Wealth is relative. My number was 2 mil saved after working my tail off for 30 years and retiring at 59 with house, car and cards paid off. I'm getting 7% return on my IRA and living comfortably on a $4k monthly disbursement plus SS. We travel, eat out, entertain, be with friends, volunteer, have hobbies, give to charities and stay healthy. I laugh to think I am a millionaire (don't feel like one) and wouldn't be getting by in LA or SF but here on the East Coast I think I can last into my 80s this way. What would I do with more $$, except probably give it away? Now the only thing with value is time.
1498
I'm sure the notion that net worth defines who they are applies to many of the uber rich. But most of the successful people I know don't dwell on money at all, or even material goods, but on the projects and goals themselves. Many of these are worthy, and simply achieving them brings satisfaction.
263
@Koho
Spoken like someone who’s caught up in the exact sort of social circles the author is describing. In my experience, rich people are constantly competing over wealth... even if they don’t wear it on their sleeve. The “projects” and “goals” are mostly window-dressing.
172
@Koho Words from a yogi who shares class each evening with "successful" professionals moaning, groaning, and breathing heavily to "achieve" each posture: maybe the need to constantly achieve is part of the problem.
132
They do it because they like it. That is why they are where they are in the first place.
472
Their GHG emissions must be massive, absolutely massive. Their impacts on habitats around the world must be devastating as well.
Their la la land ideas about how their companies are run hurt so many lives. They are the reason why workers are paid less and less and work under toxic conditions, both psychologically and physically. Unsafe factories with locked doors that burnt down with hundreds of people inside was a rich guy’s idea.
I have to add terribly incompetent. This incompetence gets inflicted on everyone all over the world.
And yet desperately unhappy. Go figure.
355
What's the deal with the weird jab accusing some democratic candidates of being secret billionaires? Is spreading falsehoods in passing just a fun game we all play now?
196
To answer this question it would be more interesting to profile the subsequent generations. Obviously someone who grew up middle class and becomes a billionaire has a certain drive to work hard that I imagine is hard to quit. But what about their kids? Why do billionnaires' kids bother starting businesses and things? Or do they not work? I wouldn't!
91
I love the Bulgari ads that accompanied this article. Speaks volumes.
428
This is a bit silly. In my experience, highly productive people want to use their talents for productive ends. This is not a problem or a mental flaw that needs to be analyzed.
425
All of which explains why taxation as part of the fruits of capitalism is a critical leg of a functioning society/democracy - a leg which has been sawn off by the Citizens United and McCutcheon decisions, enabling the ultra-wealthy to purchase yet more economic favor.
Deregulation pandered under the aegis of 'freeing animal spirits' is obvious crack-pottery, when James Rickards is quoted as receiving the mentioned phone calls from these prime beneficiaries of politically purchased deregulation and lowered taxes on the ultra-wealthy.
Bringing up the point that taxation/regulation are needed on capitalism because numerous studies show the most successful capitalists very often tend toward the sociopath side of the personality scale - at a rate MANY times the occurrence of such traits in the general population:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/13/1-in-5-ceos-are-psychopaths-australian-study-finds/
Thus the very apt term 'Vulture Capitalists'.
Until Citizens United and the McCutcheon decision are overturned, limiting the ability of a known sociopathic sector of our society to purchase economic favors, we will continue to be at their mercy; the ultra-wealthy will not otherwise stop/limit their compulsory for all the reasons so well set out in this excellent article.
264
Define “work”.
152
It's sad really....not worth it the long run. These people are truly miserable and you have to ask, was it worth it?
36
It is soooo amazing to read in comments all the rationalizatons for greed. Incredible. Shame used to be a controlling influence.
Moscow Rule #39: There is no limit to a human being's ability to rationalize the truth.
172
Feinstein and Pelosi have more money than they could spend in their and their children’s lifetimes, plus yours and mine combined.
Apparently that old adage that misery loves company must be true.
47
It's all fleeting. The ultimate desire to be desire-less and at peace can be faced at any stage of this crazy ladder.
64
“Imagine growing up middle class or even poor and then amassing millions,” Ms. Streaks said. “This sounds like the American dream, but suddenly you have a $5 million apartment, a $200,000 car and a family that has these expectations. A panic ensues when those people believe “that they are one bad investment away from being broke.”
hahahaha--that happens when you grow up poor and get a job making $50K a year. There's always that thought that destruction could happen tomorrow.
368
Call it like it is...MONEY HOARDING. People don't "Make Money" they take it from other people. Wish they would Marie Kondo their bank accounts
326
The first post below names this as a mental health condition. I would call it a spiritual health condition. While it may be possible to create vast wealth as a spiritual pursuit (see "The Diamond Cutter" by Geshe Michael Roach), for most this kind of lifestyle is clearly and dramatically all about ego.
110
Why Don’t Rich People Just Stop Working? It's not just about money, competition or feeling important. How about rich people love what they do for a living?
180
Why aren't you asking, "why don't pay forward their privilege"
80
This article brings to mind a parable where an American investment banker visits a small Mexican village and observes a fisherman, content with his modest earnings, relaxing and enjoying his family between fishing trips. The banker tells the fisherman that if he were REALLY smart, he’d work harder, build his fleet, and someday years in the future sell it for a large profit to a big corporation. “But what would I do with all that money?” asked the fisherman. “Well that’s the best part,” the banker says smugly, “You could retire... so you could spend more time relaxing and enjoying your family!”
372
From the NY Times
"Michael Bloomberg on How to Succeed in Business"
" I’m not the smartest guy in the room, but nobody’s going to outwork me."
The self made rich got there by working more. It's the habit that got them there
Inherited rich is different.
159
I should hope that if I had that much money that I would not end up such a tedious bore as those referenced in the article.
106
Maybe some of these people should look to Bill & Melinda gates and Warren Buffet as examples and delve deeper into philanthropy. Or maybe just treat their employees fairly.
I'm lookin' at you Jeff Bezos.....
334
So, they're morally bankrupt and only gain fulfillment from being the best at fleecing the middle class and poor? Got it.
139
People don't stop working towards being great. That's what made them great in the first place, those people who work so many hours a day while others are content with putting in their eight and go home. It's that greatness that brought us so many incredible inventions and business models and, yes, jobs. It's amazing how the very thing this country is about, individual success, is being hammered at by leftists and others.
358
The constant striving for more is basically fear-based.
556
Many wealthy people simply enjoy what they do.
So why should they stop?
135
"Rich" people are people. They are humans just like you and me. Ideally, we humans all want to be connected to others, feel needed, use our brains, and have some kind of purpose. But in any category, there are those who--for whatever reason--are insecure, unkind, self-centered, unambitious and so forth. You can't generalize about "the rich" anymore than you can generalize about any other "group." This only serves to further polarize.
125
I wish there was Anabuse for super yachts and mansions. This has been a continuing puzzle for me for awhile. Also it explains why very poor people in Clinton AR vote the way they do.
Granted along social conservatism lines they might anyway, but what I think helps is a belief that for all, there is never enough. and that it's wonderfully American of us to not accept that there should ever be. That the uber rich are entitled to the same scarcity mindset that they have.
This article just reinforces the premise, while many of us reading might also think of it in terms of addiction. Addictions and rituals are often all about something to do to avoid facing existential dreadful, or so thought, things shut away. But the scaling is so weird...enough money for the rent, for utilities and a reliable car and opportunity to at least not go backward yearly, are what so many hardworking people hope for.
I have to posit that probably none of us are immune to uber wealth acquisition sickness. And also that, although examples will involve complications, there have been some very rich who have enjoyed making useful things which benefit society their obsession and this is morally more ambiguous to me. (more "enlightened" putting their fortunes to work if that is possible)
15
It's fun to sit up there, looking down, and snickering to themselves. Must feel like being God, if there were a God. On the other hand, if you're doing stuff you like, why stop doing it? Most of us haven't been lucky enough to have jobs we love.
32
Or perhaps, they would just be bored. My father hates retirement, and I suspect I will to when (if) that day comes.
67
Many younger people (I loath the label "millennial") are opting out of the rat race and saying that they have "enough" after they have accumulated enough to stop working. Strangely, this has been met with skepticism, derision, or outright hostility by many media outlets.
It's easy to demonize the "elite" as greedy, broken people. It's much harder to look at our cultural landscape, and the taste-makers that shape that landscape, and ask why is it that so many people seek wealth that they will never be able to spend in a thousand lifetimes.
61
All the money in the world will not prevent that Category 3 hurricane from ramping up to Category 6.
89
Zuckerberg claims no one deserves that much money however he continues to tear down American democracy to make more and more. Once we are a dictatorship will he still want more?
109
The analogy with alcohol is a helpful one. They aren't chasing a financial goal, they are chasing a feeling.
“If you’re an alcoholic,” he said, “you’re going to take one drink, two drinks, five drinks, six drinks to feel the buzz. Well, when you get a million dollars, you need 10 million dollars to feel like a king.
121
Hmm, I'm a Silicon Valley type, entrepreneur bla bla bla. What it meant in real terms is several times, and even with toddlers in the house, I risked it all to pursue an idea. I did it prudently and so I'm a relative success -- not $100's but nearing "10s" of millions. I hit 60 and had a physical -- all numbers still fine, no meds needed. Some of this is genes, some of this is I eat only real food and exercise 6 days a week. My parents had no real money, I worked hard in school into advanced degrees paid by me, took care of myself, saved so that I could take risks, took well thought out risks building real companies and stuff you used today. I don't apologize for my wealth nor do I want some politician to aim at a hedge fund billionaire and hit me. I don't begrudge more progressive taxation either (especially on the financial industry): I think corporations should pay equity taxes and distribute that to the population so that it's "dividends, not welfare".
Anyhow, I'm not retired ... because I see I can use my talents to drive a new company that might actually help solve one of humanity's existential problems. I feel conflicted -- some of me does want to just stop, read, travel while I'm healthy. So, it's a tradeoff. Anyhow, who wants Elon Musk to retire? Didn't you always want space ships and more advanced e-cars? He's not at all comparable to a Koch Bro.
274
Interesting article, however I disagree with the insinuation that these people are working harder and longer hours. When I went to Columbia University, I believed this sort of PR. I would listen with awe about people with Harvard MBAs, working 100 hour weeks at investment banks and Dow Jones 40 companies. I would secretly envy their incomes, and I would unsuccessfully try to go without sleep and other essentials for health in order to get to the same place. It didn’t happen. Many of my acquaintances had family connections that went back generations, and the people who actually did pull those crazy hours were being fueled by cocaine. So for the vanity of characters like Elon Musk, et al, I don’t believe any of their posturing. There are many stories here, but these are people. And often, the truth is not so impressive. Because some investment bank chose some techno nerd to become a billionaire.... I’m not impressed.
233
Many rich people truly enjoy what they do.
So why should they stop doing what they enjoy, even if they do not need more?
71
I think it's pretty easy to understand. Human beings find purpose in their work, they're basically selfish, and all luxury is relative. There's always a bigger yacht.
39
There's no such thing as a nigiri roll. Nigiri is a type of sushi that is specifically not rolled. Maki, perhaps?
57
I have known several wealthy Pharmaceutical owners / CEOs. They have all been obsessed with growing something useful, a legacy of helping improve the human condition.
They are smeared by those who use the term "Greed" and class envy. God help us if we interfere with their success by taxing away the building blocks of their enterprise. We will become Venezuela.
52
Here's what I don't get:
The wealthy, some of them, don't stop working.
We think that's very cool; we honor them for it and are sooo very impressed.
But if you're not wealthy, if you're poor, we act as if we know that the mere offer of reliable, subsistence level support will send you running for bon bons and a seat on the couch.
So "for your own good", to secure a "step on the ladder of American success", "a seat at the American table", we make people suffer. We degrade and humiliate them, we refuse them decent housing, normal food, good healthcare, respect.
Then we give all that unspent money to the rich guys. More and more every year as we beat harder and harder on the heads of the poor.
The only welfare queens with any standing around here are farmers. Even they, living it up on billions in welfare just for them, believe anybody who takes government money is a sinful laggard, unworthy of breath.
How can people be so blind? How can people be so heartless?
410
Needs versus wants, with the wealthy able to meet the needs of billions of poor, but instead stockpile wants.
80
We should start treating this level of greed as a mental illness and treat it as such in the media and the arts. Enough of glorifying this bottomless greed and limitless accumulation of wealth - it's a sickness.
96
You forgot subjugation.
14
If we taxed 50% of the entire wealth of the 1%, I'm not sure if I would be affected at all; not to mention, would the gov pay down the debt or just spend more?
24
Yeah can we talk more about the defective psychologies of people addicted to money, unable to form normal human relationships, unable to stop or restrain themselves, lacking in empathy for the rest of our common species - or the planet they are wrecking on their way to evanescent wealth and in service to their fantasy that wealth will bring them love?
Because we all know how that ends.
These people need help.
Meanwhile, for the sake of the rest of us and the great democratic experiment that is the United States, we need to curb them NOW before they sink our economy, just like the idiot currently pretending to be president and steering our foreign and domestic policies into an iceberg.
69
I stayed with a friend and his family in his six thousand square foot vacation house in Cabo San Lucas. A Mercedes SUV sat in the driveway. In his closet were several hundred expensive cotton shirts, each costing more than $200. More arrived almost daily from Amazon. A maid came every day to clean, needed or not. One morning I found her dusting already spotless cans in the pantry, trying to look busy. A personal chef prepared dinner each night, despite my wife's offers to cook one of her excellent meals. One evening he mentioned his desire to buy a different, BIGGER house in the area, and he wouldn't rest until he had it. This man, and people like him, are the hungry ghosts of capitalism. They don't understand enough, and they're rarely happy. It was, by far, the worst vacation I ever had, and I never went back despite numerous invitations.
1274
@Bill Prange - A perfect anecdote, going further to explain why taxation of the fruits of capitalism is a critical leg of a functioning society/democracy - a leg which has been sawn off by the Citizens United and McCutcheon decisions, enabling the ultra-wealthy to purchase yet more economic favors.
Deregulation pandered as 'freeing animal spirits' is obvious crack-pottery, when James Rickards is quoted as receiving the mentioned phone calls from the prime beneficiaries of politically purchased deregulation and lowered taxes on the ultra-wealthy.
Bringing up the point that taxation/regulation are needed on capitalism because numerous studies show the most successful capitalists very often tend toward the sociopath side of the personality scale - at a rate MANY times the occurrence of such traits in the general population:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/13/1-in-5-ceos-are-psychopaths-australian-study-finds/
Thus the very apt term 'Vulture Capitalists'.
Until Citizens United and the McCutcheon decisions are overturned, limiting the ability of a known sociopath sector of our society to purchase economic favors, we will continue to be at their mercy; the ultra-wealthy will not otherwise stop/limit their addictive status seeking, for all the reasons so well set out in this excellent article.
166
@Bill Prange, Respectfully, if your friend is buying $200 cotton shirts (from Amazon!) that is at least one data point confirming that the rich are not smarter than the rest of us.
199
@Bill Prange
Being rich is better than being poor, but knowing when you have enough is best of all.
599
The problem is that the very wealthy design the tax code and most other laws to benefit them. It would be fine if others didn't suffer because of their greed and need for more money but in this case it hurts others. They may salve their consciences with philanthropy but in that case they get to decide what they believe is best for society not the rest of us which one expects in a democracy.
79
I didn't really understand this until fairly recently, but it's an interesting paradox. Like many people, I've pretty much worked because I had to, not because I particularly liked it. I love working in the creative field, but even then I tend to only do what I need to, rather than work all the time. I never really understood what "business" was. I had no clear definition of it. I think many people are the same.
But I had a friend as I was growing up who was industrious and had what i thought then was a fairly unhealthy obsession with money, and making money. But on reflection, I understand that it was his "thing", the way everyone has their "thing". For some, it's a hobby, like painting or car maintenance. There is a satisfaction one gets out of arranging flowers, or making a wooden cabinet, or having a good golf handicap.
I didn't realize that some people have this same sense of satisfaction out of making money. I know I enjoy a bargain. I think some people just are more enthusiastic about it, that's all. They make making money something they love to do, just for its own sake. The money itself is really just a secondary thing.
And when you think about it, that's rather a neat way of thinking. I mean, you have a habit then which instead of making you poor or unhealthy it just makes you rich!
Wish I'd thought of it fifty years ago...
61
Here's an idea. Why don't they keep working, but pay their employees more? Give them more stock in the company. Stop nickel and diming them to save a buck on healthcare. How about paying 100% of the costs-- offer a plan with no employee contributions to premiums and no copays, coinsurance, deductibles? Provide a traditional defined benefit plan, instead of making them save for retirement themselves on their meager earnings. Or, at the very least, make generous base and matching contributions to their deferred benefit plans. Offer rich life insurance and disability benefits so they don't have to supplement them themselves. And, of course, donate to charities that help the less advantaged, whether they work for you or not. And maybe they can stop polluting the environment because they can make an extra nickel or two over what they'd make if their business practices respected the environment. Pay. It. Forward. Give back. Show your appreciation for your good fortune. Pay higher tax rates -- and stop paying lobbyists to figure out how you can pay less. Support the social contract. Chances are, they need both employees and customers to sustain their businesses. There is a lot that the wealthy who are driven to keep working can do with their earnings. Who knows, if they shift the paradigm, maybe the means of keeping score shifts from personal wealth to "how much good are you doing in the world"? That used to be a measure of stature among the rich. Let's return to it.
1161
Ultimately, health and time is the only currency. For that I consider myself to be extremely wealthy.
98
I've often wondered why very famous people, at the top of the status pyramid, keep chasing increased fame and status. After all, their fame seems to bring so many disappointments and everyday hassles to their lives.
Is the answer the same as for the super-rich? Too much is never enough?
19
Back in the roaring '80s there was a study of the psychology of the rich. What they found was that the only thing the rich had in common was that it was very important to them to be rich.
The other observation, maybe from Picketty, is that wealth is exponential. The richer you get, the bigger the gap between you and the next person above you on the ladder. So, psychologically, the further up you get, the further down it feels. It like a mirage that keeps receding into the horizon.
73
What these 1% have is they don't have to worry about economic
stress. They can do what they want.
20
I think a good analogy would be the Vietnam War escalation. As one journalist quoted in the magnificent Ken Burns documentary put it, when you have trouble measuring what you value, you wind up valuing what you can measure - in the Vietnam case, enemy dead. Under MacNamara's direction, servicing that metric became the overarching strategic objective, because no other aims could be formulated. They simply assumed this tack could lead to victory if unwaveringly followed.
Once on the treadmill of wealth maximization, getting off amounts to an acknowledgement one had gone astray (even on a treadmill) earlier. As in the Vietnam case, many have found it easier to just keep running.
49
Rather than hearing on the top .01% billionaire class, I'm more interested in finding out about the top 1%, who are 100X more common. The top 1% by wealth starts at about $10 million, which sounds like plenty of money. Billionaires are a separate species. Why do the more ordinary 1%ers continue to slog away, rather than living grand lives of leisure?
17
@Josiah a) because they often live in areas where they're far from the richest, ie they compare themselves to those richer than they are and b) because once you've made that kind of money it is almost impossible not to increase your expenses such that what you have is enough. It's a trap. Chasing financial success is a trap but it's the foundational myth of our society.
39
Picketty discusses this heavily in "Capital in the 21st Century." Income inequality is heaviest in the U.S., due to our unique system of "Superstar Managers" - mostly way-overpaid CEOs and executives who make fortunes whether their companies do well or poorly. It's a mythical "Meritocracy" where supposedly innate talent and hard work lead to these salaries. In truth, it's usually based upon inherited wealth, family, and college connections. The wealth buy into the myth as much as everyone else, so often those in the top 10% try hardest to get into the top 1%.
53
My old boss, Connolly Oyler, worked until he dropped dead at age 84. He could not forego the ringing telephone, the frequent bar meetings, and adding up his coins. He didn't play golf or cards, and what else would he do all day?
17
@Marilyn Sue Michel
He had it right. Work is WAY more fun than golf.
25
Just as a lot of retirement planning is based on the observation that you can pull 4% a year adjusted for inflation from a balanced portfolio for 30 years, you could pull 3% for as long as we have data. So that 110 billion dollars means a permanent income of 3.3 billion. That's enough for 3300 people to make a million a year in today's dollars. It could be centuries before one person has that many descendants. So what happens to the rich who got their money from the right parents? Do they work?
10
I'm not billionaire but after working for more than four decades and running my own business for the last 30 years, I'm financially very comfortable.
I'm a free-lance software engineer and still spend a lot of time writing code. So why, at 68 am I still working so hard? Because I love doing the work. Nothing else I might do appeals to me nearly as much.
113
I get confused with there being two Robert Frank's that write about wealth and inequality. The other Robert Frank would have been a good source for this piece too. He writes about positional goods and the diminishing utility of them in increasingly unequal societies. This isn't just the usual lonely at the top point. Positional goods mean that your wealth allows you to bid for ever more rare things but it doesn't reduce the scarcity of those rare things. For example, you may be a garden variety billionaire but if you are bidding against Saudi wealth to buy the Salvatore Mundi ($450M) you will still feel comparatively poor.
Robert Frank also points out that buying a $100K Porshe and paying slightly higher taxes but also getting better public roads is a better deal for a rich person than buying a Bugatti for millions of dollars but having pot holes all over your streets. At some point even the rich cannot escape the tragedy of the commons.
81
I've worked closely in the past with very affluent people. I'm sure that all the various factors discussed in this article are correct at some times and with some people. However, in my experience, the vast percentage of high-income earners and business executives do what they do primarily for two reasons: (1) they love the work, the challenges, the creativity, the opportunities to perform and achieve, and the groups of similarly talented and motivated people with whom they interact; and (2) they love the position of power and influence itself which provides, usually for good reason, an elevated sense of status and importance.
Hence, there is no reason whatsoever not to impose relatively high tax rates on high levels of income. That will not diminish in any way the motivation or drive that underlies the contributions made by these high-income individuals. At some level (albeit a non-voluntary one), high tax payments might even be sold as heightening this status and importance.
685
@AM Great point. The people who want to be rich, want to be rich. They love the process of getting there. So imposing high marginal tax rates will discourage very few. Recently it was conclude that the tax rate needed to be 85% before they were dissuaded.
120
"Are the wealthy addicted to money, competition, or just feeling important?"
If you're certain billionaires, you're addicted to POWER.
49
They could end visible poverty in America if they wanted to. Why not experiment with extreme philanthropy or extreme humanity. Talk about a real change.
520
@East Roast They would rather walk around the homeless and complain that they are causing their real estate values to plummet and they don't want to see them on their way to work.
74
@East Roast True. Most charity happens as white washing of reputation, not to actually fix something.
80
Is there going to be an article accompanying this one about why every single ultra-rich person mentioned in this article is a white male, with the exception of Lady Gaga, which strikes me as a very odd choice for inclusion in this group. Why not Oprah Winfrey?
I do think there are some good insights here into the motivations of the ultra-rich. I've often wondered at the apparent greediness of those who already have more than they can ever spend or use. The obvious cure for this would seem to be to start spending time with people who have much less than you do. But stepping out of the rarefied air of the haves to spend time with have nots isn't something you see the ultra-rich of the world doing. Bill and Melinda Gates are a too-rare exception to this. Our society romanticizes wealth-gathering of this kind, even when it is shown to be a serious deterrent to equality of all kinds: social, economic, educational. We don't have kings and queens like some countries do, but we do still want to believe that some people should live in castles while other people should serve them. Look at how well we are serving Mr. Bezos and Mr. Zuckerberg, who could never have accumulated so much wealth without our help.
43
I think it’s the same reason many not so rich people work: it defines who they’re, living in order to work, instead of working in order to live. One can tell even the way some people dress for work. They put so much into it, they would be devastated if they didn’t work, even if they didn’t need the money. It defines their sense of worth.
36
Work is about money and meaning. Asking why financially well-off people continue to work presumes that work is all about money. Far from it. Obtaining more than a livable wage is generally easier than finding meaningful work. People are happier when they have meaningful work, and even people who are well-paid are unhappy when their work is superficial or harmful. Yes, money matters, it's important to have your bills paid and nice to have some left over for personal and family enjoyment. But doing meaningful work, being "rich in time", having a reasonable degree of freedom and autonomy, are all more important that earning surplus money.
67
@San knoody
What you're missing here is that the work of many of the superrich, because they work in finance, *is* money.
As Plato pointed out long ago, if I'm a carpenter or a doctor I do two things at once: I build or cure and I make money doing it. But if I mix those up I make a profound mistake, like the doctor who orders unnecessary tests to make an extra buck (it's unethical and it's a violation of her craft). What's the equivalent in finance? There is none, not when enforcement of fiduciary responsibility is eroded to the point it is. Even if I break the law in pursuit of money, the usual penalty for crime at this level is a fine. It's all commensurable. And the problem goes deeper in that many more traditionally constructive pursuits are being financialized: that's what happens when e.g. private equity gets involved. As the article suggests, there's a profound nihilism at the dark heart of this, and because of the outsize role of these people in our economy--and their lack of any sense of themselves as a ruling class with attendant responsibilities--they're taking us all down with them. Which is not to suggest that it's finance's fault per se--this is just what capitalism becomes when all those forces that try to tether it to greater purpose lose to the extent they're losing now.
61
Why does New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady continue to play football at the age of 42? He's won everything there is to win more than anyone has done in the sport. There is absolutely nothing else that Brady has left to win, and he and his supermodel spouse are incredibly rich, yet, he is still grinding away spending over a thousand hours year round to maintain ideal physical fitness all to achieve goals that have already been achieved. What's the point?
I have no answer why anyone continues to climb the same mountain to reach the same mountain top over and over again, instead of moving on and doing something else in their life, like say, Bill and Melinda Gates. Lots of successful and even super rich people do move on with their lives, but some like, Tom Brady, do everything possible to not move on.
81
This article begins with a conclusion, then looks for supportive studies. It also overthinks the issue.
Rich people enjoy their work and the competition that is part of that. They don't make a distinction between work and other parts of their lives, such as family, socializing or leisure. This is why they become rich.
You can try to portray this as a social evil, but demanding that these people retire is like insisting that Donald Trump turn off his cell phone. They're having too much fun.
57
It’s not about wealth but power and politics. Why do dictators rule with cruelty? Why do cult leaders exist? Why do those wealthy few who can live free without authority and responsibility spend so much time undermining the rest of society on the ground floor carrying them?
The only reason I can see is political power to exert their ideology on the world. I’m sure for others it’s just a game. It’s something fun to participate in that puts a bit of skin in the game when you really have passed the point of material concerns.
Also it’s a sense of fulfillment to walk into a room and feel powerful. It’s not about the money. Tax them. They should be seen and treated as aristocracy with all the political dangers of such. Enough is enough.
57
In my 40s I frequently traveled in poor countries. Ever since I feel like a very rich person: I can eat as much as I want and, unfortunately, even more than I want. When needed I can get the best medical care available in the world. I can enjoy art without owning it, and I can buy gifts for my friends. On top of that, I own a bike to take me to my vegetable garden where I experience bouts of glorious happiness. What I don't know is, if this would be of any worth without my partner.
666
The opposite is also true. More often than not in the US, a slum is a state of mind. Volunteers often go to help able-bodied people in slums to basic repairs, maintenance, repaint, cleanup, etc. This may sound harsh, but I think about it as I maintain my home.
I'm in the middle and frankly I don't really care too much about the people at the very top as long as they don't have too much market control. I'm more concerned with making sure that there is a level playing field and that everyone has an *opportunity* to excel and that life is acceptable and improving for the lower strata.
34
This article talks about the super rich, big name people. But what about those in the top 5% or top 10%? Surely they are working more than they need as well. Our household income put us in the top 2-3% so we bought a new car and a second home. We ended up more isolated from our friends and neighbors because we were always moving between our homes. We sold our primary, more expensive home and my wife quit her job. We have so much more free time, relate more to our neighbors, and are still in the top 10%. Many of my wife's coworkers and even bosses expressed jealousy about what we were doing--but they obviously had the means to do it too! What's stopping them? What's stopping you, fellow well-to-do NY Times commenters? Leave some of the money on the table for other people.
273
@Erica, This is an interesting point but as always the answer seems to be it depends. If you are in the top 5% of earners or higher but are relatively young and you and your partner still have an enormous amount of student debt that enabled you to earn so much you may not be able to downshift yet. It also depends on the number of children you plan to have, and of course the amount you are willing to spend on their own human capital accumulation. Yes, there are public schools and excellent flagship universities but why risk it? Many people want a top flight education for their children not just for the quality, which is only a small part of the equation, but for the socialization with instructors and classmates that also exemplify the type of world these children are part of and expected to maintain status within. Again, none of this is necessary but many people still feel the need to do it so their children aren't left behind.
19
@Erica - Yes; the concept of 'enough, already' has gotten lost.
41
@Erica What I like best about this personally is that you've probably lowered your carbon footprint by not heating a second home.
50
The beginning of an important exploration - public and private. What are these people, and each of us, afraid of? How realistic is each of those fears? Up to some "magic number" the fear of being left without health care at the snap of a finger, basic body care if disabled, the ability to live in comfortable environs, the ability to protect ourselves from predators, familial, stranger, and governmental (like the policeman firing through the window) is all too real. Above that, building and maintaining friendships with people whose company we enjoy can feel like it takes time and money. But how much? And cannot we be helping the world while we do that? Recent articles about employers who expect workers to work insane hours on demand - at all income levels - this is relevant to this need to build social ties. The "rich" lawyer only has other lawyers among her "friends" - that crazy law firm is the reason for that. And she likely never even made partner! All of this needs to be discussed and challenged. Our old consciousness-raising circles need to get dusted off and renewed around this issue, before we wear out ourselves and the planet with all of this work and play.
8
I am 46. I have a net worth just over 4 millions dollars. Salary 500k. Two kids in private school. My wife and I drive very modest 5 year old cars with no plans to upgrade anytime soon. We buy inexpensive clothes. We spend a lot on travel. We own one house.
And retirement seems a long ways off.
22
Folks tend to keep doing what they excel at.
Could be anything - Tennis, cooking, volunteering, and of course doing business.
Sanders is very wrong.
These folks create innovation, jobs, and progress.
Imagine if Apple still produced only PCs. After all Steve Jobs was a billionaire BEFORE inventing the iPhone.
What if he stopped working then?
47
@Tuco
So Steve Jobs would have stopped working if he had to live under the pre-Reagan tax rates, or even the Eisenhower-era rates, pay capital gains as ordinary income, and contemplate a hefty inheritance tax?
I don't think so. He loved his work. He was good at it. He would have continued it. There would still be iPhones.
Sanders is very right. Billionaires should not exist. No one needs that level of wealth, and a society that allows that ready concentration of extreme wealth, which, as the Koch brothers have clearly demonstrated, is power, is going to be skewed in their direction. Meanwhile, infrastructure deteriorates, and millions go without health care, which are but two societal crises that could be addressed with a more equitable distribution of society's wealth.
483
As a resident of SF, no surprises or enlightening ideas here. What I kept thinking was that this sounds like all of the type A personalities drawn to large cities--not just the uber wealthy. My close friends (all university instructors) seem to be anxious, over worked, and in constant need of more....money, recognition, status. Of course, we (educators) don't really have a choice! I'm so tired of being surrounded by people who, either by choice or not, "live" lives defined by work and the constant pursuit of money. What a cheap way to spend this life. I'm moving to Mexico.
134
I’m not really wealthy, but I am well-off, retired and do not have to work. However, I feel that it is important to continue contributing to society as long as you live. That is why I work.
232
I wish this article cited actual data instead of just scattered anecdotes about recently-rich CEOs and celebrities. I'm wondering about the children of the Jeff Bezoses and Larry Ellisons of the last generation. And their children. Do people with huge net worths *really* work that hard? I suspect not.
Nevertheless, it is certainly true that it used to be (like in the 1880s - 1920s) much more common for the upper class to live their whole lives without even the pretense of a job. That kind of undermines the claim that there's something about the American psyche that drives us all to work, no matter how much money we have. My own hunch is that unless we do something about this crazy inequality it's only a matter of time before we get back there, culturally.
25
@Alex, To you second point, it's more of the rise of meritocracy that makes it no longer acceptable to be idle rich or inherited rich. Even if you have money and can run in rich circles you may not be looked at admirably because you have very little influence or control compared to people that run large organizations and have articles written in the press about them.
9
Do they really work that many hours? I think, if they were honest and not trying to justify their position, they would admit that they include their socializing (or "networking"), commuting on private jet and other things we wouldn't actually consider our job tasks, as work. Actual "work" being downloaded to their employees. To stop "working" therefore, would be pretty much impossible as even their social lives lead to more "work".
452
@Laura Beeby
You hit the nail on the head! Why do the rich live longer than everyone else? Because they have less stress due to their offloading sources of stress to their employees.
104
By continuing to work, they’re trading time for money. The question is what does this additional money allow you to do that you can’t do now.
37
Or perhaps in many cases they simply enjoy their work.
15
They are addicted to never being satisfied, which you could call competition, but for them it's "competition" that is biased in their favor, so they can always come out on top.
It's like Willard Myth Romney complaining that the money he's "invested" has already been taxed. so HE should be taxed on any "gains" from that money at a lower rate, even though it's UNEARNED income and he did nothing to earn it, other than have his broker trade a few pieces of paper.
41
Po Bronson wrote a book called (I believe ) "What do I want to do with my life", that focused around careers and people finding what they really want to do. One of the things he pointed out in the book that people who set as their goal to retire when still fairly young (30's and 40's and beyond), who ended up achieving the kind of success that would allow that, usually end up not retiring, they end up either 'retiring' for a couple of months or so and then coming back with something new, or they don't retire at all. He points out that they just get addicted to the lifestyle that allows them to achieve that, that they are uber type A types who thrive on the kind of things required to meet that goal and wouldn't know what to do when it ended.
30
There is a simple way to combat affluenza. Establish a 100% tax rate over $250,000 in yearly income, a 100% asset tax over net assets in excess of $5,000,000, and most importantly, a 100% estate tax, starting at the first dollar.
66
@ItCouldBeWorse , If a "family" business is organized as a sole proprietorship, yes. Corporations can exist in perpetuity, of course. As to family farms, the land should be returned to First Nations peoples, and utilized by others at their discretion, codified by a 99 year ground lease. If the leasehold has not expired, the children would of course have all the tenancy rights incumbent.
10
@Walt Bruckner Or, not. You are pretty much advocating for economic collapse. The tax rates should be made much more progressive, but also fit local conditions and smootly increase, not sharp cliff. Since a person tends to see children and grandchildren, estates should be sized so that if one can, one can provide something meaningful to one's offspring. That's fairly inbuilt into humanity.
I'm more for dropping all corporate taxes in return for equity in corporations doing business in the US. Then, distribute that equity to the population. No more welfare etc, everyone is instead an owner, probably voting or dividends but also aligned with their own business interests. If bad times come, they come to all and so too good times.
21
@Walt Bruckner
$250k a year likely goes pretty far in Ohio. That is a good income but middle/upper middle (maybe) in NYC.
What I do like about your proposal is that it would remove any incentive for me to work. The only boat that I would be buying, however, would fit nicely on the roof of the minivan.
15
This article begins to make the case for wealth accumulation as a mental health condition. When we recognize mental health issues in our families or in the homeless, we, at our best give them support to make changes, and at our worst ignore them, possibly letting them run roughshod over themselves and others. Can we afford to ignore this as a mental health issue when it effects the income of a majority of Americans, and the health of the planet?
176
@glove
I agree completely. My father is in his 70's, is worth millions, and continues to worry about money. He works because that's what he does, but he's constantly worried about having "enough" money. I've asked him to talk to a therapist many times, to no avail.
70