Comment by nonethewiser
2 hours ago
>While Gilbert said he’s always harbored these kinds of anti-capitalist feelings “at some level,” he said that “certainly recent events and recent things have gotten me more and more jumping on the ‘Eat the Rich’ bandwagon.” Though he didn’t detail which “recent events” drove that realization, he did say that “billionaires and all this stuff… I think are just causing more harm than good.”
This is very amusing to me. Gilbert must be quite rich [0], yet there is a very large difference between his wealth and the wealth of a billionaire. In fact, the wealth inequality between himself and Bezos, for example, is waaay higher than between a poor person and himself. Perhaps why he identifies more with the latter. But where is the more important disparity? It's between a poor person and himself.
He seems to feel like he is not rich. Or does he want to be eaten? Everyone but 1 person can complain about the richer people. But at the end of the day, low absolute wealth and not the degree of difference is what matters.
[0] - There is not public information on his personal wealth but he was a titan in the industry for 40 years and founded a company that sold for $76M. From that deal salary, royalties and with a moderate amount of interest, he's probably easily at $10-30M. That, or perhaps he's terrible with money.
I think it’s a pretty simple cutoff. If you’re so rich that you can rent an entire city for your wedding, that’s too rich. If you can buy an entire Hawaiian island, that’s too rich.
You can be a beneficiary of a system and still complain about that system.
On top of that, billionaires who take over media companies and lobby politicians have much more power than a millionaire like Ron. Their ability to make things worse is on a completely different level.
Absolutely you can. But what does Gilbert expect to happen to his wealth?
It’s ok to believe and advocate for something that reduces your individual ability to accumulate capital.