Ok, finally seems like the right place to share my pitch for a Silicon Valley spin-off:
Gavin Belsom, and a bunch of other billionaires, flee to New Zealand only to find it’s crowded with all of the people they know (and despise). So now they’re stuck with each other.
It’s like Galt’s Gulch from Atlas Shrugged meets Gilligan’s Island.
First episode ends with someone coughing, cuts to Belsom’s distraught face, obscure hip-hop track plays.
It's kind of telling that these billionaires think it's easier (or at least cheaper?) to flee than invest in maintaining a functioning civil society. I guess they're hoping that somebody else (kiwis, apparently) has done that work elsewhere.
I have always questioned this claim. I feel like this is a manipulative behavior modification aspect of an abusive relationship. Give us some of your money or else will forcefully take it from you.
But let's study it from a historical point of view, what reasons do we have to believe that a strategy like that would work? Alexander II, Czar of Russia, the grandfather of Tsar Nicolas, instigated a lot of drastic land reforms, he eliminated serfdom from Russia, but the revolution happened nonetheless. In fact he himself was killed by the revolutionaries.
It would have been far far cheaper an easier for Tsars to have invested in an escape route.
> “Obviously the coronavirus is making people realize how vulnerable we all are, but what people are really concerned about is the aftermath,” said Vicino, the Vivos founder, who believes the wealthy fear an economic collapse or global depression could lead to uprisings against the top 1%. “They don't want to have to defend their homes when the gangs of looters or marauders show up.”
Apparently some wealthy people view the coronavirus pandemic as "The Event" they have been preparing for. From this[1] article:
> I got invited to a super-deluxe private resort to deliver a keynote speech ... to deliver some insight on the subject of “the future of technology” ... my audience ... five super-wealthy guys ... from the upper echelon of the hedge fund world. ... They had no interest in the information I had prepared about the future of technology. They had come with questions of their own.
> [After a few innocent questions], the CEO of a brokerage house explained that he had nearly completed building his own underground bunker system and asked, “How do I maintain authority over my security force after the event?”
> The Event. That was their euphemism for the environmental collapse, social unrest, nuclear explosion, unstoppable virus, or Mr. Robot hack that takes everything down.
> This single question occupied us for the rest of the hour. They knew armed guards would be required to protect their compounds from the angry mobs. But how would they pay the guards once money was worthless? What would stop the guards from choosing their own leader? The billionaires considered using special combination locks on the food supply that only they knew. Or making guards wear disciplinary collars of some kind in return for their survival. Or maybe building robots to serve as guards and workers - if that technology could be developed in time.
Not the person you replied to but my guess is because if your priority is to maintain your authority, instead of doing something useful for society, then maybe you’re unfit for having the authority to begin with?
And this is why the Mexican standoff between the elites and the common people exists. You think that you have a right to dictate when someone can own something or not, so people who own something invest in ensuring that they maintained the right to own something.
What makes you believe that "ownership" is even a meaningful concept in the absence of a social and a legal system that recognizes property?
If you're at the point of trying to install discipline collars on your formerly-hired goons, maybe that 25% capital gains tax rate starts to look pretty reasonable in retrospect.
Are you kidding me? I presume that the referenced poster is an NZ citizen. NZ is a democracy. (S)he has every right to express an opinion about who is able to become a resident or citizen of their country, as well as decide who can own its land. In fact non-NZ residents/citizens are not allowed to buy property in the country.
Just to be clear I think it's a terrible idea for Americans to go to another country, because here in America our founding fathers realized it 243 years ago that a democracy cannot be given all the power at once and that it must be curtailed, that's why they created a Bill of Rights.
> I presume that the reference poster is...
I don't think that the comment I was responding to was talking about New Zealand oh, but a general Democratic principle.
they love running stories like but it's actually nonsense, and there's no evidence of it happening, as the article itself admits at the end. the crypto guy quoted here sounds like a clown.
you don't need to hide in NZ. going with NZ just adds significant layers of complexity and risk, as we have seen now - orders can be closed to non-residents and citizens as NZ and AU have done now; airlines can cancel flights due to lack of demand leaving you stuck. In addition if you get to south island NZ you do not need to hide underground. You'll be fine above.
Just buy some land in Idaho in hilly/mountainous areas, I promise nobody is going to bother looting you there, and you can always drive there from CA if you need to.
Gavin Belsom, and a bunch of other billionaires, flee to New Zealand only to find it’s crowded with all of the people they know (and despise). So now they’re stuck with each other.
It’s like Galt’s Gulch from Atlas Shrugged meets Gilligan’s Island.
First episode ends with someone coughing, cuts to Belsom’s distraught face, obscure hip-hop track plays.