“Why are all of these evil billionaires…”
Well, let’s start with the billionaire part. Would someone who hasn’t a phenomenal asshole just keep accumulating wealth after the first couple hundred million? They don’t need it. They can’t use it. A human with empathy and a desire to do good would be spending it lifting others out of suffering.
@mcnado Or paying taxes...
Oct 20, 2026, 11:18 AM@dnkboston @mcnado Why pay taxes, when you can pay hundreds of millions to avoid paying taxes?
@mcnado Cause and effect, billionaires might not have started as assholes, but being a billionaire makes you one. Both directly (it's toxic to one's mind having that much power) and also indirect having that much power is being evil inherently.
That said, the why does not matter. We can change our society, or we can go back to 18th century France. There is no third option.
While it's true that, beyond a certain point, accumulation of further wealth becomes an act of violence against society, you do get to join a pretty cool club.
@grammasaurus @mcnado yes.
@mcnado Literally, the sole objective of accumulating capital is so you can give it away to people who need it more than you do.
@mcnado @LJ This is exactly what I think. I was fortunate a little over 20 years ago to be earning more money than I could spend. It wasn't anywhere near what these guys bring in, but it helped me to understand that there is an "enough" when it comes to income. These people have no idea of what "enough" is.
Oct 21, 2026, 10:25 AMI think there's also a 'too much'. The Paradox of Choice was caught up in the reproducibility crisis, but there's at least a kernel of truth. Too many constraints make people unhappy, but no constraints also make people unhappy. And, above a certain level of wealth, you're basically living in constant FOMO: everything that you do comes with a huge opportunity cost because there are so many things that you could be doing instead of whatever you're doing.
I'm curious what level this kicks in. A couple of million is enough that you can get the kind of income most people have with a job, but without having to work. Assuming a 5% return, two million gives you £100K/year to live on, which (if you don't have large obligations like a mortgage) lets you live comfortably, but with the same set of constraints as a bunch of other people. When you get to something like £30M, your income £1.5M/year at a 5% return. That's enough that you can buy a house in cash every year. You can travel anywhere in the world, in comfort, on a whim and stay for as long as a local immigration lets you. You can afford to employ a few skilled people full time to work on things that you care about.
Above that? What are you even going to do with money? You either start becoming massively obsessed with retaining and increasing your wealth, or you live paralysed by the thought of all of the things that you can easily afford to do but don't have time to do. I suspect it's incredibly hard to be happy with that much wealth.
@david_chisnall @mcnado @LJ What I'm seeing in these people is that they just keep buying shit that they don't need or maybe even want. For example, how many homes can a person use? For a while, when I was married, we had three modest homes. One was an off the grid cabin; super modest. It was a huge pain in the ass to manage and use them. Now imagine the superrich folks with giant mansions all over the world. (1/2)
Why? How much time could they possibly spend in each one?
Could I be happy with that much wealth? Yes, but because I would give so much of it away. The pleasure would be in seeing my money help other people. Once my needs and desires were fulfilled, what else is there? Helping other people, obviously. Bill Gates understands this. Warren Buffett understands this. Why can't people like Bezos and Musk? (2/2)
@david_chisnall @mcnado @LJ
@mcnado
We should relieve them of their billions and see if they become better people. For science, and for their own good of course 🤗
Oct 20, 2026, 1:04 PM@mcnado Maximizing profits is the priority of #Capitalism, not equitable thriving, such that #DemSoc upholds.
Oct 20, 2026, 1:46 PM@mcnado you can't tax monopoly money, and thats exactly what their wealth is - theoretical.
So true. I didn't discover it until a year ago, but these guys and gals don't have income often. They have assets. With most of the world's tax structure you don't tax assets until they are sold.
(This why many seem to brag that they don't take a salary at a company but only get paid in stock.)
So how do they live? They take out loans on their assets to get liquid cash. The loans are designed to where the interest payment is tax deductible. Any stock dividends that are coming in is enough to pay off the loan.
And don't get me started with fine art and how they hide their $$ with it, get loans from it, and how selling to others makes it value double or more in just a year.
They do pay some tax. It's just not their fair share.
Oct 20, 2026, 6:01 PM@noodlemaz @mcnado I don't even blame them, they are just using the loopholes the system provides. Unless you fix the loopholes, at best you take from one generation of billionaires while the next one is right around the corner. It's hard to initially acquire wealth, but once you have some, the compounding effect goes insane...
Oct 20, 2026, 6:03 PM@noodlemaz @mcnado It's how money and finances work, I invest in a small scale, but I got like 40% return on my investment. Now imagine a 40% increase on hundreds of millions they have. They just scale in a way you can't catch them anymore.
Oct 20, 2026, 7:08 PM@noodlemaz @mcnado You can't blame people for "breaking a rule" if the rule doesn't exist. In capitalism, there is no limit how much wealth you can accumulate. There is no "don't be greedy" rule. You would need to chamge the system to communism, declare everything is public property, and private ownership is banned. Then you can prevent bilionaired from existing, at least those not in power over the country.
Oct 20, 2026, 7:10 PM@noodlemaz @mcnado you can try to tax them, but then they can just move. You would need to be able to close all loopholes at once, fast. Otherwise they just... Move. And some times they are so integrated into the system, same as cancer. If they go down, they can easily pull society with them.
Oct 20, 2026, 7:26 PM@noodlemaz @mcnado IDK what you want me to say, it's not like people share all resources in the society. Everyone still cares about their own family, and will put them over the rest of the society. There is the one single rule that defines all the things we discussed: "the job of a company is to maximize shareholder value". So... That would need to go away. That or everyone MUST become a shareholder.
Rewarding psychopathy is bad for everybody.
Oct 20, 2026, 3:03 PM@mcnado "hundred"? A handful is enough for a lifetime.
@mcnado It feels so validating to hear other people say what I’m thinking! 🙏🏽
@mcnado …and if they won't behave responsibly on their own, it's society's duty to compel them to do so.
I feel guilty dreaming of a dizzying $500k to live the rest of my life in Hulk Just Want Be Alone (with exceptions) simplicity.
That's rich to me.
I can't fathom a day where my bank balance doesn't impact my smallest choices. That's crazy.
@mcnado Hell, even spending a couple hundred million on an insane hobby project would be relatable and not particularly evil.
(I have a few ideas what to do in the unlikely event I'm ever fabulously wealthy).
"evil billionaire" is redundant
@anarchademic @mcnado You could get more than 15 at a time by alternative placement of participant each side of device.... just saying.
@mcnado There's something fundamentally wrong with these wealth hoarders.
@mcnado By “hasn’t,” did you mean “isn’t”?
@deFractal lol. Yes.
@mcnado just one more comma, bro.
@mcnado Once you have enough, it's surprisingly difficult to spend it all.