Wouldn't it have the opposite effect ? Maybe I'm jaded but I would say we have very few sensible politicians as is now.

I think it’s highlighting that it would just be a false sense that we can define a perfect filter and it could actually backfire and be worse than our current status quo.

I personally don’t like wealthy always being in politics, but I do at least think they are familiar with large budgets and understand some fiscal issues. We have to acknowledge that as you leave the 1%ers, in the US, you’re quickly in a demographic that lives paycheck to paycheck and not just because of their income level. I don’t necessarily want those people controlling our national budgets, or don’t think it would be wise, and I don’t think the temptation to skim/benefit where they can would be eliminated. It might be even more pronounced, as it’s seen as a path to make money more so as the benevolence of public service we all imagine it should be. They might be more likely to give in to overt corruption versus exploiting a loophole or something similar.

It seems odd because we’re spinning further and faster into our end as a nation, or so it feels, so some change may be necessary but I don’t think this really helps. It might just exacerbate the issue.

Uh you think glory hounds with messianic complexes and a need to be loved would quit because of investment restrictions.