Stocks cannot be negative. I get the hate surrounding AI companies, but the resistance to this idea makes no sense to me.
In my opinion the number should be closer to 50% instead of 5% - but in both cases if AI companies are the biggest bubble in the world and go bankrupt then the government is left with a $0 value stock they didn’t give any money for…
If ai companies don’t go bankrupt then any returns they do generate go to the government which can be used to provide public services and offset the average Americans tax bill, thus passing any potential gains from ai to the people who generated the training data for them in the first place.
There are no gains. Ownership equates to subsidies. Why are you taking the value of the stock as an asset? If you aren’t going to flip it on the open market which the government 100% is not then it doesn’t matter what the price is. Uncle Sam doesn’t need a fucking HLOC
5% of a negative number is negative
Stocks cannot be negative. I get the hate surrounding AI companies, but the resistance to this idea makes no sense to me.
In my opinion the number should be closer to 50% instead of 5% - but in both cases if AI companies are the biggest bubble in the world and go bankrupt then the government is left with a $0 value stock they didn’t give any money for…
If ai companies don’t go bankrupt then any returns they do generate go to the government which can be used to provide public services and offset the average Americans tax bill, thus passing any potential gains from ai to the people who generated the training data for them in the first place.
There are no gains. Ownership equates to subsidies. Why are you taking the value of the stock as an asset? If you aren’t going to flip it on the open market which the government 100% is not then it doesn’t matter what the price is. Uncle Sam doesn’t need a fucking HLOC
I just don’t think governments should be in the business of burning down our planet just to make it easier for some techbros to not do their own work.