It's not about them opting to aggressively pursue world-destroying policies, it's that, if some decision they make carries a long-tailed world-destroying risk,

It's not about them opting to aggressively pursue world-destroying policies, it's that, if some decision they make carries a long-tailed world-destroying risk, the weight of it in their mind is lower if a scot-free outcome still exists for them in the event that that happens. This is a psychological influence that would exist just as often in the poorest as it does the richest, it's just that the richest have the means to avoid the negative outcomes of their lack of more cautious foresight.