← Back to context

Comment by andrei_says_

6 hours ago

I sometimes wonder, what does one need a second 500 billion that the first 500 billion is not enough for?

Interestingly, during the trial he promised to donate any potential financial winnings to OpenAI's charity.

A move that surprisingly didn't get much press.

  • I think you are referring to a tweet on March 16th where he said "Btw, the proceeds of any legal victory in the OpenAI case will be donated to charity. I will in no way enrich myself." Not during the trial, not a donation to OpenAI's charity, and obviously not meaningful given his track record of not following through on public statements.

  • I genuinely don't know how to make a non-sarcastic statement about Mr. Elon Musk's promises.

    I especially struggle to not make a Venn diagram of people who still take Mr. Musk's promises seriously, and current state of American politics.

    I simply cannot make a sentence about Mr. Musks promises that will pass Hacker News guidelines of being serious and productive.

    ...And that's how I feel about Mr. Musks promises, particularly those regarding donations and charities. I think the only way that promise by Mr Musk could've been made stronger, is if it were a Twitter poll :).

Getting to Mars, it would seem.

  • Does anyone seriously still believe this? I thought as a society we had realized Musk is simply BSing whatever he feels like until it becomes untenable.

    • > Does anyone seriously still believe this?

      I do. It’s not his singular focus. But he continues to personally invest himself in pushing the boundaries of human spacefaring capability. That goal seems more meaningful to him that it does to e.g. Bezos, who seems to have a rocket company to look cool.

      18 replies →

    • I genuinely believe he wants to go to Mars. Desperately.

      He's fundamentally a very smart socially inept largely sociopathic emotionally immature obsessively driven boy who read a lot of Heinlein as a kid. Everything about him indicates he sees himself as a saviour of humanity and the only person who has their priorities right and everybody should appreciate and adore him and it's so darn frustrating when they don't, oh wait this other party will adore me, now they don't anymore either oh HUMbug.

      Do I believe any of his promises? No absolutely not. But I do think Mars is his massive obsession and that he fervently (If completely Implausibly) believes it'll work and help humanity.

Every <unit of currency> not in your pocket is in someone else’s. Greedy narcissists can’t stand that, they need to have it all. They don’t need the extra 500 billion to spend it, they need it so the number goes up. They need to be number one. At everything. Remember when Musk lied about being one of the top players for some difficult video game, then it turned out he was paying someone else to play for him? It’s just an ego thing, which I agree is baffling.

  • Yeah, but lets practice some empathy.

    Starting point: money can't buy happiness.

    So what to do to be happy? Extreme wealth removes most practical goals like buying things or going places and doing things. Not that you can't do them, but it's not a meaningful goal to work towards.

    They have to create their own meaning, whatever that is.

    A billionaire trying to create purpose for themselves can be boring, or weird. Which one gets media coverage?

    Gates Foundation, Zukerberg's fitness craze, MacKenzie Scott's philanthropy, Bezos and Musk's [whateverness] are all just variations on a theme. And like all people, some will be better at it than others.

    Note though, that they will do what it takes to stay wealthy because what would they be without that?

    • Greedy narcissists are lacking in empathy, that’s what makes them greedy narcissists.

      That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be empathetic, of course. Someone else’s lack of empathy does not excuse our own. However, consider that billionaires mostly reach that status by exploiting others. Musk, Bezos, Zuckerberg, they all fit that mould. Being empathetic does not mean being a chump. I’m not going to shed a tear for the poor exploitative billionaire who underpays and overworks people to the point they literally die on the floor of their warehouses and others around them are ordered to keep working.

      If given the choice to defend the one billionaire who is fucking up the world and billions of lives in the process, or those who are being exploited by said billionaire, I think it’s obvious where one should place their empathy.

      It’s not my responsibility, or yours, or anyone but themselves, that they can’t find meaning in life without being massive assholes. Use some of that money to go to therapy. Use it to enhance the lives of others around you, improve your community and you improve your own well being. It’s not that hard, we’ve known for a long time that a way to happiness is to do things for others.

      Musk himself has lamented that money does not buy happiness, and after that expressed the desire to become the first trillionaire. I mean, come on…

      1 reply →

Because money is just a proxy for power, and the goal is not to have cash, it is to have power. Perhaps via being able to make decisions at various businesses, or being able to travel to a different planet, or being able to influence other people, etc.

Could also partly be a curiosity to see what one is capable of, or maybe wanting to be known for helming an organization that accomplishes xyz.

Why did he need a second 250 billion after the first 250 billion? Makes me think of a inverted Zeno's paradox.

Why do you need an extra dollar?

I can answer for myself: New Zealand plans to tax the shit out of anyone that has more[A].

You need a fukton more than median wealth to be able to protect yourself against your own government.

The type of person that enjoys chasing money doesn't stop.

[A] via capital gains taxes and wealth taxes. Also one needs an excessive amount more to handle progressive taxation and means testing.

  • > I can answer for myself: New Zealand plans to tax the shit out of anyone that has more[A].

    New Zeeland is an outlier in that it doesn't have capital gains tax.

    Its not the end of the world to have captial gains tax.

    • CGT is fine.

      I wasn't trolling, but I have unfortunately deviated from the topic.

      What isn't fine is my belief that I'm going to be rug-pulled by my government. From multiple sources I believe New Zealand will tax most savings to smithereens. The lie is that I should save for retirement; when any savings will be taken from me over time via a variety of mechanisms including taxes.

      Both our Labour (leftish) and National parties will screw me.

      The underlying issue is that our demographics leave little choice to the government. The majority of voters are naturally happy to take everything from everyone who has more than them. Voters are selfish.

      Attacking the successful is called the tall-poppy syndrome down here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tall_poppy_syndrome (I'm nowhere near successful enough for much backlash - but I do fear it).

      I was trying to make a argument based on marginal economics. NZ should be encouraging me to increase my income from export earnings: instead it drastically discourages me. I helped found a startup, so I deeply understand the multiple ways our government discourages us from earning export income. My marginal utility from an extra dollar is already drastically diminished because I already have enough to enjoy my life. The >40% taxation on top (incl GST) reduces my motivation to earn money for NZ to nearly zero. I am not a money chaser and I dislike investing.

      After some threshold, money as a marginal value becomes meaningless because other non-monetary factors like politics dominate. It seems like nobody cares how much society profits from you - they only care about their own selfish goals.

  • I want extra money so I can pay for simple things like food and pay my mortgage and send my kid to a school, and help family members out.

    Realistically I probably need $5m and I'd be set for life.

    If I had $10m instead of $5m I don't see how my life would meaningfully change.

    • That's the difference between builders and consumers. People who are mostly consumers have a realistic number where they could stop contributing to society. Smalltime builders can imagine a lot of wealth, but at a certain point don't want to get too big. Big Dreamers are only limited by what they can imagine and make happen, and only infinite capital, labor, and time could achieve their dreams. Once you surround yourself with people dreaming of humans as multiplanetary, earthly levels of labor and wealth are obviously not going to make it happen.

      1 reply →

  • Why did you turn that into a whine about a tax that exists in 31 of 38 OECD economies?

    Go to Australia where you pay a stamp duty for buying (to pay for infra) and a CGT for selling

    Edit: Changed stamp tax to stamp duty

  • "Why did he need a second 250 billion after the first 250 billion"

    because thats another 250 billion less for a competitor to use against you.

  • Yeah, no, this is bullshit.

    You can't just apply One Simple Rule like this ("more money is always better" / "more money never makes a difference"). There is, objectively, an amount of money above which another dollar, or another billion, will never make a meaningful difference in your overall lifestyle[0].

    The amount isn't a single bright line, but like with so many things, there's an area below it where extra money unquestionably improves your quality of life, and an area above it where it unquestionably doesn't.

    [0] unless "your lifestyle" involves manipulating major governments and controlling the way people the world over think, which I wouldn't consider a legitimate part of "lifestyle"

  • > Why did he need a second 250 billion after the first 250 billion?

    Because billionaires are mentally unwell.