3 ms·

I think when you get to a high-enough level of running a company, you figure out ways to turn off your empathy, and ignore your principles. Most of us develop

I think when you get to a high-enough level of running a company, you figure out ways to turn off your empathy, and ignore your principles. Most of us develop a bit of the latter. I have worked for a bunch of questionable companies that kind of go against my values, but deep down I'm a bit of a whore and whether or not I keep to these principles isn't likely to make a huge difference, so I just shut up and cash my paychecks [1]. I would like to think if I became a billionaire, I'd maintain my empathy and would keep my principles because at that point I actually could do something, but I probably wouldn't be able to become a billionaire if I maintained my principles and empathy. Sort of a catch 22, which is why I probably won't be worth any significant amount of money unless there's some kind of Mr Deeds situation and I have a long lost billionaire uncle that I don't know about who dies. I don't think Tim Cook or Sam Altman are pure sociopaths in any kind of clinical sense. The vast majority of people aren't. I think that they actively taught themselves to value their respective companies instead of fellow humans. That, and the last two years of layoffs in these tech corporations has shown me that these people are extremely short-sighted. [1] Well, if I weren't unemployed :)

siliconc0w 1y ago
You can make millions and keep your empathy but I don't think you can be a billionaire unless you're just a voracious unsatiable machine without much empathy to begin with. You can get good at projecting a facade and saying the right things and maybe even actually doing some good in some cases but it's usually just in service of expanding your wealth or power. This isn't really a bad thing, we just need to make sure that society sets the right incentives to align these individuals properly to maximize prosperity. (e.g, preventing monopolies so value is generated via innovation vs rent seeking)
- tombert 1y ago
  I agree that you can reach a few million without becoming too evil. Hell, having a decent-paying desk job and putting a good chunk of money into VOO (or something equivalent) has historically been a relatively surefire way of doing that if you're willing to wait a few decades. I honestly am not entirely convinced that billionaires should be allowed to exist, I kind of think we should start taxing like crazy when personal wealth gets above a certain number. If you're not happy with a billion dollars, you're not going to be happy with a trillion dollars, or a quadrillion, or a quintillion. I think after a certain amount of wealth, your interests aren't really aligned with what's good for society, because the only appeal at that point is seeing a number get bigger. It's not like you're "saving up for something" when you get to that much wealth.
  - siliconc0w 1y ago
    They are provably good at allocating resources (assuming they are generating value via real innovation and not through monopoly/rent-seeking) so you want them doing that. I'd just progressively tax all luxury goods at like 10,000% so that they are encouraged to continue to invest and build more companies rather than creating socially unproductive empires of empty houses and yachts.
    - tombert 1y ago
      > They are provably good at allocating resources (assuming they are generating value via real innovation and not through monopoly/rent-seeking) so you want them doing that. I don't actually even agree with that. Microsoft, for example, seems to routinely overhire and then fire large percentages of their employees (edit, correction, said "corporations" before). I think all they know how to do (I mean this pretty literally) is spend money. They are given money and then they spend that money. Sometimes spending that money leads to growth. Sometimes it leads to having to lay off 20% of the company. The important part is that the money is spent. > I'd just progressively tax all luxury goods at like 10,000% so that they are encouraged to continue to invest and build more companies rather than creating socially unproductive empires of empty houses and yachts. I'm not opposed to what you suggested but I'm not 100% sure how you'd define "luxury goods" with any kind of consistency.
      - miljanm 1y ago
        https://www.reddit.com/r/Infographics/comments/1ckndxx/four_decades_of_microsoft/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Infographics/comments/1ckndxx/four_... it looks like microsoft growth is combination of products, investments and aquisitions. one can say that they spend money wisely.
    - immibis 1y ago
      They are provably good at allocating resources in ways that make them richer. That's all we know. It says nothing about, say, value to society.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
blendo 1y ago
If you’re a billionaire, at 4% interest you’ll earn $40 million a year, or over $100,000 a week. You and I, we earn money and hope to put a little aside. But these guys worry “How will I spend this incessant flow of money?”
- tombert 1y ago
  Yeah, and if they put it into an S&P500 fund, they're likely to earn about double that long term, which is even more depressing. That's kind of what I am getting at; a billion US dollars is basically infinite money. With that much, you can easily get more money than most people will see in their entire lifetimes by literally doing nothing. I do not understand why they want more at that point. The reason I want more money is so that I can buy more or better stuff than I have right now. More money translates to a tangible thing. As far as I can tell, the only motivation for a billionaire to accrue more money is just to watch a number get larger, and if that is your motivation to do something, then clearly something is wrong with your fucking head. If you're willing to screw over everyone by lobbying to lower taxes solely so you can watch a number grow, then you kind of have to be a sociopath.
  - umbra07 1y ago
    > As far as I can tell, the only motivation for a billionaire to accrue more money is just to watch a number get larger, Really? You can't think of any other reasons?
    - tombert 1y ago
      I can understand the desire to continue to grow your companies, but no I do not understand the motivation to make more money when you already have more money than God. At that point, the drive to get more money seems like it’s primarily about watching a line go up. It’s a subtle difference; I understand corporations trying to lower corporate taxes and the like, but there are lots of attempts from billionaires to lower their personal taxes by creating loopholes and bribing congress away from a wealth tax. That’s about personal wealth, and no, I cannot think of other reasons, no matter how dismissively you ask. I save money to buy a bigger house, or fund my retirement, or to buy a car, but by the time you’re a billionaire you don’t have to worry about any of that. You can buy dozens of nice houses, you can stash away $20 million into a savings account and still be set for retirement, you can buy a new car every week, etc. A billion dollars is infinite money for an individual human, let alone multiple billions. It’s impossible to justify “more”.

siliconc0w 1y ago

You can make millions and keep your empathy but I don't think you can be a billionaire unless you're just a voracious unsatiable machine without much empathy to begin with. You can get good at projecting a facade and saying the right things and maybe even actually doing some good in some cases but it's usually just in service of expanding your wealth or power. This isn't really a bad thing, we just need to make sure that society sets the right incentives to align these individuals properly to maximize prosperity. (e.g, preventing monopolies so value is generated via innovation vs rent seeking)

tombert 1y ago
I agree that you can reach a few million without becoming too evil. Hell, having a decent-paying desk job and putting a good chunk of money into VOO (or something equivalent) has historically been a relatively surefire way of doing that if you're willing to wait a few decades. I honestly am not entirely convinced that billionaires should be allowed to exist, I kind of think we should start taxing like crazy when personal wealth gets above a certain number. If you're not happy with a billion dollars, you're not going to be happy with a trillion dollars, or a quadrillion, or a quintillion. I think after a certain amount of wealth, your interests aren't really aligned with what's good for society, because the only appeal at that point is seeing a number get bigger. It's not like you're "saving up for something" when you get to that much wealth.
- siliconc0w 1y ago
  They are provably good at allocating resources (assuming they are generating value via real innovation and not through monopoly/rent-seeking) so you want them doing that. I'd just progressively tax all luxury goods at like 10,000% so that they are encouraged to continue to invest and build more companies rather than creating socially unproductive empires of empty houses and yachts.
  - tombert 1y ago
    > They are provably good at allocating resources (assuming they are generating value via real innovation and not through monopoly/rent-seeking) so you want them doing that. I don't actually even agree with that. Microsoft, for example, seems to routinely overhire and then fire large percentages of their employees (edit, correction, said "corporations" before). I think all they know how to do (I mean this pretty literally) is spend money. They are given money and then they spend that money. Sometimes spending that money leads to growth. Sometimes it leads to having to lay off 20% of the company. The important part is that the money is spent. > I'd just progressively tax all luxury goods at like 10,000% so that they are encouraged to continue to invest and build more companies rather than creating socially unproductive empires of empty houses and yachts. I'm not opposed to what you suggested but I'm not 100% sure how you'd define "luxury goods" with any kind of consistency.
    - miljanm 1y ago
      https://www.reddit.com/r/Infographics/comments/1ckndxx/four_decades_of_microsoft/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Infographics/comments/1ckndxx/four_... it looks like microsoft growth is combination of products, investments and aquisitions. one can say that they spend money wisely.
  - immibis 1y ago
    They are provably good at allocating resources in ways that make them richer. That's all we know. It says nothing about, say, value to society.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

blendo 1y ago

If you’re a billionaire, at 4% interest you’ll earn $40 million a year, or over $100,000 a week. You and I, we earn money and hope to put a little aside. But these guys worry “How will I spend this incessant flow of money?”

tombert 1y ago
Yeah, and if they put it into an S&P500 fund, they're likely to earn about double that long term, which is even more depressing. That's kind of what I am getting at; a billion US dollars is basically infinite money. With that much, you can easily get more money than most people will see in their entire lifetimes by literally doing nothing. I do not understand why they want more at that point. The reason I want more money is so that I can buy more or better stuff than I have right now. More money translates to a tangible thing. As far as I can tell, the only motivation for a billionaire to accrue more money is just to watch a number get larger, and if that is your motivation to do something, then clearly something is wrong with your fucking head. If you're willing to screw over everyone by lobbying to lower taxes solely so you can watch a number grow, then you kind of have to be a sociopath.
- umbra07 1y ago
  > As far as I can tell, the only motivation for a billionaire to accrue more money is just to watch a number get larger, Really? You can't think of any other reasons?
  - tombert 1y ago
    I can understand the desire to continue to grow your companies, but no I do not understand the motivation to make more money when you already have more money than God. At that point, the drive to get more money seems like it’s primarily about watching a line go up. It’s a subtle difference; I understand corporations trying to lower corporate taxes and the like, but there are lots of attempts from billionaires to lower their personal taxes by creating loopholes and bribing congress away from a wealth tax. That’s about personal wealth, and no, I cannot think of other reasons, no matter how dismissively you ask. I save money to buy a bigger house, or fund my retirement, or to buy a car, but by the time you’re a billionaire you don’t have to worry about any of that. You can buy dozens of nice houses, you can stash away $20 million into a savings account and still be set for retirement, you can buy a new car every week, etc. A billion dollars is infinite money for an individual human, let alone multiple billions. It’s impossible to justify “more”.