So, when is rich too rich? What do you consider an acceptable limit?
50 million American dollars total across a person's life as adjusted for inflation.
When I can walk into the White House, purchase the United States, fund the government, and still die of old age without running out of money.
If you look at the models that were used in the framing of the U.S. Constitution, one of the things common to all of them is mention of limiting individual wealth, and is the one thing ignored in all of them when the Constitution was drafted.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
yellowdingo wrote: So, when is rich too rich? What do you consider an acceptable limit? Never.
MagusJanus wrote: When I can walk into the White House, purchase the United States, fund the government, and still die of old age without running out of money. So. billgates' couch cushions.
Depends on a couple of things. Are we talking about "so rich that the person harms him/herself"? Or "so rich that the person harms the community around him/her"? Very different questions, I think. With respect to the first, I think the answer depends on the wisdom of the person we're talking about. Some people have desires that won't hurt them when they are fulfilled, others don't. It's not hard to argue that self-destructive and/or immature people like Lindsay Lohan and Justin Bieber would be better off if they didn't have the resources to indulge their worst impulses.
On the second question, I'm also of the view that democracy (which I still value despite all its shortcomings and problems) doesn't function as well when there are gross inequalities in resources and power between the individuals that make it up. And I'd sure say we've hit a point where things have gotten way out of whack. Though I'm also sure some would disagree with me.
At some point it becomes less about money as money and more about money as status and power. People get addicted to it.
I'm not sure where the limit should be or whether it should be a hard limit at all. High marginal tax rates probably work as well to limit the inequality while still allowing the addicts to keep score.
Nice link! Interesting article.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
apparently its a mental disease.. or at least real enough to get you off of drunk driving
My parents have a lot of money - during most of my childhood we were able to go on long (as in, 2 or more weeks) trips abroad every year, and we kids generally never lacked anything. We have a rather big house, and I could always buy a new book to read when I finished one. I could go to the movies about 10 times a year, buy board games and RPG products, two or 3 computer games a year... everything that I needed, really.
I can't imagine what anyone would do with more money than that. When you get to the point where you have to buy an insanely expensive car just to find a way to get rid of some of that money you have, that's probably a good indication that you have too much. Of course in cases a medical emergency happens or something, more money would be good to ensure the best medical care. But on a daily basis? enough money is the amount you need to support your hobbies, your family, and to never be concerned about your financial situation.
Lord Snow wrote: My parents have a lot of money - during most of my childhood we were able to go on long (as in, 2 or more weeks) trips abroad every year, and we kids generally never lacked anything. We have a rather big house, and I could always buy a new book to read when I finished one. I could go to the movies about 10 times a year, buy board games and RPG products, two or 3 computer games a year... everything that I needed, really.
I can't imagine what anyone would do with more money than that. When you get to the point where you have to buy an insanely expensive car just to find a way to get rid of some of that money you have, that's probably a good indication that you have too much. Of course in cases a medical emergency happens or something, more money would be good to ensure the best medical care. But on a daily basis? enough money is the amount you need to support your hobbies, your family, and to never be concerned about your financial situation.
Mostly, you use it to make more money. That's what being a capitalist is all about. You can also use it to influence politicians so that you can make and keep even more money.
But really it's about power, not money as such. From the article I linked before: Quote: At 25, I could go to any restaurant in Manhattan — Per Se, Le Bernardin — just by picking up the phone and calling one of my brokers, who ingratiate themselves to traders by entertaining with unlimited expense accounts. I could be second row at the Knicks-Lakers game just by hinting to a broker I might be interested in going. The satisfaction wasn’t just about the money. It was about the power. Because of how smart and successful I was, it was someone else’s job to make me happy.
Now, working elbow to elbow with billionaires, I was a giant fireball of greed. I’d think about how my colleagues could buy Micronesia if they wanted to, or become mayor of New York City. They didn’t just have money; they had power — power beyond getting a table at Le Bernardin. Senators came to their offices. They were royalty.
It’s staggering to think that in the course of five years, I’d gone from being thrilled at my first bonus — $40,000 — to being disappointed when, my second year at the hedge fund, I was paid “only” $1.5 million.
I noticed the vitriol that traders directed at the government for limiting bonuses after the crash. I heard the fury in their voices at the mention of higher taxes. These traders despised anything or anyone that threatened their bonuses. Ever see what a drug addict is like when he’s used up his junk? He’ll do anything — walk 20 miles in the snow, rob a grandma — to get a fix. Wall Street was like that.
Of course, there's always hookers and blow. :)
Yes, you can be too rich, in the sense that you are going to run out of time before you run out of money.
Someone with a billion dollars almost literally can't spend it fast enough in order to get use out of each purchase before they die. Now sure, they could keep buying up prime real estate until the bank account hits zero, but can they really enjoy all that prime real estate by actually spending a significant amount of time living at each location?
They can collect fancy cars, rare art, and so on, but again, just how much can anyone really collect before it starts to get boring?
At some point, the bed you are sleeping in is as good as it is going to get, the food is as good as it is going to get, the car, the house, the private jet, the yacht...buying something even bigger or better nets you little additional benefit.
So then they have to spend a lot of time and effort figuring out who is going to get the money after they are gone.
I am sure many of us would love to have that problem...but it is a problem.
Like many people who look at the issue with a simplistic eye, the OP misses what the real problem is.
It's not that someone is too rich, or that another person is too poor.
It is the overall inequality of wealth and the concentration of so much of society's wealth into the hands of an increasingly few people.
Wealth Inequality is the issue, not the richness or poverty of individuals.
Recent threads in Off-Topic Discussions
|
