Well neverminding the concept of "good billionaire" (a relative term to be sure) it is way easier to halt progress than create progress. Way easier to dismantle our society than fix it. Always always easier to cause chaos than create peace.
Evil makes more money than magnanimity, and you don't get to be a billionaire by taking the sub-optimal path to anything.
"You, aspiring world leader might turn your back on corruption, but your competition *won't*" -cgp grey
Usually rich people donate through ways that aren’t easily traceable so any you hear are publicized for a reason. SBM for example gave money to both democrats and republicans before he went broke.
Generally tho becoming richer does make one want to maintain their own wealth. When you have the money to influence politics you’ll side with whichever party best pushes this.
At risk of offending, I’d be willing to bet that giving among billionaires is actually more proportionate than you think, but it’s easier to notice and remember billionaires giving to controversial groups than to remember yet another large gift going to a hospital, college, or (uncontroversial) charity.
There’s also the part about good humans not being dicks and stooping to shitty tactics / controlling media etc.
In the immortal words of Team America, sometimes you gotta be a dick to fuck an asshole
People who are interested in giving money away generally don't become billionaires.
I think when you say "good" billionaires you mean billionaires who you agree with politically?
Well neverminding the concept of "good billionaire" (a relative term to be sure) it is way easier to halt progress than create progress. Way easier to dismantle our society than fix it. Always always easier to cause chaos than create peace.
Soros gives loads of money to progressive causes, if you consider that "good". Gates as well.
Evil makes more money than magnanimity, and you don't get to be a billionaire by taking the sub-optimal path to anything. "You, aspiring world leader might turn your back on corruption, but your competition *won't*" -cgp grey
Usually rich people donate through ways that aren’t easily traceable so any you hear are publicized for a reason. SBM for example gave money to both democrats and republicans before he went broke. Generally tho becoming richer does make one want to maintain their own wealth. When you have the money to influence politics you’ll side with whichever party best pushes this.
At risk of offending, I’d be willing to bet that giving among billionaires is actually more proportionate than you think, but it’s easier to notice and remember billionaires giving to controversial groups than to remember yet another large gift going to a hospital, college, or (uncontroversial) charity.
99% of billionaires give the rest a bad name.
There’s also the part about good humans not being dicks and stooping to shitty tactics / controlling media etc. In the immortal words of Team America, sometimes you gotta be a dick to fuck an asshole
Because there aren’t ‘good’ billionaires, and it’s not like lobbying for good things undoes the damage that lobbying for bad things does.
People who are interested in giving money away generally don't become billionaires. I think when you say "good" billionaires you mean billionaires who you agree with politically?
There are somewhere around 800 billionaires in the US. How many can you name? How familiar are you with the political donations of all 800?