Do we need billionaires? • Hacker News Board

Re: Do we need billionaires?

#41

Post by lucamark » Fri, Jun 05, 2026, 12:51 PM UTC

alpinisme wrote: post #21

lucamark wrote: post #7

> risk-takers who are badly needed But at what point does marginal private incentive stop helping innovation and start damaging democracy? For sure risk-taking deserves reward but the size of the reward matters

Totally. Those conversations often also overlook the fact that some people are just driven and curious and risk taking by personality (especially after they’ve made it to adulthood and have entrenched work habits that may have been partly the result of economic incentives along the way). Even if you start having diminishing (personal financial) returns on added effort at some point, or even hit a ceiling, there are p…

Exactly. Many people - e.g., founders, scientists and artists - keep pushing because of curiosity and mission.

Money matters, especially early, but after some extreme level it is hard to believe that the next $50B - just to say a number - is what causes the useful work to happen.

Re: Do we need billionaires?

#42

Post by hrunt » Fri, Jun 05, 2026, 12:52 PM UTC

voidUpdate wrote: post #22

I heard a while back that the average person will see about a million of their currency over their lifetime. So we can take a million dollars to be about 1 lifetime's worth of money. Elon is currently sitting on 817,000 lifetimes worth of money. I feel like we could have like a >95% income tax when you are worth more than like $20 million and it wouldnt actually matter too much to the people who would cap it out? Of…

> I feel like we could have like a >95% income tax when you are worth more than like $20 million and it wouldnt actually matter too much to the people who would cap it out?

It wouldn't matter, because the ultra-wealthy generally don't have much income relative to their wealth. Elon Musk (in the article listed at $817B of wealth) was reported to have had $1.52B of net income between 2014 and 2018, and had no taxable income in 2018. 95% of $0 is still $0.

The ultra-wealthy's wealth doesn't grow because of income (as the tax code defines it). Trying to tax income to redistribute their wealth (or even just slow its growth) is not going to address wealth inequality.

Re: Do we need billionaires?

#43

Post by d3ckard » Fri, Jun 05, 2026, 12:59 PM UTC

Controversially, yes.

The right frame of comparison is not towards average Joe, but towards governments. Billionaires, for better or worse, are independent power sources, which IMO in grand scheme of things are useful.

I think the problem with modern world is not that some people have lots of money, but that we allowed money to buy pretty much everything else.

Re: Do we need billionaires?

#44

Post by ChrisGreenHeur » Fri, Jun 05, 2026, 12:59 PM UTC

voidUpdate wrote: post #22

I heard a while back that the average person will see about a million of their currency over their lifetime. So we can take a million dollars to be about 1 lifetime's worth of money. Elon is currently sitting on 817,000 lifetimes worth of money. I feel like we could have like a >95% income tax when you are worth more than like $20 million and it wouldnt actually matter too much to the people who would cap it out? Of…

They own stock in the company they founded.

So, you force the founder to sell 95% of the stock they own in the company.

Is this a good idea for the stock price of that company as well as the for the ability of that company to raise cash?

Re: Do we need billionaires?

#45

Post by ceejayoz » Fri, Jun 05, 2026, 12:59 PM UTC

qaq wrote: post #12

We need competent people to remain in control of companies they have created.

How much did Zuck waste on the Metaverse again?

Re: Do we need billionaires?

#46

Post by calgoo » Fri, Jun 05, 2026, 1:00 PM UTC

hrunt wrote: post #42

voidUpdate wrote: post #22

I heard a while back that the average person will see about a million of their currency over their lifetime. So we can take a million dollars to be about 1 lifetime's worth of money. Elon is currently sitting on 817,000 lifetimes worth of money. I feel like we could have like a >95% income tax when you are worth more than like $20 million and it wouldnt actually matter too much to the people who would cap it out? Of…

> I feel like we could have like a >95% income tax when you are worth more than like $20 million and it wouldnt actually matter too much to the people who would cap it out? It wouldn't matter, because the ultra-wealthy generally don't have much income relative to their wealth. Elon Musk (in the article listed at $817B of wealth ) was reported to have had $1.52B of net income between 2014 and 2018, and had no taxable…

Exactly, at that point it shares need to be taxed. SpaceX is valued at ~$1T Dollars and you own 60% of the shares? OK now you are paying taxes on those 60% every year, not on the income it generates, but on the value of what you own.

Same for land - Anything above X size or # of properties gets taxed at 50% the land value each year.

Now would this happen? Who knows, and also it will have other effects, like devaluing the stockmarket as no one want to pay taxes on billions worth of stocks.

Re: Do we need billionaires?

#47

Post by casey2 » Fri, Jun 05, 2026, 1:01 PM UTC

It's not so much risktaking that's the problem with Reaganomics. It's the risktaking+socalizing costs. If we let billionaires fail there wouldn't be as many of them. Joel Schreiber, Adam Neumann, Miguel McKelvey all billionaires yet nil contribution to society, arguably slight contribution to a small group of insiders. Clearly that's not a a stable situation in regards to resource allocation, the terrifying thing is that the gamblers and scamees of the world know this, they just want to lose all their money as a group and obtain a collective casus belli to fuck shit up.

Re: Do we need billionaires?

#48

Post by oulipo2 » Fri, Jun 05, 2026, 1:02 PM UTC

voidUpdate wrote: post #22

I heard a while back that the average person will see about a million of their currency over their lifetime. So we can take a million dollars to be about 1 lifetime's worth of money. Elon is currently sitting on 817,000 lifetimes worth of money. I feel like we could have like a >95% income tax when you are worth more than like $20 million and it wouldnt actually matter too much to the people who would cap it out? Of…

Yet he has the shittiest possible life, forced to be scared of someone harming him, all his children in age of understanding who he is hates him, same for his ex-wives, most hated person in the world after Putin and Trump

Re: Do we need billionaires?

#49

Post by Brendinooo » Fri, Jun 05, 2026, 1:02 PM UTC

d3ckard wrote: post #43

Controversially, yes. The right frame of comparison is not towards average Joe, but towards governments. Billionaires, for better or worse, are independent power sources, which IMO in grand scheme of things are useful. I think the problem with modern world is not that some people have lots of money, but that we allowed money to buy pretty much everything else.

Yeah I was gonna offer a similar hot take: in a world where government can have trillions, it's probably good on some level that some people have billions. Checks and balances.

Re: Do we need billionaires?

#50

Post by storus » Fri, Jun 05, 2026, 1:02 PM UTC

voidUpdate wrote: post #22

I heard a while back that the average person will see about a million of their currency over their lifetime. So we can take a million dollars to be about 1 lifetime's worth of money. Elon is currently sitting on 817,000 lifetimes worth of money. I feel like we could have like a >95% income tax when you are worth more than like $20 million and it wouldnt actually matter too much to the people who would cap it out? Of…

95% income tax would remove any incentive to go above and beyond and you end up with collapsing economy where everybody is doing the bare minimum. See Soviet economy outcome and tofu dreg buildings.