I'm not though. We can build a world that's not evil.
It's okay, soon we won't have Billionaires.
They'll all be Trillionaires.
In 2020, Elon Musk was worth about $25 billion dollars.
6 years later, he’s worth a trillion.
Eat the rich.
You're can't have power distributed widely if you concentrate it narrowly. It's the simplest fucking thing.
Funny - I think he’s misinterpreting what freedom means
In a 2009 Cato Unbound Thiel wrote: “I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible.”
Isn't that what the billionaires are starting to say?
Yes - that’s a quote from Peter Thiel
that is a given by now. for billionaires the name of the game is "which politicians are my bitches"
Can't have democracy with conservatism and religion.
Because they both actively try to destroy democracy
The author they're criticizing, McGinnis, sounds like a real asshole.
Right, so you don't have a democracy. What are you going to do about it?
Would unfettered Fascism and Billionaires exist? The leader would just take all their wealth. Look at North Korea.
If you could define fascism, you would know that they're very compatible. In fact, liberalism turns to fascism to save capitalists from Consequences™
NK isn't fascist, buddy. Authoritarian, yes. Communist, mostly. Feudal, quite a bit. But not fascist.
Fascism is the marriage of the state and corporations to protect both from growing resentment, using nationalism to distract the public from their actual troubles.
Fascism is the marriage of the state and corporations to protect both from growing resentment, using nationalism to distract the public from their actual troubles.
Now I'm not sure if you are trolling because that sounds an awful lot like NK... They don't have corporations like in your definition but they do have very powerful syndicates who influence and manage any internal conflict.
Which are the similarities between fascism and communism I guess, the differences being a merger of private companies as opposed to a grouping of government ones.
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›