I don’t mean doctor-making-150k-a-year rich, I mean properly rich with millions to billions of dollars.
I think many will say yes, they can be, though it may be rare. I was tempted to. I thought more about it and I wondered, are you really a good person if you’re hoarding enough money you and your family couldn’t spend in 10 lifetimes?
I thought, if you’re a good person, you wouldn’t be rich. And if you’re properly rich you’re probably not a good person.
I don’t know if it’s fair or naive to say, but that’s what I thought. Whether it’s what I believe requires more thought.
There are a handful of ex-millionaires who are no longer millionaires because they cared for others in a way they couldn’t care for themselves. Only a handful of course, I would say they are good people.
And in order to stay rich, you have to play your role and participate in a society that oppresses the poor which in turn maintains your wealth. Are you really still capable of being a good person?
Very curious about people’s thoughts on this.
I firmly believe there are no ways to become “properly” rich that don’t require you to be a bad person.
To get out of that “doctor-making-150k-a-year” category you need some combination of greed, exploitative practices, manipulating broken capitalist systems, nepotism, ruthlessness, corruption, bribery, and outright lying.
idk, you probably have a small number of artists and genuinely lucky-sons-of-bitches who get proper rich without being bad people. Or at least with their wealth not coming from being a bad person.
Yeah, fair enough, I’m not too arrogant to admit there are exceptions to every rule.
And more power to artists and exotic chefs and others, who are able to get sociopath billionaires to fork out crazy amounts of money for their work.
Removed by mod
I don’t think I can 100% get behind the direct link that being an artist makes you a virtuous person, though I understand your bigger point.
I think we are overlooking tremendously how the art world is often a method in which the ultra wealthy wash their money. I don’t think that artists that rise to the level of success of becoming a household name are blind to this.
I agree totally, which is why I made that distinction. And my last point about participating in the system that oppresses the poor just to maintain your own wealth. I can’t see how someone like that could be considered good.
We’re all arguably participating in that same system.
Not like we have a choice, especially those of us in poverty. You’re dealt your hand and thats that. Born poor, die poor. Born rich, enjoy life. Shouldn’t be that way but it is
Removed by mod
You can be born into it.
I’d say you’re a bad person if you’re born into it and don’t actively try to get rid of it.
I think the point of being a rich asshole is 1 billion dollars usd. Even 999mm is too much, but over 1 bil is an easy demarcation of excessive wealth.
1 billion? I think rich asshole starts much lower than that or 999 million, thats a fuck ton of money. Rich asshole begins at 1-3 million and up.
999 million what? 999 million net worth? What happens when the market goes on a 15% hike like in 2020? Do you become the bad guy? Or is that 999 million in liquid assets (spoiler alert billionaires don’t have 1 billion in the bank). Thinking you have a point shows how ignorant you are about wealth except the fact you hate people who have more than you
Someone who has 999 million has looked at their wealth and said, “I need more”, while knowing how hard normal people are struggling. The same goes for people with 500 million.
500 million, even if it’s entirely illiquid, is enough to you and your entire family to live 10 lives of absolute luxury while never working. You can borrow against it and still grow your wealth faster than any reasonable person could spend it.
It’s not about the specific amount of money, it’s that they keep increasing their wealth far beyond any reasonable point.
It’s a childish argument to say anyone who criticizes billionaires is jealous. I don’t want to be a billionaire, I want everyone to have a little wealth.
That was going to be my response. If you’re obscenely wealthy but you’re in the process of trying to get rid of that wealth via philanthropy, I think you get a pass.
And not just “pledges”. Actual donations.
So like, almost no multimillionaires.
Bill Gates gets a ton of benefits from his philanthropy. He gets to pay less taxes, he gets to influence the world with his donations, he gets honored at functions for his donations, he gets social validation. All while increasing his wealth.
Philanthropists basically always get benefits from their donations. Real people get hurt while they amass their wealth, and when they give a fraction of it away, they get far more benefits than a middle class person who donated a similar fraction of their wealth.
Arthur Sackler is a perfect example of philanthropy for personal benefit. He amassed his wealth directly on human suffering, getting America addicted to benzodiazepines and then opiates years later. He used his donations to museums to get himself a free place to store the artifacts he was collecting, and trained staff to preserve them. He got events in his honor. He got a hospital wing named after him, which came with priority service at a NYC hospital, where they keep specially equipped rooms and immediate access to a doctor for benefactors.
I’ll be impressed with a billionaire giving away their wealth when one of them gives it to a cause that will work to prevent anyone else from becoming a billionaire.