5 ms·

The list is getting longer and longer, but a good touchstone is simply net worth. You don't normally get to the top of a foodchain without being an apex predato

The list is getting longer and longer, but a good touchstone is simply net worth. You don't normally get to the top of a foodchain without being an apex predator.

toomuchtodo 8mo ago
Indeed. Empathy and the levels of wealth accumulation in scope are incompatible imho. They are the paperclip maximizers we were warned about.
- johndhi 8mo ago
  Where do you guys come up with these ideas? Simply having a lot of money makes someone evil? Why? They are obviously all quite competitive in business but the philanthropy they've done is pretty crazy. Gates for example is giving away hundreds of billions of dollars. What does it even matter if he's compassionate or not if he's doing that?
  - toomuchtodo 8mo ago
    Because it's about power, control, and influence. The wealth is just the tool. Melinda French and MacKenzie Scott are true philanthropists, Gates and Bezos are just status chasers. "Look at me!" "Please clap." and so on. There are only ~3000 billionaires in the world, so I am not too concerned about broad support for them in a world with 8-10 billion people. "Fuck you" money is fine, we all strive for freedom during our lifetime as humans. "Fuck everyone" money is not a welcome target, imho. That's unelected power. Its easy to not be a billionaire of course: philanthropy. But do most billionaires? They do not. They hold tightly to their power. "Why does it even matter?" Because many of us do not want to be ruled or governed by these people, who by all indications, are not fond of other humans and see them as a resource to exploit and control. I assure you, I have no envy for these people and their wealth, I am allergic to what it would take to accumulate and maintain it (as a high empathy, high justice sensitivity human). I know what enough is. This is self preservation from a class of predator. > Where do you guys come up with these ideas? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_mind https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_mind https://medium.com/roaring-rivers/are-all-billionaires-sociopaths-80146e4b4481 https://medium.com/roaring-rivers/are-all-billionaires-socio... | https://archive.today/nX2Fh https://archive.today/nX2Fh https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/interactive/2025/billionaires-politics-money-influence/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/interactive/2025/bil... | https://archive.today/Gb2RF https://archive.today/Gb2RF https://www.forbes.com/sites/ellamalmgren/2025/09/09/americas-richest-billionaires-keep-getting-richer-theyre-not-donating-much-more/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/ellamalmgren/2025/09/09/america... | https://archive.today/nLx78 https://archive.today/nLx78 https://www.google.com/search?q=billionaires+sociopaths https://www.google.com/search?q=billionaires+sociopaths
  - jacquesm 8mo ago
    > Where do you guys come up with these ideas? By thinking.
    - shimman 8mo ago
      Thinking, experiencing the world, knowing that throughout our entire history of a species that tales of "excess greed" were also cautionary tales on how greed ruins society throughout the entire world.
      - johndhi 8mo ago
        Excess greed is a different thing than excess wealth. Bill gates is giving away all of that wealth - is that a greedy action?
  - triceratops 8mo ago
    > the philanthropy they've done is pretty crazy If philanthropy and normal living expenses (even assuming billionaire living standards) were the only things super-rich people spent money on that's fine. Unfortunately they use it to directly influence politics and society. Wealth, like celestial bodies, has a gravitational field.
  - cratermoon 8mo ago
    If you gave away as much money proportionately, you'd have about 75 fewer dollars in your pocket. Tell me again how generous billionaires are.
    - johndhi 8mo ago
      Gates has pledged 200 billion - 99 pct of his wealth - and has already given 60 billion (close to half of it). Is that generous or not?
  - _DeadFred_ 8mo ago
    My working class family members always gave 10% to charity (kind of the standard social contract in the US for giving) when that 10% made up a huge percentage of the money it takes for them to live a very basic life. Compare that to billionaires who have more money than they could ever spend and the percentage they have given: Zuckerberg 2.1%. Ballmer 3.7% Bezos 1.6% Sergey Brin 2.5% Michael Dell 2.6% Ken Griffin 5% https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbeswealthteam/2025/02/03/americas-most-generous-philanthropists-2025/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbeswealthteam/2025/02/03/ame...
  - Otterly99 8mo ago
    In general (not always, but it is mostly true) philantropy from billionaires and very profitable companies tend to be overshadowed by how much they profit from a system biased toward enriching them (see: The divide by Jason Hickel). A small metaphor to illustrate: are you a philantropist if you film yourself giving away 100$ to homeless people but make tens of thousands from posting the video?
- sznio 8mo ago
  I thought about the same recently, in the context of the Epstein files. You don't become a billionaire by being moral. Each time you don't do something because it's wrong, you lost opportunity to make more money. You start with smaller things, then your standards slide more and more, until you are a billionaire, and you're so corrupt there isn't anything for you to do except make more money. Which makes me wonder, how many people went to Epstein's island not because they like diddling kids, but because they needed to network with Epstein to make more money. How many actively participated just to be in his in-group? Not because they enjoyed, they just were so corrupt that they would do anything for business.
  - renewiltord 8mo ago
    [flagged]
    - jacquesm 8mo ago
      We're all capable of seeing the difference between Taylor Swift and Epstein and his crowd. Well, almost all, apparently.
      - renewiltord 8mo ago
        > You don't become a billionaire by being moral If you’re ESL, that statement actually doesn’t specifically reference Epstein et al. If you’re not ESL, I suggest a remedial course and then the statement doesn’t specifically reference Epstein et al.
        jacquesm 8mo ago
        What an incredibly dumb and insulting comment.
    - jordanb 8mo ago
      Of course the grappling to find one good billionaire begins. While Taylor Swift is not nearly as obviously evil as the tech bros, she grifts the shit out of her fans. I do think it's kinda evil to create a parasocial relationship situation with millions of young girls and then mine every last penny of disposable income out of them. She could have just as easily superstar multi-millionare with far less grifting. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKWE1fH0pDo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKWE1fH0pDo

The list is getting longer and longer, but a good touchstone is simply net worth. You don't normally get to the top of a foodchain without being an apex predator.

toomuchtodo 8mo ago

Indeed. Empathy and the levels of wealth accumulation in scope are incompatible imho. They are the paperclip maximizers we were warned about.

johndhi 8mo ago
Where do you guys come up with these ideas? Simply having a lot of money makes someone evil? Why? They are obviously all quite competitive in business but the philanthropy they've done is pretty crazy. Gates for example is giving away hundreds of billions of dollars. What does it even matter if he's compassionate or not if he's doing that?
- toomuchtodo 8mo ago
  Because it's about power, control, and influence. The wealth is just the tool. Melinda French and MacKenzie Scott are true philanthropists, Gates and Bezos are just status chasers. "Look at me!" "Please clap." and so on. There are only ~3000 billionaires in the world, so I am not too concerned about broad support for them in a world with 8-10 billion people. "Fuck you" money is fine, we all strive for freedom during our lifetime as humans. "Fuck everyone" money is not a welcome target, imho. That's unelected power. Its easy to not be a billionaire of course: philanthropy. But do most billionaires? They do not. They hold tightly to their power. "Why does it even matter?" Because many of us do not want to be ruled or governed by these people, who by all indications, are not fond of other humans and see them as a resource to exploit and control. I assure you, I have no envy for these people and their wealth, I am allergic to what it would take to accumulate and maintain it (as a high empathy, high justice sensitivity human). I know what enough is. This is self preservation from a class of predator. > Where do you guys come up with these ideas? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_mind https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_mind https://medium.com/roaring-rivers/are-all-billionaires-sociopaths-80146e4b4481 https://medium.com/roaring-rivers/are-all-billionaires-socio... | https://archive.today/nX2Fh https://archive.today/nX2Fh https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/interactive/2025/billionaires-politics-money-influence/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/interactive/2025/bil... | https://archive.today/Gb2RF https://archive.today/Gb2RF https://www.forbes.com/sites/ellamalmgren/2025/09/09/americas-richest-billionaires-keep-getting-richer-theyre-not-donating-much-more/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/ellamalmgren/2025/09/09/america... | https://archive.today/nLx78 https://archive.today/nLx78 https://www.google.com/search?q=billionaires+sociopaths https://www.google.com/search?q=billionaires+sociopaths
- jacquesm 8mo ago
  > Where do you guys come up with these ideas? By thinking.
  - shimman 8mo ago
    Thinking, experiencing the world, knowing that throughout our entire history of a species that tales of "excess greed" were also cautionary tales on how greed ruins society throughout the entire world.
    - johndhi 8mo ago
      Excess greed is a different thing than excess wealth. Bill gates is giving away all of that wealth - is that a greedy action?
- triceratops 8mo ago
  > the philanthropy they've done is pretty crazy If philanthropy and normal living expenses (even assuming billionaire living standards) were the only things super-rich people spent money on that's fine. Unfortunately they use it to directly influence politics and society. Wealth, like celestial bodies, has a gravitational field.
- cratermoon 8mo ago
  If you gave away as much money proportionately, you'd have about 75 fewer dollars in your pocket. Tell me again how generous billionaires are.
  - johndhi 8mo ago
    Gates has pledged 200 billion - 99 pct of his wealth - and has already given 60 billion (close to half of it). Is that generous or not?
- _DeadFred_ 8mo ago
  My working class family members always gave 10% to charity (kind of the standard social contract in the US for giving) when that 10% made up a huge percentage of the money it takes for them to live a very basic life. Compare that to billionaires who have more money than they could ever spend and the percentage they have given: Zuckerberg 2.1%. Ballmer 3.7% Bezos 1.6% Sergey Brin 2.5% Michael Dell 2.6% Ken Griffin 5% https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbeswealthteam/2025/02/03/americas-most-generous-philanthropists-2025/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbeswealthteam/2025/02/03/ame...
- Otterly99 8mo ago
  In general (not always, but it is mostly true) philantropy from billionaires and very profitable companies tend to be overshadowed by how much they profit from a system biased toward enriching them (see: The divide by Jason Hickel). A small metaphor to illustrate: are you a philantropist if you film yourself giving away 100$ to homeless people but make tens of thousands from posting the video?
sznio 8mo ago
I thought about the same recently, in the context of the Epstein files. You don't become a billionaire by being moral. Each time you don't do something because it's wrong, you lost opportunity to make more money. You start with smaller things, then your standards slide more and more, until you are a billionaire, and you're so corrupt there isn't anything for you to do except make more money. Which makes me wonder, how many people went to Epstein's island not because they like diddling kids, but because they needed to network with Epstein to make more money. How many actively participated just to be in his in-group? Not because they enjoyed, they just were so corrupt that they would do anything for business.
- renewiltord 8mo ago
  [flagged]
  - jacquesm 8mo ago
    We're all capable of seeing the difference between Taylor Swift and Epstein and his crowd. Well, almost all, apparently.
    - renewiltord 8mo ago
      > You don't become a billionaire by being moral If you’re ESL, that statement actually doesn’t specifically reference Epstein et al. If you’re not ESL, I suggest a remedial course and then the statement doesn’t specifically reference Epstein et al.
      - jacquesm 8mo ago
        What an incredibly dumb and insulting comment.
  - jordanb 8mo ago
    Of course the grappling to find one good billionaire begins. While Taylor Swift is not nearly as obviously evil as the tech bros, she grifts the shit out of her fans. I do think it's kinda evil to create a parasocial relationship situation with millions of young girls and then mine every last penny of disposable income out of them. She could have just as easily superstar multi-millionare with far less grifting. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKWE1fH0pDo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKWE1fH0pDo