O’Kelley’s [sic] says billionaires represent “such an incredibly ludicrous waste of money in a world where there’s so many people who don’t have that,” but he says actually being one is also “othering”—separating you from the limits and consequences that define normal life. “There’s something about keeping connected to normalcy that is really, really important,” the entrepreneur explains. “I don’t want a yacht and I don’t ever want to be able to be without consequences. I think that’s the biggest risk, is, how can we be accountable when we have so much money we can buy anything?”

He gets it. Past a certain point, wealth erodes your humanity. I think I'd have picked $100M too - at a safe 4% return that's $4M per year, plenty for anybody to live on but not megayacht money.

I reserve my praises until I learn how exactly he gave away the money. Family-controlled foundations that only do political lobbing while avoiding taxes are a thing .

Wait is this really a good rich person? I have to think something's up

Should have shared the money with the workers who built the company into a $1.6B valuation and worth acquisition.

If only he believed in himself, he could have been a billionaire…

Good for him.

Raise the taxes, remove the cap on FICA contributions, implement universal healthcare.

I'd take just one single measly Canadian million dollars, buy a ~300-400K small house far from the city with enough land to have peace and quiet, and maybe try a greenhouse for vegetables.

That leaves enough money with what I already have to cover never working again, various moving expenses, some repairs and renos, and maybe the occasional weekend transexual escort in my whirlpool.

if i ruled the world no single person would have more than 1bn, hence why it would never happen. (id be very unqualified)

Russian Nobleman paradox. 100 million is still a lot though. Company was AppNexus, name rings a bell. Sold to AT&T.

How many more people/companies do we need to see doing this before we see change?

I am praising the action not the individual :)

Oh. I thought this was The Onion for a second when I saw the title.

$100 million invested into dividend stock would gross him $1-5 million per year. About 1/3 of that will be paid in taxes, depending on what kind of dividends those are.

Me personally, I think I'd be happy with $10 million but I guess you get hungry when there's a lot of food in front of you.

Just a general reminder to anyone to use a site like Charity Navigator to find good causes to donate to.

He's not wrong. Being circled by scavengars like some kind of dying leviathan is not a sane way to live.

The question is: does it bring lasting benefits to the people?

If he gives away a billion once, eventually it will be consumed and then we're stuck in the same situation again. The rich must give money away repeatedly, that's the only way to sustain society going forward. For that, solid and robust policy changes will have to be implemented.