If I had $267 billion
By 
I’m 100% sure I would not be doing this:
Amazon founder Jeff Bezos lauded President Trump’s performance in his second term in a new interview with CNBC, coming as the president is facing record-low approval among voters.
“I think he is a more mature, more disciplined version of himself than he was in his first term,” Bezos said during a Wednesday morning interview on the network’s “Squawk Box” show.
“Trump has lots of good ideas,” he added. “He’s been right about a lot of things. You have to give him credit where credit is due.”
Bezos said he also calls former President Obama “for advice,” adding, “He’s a very smart guy.”
The billionaire businessman spoke with reporter Andrew Ross Sorkin during a sit-down interview from the Blue Origin Rocket Factory in Merritt Island, Fla.
Bezos founded the space company in 2000, and is in a cut-throat competition with Elon Musk’s SpaceX for government contracts and a leg up in future space exploration.
The executive emphasized his partnerships with past administrations during the interview and expressed a commitment to working with future presidents on business issues.
“We need our business leaders to provide input into the administration, regardless of who the president is,” Bezos said. “I’m on the side of America, and that is so important, and that’s where business leaders should be.”
Of course that’s why I don’t have $267 billion, at least not until the end of our annual fundraiser in a couple of weeks.
When people read stuff like this they naturally ask, what’s the point of having not one but several hundred fortunes that are each individually far larger than all the money any one person could possibly need, if you’re still committing unnatural intellectual acts of this sort? If you’re a plutocrat, there is apparently no such thing as fuck you money. Now why is that?
This tragically inaccurate prediction about the state of the world in 2030 explains why, despite or because of its inaccuracy:
When the accumulation of wealth is no longer of high social importance, there will be great changes in the code of morals. We shall be able to rid ourselves of many of the pseudo-moral principles which have hag-ridden us for two hundred years, by which we have exalted some of the most distasteful of human qualities into the position of the highest virtues. We shall be able to afford to dare to assess the money-motive at its true value. The love of money as a possession -as distinguished from the love of money as a means to the enjoyments and realities of life -will be recognised for what it is, a somewhat disgusting morbidity, one of those semi-criminal, semi-pathological propensities which one hands over with a shudder to the specialists in mental disease. All kinds of social customs and economic practices, affecting the distribution of wealth and of economic rewards and penalties, which we now maintain at all costs, however distasteful and unjust they may be in themselves, because they are tremendously useful in promoting the accumulation of capital, we shall then be free, at last, to discard.
JM Keynes, “Economic Possibilities For Our Grandchildren,” (1930)
In other words, the kind of person who becomes a plutocrat is someone who has what at this point in economic and political history has become a very socially destructive form of mental illness, but it’s a mental illness that we continue to confuse with the highest forms of human achievement (thanks Jean Calvin).