this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2025
880 points (97.9% liked)

News

31652 readers
3004 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Paywall removed https://archive.is/WGWDo

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] cygnus@lemmy.ca 299 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (16 children)

O’Kelley’s [sic] says billionaires represent “such an incredibly ludicrous waste of money in a world where there’s so many people who don’t have that,” but he says actually being one is also “othering”—separating you from the limits and consequences that define normal life. “There’s something about keeping connected to normalcy that is really, really important,” the entrepreneur explains. “I don’t want a yacht and I don’t ever want to be able to be without consequences. I think that’s the biggest risk, is, how can we be accountable when we have so much money we can buy anything?”

He gets it. Past a certain point, wealth erodes your humanity. I think I'd have picked $100M too - at a safe 4% return that's $4M per year, plenty for anybody to live on but not megayacht money.

[–] rozodru@lemmy.world 13 points 23 hours ago

I've always said If I could have enough where I could purchase in cash a cottage in a small cottage town here in Canada with a top of the line internet connection and I'd never have to work or worry about money for the rest of my life I'd be happy. what would I do? nothing. I'd pursue my hobby projects, more FOSS development, gaming, painting, build model kits, drink beer, eat whatever I wanted, and socialize with as few people as possible.

That's all i want. I just want enough money right now to achieve that.

[–] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

And you would only pick 100mil because of how fucked up the world is. You can easly burn half a million in US if you have a serious health condition.

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 57 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Motherfucking $4MM total is enough to live on with a return like that.

[–] cygnus@lemmy.ca 140 points 1 day ago (39 children)

Sure, but choosing to live on $160k/yr would be a bit much when you're starting with $1.6B. I can't fault him for still wanting to enjoy being wealthy instead of upper-middle-class and definitely don't think it's reasonable to complain that giving away 95% of his wealth is somehow not enough.

[–] orgrinrt@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Even if it still feels a bit wrong, I can somehow reason with there being wealthy people and the motivation of potential lavish life, since some seem to really need it to make any effort in society. It’s somewhat understandable at least. Talking about tens of millions, with a bit of stretch hundreds - okay, I can stomach it even if it still seems extremely excess.

But billions… that’s already ten times more than that. How anyone can stomach that, I don’t get.

While my heart disagrees, my brain can get, with some effort, behind what this guy says. It kind of makes sense at least. Retaining your humanity and giving up such an inconceivable amount of money for that, really sounds pretty good in this world we’ve been living in lately. Sounds fucking weird to feel good about someone still having such excess in comparison to all the people struggling with next to nothing, but at least there’s some amount of backbone and clear thought involved.

Not sure what to think still. Like someone else commented, better reserve outright okaying this until we know how the money was given away.

But if it turns out to be sensible and humane, I can honestly say I’m fine with the kind of millionaire this one is. It’s not ideal, but it’s tolerable and in some niche sense, justifiable. If it’s all good, I even wish all the millionaires were like this… if we have to have them, as a compromise with the part of people who need all that, the “dream” to strive for, for whatever reason, at least let them be sensible and moral in some way, such as this…

[–] KumaSudosa@feddit.dk 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I don't think the premise that you can "make it" is wrong, and being somewhat wealthy is definitely motivation for many great things. If you're running a tech start-up you're probably putting in 60-80 hours a week and have to cope with a great level of stress. Of course being passionate about your product is a very important factor but without the allure of living very well afterwards I think it'd deter a lot of innovation, sports talents, musicians and whatnot.

I don't blame this dude for still wanting to live his life while being quite ethical; hate the game, not the player (in this case at least). This is about how fiscally conservative I can be. Billionaires shouldn't exist - and especially these insanely wealthy individuals taking over the world with tech, but I don't think you can take it away completely. In an ideal world there wouldn't even be millionaires but people are gonna be people and sociopaths and narcissists are always gonna exist and trying to rig the system.

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 hours ago

Right. The goal isn't to make it so no one has more than anyone else, it's to ensure that everyone has enough and no one has so much more than anyone else that they can mess up society on a whim, and that people aren't being exploited.

You want there to be a reward for hard work, creativity, innovation and all that. Just actually proportional to the value being added as opposed to what they can get away with.

I don't begrudge a person who has worked hard and had something they started become successful a more-than-comfortable and early retirement. It's when they just had money and used it to make more money, or showed up did little and got fired with millions of compensation that I'm really bothered.

load more comments (38 replies)
[–] dogs0n@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It doesn't make any sense to keep just enough, because then you may have to worry about weathering any economic storms in the future.

I think the amount he kept is reasonable, especially when they are pretty much one of a kind for doing this.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 1 points 18 hours ago

Yeah, I was thinking about fluctuating interest rates alone. If we are assuming 4% return on 4M and that's where 160K/year comes from....that's essentially a fixed income, risking all kinds of problems in the future, including very low interest rates and doesn't even begin to get into problems like inflation spiking again or unexpected healthcare bills...

[–] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world 26 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Plenty for a normal yacht, the kind you can sail by yourself or with a partner. Megayachts are basically private cruise ships that need a full staff to sail. Even if I had the money I wouldn’t want that!

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

The only people that should want one are cruise ship operators and you can rent one for a lot less.

[–] redsand@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 day ago

Joe Rogan's punk ass couldn't handle $100M

load more comments (11 replies)