Keep seeing people comment that if they were billionaires, they’d be the good kind, who used their money to help society.

And I have to keep pointing out, you don’t get to be a billionaire if you’re a person who’d help society. You don’t accumulate the billion dollars: you used it helping society.

(Yes, if somehow some foolish billionaire left me theirs when they died, I would be a billionaire who used it helping society; but no billionaire is gonna die and leave me, in particular, their money. I am related to no one with that kind of money)
@dariaphoebe A fair number of billionaires do inherit their wealth, but since they’re usually trained from birth to guard the hoard, I’d say your core premise stands.
@dariaphoebe To be fair, billionaires seem to be generally hellbent on not leaving their money to others. And what’s with the hanging on to it at all costs until death in old age? What are they even doing with it then?

@kevinteljeur @dariaphoebe if you're taking about the philanthropist class, I think it should be amended to, billionaires are hell-bent on being -seen- as not wanting to leave their money to others

The evidence for them actually putting their literal money where their mouth is, is slim.

@dariaphoebe @corbden This isn’t as silly as it sounds.

At this time in history, $1 billion is an arbitrary number that roughly meets the point where powerful people either become benefactors or focus on their wealth for the rest of their lives.

@dariaphoebe @corbden I love “the exception that proves the rule” candidates because they’re so questionable and rare, but here’s one —

Bezos’s ex-wife has the billionaire dollars but not the billionaire mindset. She may prove to be biggest benefactor in our lifetimes.

Melinda Gates and her influence on her ex-husband in the Gates foundation may be another blurrier example.

As a general concept I am fascinated by good people inside evil teams, and what would’ve happened without them

@dariaphoebe That's about right... if I landed the B-word in the lottery or sommat, I would first hire a lawyer, then tell the lawyer to hire me an accountant, and then go look up an old friend and get her to rec me a philanthropy consultant, and set about giving it away. Yes, I'd hang onto a chunk of it, but the vast majority of it's gonna land in somebody else's pocket.

@stonebear yeah.

pay off our house, fix or replace my car, and then set about giving away the rest

@dariaphoebe @stonebear alas money is power and we have scientific research demonstrating that power destroys your capacity for empathy. You need to have your plans set in stone before you even know you'll have the money or else your decision making is probably already corrupted and can't be trusted. You won't be the ethical billionaire, you'll just be another billionaire thinking they're the ethical one.

I did a poor-person's quote retweet of this, just wanted to be transparent about it:

https://recurse.social/@zev/109714330145519658

Zev Averbach (@[email protected])

Content warning: whataboutism, billionaires

recurse.social
@dariaphoebe If a person works hard they can, at max earn and save $10M and still be a good person and even that is debatable. The ONLY way one gains Billions is by stealing the labor of others, in other words parts of their very lives.
@dariaphoebe Also, the way to become a billionaire is to ruthlessly exploit people and the system.
@dariaphoebe Also, I think the urge for MORE, More, More, carried that far, is more than a little sick.
@dariaphoebe The mere fact that there are billionaires suggests that the world economies are messed up, that someone is producing value for nothing or next to nothing while someone else is scooping up the goodies.
@dariaphoebe billionaires don’t have consciences. That’s how they became billionaires.
@dariaphoebe one of the richest Norwegians moved to Switzerland afterNorway raised its wealth tax to 1.1%. The rich are like Smaug, adore money
@dariaphoebe That means as soon as you build something valuable, you give it away, meaning you lose control of building if further. Even if doing so works and allows the business to keep growing, which is plausible because people certainly can run businesses without having much equity in them, at what point would good people start divesting? Why not $100M or even $10M or $1M?

@dariaphoebe was referring to billionaires. I don't know who you're talking about @cgervasi, but there isn't a single billionaire who can be said to have got their billions because they "built something valuable".

The challenge is to find *any* hyper wealthy person who has got there by doing anything that could remotely be called "valuable to society". It's always exploited unjustly, from the resources and labour of others.

@bignose @cgervasi you can get enough money to be fine, to even maintain your vision, without being super wealthy. 🤷🏼‍♀️

Yep, agreed entirely @dariaphoebe. Once your income secures a comfortable life now and indefinitely until you die, then any more income you get is not rightly yours to hold.

To the extent that money represents the ability to direct what other people do, anything more than that amount of money is not rightly vested in any person. I don't care what they've "built" @cgervasi, they can be comfortable and then they have no more right to accumulate inordinate wealth.

@bignose
I might be confused by the definitions. I'm calling wealth things of value, which can be measured by money people would willing pay for it. Money is just the medium of exchange. I think you're saying people have a right to other people's wealth, which just seems patently wrong to me.
@dariaphoebe

@cgervasi @bignose I agree. I peopoe have a right to be exploitative by paying their employees inadequate wages.

That’s what you were talking about, right?

@dariaphoebe
I obviously don't want people to get away with exploitation. I think more people than ever have their rights respected and are free to enter honest trades with honest courts enforcing their agreements. The world has a LONG way to go, but the long arc bends toward justice. 🙂🤞🏽
@bignose

@cgervasi
> I think more people than ever have their rights respected and are free to enter honest trades with honest courts enforcing their agreements.

This simply does not describe our world. The hyper-wealthy are profiting massively while the rest of us see our real wealth decline (which you gloss as "the world is so much wealthier").

> I obviously don't want people to get away with exploitation.

And yet it is the norm today for billionaires. Let's stop them, forever.

@dariaphoebe

@bignose
I don't see wealth declining, except in war zones, and even those are decreasing. (Hopefully Russia's invasion of Ukraine is an anomaly not an end to the trend.) To me it looks like the world is way wealthier than 100 years ago and WAY better than the pre-Englightnment world of imaginary demons and no concept of liberty.

Most (not all) people with high net worths are in free places with less exploitation. The problem is not related to wealth.
@dariaphoebe

@cgervasi

I said

> The hyper-wealthy are profiting massively while the rest of us see our real wealth decline

You replied

> I don't see wealth declining [...] the world is way wealthier

thereby completely erasing any understanding of *some* people accumulating vast wealth while *everyone else* has a crappier impoverished world to live in.

You've done it several times now, and I think it reveals that you care more about abstract number go up, than about people's real lives.

@dariaphoebe

@bignose
I think (could be wrong) that most everyone is way wealthier, and freer, which is also why most people are getting wealthier.
@dariaphoebe
@dariaphoebe @bignose I agree completely. The world is so much wealthier than in the past, despite having a huge population. So many people are building wealth for themselves, and I think it will accelerate if we can keep beating the Malthusian trap, deal with the the environment (climate change and other problems), and keep expanding liberty. Those are difficult problems, but solving them leads to huge prosperity.

@bignose
Why not? If you build something that generates $100k/yr consistently it's worth $1M. The same ratio holds true if you can create something t that generates $100M, making it worth $1B.

@dariaphoebe

@dariaphoebe The only good billionaire is the one who promptly ceases to be a billionaire.
@dariaphoebe Every time I hear the words "billionaire philanthropist," I just think wow, they must really suck at philanthropy.
@dariaphoebe Exactly.... there's a certain sociopathy associated with wealth accumulation; which includes inherited wealth.
@dariaphoebe @vaurora The only less-exploitative way to become a billionaire that I can think of is to divorce a billionaire. There really are no good billionaires.