In these comments: People who think someone can accumulate obscene personal wealth and then give a small percentage away makes them good. But if someone dares suggest taxing that obscene wealth they are a monster.

Markus Persson made a pretty cool game you may have heard of.

Not a modern "billionaire", but you can make an argument that Andrew Carnegie spent a lot of his fortune on things that weren't awful.

Trick question.

The billionaires who do good don’t want their names attached to their deeds because that defeats the purpose. The point of altruism is you don’t want credit.

(Seriously there aren’t many, though, because if you’re hoarding money, you’re a horrible person.)

is this a psyop? surely its a psyop

youd probably have a hard time naming one billionaire that hasnt done anything good

theyre still a shit thing to have, practically never got the money they have by being a good person and shouldnt exist in the same world as homeless people, starvation or massively underfunded public projects

David Koch died, which is a very good thing he did for humanity.

MacKenzie Scott, Bezos's ex. She's given more than $14 billion to charity.

Philanthropy is just a tax break and PR move.

The problem isn't a billionaire that's done anything good, the problem is a billionaire who has done more good things than bad.

Those don't exist.

There's no amount of good you can do to make up for the amount of exploitation you had to do in order to get to be a billionaire.

It doesn't mean that a billionaire can't do anything good. It just means the world would still be better off without them.

They've all done at least one good thing that's a insanely low bar that's very subjective. Name one that isn't more good than harm in the world? They don't exist.

Notch made Minecraft.

He's been a little shit since then, but at least Minecraft is pretty cool.

Jack Dorsey bought me lunch once.

Mike Cannon-Brookes (co-founded Atlassian) has set up a 1.5b green fund to invest in green energy projects

Bruce Wayne.

What? They're greedy humans who are doing things that have terrible consequences out of selfishness, not mustache twirling cartoon villains out to destroy the world for destruction's sake. I'm sure every single billionaire in the world has done something good at some point. That doesn't justify the kind of wealth disparity that makes their existence possible though.

Millburn Pennybags or Uncle Pennybags gave you $200 every time you passed go.

Bill Gates. (Has donated money to charity and founded one himself).

MacKenzie Scott

A better question might be “name a billionaire that does more good than harm to the world”? Although personally I think that’s an impossibility.

That one brought a couple friends and his billionaire son down and unalived together.

Probably unintentional, but that one moment saved the planet a lot of hurt down the line I'm sure.

Current Agha Khan founded the Agha Khan Development Network which has done a fair amount of good in the developing world.

Do you mean net good (more good than bad) or is a good thing like "established public libraries" acceptable even if he also oppressed workers and stifled unions and bought government officials and stuff?