4 ms·
What else could they do with super-riches? shrug Ultimately, as evidenced by history, most super-rich reach a stage of life where they realise the riches in t
by ZenPro 12y ago
What else could they do with super-riches? shrug
Ultimately, as evidenced by history, most super-rich reach a stage of life where they realise the riches in themselves were just a way to keep score and large philanthropic contributions ensue.
It's a serious philosophical question; once [1] family financial security and [2]a high quality of life has been secured there is very little left to spend money on other than initiatives that benefit mankind or the natural world.
- PavlovsCat 12y agoFunnily enough, greed seems to occur more often in those who don't really need it anymore. > once [1] family financial security and [2]a high quality of life has been secured .. you stop focusing on accumulating more wealth - unless those aren't the real goals, and the driving force is something less wholesome. There are natural limits on the wealth a sane person can achieve, unless they inherit or get incredibly (un?)lucky, but numbers can keep rising long after they lost any connection to anything "real", and just like in gaming, people can get and stay stuck to that. And as long as they keep "winning", only the very best get a chance to pause and reflect.
- deciplex 12y ago"Most"? Certainly "some" - most is debatable. I'd like to see some numbers. There is certainly no shortage of super-rich who hit that point and... just keep going, because for those types it was never about the money - it was about the power. And while more wealth might give diminishing returns, power really doesn't, yet remains directly proportional to wealth. (For me, this is the best reason to tax the rich - it's not about revenues per se, rather it is about avoiding extremely dense accumulations of political power.)