Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan launches dark-money group to influence CA politics

Reaction to the new dark‑money group

• Many commenters see the group as a clear signal of which candidates and policies to oppose; some call it “mask off” for a segment of the tech elite.
• A minority defend it as legitimate political participation: someone with strong views “putting money where their mouth is,” which they see as admirable even if they disagree on policy.
• Others argue intent is self‑interested: chiefly to block a California wealth tax and protect ultra‑rich tech fortunes, not to improve public policy.

Concerns about money, power, and democracy

• Broad agreement that wealthy individuals have disproportionate political influence, turning US “democracy” into something closer to plutocracy or “pay‑to‑win.”
• Citizens United and related decisions are heavily criticized as converting “one person, one vote” into “one dollar, one vote.” A few defend these rulings as correct applications of free‑speech and petition rights.
• Some say “getting money out of politics” is impossible because politics is about power, and money is a key form of power; at best its influence can be managed or constrained.
• The 501(c)(4) “dark money” structure—donor anonymity while funding campaigns—is seen as legalized influence‑buying.

Views on tech elites in politics

• Many express discomfort or outright hostility toward tech founders and investors moving into politics, especially those aligned with high‑profile billionaires and right‑leaning causes.
• There is deep cynicism that these actors are driven by ego, deregulation, anti‑tax politics, and protection of a “parasitic” billionaire class rather than public welfare.
• Others argue tech already has less influence in California government than critics assume and that business‑friendly advocacy is a valid counterweight to unions and public‑sector interests.

Wealth tax, inequality, and alternatives

• Strong pro‑wealth‑tax sentiment: billionaire wealth and political capture are framed as a collective‑action problem that must be addressed via taxation and/or structural reforms. Some go as far as calling for effectively taxing billionaires out of existence.
• Opponents call a recurring wealth or unrealized‑gains tax “confiscatory,” administratively unworkable, and likely to trigger capital flight (Norway is cited, with others disputing the impact).
• Alternatives floated: higher income/capital‑gains rates, closing “buy‑borrow‑die” loopholes with a borrowing tax, stronger unions, and tougher antitrust enforcement.

Broader disillusionment with the system

• Thread-wide frustration that US politics resembles open bribery via PACs, lobbying, and dark money.
• Some express fear this trajectory leads toward oligarchy and eventual violent backlash if concentrated power continues to harden.