[NickC25]

They could have, but there's a larger issue here - they are from one of the wealthiest towns in the entire country and while yes, they could have gone off and focused on other things after the FB trial (and to be fair, they did - they won rowing medals at the 2008 Olympics), but when you're surrounded by absurd amounts of money, all of a sudden a few hundred million isn't really all that much, as crazy as it is to say. They wanted more, because they were in an environment where someone calling it a day, no matter how much they made, is just unheard of and looked down upon.

Source: I too am from their hometown. I know billionaires who keep working because they feel they don't have enough. A gentleman who lived down the street from me has grossed probably close to half a billion in his career (maybe more), yet still goes to work every day. Granted, he has kids to feed, and the Winkelvii don't, but the song remains the same. People just want more, and sometimes they get used to a lavish lifestyle, and can't quit the grind because they like the lifestyle it brings....when they have the time to enjoy it.

[teaearlgraycold]

That’s why as a well paid IC I don’t seek or envy that kind of money. Most people in America aren’t able to live comfortably (which IMO comes when you can do any reasonable thing without worrying about the price). But once you can what good is more money?

[Etheryte]

I think this is a common concept that people struggle to grasp, so let me offer a perspective. Those of us who have relatives who lived during the Second World War may have heard about famine, starving, and the like. But what you might have missed is that some of the people that lived through it look at food completely differently. There's no amount of food you can have at home where it feels enough, no pantry stocked well enough, because they remember, if the times get bad, they can get real bad. It needn't make logical sense, it's what they've instinctually learned. Money can work much the same way. If you come from a place of poverty then it can often be the case that there's no amount of money you can have in the bank that feels safe enough. This is of course only one way people can internalize concepts like this, peer pressure, family expectations, etc can all lead to similar ideas.

[wmf]

This has nothing to do with the Winklebros who were born rich.

[Etheryte]

It does, if you actually bother to read the full comment. A lack of something isn't the only way these emotions form, like any arguably broken emotion the sources can be numerous.

[NickC25]

It really doesn't.

You don't believe me? You might have a relative who experienced hard times, and sure, that affects you, I get it. But you've or they have probably not seen what the Winklevoss twins have, or what I have.

You weren't raised in Greenwich Connecticut where you were an elite rower and your parents were Ivy League professors. Cam and Ty's parents were very well off, and their sons went to a fabulously expensive private prep school ($30k per person per year, could be a lot more actually) in a fabulously wealthy town. The "I might not have enough" mentality is flipped, and it becomes an arms race of "I have enough, but my neighbor has much more" and thus forms an inherently competitive aspect to life, and worse, to making money. You've got a few hundred million? Cool story bro, that's pauper shit, my friend's got a billion. You've got a billion? Good for you, the guy down the street has 5 billion. Where the twins (and I) are from, you don't get admiration for getting that money, you get a target on your back, and everyone wants to outdo you. THAT is the world those guys grew up in (I did too). Nobody just says "wow, I made a billion dollars, time for me to go buy a place on some remote island or on the beach and just chill out with my family and those closest to me", they say "fuck, I got a billion but this asshole in my church just made 2 billion, and I want to beat him".

Nobody is content, which is stunning to me. If I ever get that kind of money, I'm buying a shack in the mountains, and a hut on the beach, putting a bit in a trust for my nephew, and donating the rest. Fuck the rat race.

[Etheryte]

Your inability to generalize a concept from one example onwards is stunning. Everyone's personality is a function of their surroundings. Just like misled behavior can stem from being desolately poor it can stem from social pressure, competitive nature, unmet wants and needs and so on. Which I already pointed out twice.

[smolder]

You say "they like the lifestyle it brings", but that feels like a euphamism. Cannibalism is a lifestyle some might not want to give up, if they're into that. When your conspicuous consumption is on the scale of peoples' whole livelihoods just winking out of existence, it's clearly not about anything material anymore. I'd suggest rather they are addicted to the power and status, to having people fawn and grovel, 24/7. Their careers are likely the place they get to exercise power the most, so it makes sense to keep "working" well past your material needs to keep your lording-over-people addiction sated.

[jmye]

I mean, your consumption is on the scale of people’s whole livelihoods, as soon as you leave a developed country. Are you just addicted to having people grovel? Or is it possible that people with a different baseline and experience have a different baseline and experience?

I don’t understand, especially on an SV-dominant board, this “anyone who has more than me is necessarily evil” mentality.

[2muchcoffeeman]

You’re purposely muddying the waters. These people don’t just have “more than me”. They have enough money to ensure their entire family will be set for life for generations if they were merely more modest.

They could do something good for humanity or something. But they don’t. This correctly raises eye brows and makes people question their motives.

[jmye]

And you have the same, compared to most of the continent of Africa. It just feels like blame-shifting, in GP’s frame.

Most folks on this board have vastly more wealth than I do - that doesn’t make them/you bad people, even if they/you pursue that raise and promotion at work. I dunno, I just think this recent tendency to call anyone with “more” inherently evil as a result (or to dog whistle at evil) is thoughtless, trite nonsense.

[2muchcoffeeman]

Comparing a middle class existence in a western country to average Africans is nonsense. What should I do with that information? Sell all my assets and move to Africa to try and live like a king? What's the point of this comparison? I live in a western country, my friends, family and responsibilities are here. That's what we have to navigate.

I'm not saying trying to be rich is bad. I want to be rich. But for most people, if you gave them enough money to never have to work again, but they would be permanently middle class, they would take it. I am very jealous of people that can do that. But eventually jealousy turns to suspicion. These people have enough money for their families and many generations after them to be better than middle class comfortable and they are doing shady things to acquire more wealth?

[NickC25]

>These people don’t just have “more than me”. They have enough money to ensure their entire family will be set for life for generations if they were merely more modest.

This is my point. If someone's got under 10 million, and a large family, sure, keep working, that 10 million will be gone in a generation if not properly managed.

Someone's got 100, 200, 300 million, has no family to speak of or whatever? Dude, take a fucking break and live a little. Do some good for your community, your neighbors, your friends, etc.

You've got over half a billion, just stop - you've won capitalism. Congratulations. Sleep in. Go take a walk in the woods. Cook yourself a meal. Read a book. Just stop slaving away, you're not going to really make a difference in anyone's lives but your own if you don't stop and look around you.

[smolder]

> I mean, your consumption is on the scale of people’s whole livelihoods.

No, and particularly not my "conspicuous consumption" which is what I said.

> this “anyone who has more than me is necessarily evil” mentality.

That's not my mentality. I didn't say necessarily evil or even evil.

I'm postulating on the motivations of people who have access to every material comfort they could ever want, but still want 1000x that because someone else has 100x that. I'm nothing like them, nor the people in my wealth range that seem to have similar motivations --splurging on status signaling, doing anything to get more. It's irrelevant that I am richer than 3rd world people.

[jmye]

> No, and particularly not my "conspicuous consumption" which is what I said.

I mean, it is. There are multitudes in rural Asia and Africa who don’t have a fraction of a fraction of what you have and would regard most of your consumption as “conspicuous”.

And you may not have said the word “evil”, but your intent was quite clear. I’m suggesting that, as I said, your baseline for what someone has, and their baseline for it, are inherently different, and that ascribing motive to that doesn’t make sense.

Mostly, I think that pretending your ostentatious wealth is actually totally ok to flaunt, just because it’s yours and you don’t care about the people who see it as flaunting and ostentatious, is a moral relative, just like the one you’re suggesting is so bad.

[smolder]

"Everything's relative" is a really great excuse to ignore scale and nuance, I'll admit.