Greed is a cardinal sin. If you have more than you need, you are, by definition, greedy.
If someone simply gave you a billion dollars later today, what would you do?
Calculate what you need to retire on, remembering that "enough is as good as a feast."
Put your retirement fund in the bank.
Give the rest to charity. Good choices include: ACLU, Amnesty Intl., Oxfam, EFF, FSF, Tor Project, etc.
Resign from your job so someone who needs it more can take it. Stay on as a volunteer if your employer is the sort of institution that uses volunteers (schools, hospitals).
If this is not what you would do, then you're a piece of shit.
The fact that these people have kept more than they need proves that they are worst than worthless. Bill Gates' worth to society is a negative $75,000,000,000. His contributions to charity (his own foundation obviously doesn't count) are a negligible percentage of that $75,000,000,000. He could give away $74,998,000,000 today and live in luxury for the rest of his life. He hasn't simply because he's not a good person.
We should refuse to buy anything from him or sell anything to him. We should not allow him to look at our children or grandchildren. He must be treated as a pariah. Untouchable. Unclean. Pervert. Subhuman freak.
The Christians got this one right. The love of money is the root of all kinds of evil. (Not just some kinds: all kinds.) The only place in the Bible where Jesus is openly sarcastic is when heaps scorn on the idea of a rich man being able to go to Heaven. The God of the Bible hates wealthy people. This is why all Bible-believing Christians refuse to allow wealthy people to become members of their churches.
All wealthy people are, have always been, and always will be disgusting piles of steaming, sticky, stinking, septic shit!
Gina's currently running at 14.9b US, Rupert at 13 not 10 (plus JERRY HALL! ) and eyeing off England. go Rupes. I may disagree with most (nearly all) those two compatriots do (like they would care..), but fuck they do it well! if greed is defined by religious doctrine, where does this leave the atheist?
Actually I never mentioned Aquinas, whose work is not scripture. I quoted what the Christians consider scripture. The bit of scripture I quoted doesn't use the word "greed," as defined by Aquinas or anyone else. The phrase in 1 Timothy is "love of money." Are you going to argue that billionaires don't love money?
This temporal vs eternal stuff carries no weight with me. I'm an atheist. That's why I call them "the Christians" rather than "we Christians."
I use the word "greed" to mean what virtually every other English speaker means when she/he uses it. I use it to mean "the desire for more when you already have enough." Look in the standard English dictionaries and see which definition you find most often, mine or Aquinas's.
If you have more of anything than you need, and you don't love it, and others need it, what possible reason could you have for not giving away what you don't need? None.
There is a word that isn't used often enough. The word is plutomaniac. Any and every billionaire is, self evidently, a plutomaniac. Many of them, I suspect, suffer from other mental illnesses.
The super-rich richly deserve our undying contempt.
"would?" have. still do - tho not what one would call "great wealth", more "the fuckload truck is in!". Gina & Rupert are wealthy australians - tho rupe's a US citizen now, we know he still loves us. "doing well" as to "whatever it is they do" - Zuks, eg., is very good at getting people to spill all (and then sell it.) ; Rupert's very good at media-manipulation (and sales); Gina's excellent at ripping the ground up (and selling it). as i said, i may not agree with what they all do, but they do it amazingly well. gobsmackingly, most times.