The "eat the rich" folks are an interesting bunch because what they define as immoral wealth changes depending on who has the wealth.
Compared to the rest of the world, including most of America, Bernie Sanders is the definition of rich thanks to his millions of dollars, multiple homes, and senatorial power. Baby's first radical, Hasan Piker, is also very wealthy compared to the rest of the world, yet even his socialist/communist die-hard followers hardly ever make this an issue he needs to answer for.
But they're millionaires. Billionaires are the evil ones, right?
Well, yes, but no. Elon Musk was evil when he was a billionaire, and it was the height of virtue to finger-wag at the man responsible for a lot of humanity's technological advancement because being a billionaire is just gross... unless you're a billionaire they like. You won't hear the "eat the rich" crowd asking for Jeff Bezos or Bill Gates to be served up on a silver platter.
As per the usual with leftist thinking, what you are takes precedence over who you are. If you're a billionaire who's friendly to leftist causes, then you're good to go.
These are the same people who drone on and on about what they would do if they were rich, and funny enough, a lot of this comes from people who actually are rich.
Below is a video from a popular podcast called "Club Shay Shay." You may recognize the host as Shannon Sharpe, former Denver Broncos tight end and football Hall of Famer. In this clip, he's talking to two comedians, Andrew Santino and Bobby Lee, of the "Bad Friends" podcast.
For the most part, I think Lee and Santino are hilarious and "Bad Friends" legitimately produces moments that could go down in history as some of the best podcast moments of all time. However, during their discussion with Sharpe, Lee and Santino got onto the subject of Elon Musk and his being a trillionaire. The duo expressed absolute disgust with it before talking about all the charity work they would do if they were billionaires so that no one could say they weren't trying to help.
To Sharpe's credit, he said it wouldn't matter how much charity you did; it'd never be enough to silence the haters, and he's correct.
Andrew Santino & Bobby Lee: Elon Musk being a trillionaire is disgusting. “I’d keep $1 billion, use the rest for research or burn it.”
— Percy (@percyishim) July 23, 2026
“Elon Musk is a trillionaire right? Gross! F*ck him. What’s he going to do with all that”
“If I had that I’d keep a billion and put the rest… pic.twitter.com/kv1y2kI9ON
To be clear, Musk is not a trillionaire. He doesn't have 13 figures in his bank account. It's primarily assets he has, and those assets are primarily his businesses. Spencer Pratt pointed this out, adding that Musk is employing thousands, and that even Lee and Santino are generating income thanks to Musk's X platform.
"Brilliant comics, not so brilliant with economics," Pratt concluded.
Agreed.
Elon doesn’t have $1T in a bank. His net worth is from the value of his companies, which employ >160K people. He’s minted 1,000s of millionaires. Even Lee & Santino earn $ from X. 160K+ people feed their families cuz of Elon. How many lives have they supported? Brilliant comics,… https://t.co/dBiv5WDIqL
— Spencer Pratt (@spencerpratt) July 24, 2026
ALSO SEE: Priceless: Elon Busts Left on How Extreme They Have Become
Elon Musk’s SpaceX Is Coming for Your 401(k), and the Left Is Going to Hate This
But just for fun, let's look at what Musk is doing charity-wise. Not that it would matter to the "eat the rich" folks, but I'll address that in a minute.
According to Forbes, which still does its absolute best to make Musk look like a villain despite his charities, Musk runs a non-profit called "The Foundation," which directs incredible amounts of money to educational institutions. He also donates to causes around healthcare, natural disaster relief, and more. At the bottom of the article, it says that Musk has donated $1.1 billion in charity since 2010.
That Forbes article was published in December of last year and covered his 2024 charity work. Since then, he's transferred around 210,000 Tesla shares (valued at around $100 million) to various charities, and donated $50 million to a company working on carbon removal.
How much charity work do Santino and Lee do?
It doesn't matter for this argument. The important thing here is that Musk outstrips them in charity work by leaps and bounds because he has an overwhelming amount of wealth to do so, and he got that wealth by being a smart businessman who made bold moves and had a forward-facing vision. Lee and Santino are famous for making funny comments on a podcast; Musk is famous for bringing the world into a new technological age.
Who is more useful here?
But Sharpe is right. None of that will actually matter to the anti-rich, and here is where things get really gross. They don't want wealth like Musk's to exist. Or, at the very least, they don't want wealth to be had by people like Musk. They want to virtue signal how evil it is to be so successful, which is a red flag in itself.
But think of this: If they were successful and Musk's wealth went away entirely, think of how many people would be out of a job, and think of how many millions and millions of dollars would no longer go to charitable causes and programs that help advance the human race. By their "moral positions," there'd be a lot less charity in the world.
And there you see the villainy of the anti-rich. A bunch of people who'd rather virtue signal about the wealthy, even if it means real charity work gets destroyed.
