[ExI] Yet more misinformation of the sort found on TwitterX

[spike at rainier66.com]

-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat <extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org> On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat
Sent: Tuesday, 18 August, 2026 10:19 AM
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Cc: Adrian Tymes <atymes at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] Yet more misinformation of the sort found on TwitterX

On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 1:14 PM <spike at rainier66.com> wrote:
> Prop 40, the billionaire tax Adrian.  Had not Elon fled California, he was at risk of owing the state 50 billion dollars.  One can buy a lot of signed voter registration forms for fifty billion dollars.

1) But he has, so he's no longer at that particular risk, no?

2) The remaining population in California that might be affected do not seem inclined toward massive voter registration.

3) The amount of unregistered homeless in California does not seem sufficient to defeat Prop. 40, even if literally all of them (of age to vote, and even if one ignores citizenship requirements) were registered and voted to defeat Prop. 40 as you suggest.

_______________________________________________



1)  The current governor of California is a likely candidate for national office.  He has specifically called for a national level 5% billionaire tax.  Elon is of course at risk, as are all billionaires (and millionaires (and eventually thousandaires.))

2)  Irrelevant.  If billionaires collectively start offering real money for signed voter applications, it will happen.

3)  ...even if literally all of them... sure.  But we don't know what literally all of them means, nor do we have any clear recourse if way more than literally all of them register to vote.  How would we disprove those applications, if we can't find the people who filled them out?  We have no mechanism for finding any particular homeless person.

Where I was going with it: of all places to commit massive voter fraud, California is the best, better even than Michigan.  In California we have arbitrarily large numbers of homeless people (because the climate is mild enough here one can live outdoors indefinitely (and the charity infrastructure is sufficient to support that lifestyle.))  Nobody worries about it much because we have a one-party system.  But... what if... that party unexpectedly loses?  And it hands over all 54 EC votes, which reverses the election?  Then what?  What if... the governor says the election was obviously stolen and proposes sending the state's party's delegates, since everyone knows they really won.  

The resulting chaos would make 2000 look like a Presbyterian ministers' picnic.

spike