Without getting into the accuracy of the asserted factual premises, this effort seems doomed from day one unless two critical issues are addressed:

(1) Lack of focus in goals: is this about present economic fairness, political inclusiveness, preserving American hemegony, adjusting the rules of society and the economy to address coming automation, fiscal responsibility, or a return to the past? All of these are cited, with no priorities or uniting structure. This is a messaging problem, sure, but more fundamentally it's a problem of vision.

(2) Lack of focus in methods: this claims to be about California first, but the races Altman says he's interested are the most and, in many ways, the least powerful of California's dozen or so directly-elected executive positions, plus federal legislative positions. If the focus is California-first, then the races of interest should be all of the California statewide Constitutional officers, plus California legislators (and maybe California statewide boards and commissions).

Non american citizen living in the US. Just a couple of though while reading "most" of it.

> I was one of the last children of the American Century. I’m not quite ready to let it go. If we don’t take action now, the US will be surpassed as the world superpower. I’d like to get back to the values that made our country the envy of the world. I still believe in American exceptionalism, and even with Trump in the White House, my proudest identity of all is being American.

> and the US should be the technology center for the world.

> US workers are the most productive in the world when they are allowed to compete on a level playing field.

This obsession with America position in the world is so pervasive that i think most thinker don't realize that it has a cost. A lot of bad policies and decisions have been in the name of "American exceptionalism".

> We should require that Californian politicians and senior civil service send their kids to public schools. They need to be aligned.

This would be a game changer...

> 1. Prosperity from technology > Creating prosperity is how everyone’s lives get better every year.

How true is this. Or is it just the author focusing on what worked for him.

Cool. I wonder where Altman stands on Citizens United and the aftermath that is super PACs. A big problem to me is how to keep money out of politics wherever possible.

I guess this would fall under his "fair government" policy, although I don't see it explicitly mentioned.

Do libertarians support having super PACs? That would be yikes to me.

Unless that is a primary issue for a candidate, I don't see how we'll ever get back to fair government, with one person one vote. There's just too much money in it already.

Why did this get flagged? A bunch of people being sour? If the technology community cannot come together here to find solutions to the problems of government, where shall we gather?

How many people here can name their state senator or representative?

Of the hundreds of people who might read this, I'm sure only a small handful could do it without looking it up. It's a serious problem that people don't follow state politics at all, and it's not a problem with the people themselves. We need a system that doesn't require people to follow what their president, senator, congressman, governor, state senator, mayor, and city councilman, along with dozens of other elected officials, are doing while in office.

If you're going to promote change, don't just promote a change in who we elect, because there's a Nash equilibrium that leads them to behave as all politicians have. Promote a change in HOW we elect them. Change the rules of the game and a different game will be played.

I can name one engineer who was president, Jimmy Carter. How many politicians in general are engineers or scientists? How many are in positions Sam mentions? My guess would be < 10%. I'm probably overestimating. Engineers are probably one of the most if not the most under represented in the field of politics. I can name a few doctors who are candidates or successful politicians.

Engineers can be politicians, would be the name of my non-profit. This new yorker piece is also a good read: http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/two-nasa-engineers-tr...

He should apply the Y combinator business model: $120k twice per year in exchange for influence over 7% of candidate's congressional voting decisions. /s

> Today, we have massive wealth inequality, little economic growth, a system that works for people born lucky, and a cost of living that is spiraling out of control.

Mr. Altman seems highly capable in affecting change here by funding and encouraging startups outside of the valley.

Of course the encredible story of wealth creation in the valley is the envy of most of the world, and they would kill to be in the situation we're in, as bad as it is.

This is a really innovative take on what traditionally would be accomplished by A PAC. Specifically, I like how transparent this is in relation to the current ways this would be done. He even gives reasoning on what his goals are [1].

[1] http://unitedslate.samaltman.com/ten-policy-goals.html

The structural problems of American democracy are because candidates are unaccountable outside (except to their donors) outside a small election window, where they temporarily perform whatever act will allowed them to attain or hold onto power.

If Altman is sincere about wanting better candidates, I'd suggest pushing for technology-driven direct democracy, candidates who, in real time, act and respond to feedback from their constituencies. Trump was elected because he did an informal version of this via Twitter. John Robb outlined how this would work:

http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2017/02...

We essentially need to disrupt the notion of candidates and turn them into our true avatars for interfacing with the political system.

Why is Sam's post flagged?

Political discourse is off-limits on Hacker News *

*Except when Sam Altman feels like talking about it

California is not the problem. Why would you waste your time supporting the wealthiest, most educated, most progressive state? You would spend millions of dollars and countless hours in California, only to lose because of Texas, Arkansas, Alabama, Louisiana, etc. etc.

You need to focus your efforts on the red south, which are filled with highly uneducated, highly manipulable people, which political parties use to get elected.

> We need a system that doesn't require people to follow what their president, senator, congressman, governor, state senator, mayor, and city councilman, along with dozens of other elected officials, are doing while in office.

... so you don't want a representative government? Couldn't disagree more. Sure it's tough to keep up with everything they're doing. But I like being able to look into it at my leisure, and I trust my community to bring important issues to my attention. Just because I don't know exactly how my representative has voted doesn't mean I'm unaware of how government is changing things that impact my life.

Really unclear to me how you would accomplish your goals without eliminating democracy as we know it.

The opposite of everything you just said. People need to be fucking responsible and learn what is right, if you need to experiment, make mistakes, fine. You are personally responsible for the government you get. You can learn before an election, take the day off if you can. There should be a national holiday. Go to meet your congressman once, like you would go to a PTA meeting if you had a child. None of this is hard. If you voted for a 3rd party candidate in FL in 2000 and MI, PA, WI in 2016, it is your fault Bush/Trump are in office. You didn't vote tactically. The rules of democracy are working just fine. We can bring about a constitutional amendment for citizens united, and abolish the electoral college. If people believe those are the right things to be doing, they will happen. If we start educating people now, maybe change will happen in years or decades.

Engineers can be impatient if there aren't quick technical answers. Engineers can also believe the latest research will give them answers, also not true. Quite a few startup founders I've heard have some absolute shit theories about politics. I can understand being a technologist, but a technologist who doesn't take the time to understand politics, or has no experience in politics needs to take the time to listen and learn before trying to impose anything on anyone.

Politics at it's root is civic engagement and it should be back to basics, just like it has been for journalism over the last yr or two.