logoalt Hacker News

vineyardmike10/02/20242 repliesview on HN

> You don't see the durable institutions like new universities being setup like after the gilded age. Not sure if it’s a tax code thing or what.

For a while, America was much more aware that you could just kill the rich like you killed kings. The rich gave away more and did more for society as a way of washing their reputation and proving they shouldn’t be killed in an uprising. Today, global society has become much more legally certain around perceptions of property rights and entitlement of the rich to their wealth.

If we saw genuine movements in America to (for example) tax wealth above 1B at like a 99% tax rate, I bet you’d suddenly see a few new well endowed universities and concert halls and similar.

Instead today, the wealthy are much more interested in showing off their reputation by buying media companies (WashPo, twitter, etc) with influence or by building their vision of the future in a commercial context - look at Elon musk and bezos going to space or Bryan Johnson trying to live forever and selling vitamins along the way.

When we do get billionaires donating, and they become unpopular, people try to penalize the institutions. Like the Zuckerberg general hospital getting petitioned to change their name.


Replies

willcipriano10/02/2024

The rich of today lack taste, they aren't funding the opera beacuse they watch marvel movies instead.

In the past they were well read, educated and had class. They would dress better, not wearing $1000 sneakers and designer sweatpants but tailored suits and Italian shoes. Talk better due to years of study. The women would walk around with books on their heads to learn to glide around the room ethereally.

It doesn't sting as much when the guy who is richer than you is more cultured and put together. When he's an idiot with a mustard stain on his shirt just like you it's unbearable.

show 1 reply
steveBK12310/02/2024

Agreed! I think that's what I was getting at with historical differences in tax policy. It's interesting some of the former gilded age estates in the northeast that have become public parks of one form or another, for similar reasons.

> When we do get billionaires donating, and they become unpopular, people try to penalize the institutions. Like the Zuckerberg general hospital getting petitioned to change their name.

To me this always seemed like broken brain syndrome. If you don't like some rich guy, the best possible outcome is that some public good extracts wealth from him that taxes have failed to do. Would we be better off if he kept the money? These people get too hung up on letting the perfect (billionaires shouldn't exist!) get in the way of the good (billionaire funding a hospital).

show 1 reply