Why are modern day billionaires narcissistic sociopaths?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Idk about Musk but Gates, Zuckerberg, Bezos, Bloomberg, the Waltons and others donate billions to charity. Now you might think that’s not enough and want them taxed more, but there is too much discourse seeking to demonize others. The talk around Bezos’s wedding was especially ott considering they paid for all services and donated millions to the city. There have always been rich people who liked grandiose displays of wealth throughout history, it’s not new. And most did not care about poor people at all.

Maybe there is something to the "Old Money" vs "New Money" stereotypes. Old Money seems more likely to subscribe to noblesse oblige, or at least see value in pretending that they do.

Old money seemed. They are all dead now.

Probably because they actually believed in a God. Modern people are not religious and have nothing to fear for indulging in their worst appetites.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you look back to the 20th century, the robber barons and industrial leaders were certainly not saints. But there seemed to be a compulsion to give back through philanthropy, and at least set an example of civilized behavior. We can think of the Rockefeller Foundation, Ford Foundation, Carnegie Library, etc.

Now our business leaders are sociopathic nut jobs. Musk, Bezos, Trump, Zuckerberg…. They give back nothing and seem to want to squash and devour the middle class. Only Bill Gates has developed a significant philanthropic effort.

Is this generational, or does extreme wealth now corrupt in a way that wasn’t possible before? I think Bezos is an interesting case. You can see video interviews with him from the early 1990’s and he’s a regular, pleasant guy. Now he thinks nothing of renting out and entire city and wrecking the lives of anyone who gets in his way.

Gee, rich guys are weird. Didn’t see this coming.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you look back to the 20th century, the robber barons and industrial leaders were certainly not saints. But there seemed to be a compulsion to give back through philanthropy, and at least set an example of civilized behavior. We can think of the Rockefeller Foundation, Ford Foundation, Carnegie Library, etc.

Now our business leaders are sociopathic nut jobs. Musk, Bezos, Trump, Zuckerberg…. They give back nothing and seem to want to squash and devour the middle class. Only Bill Gates has developed a significant philanthropic effort.

Is this generational, or does extreme wealth now corrupt in a way that wasn’t possible before? I think Bezos is an interesting case. You can see video interviews with him from the early 1990’s and he’s a regular, pleasant guy. Now he thinks nothing of renting out and entire city and wrecking the lives of anyone who gets in his way.

These charities were created when the billionaires were on death's door.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Short answer. Because they are scared. Every second of every waking moment they are afraid to stop to think about it. They know they were just lucky, to pop out from a right vagina, right time in a right place and are no better than any other working stiff trying to get by. They are scared to lose it all just as easily as they got it and no amount of wealth will ever be enough to ease that dread.

Shorter answer. They earned their property. The government just confiscates it "for the greater good". AKA Theft.

So they earn an obscene amount of property (money) and decide the best way to spend it is to fund candidates who want to destroy public education, ensure healthcare stays expensive, gut research and protect child molesters rather than fund hospitals, universities, museums, medical research and ensure the next generation has the resources to thrive. It’s a judgement call in their part, and they prove they are callous, evil people who do not want to make the world a better place. Hard to feel sorry for them.

You can add whatever adjective you want. You have no idea how they are spending the money they earn and are making generalizations. The same could be said of billionaire democrat donors of which there are many.

You in fact are making everything more expensive by just dumping money on every problem, and the "problem solvers" are only to happy to raise prices and take that free government tax payer funded sugar.

That's how government spends $7.5 billion on Electric Vehicle chargers and has nothing to show for it. I'm tired of your redsitributionist schemes in the name of the "common good".

Your life runs on jealousy. Do better.

Who said anything about EV chargers. You have $5bn. Do you use a billion to build a hospital, or do you use it to kill environmental regulations that help protect the air we breathe and water we all have to drink and bathe in (and put more people in the already overcrowded hospital). It's a judgment call. Or do you fund a new STEM program for kids in your state? Or do you buy a $20 million new yacht (your third yacht). We all make choices. Personally, if I had a couple billion, the first thing on my to-do list would not throw it all at already corrupt politicians and join in the shxtshow. Look at Trump. He'd rather spend tax dollars ripping up the Rose Garden and turn it into a brothel disco than redirect it to medical research. The way you spend says everything about who you are.

Regulator personalities are highly collectivist and authoritarian narcissists and very dangerous. Completely oblivious to the unmatched genocidic and death cult of communism.

Do you have an issue with traffic signals and stop signs, too? They are a form of regulation, after all.

The nerve of the DOT insisting we don't rule the road, huh.

When flight attendants point out the oxygen masks, are you just dying to run up and down the aisles, disable everyone else's and insist they pay you in crypto to fix them?

Unleashed authoritarianism in a capitalist society... communism... they are all made up of the same people with the same motives and end goals. Kim Jong Un isn't a portly dude by accident.

Capitalism leads to overweight poor people

Communism leads to starvation or misery of the vast majority

Correction.. capitalism leads to overweight poor people with more technology than the Apollo missions and more comfort/pleasure time than Julius Caesar

Granted, I didn’t read every post in the entire thread, but did someone at some point in suggest that it was anti-capitalist to tax corporations and the hyper wealthy at a slightly higher rate to benefit society as a whole, the very society that allowed them to become hyper wealthy in the first place?

Well, let's take the USA for example. The top 10% of the tax paying base are paying 72% of the federal income taxes. The bottom 50% are paying 3% of the total income taxes.

We already have a highly progressive income tax in the USA.

The galling part is it's never enough for you leftist imbeciles. It's the same song from you everyday: anyone else should pay, just not me.

You simply want more, more, more. It's time for YOU to pay your fair share and stop demanding everyone else pay your fare.

I could make $10 million a year or $10,000 a year. I would still feel the same way.

What's interesting is if you start comparing how progressive our tax system is compared to other countries. As cited above, 72% of the total tax burden paid by the top ten percent in the U.S.

What is it in other places? Glad you asked!

Well, here it is for all of Europe. The highest in all the european countries is 56%.

https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/eu/top-personal-income-tax-rates-europe/

Canada is 54%.

https://www.wealthprofessional.ca/news/industry-news/canadas-top-10-income-earners-pay-over-50-of-income-taxes-says-study/325551

Australia is 48%.

New Zealand is 50%

https://thefacts.nz/nzs-5010-and-1050-income-tax-rule/



Our tax system is as progressive as hell, and you want the wealthy in the U.S. to pay even more. It's your only answer to every problem.

The part you leave out is that the top 10% pay 72% of the taxes but they also hold 72% of the nation's wealth so what they are paying is in fact proportionate and not in any way unfair. Meanwhile the 48 and 50% tax rates of Australia and New Zealand are proportionate with how much of the nation's wealth they also hold. Their top 10% isn't as lopsided as ours is.

Where are you getting that the top 10% hold 72% of the wealth? Citation.

Moreover, do we have a wealth tax in the U.S.?

This article says 71.2% of America's wealth is held by the top 10%
https://invezz.com/news/2025/04/04/us-wealth-inequality-hits-new-high-as-top-10-now-own-71-2-of-nations-wealth

We don't have a wealth tax but I think Elizabeth Warren's is a good proposal.

If your net worth is $0–$50 million you pay 0% wealth tax - No tax for 99.9% of households
If your net worth is $50M–$1B you pay 2% annual tax on net worth above $50M
If your net worth is over $1B you pay an extra 4% to make it 6%

"Net worth" includes real estate, stocks, trusts, retirement accounts, personal property over $50K, and foreign holdings

The proposal includes anti-evasion measures:
- 40% “exit tax” for wealthy citizens who renounce citizenship
- Minimum audit rate for ultra-wealthy
- Expanded IRS enforcement and third-party reporting

Penn-Wharton estimates this would raise $2.3-2.7 trillion over 10 years toward paying down the debt.

That's actually an excellent and very reasonable plan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you look back to the 20th century, the robber barons and industrial leaders were certainly not saints. But there seemed to be a compulsion to give back through philanthropy, and at least set an example of civilized behavior. We can think of the Rockefeller Foundation, Ford Foundation, Carnegie Library, etc.

Now our business leaders are sociopathic nut jobs. Musk, Bezos, Trump, Zuckerberg…. They give back nothing and seem to want to squash and devour the middle class. Only Bill Gates has developed a significant philanthropic effort.

Is this generational, or does extreme wealth now corrupt in a way that wasn’t possible before? I think Bezos is an interesting case. You can see video interviews with him from the early 1990’s and he’s a regular, pleasant guy. Now he thinks nothing of renting out and entire city and wrecking the lives of anyone who gets in his way.

Rockefeller, Carnegie etc were pretty ruthless. They weren't entirely altruistic although there were a few glimmers here and there like Carnegie writing "The Gospel of Wealth" which argued that the wealthy had a moral duty to give back.

But that said it was also a combination of changing tax codes which drove philanthropy for tax avoidance, along with philanthropy being used as a PR device to try and improve their reputations for being ruthless robber barons.

That stuff still goes on today, I lived in a town with a heavy, notorious mafia influence run by a guy who was robbing them blind getting a cut of everything right and left, but on the other side he'd do things like build a community center for the town, donate motorcycles to the police department and so on so they hailed him as if he were some kind of hero and turn a blind eye to how he was ripping everyone off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you look back to the 20th century, the robber barons and industrial leaders were certainly not saints. But there seemed to be a compulsion to give back through philanthropy, and at least set an example of civilized behavior. We can think of the Rockefeller Foundation, Ford Foundation, Carnegie Library, etc.

Now our business leaders are sociopathic nut jobs. Musk, Bezos, Trump, Zuckerberg…. They give back nothing and seem to want to squash and devour the middle class. Only Bill Gates has developed a significant philanthropic effort.

Is this generational, or does extreme wealth now corrupt in a way that wasn’t possible before? I think Bezos is an interesting case. You can see video interviews with him from the early 1990’s and he’s a regular, pleasant guy. Now he thinks nothing of renting out and entire city and wrecking the lives of anyone who gets in his way.

Because we glorify wealth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Short answer. Because they are scared. Every second of every waking moment they are afraid to stop to think about it. They know they were just lucky, to pop out from a right vagina, right time in a right place and are no better than any other working stiff trying to get by. They are scared to lose it all just as easily as they got it and no amount of wealth will ever be enough to ease that dread.

Shorter answer. They earned their property. The government just confiscates it "for the greater good". AKA Theft.

So they earn an obscene amount of property (money) and decide the best way to spend it is to fund candidates who want to destroy public education, ensure healthcare stays expensive, gut research and protect child molesters rather than fund hospitals, universities, museums, medical research and ensure the next generation has the resources to thrive. It’s a judgement call in their part, and they prove they are callous, evil people who do not want to make the world a better place. Hard to feel sorry for them.

You can add whatever adjective you want. You have no idea how they are spending the money they earn and are making generalizations. The same could be said of billionaire democrat donors of which there are many.

You in fact are making everything more expensive by just dumping money on every problem, and the "problem solvers" are only to happy to raise prices and take that free government tax payer funded sugar.

That's how government spends $7.5 billion on Electric Vehicle chargers and has nothing to show for it. I'm tired of your redsitributionist schemes in the name of the "common good".

Your life runs on jealousy. Do better.

Who said anything about EV chargers. You have $5bn. Do you use a billion to build a hospital, or do you use it to kill environmental regulations that help protect the air we breathe and water we all have to drink and bathe in (and put more people in the already overcrowded hospital). It's a judgment call. Or do you fund a new STEM program for kids in your state? Or do you buy a $20 million new yacht (your third yacht). We all make choices. Personally, if I had a couple billion, the first thing on my to-do list would not throw it all at already corrupt politicians and join in the shxtshow. Look at Trump. He'd rather spend tax dollars ripping up the Rose Garden and turn it into a brothel disco than redirect it to medical research. The way you spend says everything about who you are.

Regulator personalities are highly collectivist and authoritarian narcissists and very dangerous. Completely oblivious to the unmatched genocidic and death cult of communism.

Do you have an issue with traffic signals and stop signs, too? They are a form of regulation, after all.

The nerve of the DOT insisting we don't rule the road, huh.

When flight attendants point out the oxygen masks, are you just dying to run up and down the aisles, disable everyone else's and insist they pay you in crypto to fix them?

Unleashed authoritarianism in a capitalist society... communism... they are all made up of the same people with the same motives and end goals. Kim Jong Un isn't a portly dude by accident.

Capitalism leads to overweight poor people

Communism leads to starvation or misery of the vast majority

Correction.. capitalism leads to overweight poor people with more technology than the Apollo missions and more comfort/pleasure time than Julius Caesar

Granted, I didn’t read every post in the entire thread, but did someone at some point in suggest that it was anti-capitalist to tax corporations and the hyper wealthy at a slightly higher rate to benefit society as a whole, the very society that allowed them to become hyper wealthy in the first place?

Well, let's take the USA for example. The top 10% of the tax paying base are paying 72% of the federal income taxes. The bottom 50% are paying 3% of the total income taxes.

We already have a highly progressive income tax in the USA.

The galling part is it's never enough for you leftist imbeciles. It's the same song from you everyday: anyone else should pay, just not me.

You simply want more, more, more. It's time for YOU to pay your fair share and stop demanding everyone else pay your fare.

I could make $10 million a year or $10,000 a year. I would still feel the same way.

What's interesting is if you start comparing how progressive our tax system is compared to other countries. As cited above, 72% of the total tax burden paid by the top ten percent in the U.S.

What is it in other places? Glad you asked!

Well, here it is for all of Europe. The highest in all the european countries is 56%.

https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/eu/top-personal-income-tax-rates-europe/

Canada is 54%.

https://www.wealthprofessional.ca/news/industry-news/canadas-top-10-income-earners-pay-over-50-of-income-taxes-says-study/325551

Australia is 48%.

New Zealand is 50%

https://thefacts.nz/nzs-5010-and-1050-income-tax-rule/



Our tax system is as progressive as hell, and you want the wealthy in the U.S. to pay even more. It's your only answer to every problem.

The part you leave out is that the top 10% pay 72% of the taxes but they also hold 72% of the nation's wealth so what they are paying is in fact proportionate and not in any way unfair. Meanwhile the 48 and 50% tax rates of Australia and New Zealand are proportionate with how much of the nation's wealth they also hold. Their top 10% isn't as lopsided as ours is.

Where are you getting that the top 10% hold 72% of the wealth? Citation.

Moreover, do we have a wealth tax in the U.S.?

This article says 71.2% of America's wealth is held by the top 10%
https://invezz.com/news/2025/04/04/us-wealth-inequality-hits-new-high-as-top-10-now-own-71-2-of-nations-wealth

We don't have a wealth tax but I think Elizabeth Warren's is a good proposal.

If your net worth is $0–$50 million you pay 0% wealth tax - No tax for 99.9% of households
If your net worth is $50M–$1B you pay 2% annual tax on net worth above $50M
If your net worth is over $1B you pay an extra 4% to make it 6%

"Net worth" includes real estate, stocks, trusts, retirement accounts, personal property over $50K, and foreign holdings

The proposal includes anti-evasion measures:
- 40% “exit tax” for wealthy citizens who renounce citizenship
- Minimum audit rate for ultra-wealthy
- Expanded IRS enforcement and third-party reporting

Penn-Wharton estimates this would raise $2.3-2.7 trillion over 10 years toward paying down the debt.

That's actually an excellent and very reasonable plan.

+1 Americans first! Wealthy citizens should consider it their patriotic duty to pay taxes and support their country and fellow citizens. “To whom much is given, much is required” Luke 12:48

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wealth hoarders have always been antisocial narcissists. There was previously more social pressure to "help the poor" in a paternalistic way, and philanthropy has always been a method they use to launder their public image and shield themselves from proper taxation. Nothing has really changed. Social media just gives us more access to these people and how they think and behave is more public.

All truth, no filler.

'philanthropy' as a concept is an indicator of mental illness. "You're beneath me, but I can help poor you" is a pathetic way to treat another person. If these billionaires genuinely cared about others they wouldn't be billionaires. There is no ethical way to accumulate that kind of money.

And none of these rich AHs "helping the poor" have done so to their own detriment. When they give to the point it hurts them, I'll care.

You do realize that philanthropy is not solely the purview of billionaires, correct? Philanthropy means "love of humanity." That as a concept is indicative of mental illness?

I know you can't really be this dumb.

Right?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Idk about Musk but Gates, Zuckerberg, Bezos, Bloomberg, the Waltons and others donate billions to charity. Now you might think that’s not enough and want them taxed more, but there is too much discourse seeking to demonize others. The talk around Bezos’s wedding was especially ott considering they paid for all services and donated millions to the city. There have always been rich people who liked grandiose displays of wealth throughout history, it’s not new. And most did not care about poor people at all.

Maybe there is something to the "Old Money" vs "New Money" stereotypes. Old Money seems more likely to subscribe to noblesse oblige, or at least see value in pretending that they do.

Old money seemed. They are all dead now.

Probably because they actually believed in a God. Modern people are not religious and have nothing to fear for indulging in their worst appetites.

They believed in God and a duty to their countrymen. Also, and this is important, they faced a real threat of war. As such, they needed to value their countrymen, who would be needed on the battlefield. In the post-WW2 era of Pax Americana, there has been no threat, so Western Civilization has continued its 120-year quest to embrace all the dumbest ideas imaginable.

As demographics change, the nihilist pencil-whipping "elites" are eating all the civilizational seed corn. We're watching institutions fail in real time (e.g., CDC lying about "vaccine" effectiveness about stopping transmission). On the right, they see the causes and are starting to argue for reinstalling old rules. The right is still too weak to do anything, but it won't always be so. A new generation of elites will arise, and they'll look a lot like those of the days of yore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Zuckerberg now owns 2,300 acres of Hawaii. Locals are devastated.

F*ck that guy. God, he sucks.

All staff will live in dorms and be on camera just about 24/7.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Idk about Musk but Gates, Zuckerberg, Bezos, Bloomberg, the Waltons and others donate billions to charity. Now you might think that’s not enough and want them taxed more, but there is too much discourse seeking to demonize others. The talk around Bezos’s wedding was especially ott considering they paid for all services and donated millions to the city. There have always been rich people who liked grandiose displays of wealth throughout history, it’s not new. And most did not care about poor people at all.

Maybe there is something to the "Old Money" vs "New Money" stereotypes. Old Money seems more likely to subscribe to noblesse oblige, or at least see value in pretending that they do.

Old money seemed. They are all dead now.

Probably because they actually believed in a God. Modern people are not religious and have nothing to fear for indulging in their worst appetites.

They believed in God and a duty to their countrymen. Also, and this is important, they faced a real threat of war. As such, they needed to value their countrymen, who would be needed on the battlefield. In the post-WW2 era of Pax Americana, there has been no threat, so Western Civilization has continued its 120-year quest to embrace all the dumbest ideas imaginable.

As demographics change, the nihilist pencil-whipping "elites" are eating all the civilizational seed corn. We're watching institutions fail in real time (e.g., CDC lying about "vaccine" effectiveness about stopping transmission). On the right, they see the causes and are starting to argue for reinstalling old rules. The right is still too weak to do anything, but it won't always be so. A new generation of elites will arise, and they'll look a lot like those of the days of yore.

You have been conned. The new elite will look like those in Russia and Saudi Arabia (with the average US citizen being the equivalent of their migrant workers, not citizens). The old old money will never come back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wealth hoarders have always been antisocial narcissists. There was previously more social pressure to "help the poor" in a paternalistic way, and philanthropy has always been a method they use to launder their public image and shield themselves from proper taxation. Nothing has really changed. Social media just gives us more access to these people and how they think and behave is more public.

+1 !!

[Anonymous]

The wealthier people become the less empathy they have. Numerous studies demonstrate this.

[Anonymous]

Americans don’t attend religious worship. They worship wealth. This is why there is a sick fascination with the Kardashians today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Americans don’t attend religious worship. They worship wealth. This is why there is a sick fascination with the Kardashians today.

As opposed to religions which promote hatred of people outside of your group? Also the Kardashians aren’t as popular anymore.