[Bender]

From elsewhere:

Google co-founder Larry Page moved to Florida from California in early 2026, purchasing over $188 million in Miami property. He left California to avoid a proposed 5% state wealth tax targeting billionaires, shifting his primary residence and assets to Florida, which has no state income tax.

Makes sense to me. Several businesses and individuals from NYC have also moved to Florida for similar reasons. If I were hard working or creative as them to be as wealthy I would do the same and I know others here would too, they just wouldn't likely admit or say it. None of that prevents one from having a satellite office in the former state.

[cgio]

If I were as wealthy as them I would not mind paying a 5% tax after years of tax avoidance. But that’s just one of the many reasons why I am not as wealthy as they are.

[steveBK123]

In agreement. It strikes me as contradictory to be so wealthy you can never spend it all, but price sensitive enough to uproot your life over a tax?

To paraphrase Don Draper - That's what the money is for! (to live the life you want)

But I think for many that make that much money is a scoreboard primarily, and they've given up any normalcy of a personal life so long ago to get it that they don't really know what to do with themselves once they have the money.

[maddmann]

Something needs to be done about the historic inequality in this country. It will undue all the “innovation” (ie selling ads and addicting people to the internet) that these tech billionaires have contributed.

[Bender]

Inequality will always be a thing. I am not saying it should be, just that it will be. Different people have different skill-sets, are in the right or wrong places at the right or wrong time, have different connections with people and a million other factors. Some are born with good RNG, some with a bad roll.

We as a society can barely get along with one another as this world gets more inter-connected and as more incompatible cultures are forced to mix with one another. There are too many conflicting and incompatible situations to fix before we can even get close to equality. That is the reality I can see. Perhaps if we divided ourselves up into a matrices of 512 or 1024 groups and each group populated a planet of their own then perhaps some of those planets could achieve the desired equality. Maybe. No idea how long it would last.

Even the sci-fi dream of Gene Roddenberry's totally equal future came with a lot of pain, wars, chaos and after all that there was still significant inequality and violence and this was from someone that was a staunch believe in all forms of equality. Even he had to keep it real enough or people would not be able to suspend disbelief yet still fictional enough to allow escapism.

I'm perfect fine not being as wealthy as Larry Page and having all the stress and drama that comes with it.

[clipsy]

> Inequality will always be a thing.

If you want to engage honestly, you can start by acknowledging that there is an enormous gap between believing that "record breaking wealth inequality is bad and causing societal problems" vs "no inequality should exist in any capacity."

[Bender]

If I am being honest inequality will always vary wildly based on the monetary policies and all the things I mentioned. To me anything else is getting into vague unattainable unrealistic ideologies. No harm in dreaming, everyone should. No harm in envy either even if some think it is unhealthy. It's all human nature.

If someone has a gazillion gazillion gazillion mega-bucks that does not harm me in any way shape or form. More power to them. I would be fine with them also collecting medicare and social security especially if they, like me, had to pay into social security their entire working life and could not opt out.

If we can hold out for machines like a holodeck then we can truly live any fantasy and that may be a nice form of escapism. No idea how long it will be for such machines to exist.

[_DeadFred_]

Their 'paying in' is capped at a ridiculously low rate thanks to their continuous lobbying and equal to what doctors pay in.

Brin paid more for his new home that his lifetime charity giving according to Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbeswealthteam/2026/02/09/ame...

looks like he paid more for his new house that what Forbes thinks he's given to charity.

[Bender]

And that's fine. The pay out is also on a scale. I have no desire to "rob the rich". Everyone pays into corrupt governments and fraudulent wasteful government programs. I would rather cut 50% of all programs every year to remove the burden from all citizens.

[_DeadFred_]

So he spent as much on his new house as his lifetime charity giving? Classy guy.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbeswealthteam/2026/02/09/ame...

[eudamoniac]

How much is your lifetime charity giving, out of curiosity?

[_DeadFred_]

In the 10% range like the normal societal expectation (or requirement if you are religious and actually follow your religion but mine wasn't religious giving). Was higher when I made good money. Dragged down by a decade of not doing well.

Yours?

[eudamoniac]

So, less than your house?

> normal societal expectation

Lol. Which society are you living in?

> Yours?

About $300. I'm not the one shaming people about their house costing more than their charity.

[_DeadFred_]

Western society.

My lifetime giving is more than I paid for my current house. The house in discussion for him is just one of how many that he owns? Or how many boats that count as 'second homes' under tax rules? Also consider he has paid for the entirely of this house, the average person giving 5-10% hasn't come close to paying for their house, so you need to go based off the 'already paid' amount. Also their home would be their largest asset, so going by that his largest asset for comparison would be his stock holdings, an order of magnitude larger than the cost of one of his homes.

Old boy is a billionaire, not a rando, and has proven he has zero shame. Despite starting their companies with techno-optimist claims, the robber barons had more shame/were more decent people/supported society more than the average tech billionaire.

[claudiulodro]

More than .07% of my net worth, which is what his giving works out to.