Hacker News Reader

Comment by Gigachad | Hacker News Reader

It's crazy the hundred millionaires in the top 0.1% are closer to a homeless person than Elon musk.

seems to be a general rule of life, some people are just born with the right combination to be really good at a certain game at a certain point in time. The only issue with wealth is that they can influence other games in which they have no ability just the same and that is dangerous for a democracy. Imagine if roger Federer was messing with the elections just because he was the best at tennis. Tech must be one of the few fields where someone believes that they are good at everything just because they made it.

This raises such an interesting question, how much of the wealthiest individuals wealth is due to skill, and how much is because in an unequal system there has to be someone at the most wealthiest point.

I think it's an interesting thought, I'm not sure I have a hot take here or anything. The likes of Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk are clearly good at amassing wealth (and interested in amassing wealth) but I suspect a lot less is attributable to skill than many would think.

So bezos’ parents were in a position to fund him to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars, Enron musks dad owns mines, bill gates mom was on the IBM board. It very much has little to do with skill.

I think that's pretty much true- it's worth saying there are other people who have the insane privilege of the three you mentioned who aren't some of the wealthiest people in the world, so there's some kind of explanation needed aside from just privilege, even if that's just "luck".

It’s of course not “just privilege” but privileged people get to take “risks” that unprivileged certainly can’t.

"Closer" in what sense? Does Elon Musk have a markedly more lavish lifestyle than them? Is his retirement safer? How many politicians are campaigning on investigating, regulating and prosecuting the hundred-millionaires? Do media run scare stories about the drug use and sexual promiscuity of the hundred-millionaires, suggesting that they have children from too many partners?

If you’re saying he doesn’t, that’s a really strong argument for redistribution then, isn’t it? If he don’t need it, let’s spread the love around. And spare me the job creation story.

He doesn't have a markedly more lavish lifestyle than the hundred-millionaires, but I don't want to live in a country where the government takes stuff that it (or some majority) decides the current owners don't need, and you shouldn't want to either. I think the US and world are better off with Elon Musk in control of those companies, and with those companies having lots of capital to work with. A side effect of people agreeing with me (although I'm not invested in those companies directly) is that his paper wealth is huge.

So, no, I don't think "he doesn't act like he needs it" is at all a good argument for redistribution.

If we taxed him a little more i might be able to afford a tiny violin to play to mourn his unfair treatment

Reply on news.ycombinator.com