They're actively lobbying to raise the taxes of their tax bracket. That's the opposite of empty virtue signalling. Their messaging is "people like us don't pay

They're actively lobbying to raise the taxes of their tax bracket. That's the opposite of empty virtue signalling. Their messaging is "people like us don't pay enough taxes, please raise the taxes people like us have to pay". That's a concrete, actionable demand that directly goes against their supposed interest. Unless you can demonstrate that they're being disingeneous and go behind their own backs to sabotage any actual attempts at tax reform, you have no argument. I gave this as an example of people asking for a systemic solution that goes against their own self interest but solves a systemic problem that is bad for society as a whole. "Why don't they just give away their money" is an individualistic "solution" that does nothing to fix the systemic problem except going against their self interest. Of course this assumes you agree with them that them being able to have so much money is a systemic problem worth addressing, i.e. that the system needs to be changed. "The law forcing them" is literally the system being changed. Because, as I said, the system incentivizes harsh competition and maximizing personal financial gain, so without changing the system there is no incentive for any individual to give up their excessive wealth if nobody else will. If you are desperate to find hypocrisy, you'll have more success looking at "philanthropists" who argue against having to pay higher taxes but instead "give away" their money to their own charities (which just happen to shuffle that money back into their own companies). EDIT: I see now that you were thinking of the exact billionaire philanthropists I mention as an example for actual hypocrisy, so I guess we agree on the hypocrisy, you just weren't aware of the group of people I was referencing.